A couple of 20-year-old developers make $500,000 a month promising to help men to stop watching porn, but exposed their private porn watching habits.

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    You’re allowed to watch porn, let’s just direct the fear of people finding out into finding ethical porn you don’t need to feel guilt for.

    I mean, YMMV on that ethical porn business. I’ve found that to be more of a marketing gimmick than anything I can sleep soundly on.

    Might just settle on not feeling guilty for beating off.

    • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I mean if you pay a creator directly I don’t see how that could be unethical

      But also, every job under capitalism is unethical. The system is fucked but people still need to eat, so you know, choose your evil I guess

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I mean if you pay a creator directly I don’t see how that could be unethical

        Plenty of actresses and cam girls - particularly those working overseas - are managed directly by pimps or by agencies that function no differently. Plenty more are exploited indirectly in the same way Uber and Lyft exploit their drivers - treated as contract labor, underpaid, and subjected to abuse both off and on camera.

        The system is fucked but people still need to eat

        Sure. “No ethical consumption under capitalism”, yadda yadda.

        And there’s plenty of arguments for why direct sourcing has better broad economic incentives. But Hugh Hiefner played this game with Playboy sixty years ago, insisting everyone was paid well and treated respectfully. And that was the softest of soft core. Turns out his organization was barely a step above the guys making porn videos for Times Square.

        You make the best decisions you can. But at some point you have to recognize that you’re buying a narrative as much as anything.

        • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          For you first paragraph I mean, fair, I guess I had an inexplicit assumption that you’re gonna vet the creator/know them (like, say, from social media). Ofc it doesn’t guarantee everything but. Maybe I shouldn’t have said “I don’t see how”, it’s strong wording. I know sex workers irl so it’s them I had in mind.

          But still, yes, you’re right, things are, as usual, always a bit of a mess in our world.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 hours ago

            you’re gonna vet the creator/know them

            I mean, sure. If you know the person IRL for some reason and you’re just sending them money for nudes in a sugar daddy relationship. Idk how common that is in practice though.

            But just going on OnlyFans and opening your wallet isn’t any more ethical than hitting up a strip club.

            But still, yes, you’re right, things are, as usual, always a bit of a mess in our world.

            I mean, that’s half the reason for decriminalizing sex work. So you’re not offering up police/prosecutors and associated regulators as leverage over people doing the actual work.

    • super_user_do@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Yup that is mostly marketing bullshit. As long as the creator is having fun it’s ethical to me, still keeping in mind that selling your body is not good but still legitimate because of the system we live in