• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Society turning Puritan

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Meghan54

Lifer
Oct 18, 2009
10,400
3,401
136
I just gotta ask…OP, what do you mean by turning Puritanical?

Just an FYI…the “original” English settlers, like those in MA, CT, RI colonies came to this continent because they were too religiously conservative for England. Too puritanical, essentially.

The religious freedom they sought was to be, essentially, the 17th century equivalent of the Taliban.

In MA colony, it was against the law to be a Catholic and if found out you were such, you could be killed…it was the law.

Religion dominated every aspect of colonial life, esp prior to the revolution, and in many respects that notion has never left this country. Evidence of this is everywhere. Even in the most “liberal” of areas, there still exists a huge portion of the population that wants a Christian theocratic government…much like what the Taliban are instituting and how Iran is governed.
 

Meghan54

Lifer
Oct 18, 2009
10,400
3,401
136
Americans are puritans. Bullets flying all over the tv screen, no problem. Show a disguised nipple on Superbowl half time and pandemonium ensues, including unequal treatment between Jackson and Timberlake.
Exactly. Why, even one of the “colonizing” groups actually called themselves Puritans. Imagine what their beliefs were…
 
Feb 4, 2009
31,525
11,894
136
Hey maybe stuff like this could end up being a legitimate use case for bit coins?
Porn always wins, FU Visa/MasterCard/Discover we will accept digital currency for payment.
Best part will be when “Performers” are doing stuff for ether coins then the market drops so they did all that “stuff” for $1.33 real money or when the market suddenly increased and the stuck something somewhere for 8.8 million.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
67,666
4,264
126
Hmmm… where did the dirt come from mayhaps? ;)
Self hate, of course. Sex is divine, the closest most come to unity that frees us from ego. Naturally it is the first thing our self hate will strive to fuck up, to turn into a taboo or a secret shameful lust filled addictive thrill. After that the compulsive replaces the natural creating the illusion that freedom from puritanical repression is indulgence in what repression calls sinful. Sex goes from the innocence of natural being joy to something abhorred by religious nut cases or manifestations of indulgence in all of the sexual perversions such types create.

We see those who hate themselves for their natural desires causing desires that are a perversion, or those who accept the perversions as what good sex really is. These are just opposite sides of the same sick coin.

Self hate always creates concerns of adequacy and that drives everything. Performance anxiety creates need. Need always implies a lack. Real people, what would they need?
 

DisarmedDespot

Senior member
Jun 2, 2016
461
404
136
No offense, but all of you screeching about censorship or puritans or whatever are being extremely silly and/or are really bad at parsing information. OnlyFans will never say it, but this has nothing to do with payment providers being against porn or whatever. It's because OnlyFans sucks at moderating illegal shit and the BBC's had multiple stories about. Payment providers don't give a shit what you're paying for until it puts them at legal risk.
 

Pohemi420

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
4,465
1,908
136
From what I've gathered most of that (in the cannabis industry) is pretty racist. White people don't have those issues nearly as much.
That statement is rather comical if you know anything about the industry in legalized states, and how the financial side is still heavily weighed upon by federal laws. If you think it matters what color skin you have, well...that's just silly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
13,909
2,222
126
From what I've gathered most of that (in the cannabis industry) is pretty racist. White people don't have those issues nearly as much.
Sean Kemp had trouble getting his own marijuana store going in Seattle of all places, because he couldn't get financing so he had to join with a company run by a bunch of white guys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
61,404
5,330
126
I wouldn't be surprised if the move had a bit more of a legal bend like has been suggested. There was the one site (backstage?) that was sort of a front for prostitution/escorts that got busted for sex trafficking a few years back. I really wouldn't be surprised if some of the content published to OF was of dubious if not illegal means. Same for verifying ages of content makers. It's easy to pass it off as "marketing says this is a wise move" with the real motive of wanting to bail on the site and walk away after cashing out on the IPO before you started getting knocks from the Feds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi420

Pohemi420

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
4,465
1,908
136
Sean Kemp had trouble getting his own marijuana store going in Seattle of all places, because he couldn't get financing so he had to join with a company run by a bunch of white guys.
Not trying to go OT too far, but...while that's pretty unreal (for Kemp to be denied funding by private investors in that geographical area), the white boys he partnered with still aren't going to be taking their profits and depositing them in an FDIC bank/institution...I can almost guarantee it.

