Printable View
I was just updating my google adsense campains and i used the word twinks in one of the titles for my sites . google came back and said they are no longer accepting sites with the word twinks in them !!!!
here is the exact reply google posted to me:
"We do not allow ad text including 'twink' to run on Google at this time. Please remove this inappropriate language from your ad, and we will be happy to run your ad on Google."
Does look like they must have just banned that word, because I still see some ad words under it. I said it before if you own any type of twink site I would watch out, once they are allowed to block the word “boy” the sky will be the limit on this one. Ccbill is not google but how long do you think it will be before they will try to block the word "twink" or any other term you can use do describe a person 18-24. If you run a twink site that has Ccbill or a US processor, I would start thinking about changing that NOW they are going to fuck you, and not in a good way! :honest:
Ah ... it must have something to do with this:
http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=14783
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. – Google took it on the chin this week after being sued by a Nassau County legislator for allegedly profiting off child pornography through its search engine.
In his complaint, filed in New York Supreme Court, Jeffrey Toback, (D-Oceanside), alleges that Google has profited handsomely off the dissemination of child porn and that it is an “integral part” of its business structure.
The complaint fingers Google as "the largest and most efficient facilitator and distributor of child pornography in the world.”
Toback is aiming to block Google from providing links or advertising to websites that display child pornography and to come clean with the fact that it has made billions of dollars off child porn and other “obscene” content through sponsored links.
The complaint, however, did not make a clear distinction between content that specifically features underage performers or victims and adult content.
Toback added further that Google has taken no action to curb its involvement in the so-called spread of child porn even though it is fully capable of blocking certain search terms, as evidenced by its involvement with the Chinese Government.
"Defendant is willing to accede to the demands of the Chinese autocrats to block the search term 'democracy,'" the complaint states, "but when it comes to the protection and well-being of our nation's innocent children, Defendant refuses to spend a dime's worth of resources to block child pornography from reaching children."
Google executives were quick to counter Toback’s claims by saying that when the search engine is made aware of any affiliation to sites that market child pornography, they are quick to report it to law enforcement, and that the company does everything it can to combat child porn.
No other search engines were named in the complaint, and Toback has not expressed interest in pursuing other companies over similar allegations.
Toback is best known for his efforts to raise the legal age to 19 for buying tobacco and for proposing a domestic partner registry for the state of New York.
You give these fuckers a foot hold by backing this supposed CP resection and they will never stop! If they want to report CP sites that’s fine, but to block words is not, when are people going to start seeing what is going on? My guess is when it bites you in the Ass! :mental:
Unless I'm mistaken, they haven't allowed that for a while? They accept "boys" though, go figure. Though that may vary on context.
I think twinks can still be used as a keyword at least.
It would be interesting to see if they allow use of the word "chicken." My guess is that the dumbasses making the decisions probably are allowing chicken and not allowing twink :)
Now I wonder if the next step is to remove "twink" from their search engine results?
Quote:
Originally Posted by boyfunk
Yep it starts with young, teen, boy, then moves to twink. It will never stop, people should have fought all this more from the start with every new word it just gives more precedence for the next one to be blocked. This is why people say this type of thing is a “slipper slope” I would suggest anyone that owns a twink site not supporting these word nazi enablers, that is the only thing we can do to fight back, and the only thing that Ccbill, google and countless others will take note of. I would ask that others outside of the “twink” business also show some solidarity, but that is unrealistic unfortunately. I will assure all of you in the end this will effect you too, and that you will wish you did do something. :spook:
who exactly do you think "these fuckers" are, though?
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxpower
These Family First Groups, Christian Fundamentalist, Conservative Republicans ECT that are using the whole CP thing to gain votes, support their base, and push their real goal of making it increasingly harder to make a living. I think the companies that many of us support with our hard earned dollars are also enabling these fuckers to get way with this BS :boo:
The lawsuit comes from a Democrat...Quote:
Originally Posted by maxpower
Well maybe in the particular case man, but they did not lose the lawsuit they just folded at the first residence. Of all people storyguy you should NOT support ant type of censorship especially when it comes to words. This guy may be a Demarcate, but I am willing to bet his religious beliefs are a big driving force in all this, and had done similar things in the past. Someone said something about American politics that stuck with me, “in America the really only have one party with 2 different names” This is true, in may ways their are differences but all and all they are the same if you think about it.
I just ask simply where are you going to draw the line? Keep in mine the farther back you draw this line the harder it will be to stop these word nazis. All they will have to say is that we have banned so many words already why not just one more if people are having a problem with it. This will never stop, until they are forced too, and now that some many companies are gutlessly enabling then it will just get hader and harder to stop them.
So where should it stop at? young, teen, boy, twink, virgin, chicken, first time, dudes, buddies, college, school, gay, hard-core, bare back, bondage..................................?
If you ask me it should never been allowed to start in the first place, if you want to stop CP then go after CP sites and not block words. If these companies want to do something investigating possible CP sites by asking for documents not banning words. If they really just cared about CP this is what they would do. I would really support banning any company that enables the word nazis. They only go to the middle man companies because they can not get a real law that say you can not do that, and if they asked us to stop using certain words we would tell them to FUCK OFF. Maybe if we stop paying companies that do not have our back they will grow a spine before its too late for all of us.
