That's how exploitation works: The exploited don't have another choice. That doesn't make doing cruel things to them wrong and (hopefully) illegal.

For example, someone could compel people who are starving to do all sorts of horrible things for food, and then say 'well, they chose to do it!'.

Once you make this job illegal, what do you think she does then for a job? By taking this job she has revealed that this is her best option. When you make the job illegal, you're forcing her to take a worse alternative.

This is true, but I also think that the information in the article alone is insufficient to make a judgment.

This salary is over the Philippines minimum wage. It's a legal job like any other.

The people interviewed are not super happy about the content of the job, but none of it seems to be anything more than it being pornography-related.

Nobody's really seeming to cross any lines of illegality as described in the article. This doesn't come close to the kind of conditions faced by Meta's contractors in Africa spying through Meta glasses in private homes.

I would equate this type of job to any type of job that has aspects that some people would never be willing to do.

E.g., I would never be willing to be a window washer. I'm too scared of heights. Same deal with tower construction. But there are plenty of people doing those jobs who don't feel exploited.

The plus side of jobs like this are that you can do this work at home, you can be physically disabled, there's often some level of flexibility of hours, and there's no manual labor.

I'm going to guess that the only scandal here is that the Philippines is 80% Catholic and possibly more conservative than people in the countries where OnlyFans generates its income.