Opinions on onlyfans and adult entertainment industry

07-01-2021 02:24PM

paw patrol wrote: »

dunno maybe in your 20s
but when you get into your 30s meeting a girl of similar age without and ex and/or kids becomes rare. meeting one who is sane without a kid and a long term ex is unicorn stuff

for fear of upsetting people , excluding medical reasons etc..

I used to think that when I was 20 odd, lots of my friends did too. "the good ones will be gone ....... " etc etc etc.
I reckon anyone in their 30s who honestly thinks that needs to lose weight, get their dress sense together or sort out whatever else is holding them back.

At 38 I met a perfect 34 year old.
Who cares if there's a long term ex ?

Lux23 · 07-01-2021 02:45PM

Biker79 wrote: »

Maybe for a while they cant...until their mid-30s.

After that, their saucy careers are over. And from there, its a solitary life in a studio apartment with some cats for the next 50 years.

Or as a single mother.

Ah not necessarily - you just find a different client base. No matter who you are, and what you look like, there will be someone out there that would get their rocks off looking at your bits.

Lux23 · 07-01-2021 02:53PM

Augeo wrote: »

that's an extreme......... 36 year old and a 27 year old isn't a major gap.

No, it's not but if you have gotten to 36 without any major relationship experience you're probably going to struggle.

I know several men in their early 40s that spent their 20s and 30s chasing increasingly younger women, and apart from one or two of them, they have very little to offer any woman in the way of emotional support because they have virtually no long term relationship experience.

And that's before you look at the other stuff like career prospects, financial security - they kept dating younger women because they never moved on emotionally and now they're that sad lad you see in a pub watching groups of younger women.

07-01-2021 03:04PM

Lux23 wrote: »

No, it's not but if you have gotten to 36 without any major relationship experience you're probably going to struggle.

I know several men in their early 40s that spent their 20s and 30s chasing increasingly younger women, and apart from one or two of them, they have very little to offer any woman in the way of emotional support because they have virtually no long term relationship experience.

And that's before you look at the other stuff like career prospects, financial security - they kept dating younger women because they never moved on emotionally and now they're that sad lad you see in a pub watching groups of younger women.

But you're off on a tangent now............ as well as being in the 30s you're adding in "without any major relationship experience ".

I was replying to posts about lads in their 30s being with ladies in their 20s & the fact that there are plenty ladies in their 30s out there without sprogs who are sane.

fantaiscool · 07-01-2021 03:07PM

Lux23 wrote: »

Ah not necessarily - you just find a different client base. No matter who you are, and what you look like, there will be someone out there that would get their rocks off looking at your bits.

*as long as you are female

07-01-2021 03:33PM

Padre_Pio wrote: »

I suppose people had the same opinions about the growing divorce rate, single parents, or that men and women are having more sexual partners than before.

Spot on.

Society is just one continuous evolution. The world is not going to collapse because people get their mickeys and minges out on OnlyFans.

07-01-2021 03:39PM

fantaiscool wrote: »

Well it's easy to think that but your age would rule you out for many women in their early and mid 20s, it's that simple whether you want to accept it or not. Just taking the average girl who is in her early-mid 20s and ask her would she prefer to date a 26 year old guy or a 36 year old guy and I think you'd find almost all of them saying 26, certainly a very high percentage of them.

No doubt ....... I don't think the chap is disputing that.
Realistically if you are good with women you are good with women ...... as the poster mentioned as you get older you might get better at being good with women.

Nothing you have said makes the statement "men often reach their peak attractiveness in their mid to late thirties" false or untrue.

fantaiscool · 07-01-2021 03:53PM

Augeo wrote: »

No doubt ....... I don't think the chap is disputing that.
Realistically if you are good with women you are good with women ...... as the poster mentioned as you get older you might get better at being good with women.

Nothing you have said makes the statement "men often reach their peak attractiveness in their mid to late thirties" false or untrue.

Is "being good with women" a thing? What do you mean exactly? Sounds like PUA stuff? How good someone is with women is probably correlated to how good the guy looks. A looker is always good with women isn't he. I'm happy being myself and just seeing if myself and the girl click and enjoy each others company. Maybe you're talking about shy lads or lads with issues? In that case I agree but if a lad can just be his normal self and chat away then I wouldn't class that as "being good with women", more just being a normal lad. The same way a girl being "good with lads" isn't really a thing is it. Maybe I'm totally off base but thats how i see it.

07-01-2021 04:15PM

fantaiscool wrote: »

Is "being good with women" a thing? What do you mean exactly?..........

Of course it's a thing, loads of lads are brutal with women, can't chat etc for whatever reason.

I'm struggling to accept that you a questioning is it a "thing". Everyone knows folk great with women and folk that couldn't "score in a hohouse" :pac:

fantaiscool wrote: »

............ Every lad in my group of friends is confident and a cool guy. It's normal isn't it? .......

