The rise of OnlyFans

fez said:
I think its a bigger issue with the monetary cost and life cost of having children these days. Most people will struggle to have anything like the quality of life their parents enjoyed without kids and as soon as you add kids to the equation you can basically wipe out half your income unless you are a very high earning couple.

This is simply the price we pay as a society for making everything me first, allowing the cost of living to spiral out of control and requiring both people in a relationship to have a good job to have a good quality of life. Loads of people want a family, they just can't see how its financially viable or sensible. Then you end up with too many of the wrong sort of people contributing to the next generation instead of the ones you want doing it.
Click to expand...

Would love to know how many people want more kids/a kid but can't vs those who just don't want kids.

Both cohorts are growing.

Some governments are throwing cash at it.. But looks like it isn't working anywhere really.
 
ttaskmaster said:
Most women have a degree of 'mentalness', but that's a reflection of how society shapes them and the neuroses that result.
Click to expand...

For most of human history they had to be very careful about who they had sex with and when. It's only been since the introduction of birth control that women have been able to be less concerned about the consequences, but that's only been a few generations. There is also some very interesting data coming out about the effects of birth control and how being on or off it can completely change the type of man they are sexually attracted to.

I believe that women, on average, are not inherently more 'mental' than men. Instead, we simply tend to prioritise and care about different things to varying degrees.
 
[FnG]magnolia said:
If only the decent men were easier to find and were, in fact, decent.
Click to expand...
That's part of the problem - There are plenty of 'nice guys' out there, but anyone who has to describe themselves, or thinks of themselves, as a "nice guy" generally isn't one.

Ayahuasca said:
For most of human history they had to be very careful about who they had sex with and when. It's only been since the introduction of birth control that women have been able to be less concerned about the consequences, but that's only been a few generations.
Click to expand...
They still do have to be very careful, but not just for reasons of pregnancy and social scandal. There are a lot of very nasty people out there who do a good job of either hiding their true selves, of helping others to cover it up and perpetuating the issues, or of ignorantly denying the issues altogether. Stats on rape, sexual and domestic abuse, child abuse, and other such 'concealed' crimes tell part of the story, but those are just the ones that get reported.
That's before you get into the details of what makes a 'normal', non-criminal man decent. I'm sure my attitude wil be dismissed by the Andrew Tate worshippers as pussy-whipped feminisation, but the question is are they (or you) the sort of guy you'd want your daughter to be with?

Ayahuasca said:
I believe that women, on average, are not inherently more 'mental' than men. Instead, we simply tend to prioritise and care about different things to varying degrees.
Click to expand...
I also think men underestimate how 'mental' they and their brethren can be.
 
It is shocking how many women have stories about cruel or even abusive partners.

The change over time of women's rights has been a great thing in the most part. Sure we have some bad side effects like needing 2 incomes for a house now.

But in balance, the fact that women can work to senior positions, can do OF if they choose to, have birth control available.. Its all good on balance.
 
malachi said:
It's the poorest people who have the most kids, that won't be changing anytime soon. And why should it? When you see reports about birth rates dropping over the world.
Click to expand...
Well if your on benefits you can’t afford kids.

Period.

You’re living off charity and expecting other people to then pay for the children you have.

That’s why it should change. Dropping birth rates is fine as the planet is overpopulated.
 
Last edited:
ttaskmaster said:
They still do have to be very careful
Click to expand...

They do but less so. The data shows that on average they are having more casual sex with a higher number of partners. So you would think if they were still being very careful we wouldn't have seen such an increase.

I'm not saying birth control is a bad thing, it absolutely isn't. However, it has changed and continues to change society.

My wife is one of those who notices a massive change in her mood, energy level and desire when she's on it. It's only in the last few years that we've seen some pretty convincing studies on the effects it can have on mood disorders, sexual attraction and so on.
 
Last edited:
413x said:
It is shocking how many women have stories about cruel or even abusive partners.
Click to expand...
The sad thing is they put up with bad behaviour at the start instead of choosing someone else.

Some men's behaviour as gotten out of hand. Together with the "boys will be boys" mind set of some women, to the lack of male peer pressure, it is a social disaster.

If a guy as no male friends, or is averse to having male friends, that is a red flag in my opinion.

413x said:
The change over time of women's rights has been a great thing in the most part. Sure we have some bad side effects like needing 2 incomes for a house now.
Click to expand...
That is why feminism was backed and promoted. Not for women's rights. But to double the workforce to double the amount of tax the government is getting.

413x said:
But in balance, the fact that women can work to senior positions, can do OF if they choose to, have birth control available.. Its all good on balance.
Click to expand...
I'd say the balance is society. Individualism is no good if it's not part of the wider community. Brainwashing women that they are a lesser person because they want to be a stay-at-home mum isn't good. It id destroying the family.

