Ahh, I see where we're getting confused - I went back and looked at what I wrote. It's possibly a transatlantic miscommunication. 'Position of Trust' is a legal term here in the UK. It applies to people who work with children but who aren't often in locum parentis on behalf of the state. So people who help in schools (but aren't teachers) or those people who run after school clubs. They do not follow the same code of conduct as teachers - but they do have their own separate legal place in the lexicon. It helps delineate when things are black and white in law. So... if your family friend comes over and begins having a sexual relationship with your 17 year old son or daughter, that's a private matter between you, but if their gymnastics instructor starts to have a sexual relationship with them, legal action can be taken - usually with a regulatory board and in some cases the police. A position of trust is not about how trust worthy someone is, it delineates the relationship between them to avoid legal ambiguity. If Ms OnlyFans was helping out at school, she would be in a position of trust here in the UK.
As for all these wider points about where lines are drawn, I think more discussions need to happen. The lines being drawn need to be agreed between different sections of society as that is what the demos means. Personally, I'm in favour of high levels of education and open discussion - but such discussions have to be done on neutral ground by neutral people. We cannot simply throw open the gates to either progressives or conservatives.... we must find a balance and, those of us on the political left, must continue to push for a more inclusive form of education. Do I think there's potential for discussion about OnlyFans... sure. Do I think that should be done by an OnlyFans creator being available for them to chat to in the first instance - not necessarily. Is that a hard line? Not for me. Is it for some other people.... probably. Democracy is about where the majority agree on a code of conduct to protect the minority. The code of conduct in this instance is there to protect children - and I think that's sensible, particularly as we have no real understanding of what internet pornography is doing to young men and women.... other than I think it's bad.
Children should be free to be who they are, but children cannot be free to be addicted to pornography because they've managed to get access to it. There are some interventions which are necessary - those interventions are often done by the State and via people who work for the state and those in positions of trust (or whatever the US legal equivalent is)
