Questionable Content Poll{Please Vote}
-
Please be honest and discuss as needed.
-
what is questionable. What i find is questionable may not be for others. The compliance should always be researched. For us here a users of the site should be helping the moderators in the area, if we come across something like the cobra collection we should give a head s up
mikey in utah
-
what is questionable. What i find is questionable may not be for others. The compliance should always be researched. For us here a users of the site should be helping the moderators in the area, if we come across something like the cobra collection we should give a head s up
mikey in utah
Please read the "YOU MUST SEE THIS!" thread in this sub forum before you vote. By questionable content he means content in which the actors regardless of compliance statements appear to be underage and simulated rape where it appears to be a little too real. It is my opinion that this site should adopt a policy of better safe than sorry when it comes to dealing with these issues.
As we know from the Cobra incident mentioned above that compliance statements can sometimes be false and that some members of this industry are not 100% honest. I know that in any civilized country that the law states that you are "innocent until proven guilty" but also know that in many cases in society the opposite is in fact true. If the police came to your home and started seizing computers and searching your belongings do you really think people in your neighborhood or community are not going to start forming opinions based on what they saw or heard about??? The Law is tough but society is tougher. Any person who has followed or heard about any high profile cases will tell you that guilt is often determined way before innocence.
I feel that the only real proof is in what we can see with our own two eyes and feel this issue is too risky to sit here and argue over the semantics of the situation. We should be adopting a stance that protects the safe and security of the site and it's members. When the line between reality and fantasy is blurred regardless of disclaimers which can be false it is best to disassociate ourselves with such content because the risks are far greater than not and it puts us all at risk.
This is not a quest to purge all simulated rape or youngblood content from this site because I still believe that this site should offer freedom of choice but I do question those who choose to view such content. I do feel however that there is some content in this realm where the line between simulation and reality is questionable and rather than relying on those who produce it to tell us whether it is or is not we should simply use what we see as proof. If someone told you the sky was green do you go home and research to see if it is true or would you simply look to the sky yourself to prove this person otherwise??? The best evidence is in what you can see not in what someone else tells you is true.
-
Well put jay230! So I can assume from now on you will not take My word or any other mods that a torrent is safe and when you report them as questionable you will have already "looked to the sky" yourself to prove it really is blue ;D Thanks for that because we Mods are few and you users are many. We can use all the help we can get proving our torrents are safe. BTW guys thank you all for voting in my poll and discussing it.
Much Love
Brandon -
Well put jay230! So I can assume from now on you will not take My word or any other mods that a torrent is safe and when you report them as questionable you will have already "looked to the sky" yourself to prove it really is blue ;D Thanks for that because we Mods are few and you users are many. We can use all the help we can get proving our torrents are safe. BTW guys thank you all for voting in my poll and discussing it.
Much Love
BrandonThe proof I am talking about is the proof we can see with our own two eyes ie. the actors in said torrents. NOT A FUCKING COMPLIANCE STATMENT. The comment on the sky being blue was that you don't need a piece of paper or a book to tell you that it is in fact blue, you can see with your own two eyes without further proof! I've said this all along and I will say it til the bitter end that compliance statements can be false and should not be trusted to prove whether content is safe or not!
Better safe than sorry isn't condemning such content it is just saying it is too risky to associate ourselves with. There is no regulatory body that governs the porn industry there are a few loose rules but little to no follow up or rules as to who can produce such content. It is mostly self regulated and while most do a great job of devolving codes of practice any joe can start a porn studio and they do everyday. Most of the questionable content is produced through these turn key studios who's to say such statements are just there as smoke and mirrors since the law is pretty much reactive rather than proactive??? Yet another valid argument that proves that the best proof is in what we can see in these videos rather than what a studio tells us is happening behind the scenes that will probably be dismissed yet again.
-
;D ;D ;D Keep up the discussion guys! The poll is saying it all so far. Thanks for all the input. Let's keep it repectful and clean and I have no problem hearing all sides….regardless of how misguided they are. Truth and proof rule here as they do in every civilized country. Play nice guys and please don't take it personnal
-
A user reported a bigfunhouse.com torrent. cumeaternc and I researched it and found that the site was shutdown for producing underage content, and arrests were made. They have a new site now. Should we trust them, even with their compliance statement? I'd say certainly not, consider them banned here.
gayteenstudio (GTS) was reported and brought to our attention in a thread. I checked them out and found that they too were shutdown and arrested on the same charges. I deleted all of those torrents.
