The Paradox that has me confused

Printable View

08-13-2006, 05:52 PM
IdolKnights

The Paradox that has me confused

With all the talk of Twink sites that push the line and those in the images albeit legal or not, brings up the thought of ethics as well as personal right.

Ethically it feels wrong, to me, to push “adult classed” pictorials of under aged looking models in very adult situations for titillation to the viewer.

On the other hand

If a model is 18 or older and legally regarded as an adult yet looks 12, who are we or anyone else to deem then 12 in actions and responsibility?

I was reading this months “the Guild” www.guildmag.com and it has an article on page 52 about a new magazine “Destroyer” out of Prague.

The magazine is a boy love magazine and is getting a lot of heat from the GLBT community and from how the article reads, the Scandinavian Neo-Nazi party?

Also from the article is this quote “a law to treat arbitrarily defined “young-looking” adults as legal children has been rejected” (in England)

to treat arbitrarily defined “young-looking” adults as legal children!!!

I fully agree with the idea that it’s ethically wrong (again, to me!) but is it worse to deny those of an adult prosecution age, in an act of crime, the right to work an adult job?
08-13-2006, 05:59 PM
IdolKnights

Sorry - GUIDE MAG not GUILD - www.guidemag.com

When I go to edit the message it keeps ripping out everything past the point I edit from.
08-13-2006, 06:08 PM
marcjacob

cant we just leave this? all the arguments today have done my head in. its time to move on. people will make their own minds up, as long as the models are 18+.
08-13-2006, 06:15 PM
maxpower

Ya that’s what I say it the guys are 18+ then deal with it, if you don’t like it don’t look at it. Its insane just cuzz someone looks young that they should be considered a child. Really the whole thing is insane the same people bitching about a guy that might look a bit too young for them are fine with taking pics of another guy with a blender up his ass. :loser:
08-13-2006, 06:59 PM
gaybucks_chip

Max, you're a dumbass.

Pics of an adult with a blender up his ass might be obscene, but aren't harmful to underage children.

A site with models that, by almost anyone's eye are probably less than 18 years old, IS harming the children if they are, in fact, underage... and as has been repeated ad nasueum, a lot of the eastern European models have questionable IDs that may be forged or altered.

Common sense is what everyone here (except you) are speaking of.
08-13-2006, 07:04 PM
marcjacob

Quote:

Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip

Max, you're a dumbass.

Pics of an adult with a blender up his ass might be obscene, but aren't harmful to underage children.

A site with models that, by almost anyone's eye are probably less than 18 years old, IS harming the children if they are, in fact, underage... and as has been repeated ad nasueum, a lot of the eastern European models have questionable IDs that may be forged or altered.

Common sense is what everyone here (except you) are speaking of.

but what if they are 18? how is that harming kids? if theyre 18 their legal in my view.
08-13-2006, 07:14 PM
basschick

marcjacob - true enough, but there are sites webmasters promote where the guys look very obviously underage and processors in the u.s. have refused to process for those sites.

sure, a 19 year old could look 17 or 16 although he'd usually attain certain physical signs of maturity. but a site full of guys who all look 14 and are 18+ strains my credibility past the breaking point. and i feel sure that it would strain any judge's credibility in the same way.

the people who support those sites because of the i.d. given might want to keep in mind that in court they can have an expert examine those scans and determine if the dates have been altered.
08-13-2006, 07:18 PM
marcjacob

of course, but all this talk of models looking 12, ive not seen a single pic where i thought that. now they may have been removed before i got there or this could be a hole load of nonesense. i remain unconvinced.
08-13-2006, 07:28 PM
IdolKnights

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcjacob

of course, but all this talk of models looking 12, ive not seen a single pic where i thought that.

