zlacker

>>mef+(OP)
What I find fascinating/disturbing with OnlyFans and in some way with Twitch and streaming in general is more the client side than the creators. Here are basically people paying, and paying a lot, for parasocial relationships. Because clearly it’s not about the content per see which is a dim a dozen and available for free in trove.

I think it says something quite dark about our society as a whole that we have basically commoditised distress and are encouraging some people often themselves in dire circumstances to prey on others to the benefits of the middle men. I find these new pimps scarier than the old sort in that they pretend to have clean hands.

>>Random+hPb
This view isn't matched by the stats. I have a friend who is a successful OF model and only a fraction of one percent of her subscribers ever DM her. A lot of them subscribe, see what they want and then immediately delete their accounts. There's no apparent relationship between her fans and her, for the most part.

>>qingch+Skc
Parasocial relationships don't require interaction, you could just watch a twitch streamer a lot. I think if we defined it by requiring interaction we would underestimate the percieved impact of these social phenomenon.

>>ehnto+Umc
It not only doesn’t require interaction, the lack of interaction is what makes is parasocial.

>>mudita+doc
So like, movies are more para social because they have less interaction?

>>jayd16+rrc
On the assumption that there is a relationship (believed to be) involved: yeah, I would say so. Streamers (often) have a chat, actual interaction is possible in a way movies do not allow.

The closest equivalent you would get with a movie is to send fan-mail and get a response. Which people do, but I think it's safe to claim the frequency is much lower.