Off Topic WHy people pay for e-thot content (The Surprising Psychology Of OnlyFans Simps)

[oliver21a]

My apologies for the late reply. I clumsily thought I had replied to your post already Yeah, imagine that. Somewhere around that part he also concluded it's almost 900M something gross. Even if that is over 4 years, that is still a lot of money people pay to only fans! I'm surely going to read the NTY article you pointed out. Also, I'll skim over the Trevejo thread if we have one. I had no idea who she was before watching this video. Anyway, another post from you and another opportunity for a good read. Thanks mate. Have a great day. Cheers P.S Just for fun (and maybe i had time to waste), I was trying to find out the science behind why some people are really interested in girls making "room cleaning videos" in skimpy dresses. I'm sure someone on the internet will have a video getting into the history, dynamic, and psychology behind how that started out and why it has such a big demand (especially in Europe and South American countries).. I find that weird how a very normal activity can be sexualized to the point that there are tons of girls making that content and people wanting to pay to watch do it... Anyways, let's see what i find there, lol

[oliver21a]

I doubt that. You wouldn't want to overstate your income and tax at odds with the tax department. Very wrong move. Also, with the current situation leaving people with so little options surely they are throwing money to these thots (especially the new ones) for cheap entertainment. It can only mean the bigger ones are making even more. So if anything, they'd be hiding the real amount they make. it's can become quite a challenge to track revenues of such nature. Also, not related, but have you noticed the increasing number of girls making content (not just on onlyfans) this year. It's crazy. I see new faces on the every day. No doubt cash app and premium snap are so big now, especially cashApp (i think it just launched around 2016 as well). It's rise is also a success story and I will not be surprised if you tell me most of the income generated is through transactions relating to the adult industry.

Link:
https://volafile.org/r/peri

[oliver21a]

To your Twitch question, I'm almost positive they don't allow nudity, but the "selling their bodies" thing is really just speaking to the fact that if they weren't visible on camera, they wouldn't be making the same kind of money. And everyone knows it. So they'll wear tight tops and make sure there's cleavage, maybe some short shorts and make sure their legs are visible...they'll stand up and do dances or things like you saw in those clips. It's all for titillation. From what I gather, basically the people who make money on Twitch are: 1) Highly skilled players (i.e. people watch because the streamer is just that good at the game. Like watching professional sports.) 2) Highly entertaining players (i.e. people watch because the streamer is really funny and/or does interesting things that are fun to see. Like watching a live reality show.) 3) Attractive females (i.e. people watch because it's something nice to look at, and provides validation when they pay attention to you. Like having the hot popular girl in school talk to you.) Some of these girls are actually into gaming. Others just realize it's another potential income stream. When Christina Khalil started seeing her numbers decline on Patreon because people got tired of her same stale "try-on" content after 2-3 years, she started a Twitch stream. She's not a gamer and never expressed any interest in video games in all of her years on YouTube. It was obvious she was literally only doing it as a way to try and make more money. (And why not, I mean, just sit there and play a video game on camera and people will pay you. What's not to like. Worth a shot.) The overlap with OnlyFans is that dudes who are lonely enough to want to pay for companionship/attention are generally also going to be into gaming. It's pretty logical, as of course gaming is a very effective way to entertain oneself and pass the time, and it doesn't require any real social interaction or stepping out of one's comfort zone. Hell it doesn't require one to even step out of their room. But yeah, they're certainly two different services that serve different markets, even though there's a significant overlap in customer base. One isn't going to supplant the other. Simply bragging on social media or making a claim in an article is really not likely going to have any tax impacts. But yeah I doubt many thot tax forms are accurate. As for new faces, yeah it's like I said, the Overton window has shifted and it's become way more acceptable. Everyone is a camwhore on Instagram/Tiktok/Snapchat already. And everyone also engages in sexting and sharing nudes as well. And everyone knows everyone does it. So it's basically considered normal mainstream behavior at this point. Combine that with the diminished options for income due to lockdowns, along with the ease of producing content (like they said, it can be as simple as some still images she snapped herself from in her own bedroom just wearing a tanktop and short shorts), and the amount of money that can be made from such easy activity...of course plenty of girls are going to go for it.