How about a 24yo that looked 8?

http://www.penny.ca/joe3.jpg Joe C when he was still alive
08-13-2006, 11:43 PM
Madame0120

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxpower

Ya that’s what I say it the guys are 18+ then deal with it, if you don’t like it don’t look at it. Its insane just cuzz someone looks young that they should be considered a child. :loser:

It is the straight main stream world perspective that we should be aware of too. When I was at YP one year, a well known company had a teen banner hung that I didn't find offensive - but it still drew comments. I knew the vendor, and had no doubts the girls to be over 18 - but yeah .. they really worked the costumes and styling to make the models, look - well young.

The comments were made by "regular kinda kinky folks", who thought the non-nude graphics - crossed a line.

I don't object to it myself, the law says 18 years of age, and can't fathom the mess Big Brother will cook up when they launch The Department of Guess Your Porn Age. The very idea of it smacks of a carnival! No, that's too unkind a comparison. Carney folk have rules and honor.

:shithitfan:

The only reason I don't care for male twink, is they all look like the crop of boys, who grew to young men - while eating us out of house and home for more than 20 years.
08-14-2006, 04:10 AM
gaybucks_chip

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame0120

The only reason I don't care for male twink, is they all look like the crop of boys, who grew to young men - while eating us out of house and home for more than 20 years.

Got that right. One of the pieces of advice I gave to a new producer was to go to Costco before the models show up and buy a TON of food. I was absolutely floored at how much 6 twinks who collectively weighed maybe 650 pounds could eat!
08-14-2006, 06:13 AM
maxpower

Quote:

Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip

Max, you're a dumbass.

Pics of an adult with a blender up his ass might be obscene, but aren't harmful to underage children.

A site with models that, by almost anyone's eye are probably less than 18 years old, IS harming the children if they are, in fact, underage... and as has been repeated ad nasueum, a lot of the eastern European models have questionable IDs that may be forged or altered.

Common sense is what everyone here (except you) are speaking of.

OK how about this Angry Dad :anger:

(1) We are not talking about children we are talking about 18+ adults

(2) Personally I think this torture porn is obscene, and harmful to all of us much more then a guy that might look a year or 2 too your for someone.

(3) I invite everyone to take a look at your site and play the “guess how old he looks to me game” then send you e-mails saying how you ARE harming the children if they are

(4) See a doctor and get some testosterone replacement seriously no one could be this big of a dick day in and day out with out some real problems.
08-14-2006, 06:15 AM
maxpower

Quote:

Originally Posted by IdolKnights

How about a 24yo that looked 8?

http://www.penny.ca/joe3.jpg Joe C when he was still alive

Well midget porn is weird but ok I guess man. midget's need love too :heartu:
08-14-2006, 06:19 AM
maxpower

Quote:

Originally Posted by marcjacob

of course, but all this talk of models looking 12, ive not seen a single pic where i thought that. now they may have been removed before i got there or this could be a hole load of nonesense. i remain unconvinced.

Some people just want to act like dicks, others think their view of age in a pic regardless of documents is what really matters. Its a no win situation with some of these people, but the site most of them bitching about the most I am sure are legal as hell or they would have been taken down long ago. :tongue:
08-14-2006, 06:24 AM
maxpower

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madame0120

It is the straight main stream world perspective that we should be aware of too. When I was at YP one year, a well known company had a teen banner hung that I didn't find offensive - but it still drew comments. I knew the vendor, and had no doubts the girls to be over 18 - but yeah .. they really worked the costumes and styling to make the models, look - well young.

The comments were made by "regular kinda kinky folks", who thought the non-nude graphics - crossed a line.

I don't object to it myself, the law says 18 years of age, and can't fathom the mess Big Brother will cook up when they launch The Department of Guess Your Porn Age. The very idea of it smacks of a carnival! No, that's too unkind a comparison. Carney folk have rules and honor.

:shithitfan:

The only reason I don't care for male twink, is they all look like the crop of boys, who grew to young men - while eating us out of house and home for more than 20 years.

You are right about all of that for sure, all I can really say is its nice to see someone think about both sides and not presume allot of crap. But I do feed my twinks "not that I do and shoots" anorexia is something I do not want to promote as well.