150
China Shuts Down OnlyFans, Calls It a Threat to National Morals and Social Order
(thedailyguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2025
150 points (99.3% liked)
news
24196 readers
564 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Why? Women should be empowered to do what they want with their bodies. Just because the majority doesn't agree with it doesn't mean it should be banned.
You talked about "nanny states" which is a common right wing argument about hating "when the government does stuff" so I was very confused. I still am tbh. If women want to pull out a camera and film themselves having sex in China, they can do that, they just can't do it for a profit, which prevents a lot of exploitation and coercion. I don't understand your angle here, you do seem to be anti-exploitation of women, but also seem to hate the idea of a government...trying to curtail exploitation of women? I'm just not sure I understand what you want. If I've fallen for a bit, please give a very funny response.
Sometimes right wingers have the right words for concepts. Just because I use the term does not make me a Republican.
I agree there's plenty of exploitation and coercion in sex work, but that's not all of it, and rather than ban everything about it I'd like to see legalization and regulation. Being able to have sex in whatever way you want between consenting adults is a fundamental human right to me, just like the right to abort a pregnancy. I don't want a government telling us what we can & can't do with our own bodies.
I believe banning things doesn't work, just pushes the activity underground making it more dangerous for everyone involved.
Under Capitalism its more complicated because the coercion behind sex work can be implied. In a Communist society hopefully no one will feel pressured into this line of work and the ones who do it do so willingly because they enjoy it.
I get that Hexbear doesn't like it.
This site has a lot of moral hangups. I started a thread about it and it got deleted by a mod. You can disagree with me without calling me a troll. I'm being sincere 🤷♂️
You don't have to like me. I'm used to it. Been an outcast all my life.
Oh ok, I don't hate you for disagreeing with me on this or anything, I wasn't calling this a bit to be mean, I've just seen you do things "in character" on this account, and I don't know much about Pete...I can't spell his last name. So I wasn't sure if this was a sincere opinion or a really complicated bit I didn't understand.
I do think it is a bit of a poor showing to just insist that is a "moral hangup" if someone disagrees with you on what the exploitation of women can look like, and it can get confusing when you're talking about a perfect hypothetical communist world, vs the actual reality that we live in, where China has decided to ban an American porn platform on the grounds of it being exploitative.
If I understand you correctly, you wouldn't disagree that exploitative platforms should be banned, just that you don't think that the government should ban sex work period, only the exploitative forms. Which I don't disagree with either, but one person's "exploitation" is another person's "perfectly fine" so it can be borderline impossible to sort out where that difference actually lies. Which I think is the center of our disagreement tbh, we would have different ideas about what constitutes "exploitation" and what doesn't. I think this is one of those things where we agree in broad strokes, but disagree on pointless minutia, which really isn't worth getting upset over.
This whole time I wasn't ever mad at you or anything, I was just confused and unsure of your opinion on things, and hopefully, I understand it properly now! Hope you have a nice day, and I do mean that sincerely. :)
No worries! Looking back I think I got too defensive. It's been a rough week for me on here and this is one of those issues that riles me up. IDK, I just see we all have less and less freedoms and I'm worried how far it will go?
Thanks for understanding. Hope you have a great weekend!