[oliver21a]

As for the room cleaning videos, . Because it's human psychology, you can kinda get as deep as you want and never hit bedrock. But in short, as with most things, there's a combination of nature/nurture factors at play. Humans are going to tend to have natural tendencies towards sex for biological reasons. And then, lived experiences will usually have an influence in those. As far as I can tell Rule 34 is true largely due to males, and it makes some kind of sense that males would have a greater propensity to sexualize things that aren't typically seen as sexy, because males tend to be interested in things whereas women tend to be interested in people. So female fantasies and fetishes will tend more toward people situations, and male fantasies will tend to have a much wider range, with men sexualizing all kinds of things. The sexualized non-sexual figure is pretty popular, particularly with heterosexual males. If I had to guess, without looking into it at all, I'd say it stems from a housekeeper/teacher/babysitter simply being one of the only non-relative adults that a young male will spend enough time around to develop a crush on. A housekeeper may be around on a regular basis, but interaction might be sparse, and a young person might simply watch them go about their chores. If she wears some kind of uniform, that can add to it because it specializes her...she's different because she doesn't dress like everyone else. If she has a particularly unique body attribute, especially large breasts or hips or ass, that can increase it because not only is there a biological attraction at play, it's different and intriguing. A young person might even catch glimpses of cleavage or undergarments, and it adds to the sexual curiosity and imagination. Basically most fetishes are simply manifestations of things from early youth that a person is finally getting to experiment with. You might have a teacher with a nice figure, and she wears form fitting clothes, and she smells nice, and because you aren't around many adults anyway, she may be the only real life experience you have with an attractive adult woman. So your brain associates that attraction with the situation... are attractive. And then when you're an adult, you still remember certain instances where she bent down to get something, or you bumped into her and felt a boob or something. In youth you might fantasize about being able to do something about it. Those fantasies don't necessarily go away just because you get older. Maybe you always had a crush on one of the cheerleaders, or all of them, but you weren't the kind of guy who could get a cheerleader or any girl in school. When you're older, having a woman put on a cheerleader outfit is basically helping to actually live that fantasy. You get to be the bad boy you never were in high school. For females it's a similar kind of thing, but obviously in different manifestations. Males tend to be simply aroused by beauty and youth (again, biology, because such things suggest good genes for offspring and a better likelihood of their survival). Females on the other hand have the tightrope issue of needing someone who can protect and provide, but also who won't abandon or destroy her. So like Jordan Peterson points out, a harmless man may be safe for a woman to be around, but he's of no real use to her. "" This is why female sexual fantasies tend to revolve around dangerous monsters with power. It covers all the bases for a woman... there's excitement from the danger, there's attraction to the power (again, biology, because power suggests not only good genes for offspring, but a better likelihood they'll be protected and fed, and therefore survive.) And then there's the intrigue from the challenge of having to tame the wild beast, and the ego boost that comes from being the woman to do it.

Link:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/ ... ThirtyFour

[oliver21a]

With no disrespect to your wonderful capability of supporting most things you say with different sources and links, I liked your comment about fantasy more than other comments. It had more of your opinions and was more expressive and less of having facts to support your statements (not that I don't understand their need, it gives substance and credibility to your statement). but this one gave a bit of insight into your writing style and how you may think about a subject. Great writing and great comments. I'm beginning to enjoy this thread as much as others.. which is totally weird lol, hey, same word different verbs. I guess at this point you should start your own OnlyFans with writings like these rule 34.. but only so that everything needs to studied, analyzed, and critiqued upon. Have a great day! Cheers

[oliver21a]

Disclaimer: Just came across this today so I can't say I have searched a lot This grabbed my attention. 5:02 and onwards Can't find anything to support his evidence. It's WatchMojo so I can't believe they got this out of thin air, these guys do their research. It's interesting that new media types and tech will be influenced by anything in the porn industry. Media format in general, yes, creators to have significant influence. Savings space, better image quality, easy to store. they're all functions that are used by any media creator and owner, not just the porn industry but WatchMojo says porn had an influence on choosing the "next" mainstream media tech and I can't find anything to support this. Was wondering if any of you sharp-eyed people have anything to share or comment over this 'fact?' again, you might think this is a waste of time, maybe it is. I found it interesting