They majority of sites which harbor child porn are shutdown within a year. Sites that stay afloat for years on end are generally safe, but IMO that doesn't mean we should trust their history, claims, or compliance statements.@teenboyreview:
The Models - Everyone ages at different rates, so some models who are 18 or 19 years old can easily look anywhere between 3 years younger or older depending on genetics or diet. Typically models from Eastern Europe, Russia or Asia tend to look much younger due to both reasons with diet being the larger factor. However if a given site has models that simply look TOO young as in barely out of puberty, then you may want to avoid these types of sites even if they have compliance statements posted. The younger the models look, the harder it will be to justify to the authorities that you were not actively seeking underage content. Ultimately, if you are not comfortable with models that tend to look much younger than their age, then avoid such sites. Teen Boy Review lists sites who models range in age from 18-20 years (and 21-23 years where such content is no more than 20% of the sites total offerings), with a wide variety of types from those who look like they just had their 18th birthday to more defined college age twinks.
I have changed my mind a bit on this matter after doing some more thinking and reading. Researching questionable content for compliance statements, their history, etc is a waste of time. A given site/studio may decide to comply with 18 USC 2257 fully, or occasionally not. No one can be 100% certain of their compliance, and even they can't because they may have been fooled by a fake ID. Compliance statements don't mean much and are easy to put in place. How often do sites/studios get inspected? Consider the fact that they may not get inspected immediately after producing illegal content. The actual proof of the models ages can be found after the producers of the content have been busted, compliance statements don't mean shit, and finding out then is too late.
(d) Frequency of inspections. Records may be inspected once during any four-month period, unless there is a reasonable suspicion to believe that a violation of this part has occurred, in which case an additional inspection or inspections may be conducted before the four-month period has expired.
They may be inspected once during a four-month period, or not. Meanwhile, their content can be ripped, upped here, and proven to be illegal at a potentially much later time. So why waste time if our eyes are telling us the models look questionable? Think about how long bigfunhouse.com torrents were here before we found that they had produced illegal content in the past, and think about gayteenstudio (GTS) which started this discussion. I don't even want to mention or think about how long those torrents were here, it's quite embarrassing to me…
One comment concerning the four-month interval for inspections states that although some large entities or a custodian arrangement may warrant inspections as often as every four months, the many small production operations with small numbers and static images do not. It claims that inspections of such entities that occurred with such frequency would simply mean that inspectors would review the same images, which it contends is an invitation to harassment. The Department responds to this comment by noting that while inspections may take place as often as every four months, they are not required to occur so frequently. Moreover, the regulation requires that inspections ``be conducted so as not to unreasonably disrupt the operations of the establishment.''
hxxp://www.zei2257.com/FR-28CFR75-20081218.html
A site may start out small and grow slowly, which may help them fly under the radar for some time. I mean if they've had some visits and the content basically remained the same long enough to put off inspectors for a while. That is if I am applying what I understand about compliance statements and investigators correctly, am I?Sooo, I am all for making eyeballs #1, count me in with the eyeballin' crowd.
-
The proof I am talking about is the proof we can see with our own two eyes i.e., the actors in said torrents. NOT A FUCKING COMPLIANCE STATEMENT.
I believe Jay is saying, "if an actor looks under-age, then the material is inappropriate for this site, even if there is a compliance statement." To be safe, I think this is a good approach, but we have to acknowledge that there's a lot of uncertainty here. While a 10-year-old is clearly a 10-year-old, it's a lot less clear when guys are older. I've taught at the junior/senior high and university levels, and I've seen lots of guys who were 20 and looked 16, as well a few who were 16 who looked 20. Mass media tends to distort our concept of age, because high school students are often played by actors who are 20, and college students are played by actors who are 25-30.
If this were a court of law, we could presume that a file is appropriate unless proven guilty. Unfortunately, we don't have any means of getting proof here–so the real question is, "how do we decide if something is inappropriate?" It comes back to instinct and subjective evaluation, which will never be perfect. If we err on the safe side (which I think is a good idea), we have to accept that some torrents with entirely legal content are going to be deleted or excluded. That's just the cost of doing business on a site like this. I think it's a small price to pay--and there's no shortage of other content available through this site.
On a related note, I would suggest that we use judgment in how we deal with people who upload considered-to-be-inappropriate content: It's one thing if the material is explicitly banned from this site or contains unquestionably underage actors--those people should probably be banned. But in the case of the video that started this thread--from a now-defunct website that claimed to be compliant with US age limits--I think the user seeding that material can be counseled about the site's policies and permitted to stay. I think we can be quick to condemn material, but we should be more cautious about condemning members.
