'Harry Potter' Star Shocks Fans With OnlyFans Announcement
37-year-old actress , best known for her role as Lavender Brown in the film series, has taken an unexpected turn in her career by launching an OnlyFans page.
Jessie Cave announced the venture on Instagram, explaining that her new platform will focus on "niche hair content."
Cave, whose long, light brown hair is a signature look, described the project as a "strange new journey."
In a humorous video accompanying her announcement, she is seen brushing her hair while explaining to an off-camera voice, presumably her longtime partner, Alfie Brown, that her OnlyFans content will primarily involve "stuff like this."
The off-camera voice playfully questioned whether hair-brushing content is a known phenomenon, to which Cave responded with a confident "No." She explained that fans "want to hear the sounds" of brushing and "swishing" hair, showcasing her unique approach to the subscription-based platform that is typically associated with adult content.
'Well, don't give it away for free!' the man urged as Cave demonstrated her planned videos. She asserted, 'I need to tell people what I'm offering,' adding, 'It is a fetish. I think. I hope! Slutty Mormon. I'm going for a very pure aesthetic.'
When asked what she hopes to achieve, Cave replied, 'Just very sensual stuff with my hair.' She joked that this venture 'could make the big bucks' while reassuring both her partner and potential subscribers that her content will steer clear of more explicit material. 'There will be no 'feet' or 'bums' involved,' she said.
Her OnlyFans bio reinforces this boundary:
'Former 'Harry Potter' actress, writer, doodler and now Only Fans Long Hair Specialist. I do NICHE HAIR CONTENT which you may well quite like. How magical! Owl drop near daily.'
Cave, who describes herself as a "Long Hair Specialist," emphasizes that while her content may be "sensual," it won't include explicit sexual material. She added a whimsical touch, promising "Owl drop near daily" updates, keeping with her "Harry Potter" roots.
'If you have a hair thing, this is the place for you,' she said, encouraging potential subscribers to message her with specific requests.
Before announcing her OnlyFans, the comedian and her on-again off-again boyfriend Alfie Brown said they are taking their personal and professional partnership to the next level.
After a decade of navigating a turbulent relationship filled with love, breakups, and co-parenting four children, the couple is now teaming up on stage. This summer, they will debut a joint work-in-progress show at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe, with the potential of launching a podcast titled "Before We Break Up Again."
Though the podcast is not set in stone, the cheeky working title speaks volumes about their relationship dynamic. 'Lots of people go: we just want to have a bit of time for us before we have any children. Well, we've never had any time for us,' Brown explained.
The couple's journey began unconventionally, as Cave became pregnant after a one-night stand, long before they were officially a couple. Since then, they've experienced two breakups, reconciled, and grown their family, all while learning how to navigate life together.
'We started our relationship at level 8, without any of the lessons you learn on level 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7,' Brown said, with Cave adding, 'We definitely have a different rulebook.'
Their upcoming show will delve into the intricacies of their relationship, sharing insights from their time as exes and as co-parents. While this might sound like a well-thought-out creative collaboration, the initial motivation was more practical.
Brown candidly admits, 'Flats in Edinburgh are extortionate, and we needed to do an extra show to make enough money.' However, what began as a financial decision has evolved into something 'one of the most exciting things we've ever done.'
Cave and Brown are no strangers to airing their personal lives on stage.
During their first breakup in 2018, both comedians performed solo shows in Edinburgh, each discussing their relationship. The performances created a buzz, with audiences eager to catch both sides of the story.