I know loads of lads who weren't confident with women or good with women. They all got married etc so they met someone etc etc etc but put them into a nightclub or a bar and they'd be going home with a bag of chips 99 nights out of a 100.

fantaiscool wrote: »

.........A looker is always good with women isn't he...........

Not really, not all women or even most of them are that shallow to be fair.

Lux23 · 07-01-2021 05:05PM

fantaiscool wrote: »

*as long as you are female

Nope, men can find plenty of paying customers too, just they will generally be other men.

Lux23 · 07-01-2021 05:10PM

fantaiscool wrote: »

Is "being good with women" a thing? What do you mean exactly? Sounds like PUA stuff? How good someone is with women is probably correlated to how good the guy looks. A looker is always good with women isn't he. I'm happy being myself and just seeing if myself and the girl click and enjoy each others company. Maybe you're talking about shy lads or lads with issues? In that case I agree but if a lad can just be his normal self and chat away then I wouldn't class that as "being good with women", more just being a normal lad. The same way a girl being "good with lads" isn't really a thing is it. Maybe I'm totally off base but thats how i see it.

I think there are some people that are naturally very charming and they aren't necessarily the best looking. They are just friendly and easy to talk to.

Aw Noice · 07-01-2021 05:40PM

I am a 36yo white male with a Tinder account set to various cities in South East Asia.

I have matched with over 200 women and many of these are 18-21 yos who would be happy to be my gf.

Aw Noice · 07-01-2021 05:47PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Never underestimate the amount of men chasing even a mildly attractive woman.

The male sex drive is so strong that men will do anything for sex.

Padre_Pio · 07-01-2021 06:17PM

Aw Noice wrote: »

I am a 36yo white male with a Tinder account set to various cities in South East Asia.

I have matched with over 200 women and many of these are 18-21 yos who would be happy to be my gf.

Did you ask all 200?

I have probably 200 tinder matches, but how many do I actually want to message?
Of those, how many would respond if I messaged them?
How many would like to eventually meet up?
How many would want to meet up a second time?

I said it many times that if your tinder profile was just labrador pictures you'd have more matches than 90% of men.

07-01-2021 06:19PM

Aw Noice wrote: »

I am a 36yo white male with a Tinder account set to various cities in South East Asia.

I have matched with over 200 women and many of these are 18-21 yos who would be happy to be my gf.

Most of them are likely pros or just after a westerner.

Aw Noice · 07-01-2021 06:20PM

Augeo wrote: »

Most of them are likely pros or just after a westerner.

Cope

Aw Noice · 07-01-2021 06:22PM

Padre_Pio wrote: »

Did you ask all 200?

I have probably 200 tinder matches, but how many do I actually want to message?
Of those, how many would respond if I messaged them?
How many would like to eventually meet up?
How many would want to meet up a second time?

I said it many times that if your tinder profile was just labrador pictures you'd have more matches than 90% of men.

I talk to the most attractive ones. I'm like a 5/10 in looks so getting this rock star treatment is amazing.

It will be incredibly easy to get a 9/10 gf in SEA once the pandemic is over.

fantaiscool · 07-01-2021 06:31PM

Lux23 wrote: »

Nope, men can find plenty of paying customers too, just they will generally be other men.

Well you might have a point. On the other hand you could be doing a disservice to the gay community. I'm not sure. I don't think most guys would feel comfortable putting themselves out there for a gay audience anyway.

Biker79 · 07-01-2021 10:58PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Spot on.

Society is just one continuous evolution. The world is not going to collapse because people get their mickeys and minges out on OnlyFans.

Not sure you could call the mass participation of women in p**hub and only fans as evolution.

Its quite anti-reproduction, when you think about it.

Evolution implies a linear trajectory. But sexual debauchery tends to peak as civilisations begin to decline - if the rise and fall of historical civilisations is any measure.

Maybe this time will be different.

07-01-2021 11:06PM

Biker79 wrote: »

Not sure you could call the mass participation of women in p**hub and only fans as evolution.

Its quite anti-reproduction, when you think about it.

Evolution implies a linear trajectory. But sexual debauchery tends to peak as civilisations begin to decline - if the rise and fall of historical civilisations is any measure.

Maybe this time will be different.

Nonsense.

Many of the great and long-lasting civilisations were awash with debauchery throughout their time.

Rome
Greece
Egypt
Mongols
China

all had very liberal views on sex and relationships.

This idea that debauchery is a sign of civilizational decline is a total work of fiction.

Potential-Monke · 07-01-2021 11:19PM

fantaiscool wrote: »

The sexbot is interesting mainly because theres an accusation that the whole concept objectifies women but on the other hand women are objectifying themselves doing things like OnlyFans. Guys are not signing up for their personalities. If the sexbots become so advanced that there is no difference in how it would feel to have sex with one vs an actual woman then I wonder what would happen. I have no idea. I think men would still swarm to actual women as it's more about getting validation from women which a sexbot can't give? Although I have no idea how paying a woman for OnlyFans is somehow giving validation to a man. I would opt for a sexbot if it was realistically on par with having sex with an actual woman but I'm not sure it would take off. It's probably light years away too.