-
you can be sure that we don't ban users for questionable content. we only "silently" remove it and the uploader is informed about not to do it next time.
-
O.k guys the joke is up. jay230 I agree with your assesment 100% :laugh: I wish you could have done a better job of articulating it than you did. My goal was to see how a reasoned and educated argument(my "view") could stand up to a emotional opinion and stood up pretty well! Listen, as adults we have to do everything in our power to protect innocenet children from such disicable pratices as child/underage porn. jay230 you were an easy target because not once did you point to precedent of law like truckr did in his post. My own opinion is to stay away from anything that looks like it could get you in trouble(in porn and in real life). I still do believe that if you are a responsible user you will go out and try to find the information we need to pull a questionable torrent and approach the uploader. truckr found all his info with some simple searches I bet. I don't approve torrents with models that appear underage and I never will. jay230 with due diligence and some facts you may have a real argument but until then it's just your opinion. I was in law for a while and you would be amazed at how easy it is defeat an opponent who has no facts or proof. Does that make it right? NO, but that's the way the world works. It's sad to say but I'm sure more sicko studio producers have gotten off of child porn charges than have been convicted. As a community if we stand against this stuff we can make a difference. The grim truth is that there must be a market for it if the studios are producing it. Before I pulled the bigfunhouse torrent it had been snatch over 17,000 times! Guys as you see questionable content, or even if you snatch a torrent and the pictures don't match the video(i.e. college guys in the pics and much younger guys in the actual video) report it to us. Help keep our community safe.
-
Help keep our community safe.
and i would add: not only safe but also saNe
.. sorry guys, but it's really not "healthy" to be attracted with kiddie porn. this has much more to do with your psychics than with your sexual preference. think of this: the kids do it for money, but they are not fully aware how deep this can damage them, sometimes even for all their life being. then no wonder that we have streets full of young whores, with so "noble" name "escort" ![😕](https://community.gaytorrent.ru/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/apple/1f615.png?v=hvqg2qn0nb4 ":-\")
-
Thanks guys… I did try and back up my statements by doing some research but the things I was finding were in no relation to my arguments. I am not the best writer and often struggle to find the right way of saying something the first time around. I do that cumeaternc for pushing me in regards to the issue so that my statements could come into perspective and thank those who have backed up what I said.
Along with with evidence found in pictures and torrent files I think just to be safe as well doing research on the studios like cumeaternc and trukr did is also a good thing because it helps backup their decisions to remove content and supports the notion that this isn't a war on guys who like younger guys but to keep the site safe. Though first and foremost our eyes tend to be the most honest.
The best way for us to help keep the site sane like amice is talking about is to leave comments on videos or even on the forum to make users who enjoy this type of content question themselves and the legality of their actions. This also apply to other legal content such as bareback which is a HUGE sore spot for me and goes hand in hand with twink porn because more often than not it's young boys in this genre. These comments aren't about bitchy or pissy but sometimes the more bold statements are the ones that have the most impact.
You can argue the law how ever you want I'm sure there are people getting off on this sort of thing everyday. Really it's all in how you argue you can still argue intent with little evidence it's all in how you strategically tie intent to what you have. Me I had very little so I thought outside the box. I tried to illustrate how the law views other types of content such as cartoon drawings and then I used an analogy. I enjoy a good challenge.
-
Mass media tends to distort our concept of age, because high school students are often played by actors who are 20, and college students are played by actors who are 25-30.
Anyone remember the US tv show "Beverly Hills, 90210"?
Jason Priestly was 21 when the series started, but played a 13 year old. A several weeks into the show his character turned 14.
Luke Perry was 23 and playing a 14 year old at the start of the series.
-
I live in America and believe me the mass media has distorted what we perceive as teenage or young adult with so many "teen" drama shows. Dawsons Creek, Saved By the Bell, BH 90210, the list can go on. If there is ANY question of age when it comes to porn though my policy is ALWAYS don't touch it!
-
As I said in the mod section, there are respectable and responsible porn companies that use young looking guys for their videos; ie AYOR, Eurocreme, BA, Hammer, etc, etc, etc.
There will always be cases like Brent Corrigan's where he used convincing fake ID to get into the business. This is the reason no one from Cobra or porn dealers were arrested over it. The videos were recalled and that was that, except for the civil suit between Corrigan and Cobra. Traci Lords is another example of an under age porn star who used fake ID. We can never protect ourselves from this, except delete them from the site and our hard drives if/when they are made known.