While their transparency might seem risky, the couple feels that sharing their truth is an essential part of who they are. 'It's so fundamental to who we are,' Brown said. Cave echoes the sentiment, 'I wouldn't know how to do anything without talking about my life. So if it has been detrimental, I'm doomed.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Refinery29
13 minutes ago
- Refinery29
Do Me A Favor And Stop Sending 'Happy Birthday!' Texts In The Group Chat
Photographed by Ramona Jingru Wang. The past might be a foreign country but if you're an older millennial with a Yahoo email address and a drawer full of ankle socks, the present is no less baffling. Why are grown men trading punches over plushies? What in the name of god is the poop rule? Who's eating all the cottage cheese? Bewildering trends like these are hardly a modern phenomenon, I know, but in the age of TikTok they spread from one side of the world to the other before you can say 'Dubai chocolate'. Consequently, for those of us who dip in and out of social media instead of maintaining a constant online presence, logging into Instagram on a Sunday night can feel like climbing the Magic Faraway Tree and finding yourself in a strange new land. Still, crazes come and go and for the most part provoke nothing more than a chuckle or a raised eyebrow. So what if we lose the run of ourselves every now and then? Ultimately the clamor subsides, the dust settles and society rights itself again. Events rarely spin completely out of control because the majority of people, I like to think, know how to behave — online and off. And then a friend drops a message in the group chat. 'Happy Birthday Tash!' It is 7.01 a.m. and you are still in bed, rubbing sleep from your eyes. Within minutes, texts begin to arrive from the other members of the group. You can tell who's made an effort to personalise their message — or, perhaps, who is in a rush — by the presence of an extra exclamation mark here or an abbreviation there. 'Happy Birthday Tash!!!' 'Have a great day T x' 'HBD Tash!' The birthday girl, hopefully having a lie-in, is silent and now you are feeling the pressure to add a greeting to the chorus. The fact that there is a thoughtfully chosen card for Tash propped up on your dresser, to be handed over when you meet her later for a celebratory drink, is neither here nor there. Failure to participate in the birthday pile-on will be noted not just by Tash but by everyone else in the group. Dutifully, you tap out a message and head for the bathroom to brush your teeth. Friends coming together to wish another friend happy birthday. Harmless enough, right? Wrong. If you ask me, the person who sends that initial message is committing an egregious act of friendship hit-and-run. Think about it. DM a friend on their birthday and chances are you'll have to send at least one follow-up text when they inevitably ask how you are and what you've been up to. Share your well wishes in the group chat, however, and you sidestep the time-consuming business of engaging in further conversation — a particularly effective strategy if the friend in question is second-tier rather than BFF. Perhaps this is the cynic in me talking but I suspect, too, that the motivating factor for sharing birthday greetings in the group chat is less a desire to make your loved one feel special on their special day and more a compulsion to show off. There is a performative function to dropping a 'Happy Birthday!' text in a space where it can be seen by people other than the intended recipient. The fact that it unleashes, almost invariably, a flood of messages from other members of the group is confirmation for the original texter that they are somehow superior. That they have won the friendship race. (I'm not extrapolating here; check out these posts where proponents of such heinous behavior confess to relishing this very feeling.) It's the group chat equivalent of the juvenile mentality that was common in the early days of YouTube, when people — probably men, let's be honest — would scramble to be the first to comment on a clip, posting simply and quite pointlessly, 'first'. And what about the poor individual on the receiving end of this barrage of texts? Imagine waking up on your birthday, reaching for your phone and opening the group chat to find a stream of greetings all sent within minutes of each other. To my mind these aren't 'Happy Birthday!' messages. These are 'Gina's wished you Happy Birthday so now I'm wishing you Happy Birthday!' messages. Or 'Oh shit I forgot it was your birthday, good job Ellie reminded me. Happy Birthday!' messages. The overarching sentiment is not warm and heartfelt but guilt-stricken and insincere. For she's a jolly good fellow? Don't make me laugh. If you are lucky enough — or, depending on your perspective, unfortunate enough — to be part of a family group chat, there is a fun twist on this trend which involves adults who really should know better filming their kids singing 'Happy Birthday' to nanna or grandad or whoever and dropping the video in the chat. We know what you're doing, guys. Send the video directly to the recipient and pass up the opportunity to have the entire family coo over your little one's adorable lisp and idiosyncratic dance moves? Please. The trouble with this is that it creates a kind of one-upmanship, with each subsequent birthday kicking off a procession of pageant-like home movies in which grown-up siblings vie to outdo one another via the medium of their children's cuteness. I have a kid myself so I understand the drive to show them off but in doing so the person whose birthday it is — the reason for all this silliness, remember — gets forgotten altogether.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
What Swift fan accounts should know about copyright after Barstool's 'Taylor Watch' canceled