I wouldn't say it's lightyears away. There are already "real feel" dolls out there which are supposed to be really good, they're just not moving yet. And another inventor has some dolls already that do very basic speech.

I don't think I'll be around for it, but sexbots will 100% be a thing at some stage. If they get to the level where you can't really tell the difference, I can see a lot of people going for them. I would, but only because what i'm looking for in a woman is probably not realistic and/or well out of my league. I'm quite happy being single right now, and if there was a bot to take care of the sexual stuff, I would genuinely consider it, again especially if one can't tell the difference. It would be great to have the benefits of a missus but with an off button. Plus they could probably be programmed to be exactly what you're looking for.

Mister Vain · 07-01-2021 11:37PM

They already have sex doll brothels in some places. Now that would be weird.

Potential-Monke · 08-01-2021 01:55AM

Going by the above, it's a good way for women who want to make money via sex to screen potential buyers! Get paid to be seen naked, then arrange some squishy time with viewers for extra monies, and have you pick. Win-win!

Padre_Pio · 08-01-2021 01:13PM

Aw Noice wrote: »

I talk to the most attractive ones. I'm like a 5/10 in looks so getting this rock star treatment is amazing.

It will be incredibly easy to get a 9/10 gf in SEA once the pandemic is over.

The "rock-star treatment" is having Asian women send you a text :pac::pac:

Liam Gallagher was right, times are tough

Mister Vain · 08-01-2021 01:49PM

Aw Noice wrote: »

I am a 36yo white male with a Tinder account set to various cities in South East Asia.

I have matched with over 200 women and many of these are 18-21 yos who would be happy to be my gf.

I have mine set to Irish towns and I still manage to only match with girls in Hong Kong.

Biker79 · 08-01-2021 02:31PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Nonsense.

Many of the great and long-lasting civilisations were awash with debauchery throughout their time.

Rome
Greece
Egypt
Mongols
China

all had very liberal views on sex and relationships.

This idea that debauchery is a sign of civilizational decline is a total work of fiction.

And they all vanished for the reasons I mentioned.

It most certainly is not nonsense. A population cannot sustain itself by reproducing into the next generation, once debauchery goes beyond a certain level. You may find that offensive but its simple arithmetic.

Unless tech advances to create artificial wombs. At which point women can then supply their eggs and men can supply their sperm, and let the machines do the rest.

It won't be the women of p**nhub and Onlyfans that will step up to solve this problem though, you can be sure of that.

EmmetSpiceland · 08-01-2021 02:44PM

Biker79 wrote: »

And they all vanished for the reasons I mentioned.

It most certainly is not nonsense. A population cannot sustain itself by reproducing into the next generation, once debauchery goes beyond a certain level. You may find that offensive but its simple arithmetic.

Unless tech advances to create artificial wombs. At which point women can then supply their eggs and men can supply their sperm, and let the machines do the rest.

It won't be the women of p**nhub and Onlyfans that will step up to solve this problem though, you can be sure of that.

Time to bring us back to the ‘Ireland that we dreamed of’, eh, B?

fantaiscool · 10-01-2021 10:56AM

Biker79 wrote: »

And they all vanished for the reasons I mentioned.

It most certainly is not nonsense. A population cannot sustain itself by reproducing into the next generation, once debauchery goes beyond a certain level. You may find that offensive but its simple arithmetic.

Unless tech advances to create artificial wombs. At which point women can then supply their eggs and men can supply their sperm, and let the machines do the rest.

It won't be the women of p**nhub and Onlyfans that will step up to solve this problem though, you can be sure of that.

Those civilizations didn't have artificial intelligence. AI will soon enough be taking jobs and pushing humans out of the workplace more and more. Capitalism ensures that companies will use AI to reduce costs as soon as they can. I remember being in Tesco a few years ago and there were so many people working. Once machines came in they dropped the numbers of staff hugely. This is happening not just to low paid jobs either and will continue to happen.

99nsr125 · 10-01-2021 02:27PM

fantaiscool wrote: »

Those civilizations didn't have artificial intelligence. AI will soon enough be taking jobs and pushing humans out of the workplace more and more. Capitalism ensures that companies will use AI to reduce costs as soon as they can. I remember being in Tesco a few years ago and there were so many people working. Once machines came in they dropped the numbers of staff hugely. This is happening not just to low paid jobs either and will continue to happen.

It will happen to high paid jobs first guaranteed

Think about automation and robotics in car plants.

Padre_Pio · 07-02-2021 12:51AM

Did you use your real name when you subscribed?

Opinions on onlyfans and adult entertainment industry

Comments