Just a general question, building on my comments earlier in the thread.
People download music illegally for free all the time. So, if you're not going to pay for something like Sgt, Pepper or Pet Sounds -- which are considered some of the premiere 20th century works of musical art -- why on earth would you pay to see a bunch of sleazy girls?
Does anyone else see that lack of logic in that?
I think we're just from a different generation. The only "porn" I ever paid for was Playboy magazines when I turned 18, almost just for the thrill of it. Within a few years, there was just free porn everywhere though. I never understood the idea of paying for it.
I download music too, and I don't pay for it, and I don't consider it stealing. It's no different than hearing it on the radio. It's not like I'm going in to a store and sticking a CD under my jacket. I make sure to support the artists I actually like by attending their concerts and paying the ridiculous fees they charge, cause they actually get that money instead of a record company.
As for paying girls to see a naked picture of them and get a text from them? That's baffling to me. That's like someone telling me they prefer to stick their head underwater and breathe it in instead of oxygen. I can't possibly understand that mindset. They may as well be a different species from me, their thinking is so opposite of mine.
In other words, yes, I fail to see the logic in it.
100% agree, and it’s so harmful. This thirsty, pathetic, beta, simp behavior is destroying relations between men and women. Especially this onlyfans thing which has the entered mainstream to a certain extent (I only know about it because of news items talking about how such-and-such an actress joined, how some woman made millions on it, etc.). Women see this stuff too and immediately start over-valuing their assets, even the old fat ones. Men who send women money on onlyfans or tinder are ruining it for the rest of us who just want to date a woman with a realistic idea of their self-worth and reasonable expectations.I think we're just from a different generation. The only "porn" I ever paid for was Playboy magazines when I turned 18, almost just for the thrill of it. Within a few years, there was just free porn everywhere though. I never understood the idea of paying for it.
I download music too, and I don't pay for it, and I don't consider it stealing. It's no different than hearing it on the radio. It's not like I'm going in to a store and sticking a CD under my jacket. I make sure to support the artists I actually like by attending their concerts and paying the ridiculous fees they charge, cause they actually get that money instead of a record company.
As for paying girls to see a naked picture of them and get a text from them? That's baffling to me. That's like someone telling me they prefer to stick their head underwater and breathe it in instead of oxygen. I can't possibly understand that mindset. They may as well be a different species from me, their thinking is so opposite of mine.
In other words, yes, I fail to see the logic in it.
I don't understand the texts either. The women don't actually like the men. It's pretend.
I don't think the desire for normal human sexual relations that involve talking kissing, caressing, foreplay and anything other than a mere "here's me assuming the default doggy position with lube pre-applied, do whatever you want and don't ask questions" involved in a typical experience with a prostitute can be called a "fetish".This has been covered before. There is a 'fetish' called GFE, girlfriend experience.
She looks retarded.
She is essentially grooming herself, posting pictures that push personal boundaries till she is comfortable with the new boundary, then pushing a little further.
Where does it end with her... that is the scary part.She is essentially grooming herself, posting pictures that push personal boundaries till she is comfortable with the new boundary, then pushing a little further.
She Actually articulated this in an interview on the H3 podcast. Just a little further each day until she is comfortable with the new behavior.
Attention is one heck of a drug, especially when it is from the opposite sex.I don't understand the texts either. The women don't actually like the men. It's pretend.
Great post Kosko.
I think the only way a female version would work is if you could convince women they were interacting with high value men, millionaires or male models, and you would have to give them deniability, so make it a site where they feel they are getting an inside scoop on the perks, dilemmas, and heartbreak of top tier men.
You probably would do best never to make them feel cheap like they were paying for nudity, more along the lines of a heart to heart (fake) late at night with a male model who happens to be in bikini underwear. He could complain about his girlfriend, tell each fam individually that they are the only one he can really talk to, and any positive attention he gives to other fans is just because they 'seem to need it."
Probably wouldn't scale as easily, women being more needy than even the simp men.
My friend is already working on a venture like this, but it's not female-only.I like where you are going with this; it would have to be celebrity or top 1-5% percent focus. This ironically is what Only Fans was initially designed to do. This could work, but I do wonder about the supply.
There is a bottomless pit (unfortunately) of wacky women who are more than happy to become E-whores for money on the male-focused end. On the flip-side, what do you offer an elite blue-chip dude to waste time interacting with sub-par women?
But it may be that a female "Only Fans" would not be built the same way as a male-focused one is. There would be little to need for adult content as women do not have an appetite for flesh the same way men do.
Next, I thought it would have to revolve around narcism or some type of consumption product/service with limited supply. From a business standpoint, I wonder if women would pay $X per month to have access to X limited popular products (handbag, boots, makeup)- that is more in-line to hit the weak-spots of women. This also caps scaleability because the "exclusivity of access" is limited (unless you created a bidding market for access). Typically for female products, you spread it far, abundant, often, and for cheap. Lots of crap for next to nothing and let the women gobble it up. I wonder if there is actually an ability to introduce scarcity into modern young women's life?