The reason this comes up is because I was reading Imp1 comments and replies to them and he’s mentioned multiple times before that he believes that the actual answer to a lot of this is making artificial wombs so that you can cut out women from making kids and relationships with women have to be about something else. That would mean that since women can't use their wombs as a bargaining tool, their intellect and personalities have to be what keeps a man interested, at least imo, and I can see why it would appeal to him, but are they even reasonable?
I haven't done the research myself and thought it would be more fun to have a discussion over it, but still, I’m just curious as to how the tech works if at all. I've seen things where the tech is being “suppressed” (hidden from the public like a lot of current tech we use today was during the Cold War, ala the internet), but is that true, or not? It's just genuinely an interesting topic to me.
It does make sense. The porn industry doesn't rake in billions annually by being scrupulous.
No, they rake in billions by being a way to suppress base desires without ruining your life.
OnlyFans is porn, and I assume you think it has ruined many lives.
Throwing the baby out with the bathwater comes to mind with this argument.
Just because women manipulated it into yet another way to exploit the broken products of the feminist education system, doesn't make the basic idea bad.
It's like getting rid of game streaming because women ruined that to make it a way to exploit broken people.
It's what they do. You let them run the church and they'd turn that into a man-hating extortion racket.
Porn was always exploiting men. That's why your arbitrary line between OF and the rest of porn makes little sense.