It might be good for the "I'm alright Jack/Jackie". But it's not good for the continuation of society.
 
Brazo said:
Well if your on benefits you can’t afford kids.

Period.

You’re living off charity and expecting other people to then pay for the children you have.

That’s why it should change. Dropping birth rates is fine as the planet is overpopulated.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
Birth rates need to drop we have to devise a way of coping with it.
Just like in nature. Populations go through peaks and troughs. We are hitting the Peak now.
 
The populations of western society is dropping, birth rates are below replacement. Western society isn't the issue.

3rd world countries where population growth is exponential will have a far greater impact over time than an increasing population in the west.

The population of India for example has increased from 350 million in the 1950s to over 1.4 billion today, and is projected to exceed 1.7 billion by 2050.
China had 500 million in 1950 and has 1.4 billion today, Their population is projected to decrease 700 million by 2050 (due to declining birth rates)

The UK has increased from 50 million in 1950 to 68 million today, and is expected to peak at 72 million by 2050.
The US 148 million to 340 million, peak of 375 million by 2050.

These numbers pale in comparison to the global population numbers out side of western countries. If population in western countries continue to fall, while others rise, then over time there will be a gradual shift in society and which countries control the power.

For reference global population 2.5 billion in 1950, 8.1 billion today, 9.7 billion by 2050.
 
MadMossy said:
The populations of western society is dropping, birth rates are below replacement. Western society isn't the issue.

3rd world countries where population growth is exponential will have a far greater impact over time than an increasing population in the west.

The population of India for example has increased from 350 million in the 1950s to over 1.4 billion today, and is projected to exceed 1.7 billion by 2050.
China had 500 million in 1950 and has 1.4 billion today, Their population is projected to decrease 700 million by 2050 (due to declining birth rates)

The UK has increased from 50 million in 1950 to 68 million today, and is expected to peak at 72 million by 2050.
The US 148 million to 340 million, peak of 375 million by 2050.

These numbers pale in comparison to the global population numbers out side of western countries. If population in western countries continue to fall, while others rise, then over time there will be a gradual shift in society and which countries control the power.

For reference global population 2.5 billion in 1950, 8.1 billion today, 9.7 billion by 2050.
Click to expand...

Even India is set for decline.
The birth rate just needs time to ripple through

Its literally only parts of Africa where birthrates are over 2.


Edit
Looks like there are a few area outside of Africa above 2.
Apparently World is at 2.2 a whisker away from global net under replacement
 
Last edited:
413x said:
Here's an interesting case study for you guys.

I have a friend of a friend who is incredibly desirable. She's really interesting, she's exciting and full of life, she's very attractive. She travels (seriously she's impressive how much she makes of life). She comes with one big issue.. Long term health issues. And I get the picture shes quite intense in relationships.

She does a lot of Instagram but I'm pretty sure not OF as she has a bf. She'd make a bomb on OF.


She's had a string of failed relationships. She's blessed and cursed with that desirability.
She could probably get nearly any guy into a relationship. And this is a problem. Because she can, she's dated the rich, she's dated the chads, but they all have failed. Mostly... She's dated douches. I get the picture she's the trophy gf.. Then the novelty wears off.

She's now mid 30s, wants a kid of her own, has thesehealth issues, and her latest relationship is on the rocks.


The curse of that desirability is certainly double edged. She's also cursed with wanting to travel and wanting a family and those physical health issues. Imagine being the next guys she dates... She's funny, she's hot, she's adventurous. great.
The reality sets in.. She still seems to want it all.. Travel, family, with health issues, and a top tier guy.

Let's say she doesn't get what she wants, she can always drop back to OF. I wish I had that option.
Click to expand...

You're blaming all the guys for her relationships not working when there's 1 common denominator - herself. Someone can come across as charming and charismatic but have Narcissistic Personality Disorder, which makes them very difficult to have a functioning relationship with.
 
Brazo said:
Well if your on benefits you can’t afford kids.

Period.
Click to expand...

Yeah castration for poor people am I right....?

If everyone in the country waited until they could "afford" to have children, the population would crater in no time at all. When you're in a low income house hold, you find a way. Through out history people have no "waited" to have children, they just did, and if you go back far enough families were often far larger due to the chance of survival being so low.

During those time periods though many people were self sufficient, ran their own farms, had their own animals and the size of the family they had was often a reflection of the resources available to them, as people moved into larger towns/cities those resources became more restrictive, but even then people found a way to manage.
 
Last edited:
ANDREW GREEN said:
You're blaming all the guys for her relationships not working when there's 1 common denominator - herself. Someone can come across as charming and charismatic but have Narcissistic Personality Disorder, which makes them very difficult to have a functioning relationship with.
Click to expand...
The other thing is, looks fade, and then, what do you have?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom