body { -ms-overflow-style: scrollbar; overflow-y: scroll; overscroll-behavior-y: none; } .errorContainer { background-color: #FFF; color: #0F1419; max-width: 600px; margin: 0 auto; padding: 10%; font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; } .errorButton { margin: 3em 0; } .errorButton a { background: #1DA1F2; border-radius: 2.5em; color: white; padding: 1em 2em; text-decoration: none; } .errorButton a:hover, .errorButton a:focus { background: rgb(26, 145, 218); } .errorFooter { color: #657786; font-size: 80%; line-height: 1.5; padding: 1em 0; } .errorFooter a, .errorFooter a:visited { color: #657786; text-decoration: none; padding-right: 1em; } .errorFooter a:hover, .errorFooter a:active { text-decoration: underline; } #placeholder, #react-root { display: none !important; } body { background-color: #FFF !important; }

JavaScript is not available.

We’ve detected that JavaScript is disabled in this browser. Please enable JavaScript or switch to a supported browser to continue using twitter.com. You can see a list of supported browsers in our Help Center.

Terms of Service Privacy Policy Cookie Policy Imprint Ads info © 2023 Twitter, Inc.

Conversation

I don't think Onlyfans is introducing more promiscuity - I think it (and stuff like WAP) are symptoms of changing cultural tides in regards to *seduction*, not actual sex. The difference may be hard to spot but I think it's extremely important. Thread:

14

38

289

I suspect seduction rites and sex rites are two extremely different classes and should be treated separately. Seduction rites include culturally visible sexual power - from bared ankles to miniskirts - and messaging around that power. Right now we're seeing a huge rise in 1/

1

1

55

female sexual signalling - the scope of what is acceptable female seduction display is widening a lot - look at Onlyfans and WAP. It's very explicit, borderline pornographic, female-empowerment messaging. But I think this is *not* transferring to sex as much as people think! 2/

2

2

63

Our cultural messaging isn't emphasizing sexual messaging, it's emphasizing sexual *power*, and culturally, women's sexual power is held *without* having sex with men. Case study: Bella Thorne. Bella is the most recent famous Onlyfans girl and a great example of 3/

1

1

59

what people (or more importantly, young women) think of as sexual power and *how* to be acceptable on Onlyfans. Bella posts very tantalizing photos, obscured art nudes, high-flash short-skirt shots, but *not* actual pornography. Her message is "Come close, but don't touch." 4/

1

1

44

And this is the same with WAP - the singers of the song are both in long term relationships, one of them married. Iirc Cardi B has joked about not actually having sex with many people, despite the song. The lyrics are explicit but the women themselves *are not*. 5/

1

1

48

The fascinating thing about Onlyfans isn't that girls are sluttier (young women are having *less* sex!), it's that the line between seduction and sex is getting much more visible in the narrowing space. To me, the lack of bleed over is the important and worrying thing here. 6

1

1

73

Women's sexual power is being flaunted - the thing you want but cannot get is being blown up, socially embraced, put into your face. And I think this is good - but what's worrying to me is the asymmetry between gendered power here. I think if we don't figure out a way to give 7/

3

67

men - especially less powerful ones - a distinct way of being able to actually access sex, we might be in for more trouble. In this regard, I think in-person escorting is way more socially healthy than online stuff like Onlyfans is. 8/8

21

2

154

This Tweet is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more

Replying to

why the hell is my twitter full of people just assuming that im an idiot? Ive talked *extensively* making your exact point on podcasts, seriously fuck twitter today

1:23 AM · Oct 13, 2020