There is simply too high a risk of seizure/forfeiture from the feds. There are state banks that have opened for these legalized market businesses, but they are not FDIC insured against losses.
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
13,909
2,222
126
No offense, but all of you screeching about censorship or puritans or whatever are being extremely silly and/or are really bad at parsing information. OnlyFans will never say it, but this has nothing to do with payment providers being against porn or whatever. It's because OnlyFans sucks at moderating illegal shit and the BBC's had multiple stories about. Payment providers don't give a shit what you're paying for until it puts them at legal risk.
That's the issue Tumblr was having too. Although somehow Pornhub is a able to verify content (or they say they can).
 

alcoholbob

Diamond Member
May 24, 2005
6,213
292
126
thats fine you can still technically have candy without sugar.

Only Fans to the best of my knowledge makes money exclusively with porn. I seriously doubt anyone is gonna pay real money to watch girls just sitting around.
The ones that do are already on twitch anyway…
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
28,682
4,416
126
The thing I don't get, is if one payment processor jumps ship, why wouldn't there be someone else ready to pick up all that business?
 
Mar 11, 2004
21,607
3,750
126
Quick buck in terms of IPO.
Yes, I knew what you were talking about (seriously?). And if there's a mass exodus of users before their IPO then their IPO is gonna be poor. That's on top of most social media IPOs being much lower than anticipated. This move could doom OnlyFans before they even go public. And it'll be even worse when they pay tons of others for exclusivity deals to try and drum up subs.

Which hey, if they're being shitbags that were actively covering up such behavior then they deserve worse, and so fuck them.
 
Last edited:

Torn Mind

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2012
6,853
987
126
I think Americans will always have a domineering moral streak even without organized religion; they just don't realize it. Just establish something is sacred and boom, "society" gets a movin'. Those sinners. They must either be purified of their wrongful beliefs or else...cancel them...

The chips and fish never left the American psyche. They just converted them into hamburgers and fries.
 
Feb 4, 2009
31,525
11,894
136
Why is everyone so upset about this? I could care less. All of these services seem like they are designed to have sexy women scam lonely/insecure dudes out of their money.
I see zero value to these services.
 
Mar 11, 2004
21,607
3,750
126
No offense, but all of you screeching about censorship or puritans or whatever are being extremely silly and/or are really bad at parsing information. OnlyFans will never say it, but this has nothing to do with payment providers being against porn or whatever. It's because OnlyFans sucks at moderating illegal shit and the BBC's had multiple stories about. Payment providers don't give a shit what you're paying for until it puts them at legal risk.
My issue there is that, shit like that propagates on Facebook at (I'll have to find the articles, perhaps it was in the comment discussion on the Ars articles about Pornhub where the ones citing that stuff on Pornhub also showed it happens on Facebook) higher levels yet no such ban on Facebook. Why is that?

And the crackdown that I mentioned that happened under Obama happened to a lot of people in the established porn industry, over stuff that was fully legal (although I do wonder how much might be sketchy because of payment - i.e. transfer from offshore bank account or something that is more difficult to track the money value of like stocks or jewelry, etc, and wasn't taxed properly; there's not much transparency from either side with regards to what was all happening) and had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with child porn.

You're delusional if you think its just about child porn, that's just the way they excuse it so that people like you will act like no big deal. Same reason that QAnon has been posting insane obviously (if you actually bother to vet them) bullshit statistics about human/sex trafficking. They know it works. Hell, look at Apple going to start scanning your photos for child porn. Its an easy way to start.

Which absolutely I guarantee that OnlyFans (and PornHub, and others) need to do a better job of dealing with abhorrent sexual conduct (underage, forced/coerced, exploited, etc) so my issue isn't even that really, its that other bigger players are also having that issue whilst nothing is actually being done about them. So why are only the sex sites being singled out? If they can show proof of behavior of them trying to cover it up then ok (but then I think that was true of Facebook as well, so again, why the difference?). That was what sunk backpage was that there was proof that they actively looked at and edited posts to hide that shit for the ones posting it. In which case, ok, then why the fuck are they not being charged with criminal behavior instead of just threatened with payment processor removal? If they want companies to take this shit seriously then they need to start holding them actually accountable. But they're not. That's why this rings incredibly hollow.

