EU Sweden Cracks Down On OnlyFans - Will U.S. Follow Suit?

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

OnlyFans keeps a 20% cut of what users pay, boasting $1.3 billion of revenue in 2023. It’s a lucrative approach to monetizing porn consumption, but the platform just hit a legal roadblock in a seemingly unlikely country.

The X-rated social media platform OnlyFans is experiencing real growth, with revenue, content, and user numbers all on the rise. The site’s over 4 million “creators” sell content – including images, videos, and personalized chats – to more than 300 million subscribers, or “fans.” It’s primarily a sex site, and claims that the platform isn’t powered by porn are usually accompanied by winks and nods to the contrary.

Sweden, which in 1971 became the second country in the world to formally legalize all forms of pornography, has not been as soft on prostitution. In 1999, the country criminalized the purchase of sex, but not the sale, in efforts to protect vulnerable women from facing stiff legal consequences.

That policy will now apply to the virtual world. As of July 1, Swedes could face up to a year in prison for paying someone for personalized online sexual services, including sexting and video content. The new law also criminalizes promoting or profiting from others who perform sex acts for payment on demand, forcing OnlyFans to pull out of Sweden.

In a country known for libertines more than prudes, the law passed with broad, cross-party support. “The idea is that anyone who buys sexual acts performed remotely should be penalized in the same way as those who buy sexual acts involving physical contact,” said Gunnar Strommer, Sweden’s Justice Minister and a member of the Moderate party.

The U.S. has drawn a harder line on in-person prostitution than Sweden. Excluding certain counties in Nevada, it is illegal to both buy and sell sex in America. But OnlyFans – which exploded in the U.S. during the pandemic – remains legal in all 50 states, allowing Fenix International Limited, the London-based firm that owns OnlyFans, to profit from the sale of millions of sext messages and live video chats.

A growing number of bipartisan lawmakers are citing concerns about the role of social media in online sex trafficking. Some are calling out OnlyFans by name.

“Americans are being sexually exploited on OnlyFans,” said U.S. Rep. Ann Wagner, a Missouri Republican. “Congress and federal law enforcement must do more.”

In 2018, Wagner sponsored the FOSTA-SESTA Act, which Donald Trump signed into law. The bill gave federal and state prosecutors more authority to go after websites on which sex is sold, even holding platforms and Internet service providers responsible for user-generated ads related to sex work. But the FOSTA-SESTA Act mostly targets traffickers who use the internet as a recruitment or facilitating tool, whereas Sweden’s law prohibits the purchase of virtual prostitution (that is, paying for sex from sex workers who provide their services in the virtual space) as well as profiting from virtual prostitution.

With Trump back in office, Wagner and like-minded lawmakers appear eager to enact stricter regulations. If Sweden’s new law were replicated in the U.S., OnlyFans’ earnings would plummet. Roughly a quarter of the site’s content creators are American women, and nearly two-thirds of the platform’s revenue is generated in the U.S., according to the most recent data.

Many sex workers say that criminalizing online prostitution is illogical because it will only result in women working in more dangerous in-person settings. A number of human rights organizations also argue that prostitution should be legalized because it grants sex workers greater access to legal protection and healthcare while also helping law enforcement better differentiate between the consenting and the coerced.

Some European governments agree, including Belgium, which last December granted sex workers formal labor rights, entitling them to sick leave, maternity pay, and pensions. Some are unionizing, and many more are opting to ditch the brothel scene and work from home.

As for trafficking, OnlyFans argues that they have invested in AI tools and ID verification systems to ensure that only of-age, consenting adults are participating on the site. It is true that OnlyFans has invested more into such measures than most other social media platforms or porn sites. But despite these filters, there are still reports of abuse and trafficking occurring on the site, which OnlyFans says is the result of only a few bad apples.

Many industry advocates say that lawmakers seeking to regulate the online sex trade are simply anti-porn religious zealots. But few U.S. lawmakers are signing on with Utah Senator Mike Lee, who is currently on his third attempt since 2022 to ban pornography nationwide. Rather, most speak of the issue in terms of the need to curb trafficking – mirroring the narrative of many Swedish lawmakers.

Sanna Backeskog, a Swedish politician and proponent of the recent law, insists she has no interest in being the porn police. She said, “This is about digitalized prostitution, where the boundaries between pornography and human trafficking are blurred.”

As lawmakers in the U.S. and Europe seek to clarify those blurred boundaries, some say Sweden is on the right track, that regulations will curb demand, and trafficking will go down. Others say the law will only make things worse as more prostitutes revert to doing their work in the dark.

