zlacker

>>mef+(OP)
It does seem like the business preys on, primarily teenage boys, in a way that traditional pornography does not.

If you look up the user demographics, you'll notice an obvious problem: The demographics do not include the number of users under 18.

https://techreport.com/statistics/software-web/onlyfans-stat...

Some may say: well that's because you have to be 18 to use the site. But that's not true. Anyone can signup for onlyfans without entering their age. Onlyfans only does age verification for creators.

If you think this site isn't primarily being used by teenagers, then I have a bridge to sell you.

>>rybosw+Wgc
Interesting. I wouldn't have guessed teens would have the money. I'd have guessed the cash cows would be adult, well-employed.

But if it's a common scenario for an adult OF creator to be sexually interacting with an underage teenager online (and, really, "grooming" them), are we going to start seeing life-ruining prosecutions of creators?

Incidentally including subpoenas of lists of creators and consumers, for additional chilling effect on both?

If so, could that kill OF's business, at least for Western creators, as well as for some consumers?

And if OF ends up with creators mostly in non-Western countries, with a reputation for preying upon UK/US/etc. teens (and maybe even reports of human trafficking, and/or funding sanctioned parties), will OF be banned in many Western countries? Maybe the most lucrative ones?

Separate from serious questions about what's ethical and healthy for everyone, given that the topic is OF's economics, I wonder whether they're making so much money because they're too close to the line of what's legally sustainable.

>>neilv+Cmc
Teens will always find a way to spend money, with or without their parents knowing. I can remember when it was possible to rent adult videos on HBO. It would charge to your parents credit card but that only matters if they check their bill and many people do not.

I wouldn't venture to say what percentage of the income is coming from users are the under age of 18, beyond that is certainly a number larger than $0.

> But if it's a common scenario for an adult OF creator to be sexually interacting with an underage teenager online (and, really, "grooming" them), are we going to start seeing life-ruining prosecutions of creators?

This more or less happens on twitch.tv with alarming frequency. The hot tub streams are not much different than soft core imo. And users will get shoutouts and prizes (in the form of writing the users name on the streamers body) for sending money. It's all done in a way that's nearly impossible to attribute wrong doing to creators, though.