Screw it! I’m Downloading OnlyFans!
/“Screw it! I’m downloading OnlyFans!” I turn and see the girl behind me laughing with her friend in lecture. They continue to brainstorm the various ways they can pay for their expensive utilities bill. OnlyFans is online platform where creators sell exclusive content to users. Users pay a fee, usually between five and ten dollars per month to subscribe to a creator’s account (Jarvey, 2020). Although OnlyFans does not advertise sex work, OnlyFans is primarily associated with one thing: porn (Safaee, 2021). OnlyFans has become exponentially popular and it is now mainstream, and COVID-19 has had a huge influence on the company’s success. The restrictions imposed by COVID-19 created a demand for digital sex work and digital intimacy, and the timing and goal of OnlyFans were near perfect. During the first year of the pandemic, global subscriptions rose from 20 million to 120 million (Nilsson, 2021).
This blog explores the benefits and drawbacks to creating sexually explicit material (SEM) on OnlyFans with an emphasis on sexual wellbeing and will assess if the mentality, “Screw it! I’m downloading OnlyFans!” holds any value.
OnlyFans = Empowered Sex God?
Katrin Tiidenberg (2014) studied exotic bloggers and self-shooters on Tumblr, a social media website. OnlyFans is similar to Tumblr and may demonstrate similar effects on sexuality. Like Tumblr, OnlyFans operates like a social network: creators posts photos and videos to their account; however, the key difference is that OnlyFans users must subscribe to have access to content (Jarvey, 2020).
Blogging SEM directly challenges a theory called the “regimen of shame,” where many sexual practices cannot be openly expressed, causing immense anxiety and dissatisfaction (Tiidenberg, 2014). Tiidenberg (2014) found that creators on Tumblr had increased sexual desires and sexual open-mindedness. This finding was attributed to two unique characteristics of sexual self-shooting and blogging. First, creators on Tumblr were frequently exposed to sexual scripts that were different from their own, and the website was viewed as a safe community for discussing sexual desires. Furthermore, Tiidenberg (2014) notes SEM that is self-shot has shown to be a form of empowering exhibitionism. Feeling in control of the process of taking and editing sexual content, paired with the support from subscribers, transforms one’s blog into a sensual “looking glass,” and can improve sexual self-esteem.
Give Me Some Sexual Agency
OnlyFans may give women some of that sexual agency they’ve been craving. OnlyFans is recognized for personal power and control over sexual decisions, especially in the adult entertainment industry. Marylin Corsianos evaluated if mainstream pornography could promote women’s sexual agency in 2007 (pre OnlyFans). Most of Corsianos’ (2007) work highlighted that SEMs are entrenched in a patriarchal and heterosexist landscape. For example, in mainstream pornography, women are expected to perform a sexual script that emphasizes men’s satisfaction over their own pleasure and are bound to a hyper-feminine role. Corsianos (2007) concluded that new pornography must be diverse/self-defined and more accessible to creators to improve women’s sexual agency. OnlyFans is an example of the rise in individualized erotic labour where sex work is conducted, managed, and advertised in an isolated setting (Jones, 2015). It seems that the framework of OnlyFans allows women to obtain the sexual agency that Corsianos described. OnlyFans might just make women their own boss, and finally allow them to gain capital on their sexuality without entering the historically sexist mainstream porn industry.
No Such Thing as Easy $
Selling SEM comes with risks. Many individuals struggle with the stigma and social repercussions that are associated with this type of work. This begs the question, why did OnlyFans make exotic labour more appealing to those who previously would have never considered this type of work? In short, money. OnlyFans captivates its users by promising fast, easy money with the added benefit of being your own boss (Safaee, 2021). Individuals who sell SEMs reported that money was the primary motivation for joining the industry and maintaining involvement (Griffith et al. 2010). However, there are misconceptions surrounding OnlyFans and its profit that are vital to consider. First, the distribution of income on OnlyFans is exceptionally skewed. An analysis found that the top 1% of creators make 33% of the profits on the website (Perry, 2020). Furthermore, the average woman creator on OnlyFans only secures 30 subscribers. Additionally, the analysis notes that creators’ income may not pay off when measuring both the time spent creating material and interacting with subscribers (Perry, 2020).