The appetite for online sexual interactions is growing, and OnlyFans is reportedly on sale for $8 billion. The platform’s current owners hope that nations (especially the U.S.) won’t mimic Sweden’s recent law. After all, how else would OnlyFans continue to flourish in such a hot market?
 
The tylers, the two guys who run Zerohedge, posted some pics in their repost of the articles. Here's what the tylers find hot.

Maria-Luna-Onlyfans_jpg_92.webpimage9_png_92.webpiamasiadoll_jpg_92.webp83918066007-bophouse-1_jpg_92.webp417116270_345872525051532_2003231616119039797_n_jpg_92.webp3HZLxFI6VLYMKrcSQMMJm47iNrUs9peghq5Ce5_CWyn-xHvZEk2YdKWOvlZ0bZEsb8a4lP-T3XsrDcS7xYrx5FsqvdeXc...webp3290deb4f8db024f1613ccd7475a07bc_jpg_92.webp1_OnlyFans-star_jpg_92.webp
 
I was really unclear on how they're drawing a distinction between prostitution and porn here. But I see from another article linked in the text that the distinction is live performances:

While viewing and paying for pre-recorded content remains legal, the law targets live, commissioned interactions, which lawmakers argue blur legal and ethical lines.

I still think it's shaky. Camgirls were a thing for years long before the centralization of online spaces. Were they considered prostitutes, legally? Hell, strippers have existed for God knows how long. Assuming we're talking about only the ones who strip (and don't actually have physical contact with the onlookers), are they considered prostitutes, legally?

I can understand wanting to curtail all forms of pimpery, whether it's the bartender who takes a cut from the strippers or the platform that takes twenty damn percent from the OnlyFans "model," especially when these people may have been groomed and/or coerced into what they're doing. I'm just not sure this is the way to do it.
 
Local government that prides itself on feminist reputation trying really hard to thread the needle on banning online thottery without incurring a feminist backlash.
As can be expected, the chosen strategy involves punishing the nearest men by drawing parallels between paying a girl to film herself schlicking at home while saying your name to having sex with one in a dirty hotel room while her pimp keeps watch outside. One is considerably more perilous for the woman involved and that's basically the only reason the legal double standard between selling/purchasing sex made sense.
 
Sweden yes?
Accidentally correct outcome on the stupidest of premises.

some say Sweden is on the right track, that regulations will curb demand, and trafficking will go down.
The legality of vices really doesn't seem to affect their demand, and with this kind of content in particular, people will probably just end up replacing it with foreign sources. Its the internet, there will always be new sources the government hasn't noticed yet. A lot of these "outlaw the demand, not the supply" stuff just creates a perverse market where they'll sell it anyway, and it turns into a huge pit of scams and bullshit because the retarded buyers are basically signing up to be blackmailed. Maybe try not having a shitty ass border if you're worried about people smugglers kidnapping folks into sex work, as opposed to targeting the extreme end of the business model in a vague effort to make it inconvenient. Or, better yet, if someone is trafficked, and caught illegally selling sexual services, you can just give them immunity to the sex crimes if they provide info leading to the takedown of the traffickers. The law is whatever you want it to be if you can get people to agree to write it down. Loopholes are decisions and negligence, not a mandatory thing.

Long term, AI will probably kill a lot of this entirely. Either people will accept virtual sluts as a good enough substitute, at which point the infinite energy of horny will do what it did with image generation and make it free and open source, killing the porn producers when people start running local versions. Or, people will reject the virtual sluts, but the appeal to the porn producers of using virtual sluts and making gooner money with very little costs and no legal complications from real actors will lead to a perpetually untrustworthy market where you never know if they're real. And if you'll never know, why bother risking paying to be scammed, just use the previously mentioned inevitable free models and accept its the best you'll get, even if you don't really like it.

The social implications of all this could be horrifying, but all I'm talking about is how it'll shut down the coomconomy, which is a generally good thing.
 
Coomers addicted to camgirls are a legit social problem. It's the sex thing plus the faux social interactions that has the potential to really fuck with their heads.

Like you're lucky if all they do is go into debt, because they have the potential to get really unhinged.

My favorite example is Grant Amato. Dude went broke throwing money at some eastern European camwhore, then stole his family's credit cards, maxed those out, and when his dad confronted him about it, he murdered them all. He tried to sorta frame his surviving brother for it, if I remember correctly.

That sort of outcome probably isn't super common, but still, I really don't think these sorts of social interactions are particularly healthy.
 
My favorite example is Grant Amato. Dude went broke throwing money at some eastern European camwhore, then stole his family's credit cards, maxed those out, and when his dad confronted him about it, he murdered them all. He tried to sorta frame his surviving brother for it, if I remember correctly.
I was going to bring that up.
 
