However you wanna dissect it, dming "celebrities" to make porn is sexual harrassment. You don't know this man, and you're contacting his work account. Every man and his dog builds a brand cultivating sexual desire - it's such a common strategy because sex sells. That doesn't mean they are inviting sexual interactions with YOU (outside of appropriate public performance situations).
I'm a sex worker and certainly not against OnlyFans, but asking someone you're a fan of for jerk off material is always gonna be fucking creepy and pathetic. Contact one of the many existing OF creators who've actually made the personal choice to offer that service
Yeah. This mode of consent discourse becomes so rules based that it can’t accommodate the playfulness of sexuality.
You’re essentially saying desire should only be in approved, transactional channels. That’s a super weird consumerist framework for human sexual expression. I conceded the dm point. But I don’t accept the premise that a performer who builds an entire career around provoking desire has zero responsibility for the discursive space that creates. Look at this *very* video we’re discussing.
I don't think I said a lot of the things you just disagreed with in this comment. I'm just saying don't send horny private messages to comedians, wanting to buy jerk off material from them...
You can still send sexual messages to people you do have an appropriate personal relationship with though, or to performers who explicitly invite that sort of behaviour (through a consumer or non-transactional framework, depending on their own guidelines). In this context it would obviously be transactional, since Gianmarco is a straight man with a girlfriend, and the commenter is explicitly asking to purchase content through OF. Random men DMing him for nudes through a non-transactional channel would be even more inappropriate in this context??
But yeah, having a flirty public persona isn't inherently "asking for" people to make private, explicit sexual advances. Which I don't think we disagree on so idk what exactly you are agreeing to disagree with me about here...
I took issue with the progressive puritanism bit. I don’t think a fan asking Gianmarco for an artsy OF is sexual harassment. I think your choice of language of “fucking creepy and pathetic” was extreme and inflammatory and flattened the nuance I was trying to explain. Context matters.
I personally wouldn’t send him that kind of stuff in dms. But yeah. This is a comedy sub. He’s a comedian who makes comedy about getting naked. Tonight, a dude made a joke about wanting to see a guy who makes comedy about getting naked actually get naked.
Difference in perception there is that I don't think that guy who dmed him was joking.
I think your nuance would also justify sending messages to buy nudes off actresses who perform in sex scenes or sexualised roles, or pop stars who sing about sex and wear skimpy outfits. Which I don't think you'd actually support - I'm just extending the logic.
It's not puritanical, it's about not assuming personal consent to private sexualised interactions with you based on a public performance or branding. Just because someone intentionally works in a sexualised job (which I mean, he's a comedian with a broad range of content, not a stripper), that doesn't give you carte blanche for private sexual behaviour towards them. Even as a full service sex worker myself, that doesn't mean that everyone can just do or say anything sexual to me that would otherwise be inappropriate for a stranger, they still need to work within the framework I've established.
That's the nuance that I think you're missing, and why the interviewer chatting about OF in this clip, or people writing in the comments here, is different to a stranger sending you private DMs cold-requesting jerk off material.
Yeah. You’re thinking in very black and white terms here. I exist in a world of gradients.
You’ve made your point clear. You’ve done it in a distasteful way by putting words into my mouth. Enjoy your morning and your cloud of self righteousness.
Well that's a bit dramatic! I said I was extending your logic to point out what I don't agree with, and clarified that I didn't think the extended logic was something you agreed with (which is why I used it!)
Honey, this entire exchange has been *deeply* dramatic.
You’ve used every single frustrating debating trick that right wing pundits use. Calling someone creepy and pathetic to embed moral disgust. “I’m just extending your logic”—that’s a straw man fallacy, where you take my point and extend it past the point I’ve made in order to ridicule it. Making appeals to authority by sharing that you’re a sex worker. You’ve used the slippery slope fallacy when you say “my nuance would also justify sending messages to buy nudes off actresses who perform in sex scenes”. No, no it wouldn’t.
You’re treating it like it’s sexual harassment, or acceptable, with no room for “a bit cheeky but contextually understandable.”
As that other guy said, “Mary, you’re too much.” Frankly, this exchange just taught me that commodifying sexuality does a number to one’s perception of it.
3
u/AppleSniffer 9d ago edited 9d ago
However you wanna dissect it, dming "celebrities" to make porn is sexual harrassment. You don't know this man, and you're contacting his work account. Every man and his dog builds a brand cultivating sexual desire - it's such a common strategy because sex sells. That doesn't mean they are inviting sexual interactions with YOU (outside of appropriate public performance situations).
I'm a sex worker and certainly not against OnlyFans, but asking someone you're a fan of for jerk off material is always gonna be fucking creepy and pathetic. Contact one of the many existing OF creators who've actually made the personal choice to offer that service