To be safe, we should only allow videos of guys with grey hair. Oh wait, my uncle Pete was bald and completely grey at 17. Damned, that rule won't work either.
NOTE 1: True kiddie porn will always be banned. In this thread we are talking about under age {16 -17}.
NOTE 2: We won't ban people for posting questionable stuff, only the stuff that is on the banned list.
-
As I said in the mod section, there are respectable and responsible porn companies that use young looking guys for their videos; ie AYOR, Eurocreme, BA, Hammer, etc, etc, etc.
There will always be cases like Brent Corrigan's where he used convincing fake ID to get into the business. This is the reason no one from Cobra or porn dealers were arrested over it. The videos were recalled and that was that, except for the civil suit between Corrigan and Cobra. Traci Lords is another example of an under age porn star who used fake ID. We can never protect ourselves from this, except delete them from the site and our hard drives if/when they are made known.
To be safe, we should only allow videos of guys with grey hair. Oh wait, my uncle Pete was bald and completely grey at 17. Damned, that rule won't work either.
NOTE 1: True kiddie porn will always be banned. In this thread we are talking about under age {16 -17}.
NOTE 2: We won't ban people for posting questionable stuff, only the stuff that is on the banned list.
There is a difference between a guy that looks like he just turned 18 and a guy that is obviously younger than that. I don't think any of these actors you speak of from TV shows were actually meant to be seriously believable as significantly younger than they were they were simply the right person for the role. Isn't it a running joke that these teen dramas are slightly out of touch from reality?
We can protect ourselves by disassociating ourselves with content where actors may or may not be underage. We've illustrated several times now how our eyes are the best judge. I understand that there may be in your eyes several reputable studios that use young looking guys but who's to say they just haven't been caught or even will be?
I never said the site should condemn those who Download or Upload questionable content unless they continue to upload such content to the site.
The Brent Corrigan and Tracy Lords cases were highly publicized cases due in part to the characters involved and the way things were handled… I'm sure they are many other cases where things were handled much quieter. Cases like this would be avoidable if this industry was so dangerously obsessed with youth which is far more than it is in mainstream Hollywood. I'm not saying actors should be grey and balding before they should be allowed to do porn but at least old enough as to clearly depict two consensual adults engaging in sexual acts.
In terms of the way I think the law would view such cases where actors are much younger than they appear much like you "Uncle Pete" much differently than when actors CLEARLY appear to be on the younger side. Even though we are talking about 16-17 year olds who some would consider to be capable of making their own decisions or adults in their own right in the eyes of the law they are not.
There is no one true solution to this problem because each will have it's own pro's and it's own cons. I do feel however that the amount of content purged whether it be within compliance or not is small compared to the damages caused by keeping it here.
BTW IMHO the torrent file that started this conversation the actors appeared to be more along the lines of 15-16.
-
Just a quick note. I have set this thread as Non-Sticky but you may continue to vote and discuss as desired. Thank you all for your honest input.
Much Love
Brandon -
Excellent Topic and discussion!! Thanks educational indeed!!!
-
(I totally agree, Cumeater! There's nothing more sexy than swapping sperm, mouth to mouth with the right man! Mine or his, or both! Had a few bitter and acidic loads, but nothing I would spit out! I remember one that was sweeter than candy!)
As I state in my profile, True force or coercion is rape and is wrong. Underage models, especially use of children in porn, sickens me to the the very marrow of my being. That too is rape, and far, far worse. I wouldn't hesitate to report either of these acts. I would feel compelled to.
That said, I'm not opposed to fantasy and enjoy acted scenes of rape or force, using consenting men of consenting age. I enjoy acting out these scenes myself with a willing partner, playing either role. I don't know how some of these guys handle it, but I love watching a consenting dude grin and bear a good spanking or a huge cock up the arse! I enjoy hearing the grunts and groans as a dude wills himself to take a little more or stretch a little wider, as well as the persuasive urgings of the big dick owner! If the actor is of age, whether for he's doing it for love or money, as long as he's willing, I'm okay with it on film. There are probably exceptions, but overall, this is my feeling on the subject. I don't get into fisting or S&M. Not against it, just not my scene. You "asked" my opinion, you got it!
-
True force or coercion is rape and is wrong. Underage models, especially use of children in porn, sickens me to the the very marrow of my being. That too is rape, and far, far worse. I wouldn't hesitate to report either of these acts. I would feel compelled to.
I had forgotten about this thread and this poll but upon reading it again it heartened me to know how "responsible" our community of members can be when it comes to protecting our tracker and protecting innocent children and those that may be subjected to true rape and torture.