So if live no contact performance is illegal to buy, are all the strip clubs getting closed too?
women from facing stiff legal consequences.

forcing OnlyFans to pull out of Sweden.
Gotta get those innuendos in…
Do I read correctly? Four million ‘content creators’ and a quarter are American women? So one million American women on OF? 300 million people, so 150 million women, probably about 100 million in the 18-60 bracket. One percent are on OF? That’s insane
 
So if live no contact performance is illegal to buy, are all the strip clubs getting closed too?



Gotta get those innuendos in…
Do I read correctly? Four million ‘content creators’ and a quarter are American women? So one million American women on OF? 300 million people, so 150 million women, probably about 100 million in the 18-60 bracket. One percent are on OF? That’s insane
I’d love to do a study on how many women today rely on sugar daddies, sex work, and wish fulfillment for income. Also at what age does a woman start considering it. Because I know it isn’t right when it’s legal, it has to be introduced as a concept when they are still a minor. Maybe through relatives or something.
 
Also at what age does a woman start considering it. Because I know it isn’t right when it’s legal, it has to be introduced as a concept when they are still a minor. Maybe through relatives or something.
Many, if not most of them are groomed by media as young teenagers.

The TikTok to OnlyFans pipeline is a phenomenon that’s been known about for a while. A lot of TikTok and other influencers glamorise and promote cyber prostitution to young teenagers to convince them to join as soon as they turn 18. OF has a referral program so users can get kickbacks for everyone they convince to sign up.

And you know those articles you see every so often about a slightly above average young woman on OF who makes $60,000 per month, gets to travel the world and bought a mansion at 22? They’re ads, but not for her to get more subscribers. They’re ads primarily directed at younger girls to sell them on the idea that “sex work” is a safe, easy ticket to a dream life that would otherwise be out of reach.
 
At the end of the day, pornography is just prostitution via a camera. The fact it is allowed in the US, or Sweden is simply a representation of the fact neither nation is opposed to sexual quid pro quo. Pointing out the it's illegal to buy sex in either country only reinforces this point. Its illegal to buy because its assumed that men are the only buyers, and women are the only sellers. Allowing easily available sex for men drives down the perceived value of sex with a woman who demands a relationship. Which is where 99% of the opposition to porn, and sex workers comes from. Penalizing buyers, but not sellers is like penalizing addicts, but not drug dealers. It is a pointless action.

Don't believe me? Fine, but answer as to why porn is allowed to exist? Whatever can be said of street prostitution, or brothels, what happens there tends to be away from the viewing of the public. Its not directly in front of the eyes of children. It can't be taken into schools via smart phones, it can't be watched late at night in a bedroom. However going after porn requires going after the women who film it, it is a solution unacceptable to women, be they ardent lesbians, or "bible thumping" moms. Any excuses about "men demand it" fall flat when one realizes porn was illegal for most of America's history. Up until 1969, the mere possession of a pornographic image was illegal in the US. That's not to mention the long history of the porn industries fight to go from illicit underground to accepted mainstream. It can't be said that if women opposed porn it would be made legal in the same span of history as the feminist movement. In fact the opposite can be said and is true. Without feminism, porn in America would never have happened. Given that feminisms main opponents were the same Christians who outlawed porn in the first place.

What countries like Sweden are doing here is wasting time instead of tackling actual issues. They're not opposed to porn, they're not even opposed to prostitution. They're merely opposed to the "immoral" hit that women would take. The vast rapes, the vast asylum seeker gangs, the rampant crime, the drugs. These aren't actual issues. There inconveniences. Women not being able to use sex as a means to control men, now that's an actual issue that needs addressing. Even if the lack of control is mere a step down in the absolutist, all or nothing, control modern women demand.
 
The tylers, the two guys who run Zerohedge, posted some pics in their repost of the articles. Here's what the tylers find hot.

I will never understand the appeal of the Moscow Whore look.

Do I read correctly? Four million ‘content creators’ and a quarter are American women? So one million American women on OF? 300 million people, so 150 million women, probably about 100 million in the 18-60 bracket. One percent are on OF? That’s insane
And most of them make almost nothing, I doubt many of them are particularly active. The reality is that OF and Cam Sites and such are held up by a few really big performers, if you will, and everyone else barely makes anything. MyFreeCams once had an "accident" a few years back where they made the amount of tokens the girls had made that month visible. Lots of butt hurt camgirls since it turned out the top models were often lying to the lower tier ones about how much they were making. Highly amusing.
 
Back
Top Bottom