That’s like saying, “why don’t I drive 100 miles to the nearest recycling center to recycle my cardboard box, instead of burning my cardboard box in my backyard fire pit?”

I.e. moon is still really far away and difficult to get to

Let me tell you how their habitat is protected under the Endangered Species Act - it’s really not. Oh, of course you can’t kill the bats while they are in the tree, you just wait till they’re [likely] gone to take down the tree. Potential habitat is still destroyed.

It’s weak regulation, in my opinion. I deal with these matters all the time and know it doesn’t go far enough.

Everyone watches porn, of course.

But not everyone pays for some sort of fake online relationship.

Well, if you look at the survey sample in the actual study, it was concentrated mostly to one university. Take this study with some salt.

Open to other thoughts, but generally it doesn’t matter. Obviously, more is better if taken from a diverse pool - but when the sample is more concentrated to one university, it’s hard to see much validity no matter how many you have.

Meh.

> “Litam and her colleagues surveyed 718 U.S. adult participants who ranged in age from 18 to 71 (average age 29). The sample included 348 OnlyFans users (219 male users and 129 female users).” “…Of the total sample, 285 self-identified as college/university students with the remaining 433 from MTurk”

Needless to say, as you can see, there are those in this thread heavily defending the point that “OnlyFans users are no different than the average person,” etc. Can I get an “….ehhh idk”?

Well, check their sample. It’s not that large, and over a third are women. Surely, this isn’t random. And over half surveyed are from one university - yet, you can make a headline ambiguous like this.