What Swift fan accounts should know about copyright after Barstool's 'Taylor Watch' canceled The rumors may be terrible and cruel, but the ones about Barstool Sports' "Taylor Watch" podcast being canceled are true. The podcast with 115,000 fans on TikTok, 78,000 fans on Instagram and 16,000 subscribers on YouTube — geared toward discussing all things Taylor Swift — aired its final episode on June 4. What was supposed to have been a celebratory moment for Swift regaining control of her masters started on a melancholic note as hosts Kelly Keegs and Gia Mariano sang "Ave Maria." The two sat in their brown leather chairs to acknowledge the termination of a show they've cultivated for two-plus years. "'Taylor Watch' is canceled," Keegs said on the 150th episode, "because having a music related podcast or something that can toe the line with lawsuits in general where it comes to music rights, whatever, is just not feasible with Barstool Sports at this time." One underlying issue lies in copyrighted photos, videos and music being used on social media. Several posts potentially opened parent company Barstool Sports to lawsuits, and the podcasters had two options: to cancel "Taylor Watch" or be fired. "It was all just stupid mistakes on my part," Mariano said on the podcast through tears. "It was never intentional. We would never think that we could just get away with something." "Or even jeopardize the company," Keegs jumped in. "We love working here." Long live the Eras Tour with our enchanting book The one- to two-hour episodes crafted a corner in the Swiftie community where fans (and some haters) tuned in to hear the thoughts of Keegs and Mariano. " Gia and I went to Paris Night 2 together, and there were some people coming up to us and saying what they liked about the show," Keegs tells the USA TODAY Network of Swift's May 10, 2024, concert. "Then by the time we were in Miami — that was a totally different experience — I couldn't believe how many people were coming up to us who knew who we were." The two hosts offered unfiltered thoughts on Swift's music, business moves, concerts and news. They would post short snippets to social media. A couple included some paparazzi photos and sped-up music pulled from the internet. "It's what I looked forward to every week," Keegs says. Her favorite part was the voicemail segment when people called in to offer their thoughts. "We got a call from a mom excited about the 'Speak Now (Taylor's Version).' She gave birth to her son when the first version came out and now he's a teen. She made him listen to 'Never Grow Up.' It was a beautiful full circle moment." Copyright's gray area So where do the legal lines lie for copyright? It's a perfect question for David Herlihy, an intellectual property, new media and entertainment lawyer who also teaches at Northeastern University in Boston. Copyright is the subject of entire college courses, so keep in mind the following is heavily abbreviated. Herlihy also provides an asterisk: " None of these things are absolute, but there are basic policy contours of copyright." Let's start with images and videos that fan accounts share on social media. Herlihy says the copyright of photos of Swift taken in a public place are owned by the photographers and can be licensed to news outlets. However, the photographers can't make merch with the photos, "because that's a commercial exploitation of her likeness." What about fan accounts that repost photos and credit them, do they need permission? Some cases can be deemed fair-use, which means using copyrighted material doesn't need permission under "certain circumstances." This balances copyright holders' intellectual property rights with the public's need to access and use information. "You're using the photograph for news reporting, commentary or for conversation, and the law regards news, commentary and conversation as valuable," Herlihy says. "So depending upon the nature of the use, the rights of the copyright owner may actually yield to other socially beneficial purposes." What Taylor Swift's trademark applications say about potential business moves. However, Instagram has a clear policy that users cannot post content that violates someone else's intellectual property rights, including copyright. 'Taylor Watch' is not the first account within the past month to get flagged. In fact a few behemoth Swift fan accounts with six digits in followers were recently sent to Instagram purgatory and deactivated for similar infractions including @ and @tstourtips. Meta, Instagram's parent company, did not comment on the deactivations to the USA TODAY Network. The accounts, which are not officially affiliated with Swift, share news, theories on upcoming announcements and records broken by the superstar. They foster micro-communities of the global fandom. And they celebrate moments like Swift buying back her first six albums from Shamrock Capital. For Keegs and Mariano, "Taylor Watch" was their safe space to gab about the superstar. 'It's not like we aren't Taylor fans still,' Keegs said. She tried to find a bright side explaining, "If we want to be poetic about it, I suppose you can say our watch has ended because [Swift's] gotten all of her stuff back." Don't miss any Taylor Swift news; sign up for the free, weekly newsletter This Swift Beat. Follow Bryan West, the USA TODAY Network's Taylor Swift reporter, on Instagram, TikTok and X as @BryanWestTV.
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
I Scream, You Scream. They Don't Scream for Ice Cream.
The Museum of Ice Cream is a sugarcoated daydream — or nightmare, depending on your tastes. The location in SoHo opened in 2019, spawning out of a temporary pop-up three years earlier that reportedly had a 200,000-person wait-list. It's less of a museum than it is a made-for-Instagram selfie emporium. You won't find much on display to spark any philosophical thoughts — what is there to say about the ephemeral nature of ice cream, or how about its role as a symbol of pure hedonism? You will instead find a banana jungle, a spiral slide, unlimited scoops of Fruiti Cereal Swirl and Ess-a-Bagel ice cream sandwiches. 'Ready To Rediscover Your Inner Child?' the museum prominently asks on its website. But in the depths of the museum's sprinkle pool, a feud has been brewing. The inner child belongs to adults, and the Museum of Ice Cream wants to cater to them. Though 'pinktinis' and sprinkle shots are on the menu, the party ends early: the latest available tickets on weekends are for 8 p.m. For years, the museum has wanted to extend its hours and liquor sales. Last week, the New York State Liquor Authority denied the museum's latest proposal, which would have allowed the museum to serve alcohol until 10:30 p.m. daily and midnight during private events. The application also sought to extend liquor consumption to all three stories of its building; alcohol use is currently limited to the main floor. 'We are requesting nothing beyond what other similar SoHo establishments already have — whether it's ice cream shops with licenses to serve alcohol or museums that host occasional private events. We're simply aligning with longstanding practices in the neighborhood and industry,' said Kate Ambas, a representative for the museum, in an emailed statement. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
