Earlier this year there was a news story about a university offering freshmen women bodies-with-front-holes classes on how to safely get into OnlyFans.
It's not that much of a stretch to see them putting together "entrepreneur" funds that will loan gift money to strong, brave, and independent young female entrepreneurs to assist in buying a nice 4K camera and some studio lights for their business endeavour. All written off as a corporate responsibility tax break.
I'm surprised the alphabet people haven't been more vocal in demanding fair representation in porn though. The existing audience won't want to watch it. So the obvious solution is that the government (i.e., the taxpayer) should subsidise the companies on the condition they hire them (i.e. pay them to hire ugly danger hairs).
Hell, there was drama the past week or two about a "Family Sex Show" in the UK, that was basically just child grooming in a "we are kind and caring leftists" disguise, and that was funded by the tax payer.
It's not that far off TBH.
Earlier this year there was a news story about a university offering freshmen
womenbodies-with-front-holes classes on how to safely get into OnlyFans.It's not that much of a stretch to see them putting together "entrepreneur" funds that will
loangift money to strong, brave, and independent young female entrepreneurs to assist in buying a nice 4K camera and some studio lights for their business endeavour. All written off as a corporate responsibility tax break.I'm surprised the alphabet people haven't been more vocal in demanding fair representation in porn though. The existing audience won't want to watch it. So the obvious solution is that the government (i.e., the taxpayer) should subsidise the companies on the condition they hire them (i.e. pay them to hire ugly danger hairs).
Hell, there was drama the past week or two about a "Family Sex Show" in the UK, that was basically just child grooming in a "we are kind and caring leftists" disguise, and that was funded by the tax payer.