Goodbye Privacy.
OnlyFans might seems private--I mean, people need to pay to see the content, right? Angela Jones (2015) investigated the role of sex work in the digital era. They note that scholars in sexuality view the Internet as a positive adaptation in the sex work industry, creating more affordances in physical safety and improving solicitation for SEM producers. However, Jones (2015) reminds us that the Internet is not as safe as you may think. SEM workers, such as Camgirls, are frequently victims of capping and doxing, two risks that one must be aware of when considering OnlyFans. Capping is when consumers share a creator’s SEM on other platforms without consent or compensation. Doxing is when viewers find personal information, such as your address, birth name, etc. and share with other users to harass the SEM producer. Indeed, creators on OnlyFans were distressed by the lack of security on their account. Safaee (2021) interviewed six creators on OnlyFans, and found that a common concern reported was the emotional stress of their content being shared. Multiple creators had not disclosed their account to family or friends. Many creators felt that they would be humiliated if those in their social circle become aware of their account. As discussed previously, shame around sexual behaviours can cause immense anxiety and dysfunction in one’s sexuality (Tiidenberg, 2014).
Does OnlyFans Really Matter?
Why does these issues matter if OnlyFans is “worth it” to the average creator? SEM has grown exponentially in the last few decades and it is increasingly consumed due to accessibility from the Internet (Pukall, 2020). Much emphasis is placed on the effects of consuming SEM, while the effects of producing SEM has been ignored. This is problematic, as platforms, such as OnlyFans, have increased participation in this form of sex work. To many, OnlyFans is appealing, given that the individualized erotic labour entails more sexual agency and empowerment. However, this article addressed two main costs associated with creating content on OnlyFans. First, that OnlyFans has a false reputation of providing an impressive income for its users which undermines the popular motivation for producing SEM. Second, creators on OnlyFans experience immense emotional distress over the lack of privacy and risk sexual shame and harassment. Indeed, it seems as though SEM on the Internet is here to stay, so perhaps it is time to consider the health and wellbeing of its creators especially as this workforce increases in size and becomes more mainstream.
Chelsea Roberts, Psychology (Honours) - BAH / 3rd year, Queen’s University.
References
Angela Jones. (2015). Sex Work in a Digital Era. Sociology Compass, 9(7), 558–570. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12282
Aryana Safaee. (2021). Sex, Love, and OnlyFans: How the Gig Economy Is Transforming Online Sex Work. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Griffith, Hayworth, M., Adams, L. T., Mitchell, S., & Hart, C. (2012). Characteristics of Pornography Film Actors: Self-Report versus Perceptions of College Students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42(4), 637–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-0033-5
Katrin Tiidenberg. (2014). Bringing sexy back: Reclaiming the body aesthetic via self-shooting. Cyberpsychology, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2014-1-3
Louise Perry. (2020). By exploiting loneliness, OnlyFans became the porn industry’s great lockdown winner. But at what cost? New Statesman (1996), 149(5545).
Marylin Corsianos. (2007). Mainstream Pornography and “Women”: Questioning Sexual Agency. Critical Sociology, 33(5-6), 863–885. https://doi.org/10.1163/156916307X230359
Natalie Jarvey. (2020). OnlyFans: Hollywood’s Risque Pandemic Side Hustle. Hollywood Reporter, 426, 32–33.
Patricia Nilsson. (2021). OnlyFans blurs boundaries as lockdown demand drives success. FT.com.
Pukall. (2020). Human Sexuality : A Contemporary Introduction (Third Edition.). Oxford University Press.