On CSPAN2/BookTV yesterday, I watched Larry Flynt at the LA Times Book Festival. Flynt has a new book out. The very liberal audience along with interviewer Robert Sheer did bring up questions of "porn's insistence of eriticizing younger and younger looking women"Quote:
Originally Posted by maxpower
And the duscussion of Huslter's Berely Legal magazine naturally caused the audience to link it to child porn.
Robert Sheer and that audience are not exactly a bunch of Christian Fundamentaliasts. And they seem to similarly draw confused links between young looking people and child porn.
If you are just going to constantly take people with criticisms and label them as the usual suspects and scapegoats, there is not ever be much enlightenment on this issue.
Once again - it would be kinda good if the adult industry had an advocacy organization that could publicize why those attitudes are mistaken.
Steve
I don’t know maybe that is a good idea, I run twink sites and it really feels to me like I am being lumped in with CP sites just because my site uses guys under 23 or so. I also see about every word I can use to describe anyone that is legal but still “young” is consisted promoting CP. I do not want to use underage people and I do not want to have to call my young twink guys “men” just to be listed anyplace.
the thing is you expect ccbill and google to fight this - but it's probably not in their best interest to do so. they have to make business decisions that are best for their company. if the word gets out into the media that google promotes cp it won't matter that they don't and that they win in court because they will lose masses of searchers who use them daily. and they will probably spend hundreds of thousands on lawyers with people suing them.
same with ccbill. if visa fears to be linked up with what the public is being told is cp, ccbill must comply. even if they sue them - and again, that takes years and thousands - not one webmaster will have visa to process with.
Damn that sucks. It mean young boy not like lolita which meant underage girl.
Mark
Like I said before,
"18-20 teen boys"
"Hot, barely legal teens"
"Cute American twinks 18-20"
"Hottest 18+ boys/guys/twinks/"
Any of those are fine, get the message across with no problem, and make it clear that everything you're doing is legal.
If you're promoting younger (18-19 yo) guys, you're *going* to have some people that call it CP, even though it isn't. Nothing you can do about that except make sure you have everything clearly marked to indicate your content is legal. Some dumbasses STILL don't get it and somehow try to argue that legal 18+ guys who look younger are somehow CP... but that of course isn't the case.
This reminds me of all the stuff that happened around the time the new Visa regulations came in to effect a few years ago for online processing of adult content, there was a big stink at the time that terms such as 'teen' and 'twink' would soon end up being banned on a lot of places, including the processors.. That hasnt happened.
That being said, looking at the adult industry as a whole, i can certainly see why individuals across the globe could concieve a link between the usage of those words and CP, lets not fool ourselves here, for the most part, the adult industry IS closly associated with 'younger' looking models.. Some of them do even look under 18 although, for the most part, they actually arent but, the 'perception' of the few, unfortunately, far outweigh the 'facts' of the masses.
You only have to browse through some of the solo model sites out there to realize the boundaries of legal porn and younger looking models are being pushed on an almost daily basis.. The adult industry really is self perpetuating the stereotype that we're all CP pushing perverts because of this and, until something is done about it, it will only get worse, imho.
Whilst i realize there are some very strong first ammendment issues at hand with this type of thing, using models with braces, pigtails, childs clothing, plush toys, etc to make them look younger than they actually are, whilst it may be profitable for the companies utilizing these types of marketing techniques, we all know the type of surfer they are trying to attract and, that, is a boundary we need to have clearly defined between what is and, what isnt acceptable, if not on a legal basis, on a moral one as an industry as a whole.
In my eyes, there is no difference between profiting from a surfer by distributing real or, implied underage models and, as an industry, we definately need a voice to get this message out there.
The unfortunate thing is, those companies that are marketing their content by making the models look younger by dressing them up with pigtails, childrens clothing, braces etc are the ones who really do have major contacts in the industry with those organizations who might be of use to us to fight this perception and THAT is a major shame especially as the only fight they want us to take on, is the one that will allow them to continue producing this type of content... After all, its profitable for them.
Regards,
Lee
True enough Chip however, in my post above, i mentioned the fact that some companies actively go out of their way to promote their models to look a LOT younger than 18, whilst i dont have a problem with a model who is 18+ who naturally looks 16, the companies who deliberately try to make a 21yr old look 14-17 are the ones we need to be questioning, as i said above, we all know the type of surfer these sites are catering to and because of that, its making the lines blur for those of us who do operate sites with legal content when compared to those who dont and that, is a major problem, not only for the fight on CP but, for the adult industry as a whole because of the highly restrictive legislations that the government wants to pass in the name of protecting children as of late.Quote:
Originally Posted by boyfunk
Regards,
Lee
You know Patti, i think that really is part of the problem here, id say that most in the industry DO expect companies to fight for them instead of doing something about it themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by basschick
Im reminded of a thread we had a few weeks ago where one of our community members expressed the need for Titan to start a legal fund so that producers could go after individuals who steal their content... Why should they?
As you said, CCBill and Google need to do what is right for their business and nobody elses yet, all the time we hear of companies and individuals (mostly individuals i would like to add) who do expect things to be fought for them, for free, at the drop of a hat, that simply cant be done... By the way, anyone know whats happening with Acacia as of late?
Regards,
Lee