That statement is rather comical if you know anything about the industry in legalized states, and how the financial side is still heavily weighed upon by federal laws. If you think it matters what color skin you have, well...that's just silly.
Yeah, talk to black people that tried going legit. You're clueless dude. There's a shitload of racism in the legal cannabis industry. Well perhaps not in the industry but rather the powers that grant legal status and financial avenues for making it legit.

Sean Kemp had trouble getting his own marijuana store going in Seattle of all places, because he couldn't get financing so he had to join with a company run by a bunch of white guys.
Stuff like that is not uncommon. And it happens outside the cannabis industry as well, but my point being so much of what the person I responded to was saying is institutionalized racism and isn't because of the illicit nature of the industry.
 
Last edited:

Pohemi420

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
4,465
1,908
136
Payment processors wield a ton of power…and the anti money laundering stuff has only made them more risk averse. Just ask anyone in the “legal” marijuana business.
From what I've gathered most of that (in the cannabis industry) is pretty racist. White people don't have those issues nearly as much.
That statement is rather comical if you know anything about the industry in legalized states, and how the financial side is still heavily weighed upon by federal laws. If you think it matters what color skin you have, well...that's just silly.
Yeah, talk to black people that tried going legit. You're clueless dude. There's a shitload of racism in the legal cannabis industry. Well perhaps not in the industry but rather the powers that grant legal status and financial avenues for making it legit.
The discussion started out on payment processors (ie banks and credit card companies). Not garnering initial investment capital.

If you want to move the goalposts, that's fine. But don't act like you can use an FDIC bank for your "legal" MJ business just because your skin is white...that's what I took your initial comment to be stating. Maybe I was mistaken.
 

DisarmedDespot

Senior member
Jun 2, 2016
461
404
136
My issue there is that, shit like that propagates on Facebook at (I'll have to find the articles, perhaps it was in the comment discussion on the Ars articles about Pornhub where the ones citing that stuff on Pornhub also showed it happens on Facebook) higher levels yet no such ban on Facebook. Why is that?
Facebook has a shitton of problems, but (correct me if I'm wrong, I don't use FB) they don't have an equivalent to OnlyFans where the user pays FB money to access content.

You're delusional if you think its just about child porn, that's just the way they excuse it so that people like you will act like no big deal. Same reason that QAnon has been posting insane obviously (if you actually bother to vet them) bullshit statistics about human/sex trafficking. They know it works. Hell, look at Apple going to start scanning your photos for child porn. Its an easy way to start.
You're delusional if you think some soulless payment corporation gives a damn about morality. What do you think is more likely:
  1. Said payment orgs who have been happily taking money from 'traditional' porn studios suddenly decide to be the morality police and cut OnlyFans off because morality
  2. Said payment orgs threaten to cut OnlyFans off because it's exposing them to legal risk
Which absolutely I guarantee that OnlyFans (and PornHub, and others) need to do a better job of dealing with abhorrent sexual conduct (underage, forced/coerced, exploited, etc) so my issue isn't even that really, its that other bigger players are also having that issue whilst nothing is actually being done about them. So why are only the sex sites being singled out? If they can show proof of behavior of them trying to cover it up then ok (but then I think that was true of Facebook as well, so again, why the difference?). That was what sunk backpage was that there was proof that they actively looked at and edited posts to hide that shit for the ones posting it. In which case, ok, then why the fuck are they not being charged with criminal behavior instead of just threatened with payment processor removal? If they want companies to take this shit seriously then they need to start holding them actually accountable. But they're not. That's why this rings incredibly hollow.
Again, payment processors DON'T give a damn about morality. There's two reasons they haven't cut off FaceBook but did threaten to cut off Onl;yFans:
  1. Since Facebook is not directly charging to access content (again, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't use FB), they're not exposing the payment orgs to legal risk directly
  2. Facebook is a shitton more money than OnlyFans
This is the exact same shit that went down with PornHub. PH has several damaging stories come out, payment processors recoil due to legal risk, PH has to make drastic changes. OnlyFans has several damaging stories come out, payment processors recoil due to legal risk, OnlyFans has to make drastic changes.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY