Controversial Topic: Young Looking Models

[samebb]

Im starting this tread because I really do want to hear people’s opinions. It’s a huge issue in the industry, but also a huge market. Im not sure how well this thread will be structured as of yet, im just going to type until I have it all said.

Here is my standpoint on the whole thing.

Yes, I work almost exclusively in the twink market. I do this because, I myself am only 20 years of age, and can relate to a market of my age group. Some of you may think this means very little when it comes to working in with twinks, and maybe it doesn’t for others, but it does for me. It helps me to work in a market where I can promote models I find personally attractive. The same couldn’t be said if I worked with “bear” sites.

Now as many of you know, I have recently been asked to provide all model Ids and releases to pass billing compliance at a new site. The content on this site was purchased from a largely used content provider, and already live on sites that have been approved by another billing company. This did piss me off. Why? Well, if I had known this before it would have been easier to organize and get ready before compliance started, and also, it’s a small minded approach saying, that site has a couple of younger looking models, lets get all the Ids for that one, when another site they approved without Ids could have had a VERY old looking 17 year, actually breaking the law. Shouldn’t they make it one rule for all?

Now this next part really might piss a few of you off. Yes the adult industry is still mainly US based, and I think a LOT of Americans have become very small minded and disconnected from the rest of the world. Not all, and most likely not as many who work in this industry, and not just Americans, lots of 1st world people.

Lets face it. Go to Thailand, and look at the 18 year olds there. In fact, most places in Asia. You stick them next to an American 18 year old, and the Thai guy will look 12! This can also be said about a lot of 18+ guys in Eastern Europe, South America, and many other places. I have seen TV programs about how, in lots of the western world, children are growing up faster, largely because of diet, and additives in food to be more exact, that are forcing this change. A lot of the world’s countries don’t have these additives and such in their diet, and their youth, on mass, don’t grow up as fast.

So if you run pay-sites and you have models that are, no-doubt 18 years of age or older, you have copies of their identification, a signed model release, and you are in no way breaking any laws by publishing them online, should you worry?

It seems, there is no debating when it comes to a site with a young model. GayPay.com’s new site ChilloutBoys.com was slammed for having a young model on their tour last week, and this site has a 2257 address in the US….

So is the only worry the fact that, other webmasters are going to accuse you of publishing underage content?

If you HAVE provided all documents to your processor so you could pass compliance, and they have had no problem with the site, should that be enough for everyone else?

Yes, I agree there is always exceptions, such as the infamous BucksFactory, who pusblish sites that ONLY feature underage looking models, as in hundreds of them, and are based outside of the western world, so questions could be raised. Now I stopped promoting these guys as I became worried about their content, but I still wonder. This company have been processing for what? 2 years with these sites, and VISA are still allowing it? Surely VISA has thrown everything at these guys to try and ensure nothing was out of line, and they must have passed?

Well I think I have typed all I wish to right now, this post is huge. I really look forward to responses on this as its an issue that effect my day to day working, and im sure a lot of you guys experience the same.

Thanks!

[CorbinFisher_BD]

I can understand how you'd end up frustrated but at the end of the day I think you have to accept hightened scrutiny as part and parcel to what you do.

ISPSs have every right to scrutinize to their own liking and per their own terms. Just because a bouncer sees a young looking patron walking out of the bar across the street doesn't mean he shouldn't bother asking them for ID when they try and get in to his bar. Further, ISPSs assume their own liability and risk and "But the other company said it was ok" isn't going to do them any favors if legal issues come up.

You have twink sites and sell twink content. Accept greater scrutiny as something that just comes along with selling that kind of product, keep your shit in order, follow the rules, and merrily move along making yourself money.

From CorbinFisher.com's perspective, we deal exclusively with models between 18-25. The vast majority are 18-23, even. But we stress their being "studs", "men", and a boyish model doesn't do us any good. So we're dealing with the exact same age group twink sites are, but face much less scrutiny. Not because we're any smarter or wiser, but simply because that's just the way it is.

As an analogy, I have a friend who lives in South America and makes a very comfortable living exporting flowers to the United States and Europe. He sometimes complains that his shipments get delayed at customs longer than the product growers in Europe and the US have to deal with when shipping between countries. But he accepts it as part of doing what he does, given the amount of... ahem... "illicit agricultural product" coming from the very same countries he exports out of. No one's calling him a narcotrafficker or picking on him. It's just that heightened scrutiny comes with the territory when you look at what he does and where he does it from.

Accept it. Move on. IMHO.

[basschick]

when i was 20, a mature looking 16 could look 22 to me. the truth is there's no way to know that all is legally covered. if you prefer models who make the average person go "damn, he looks pretty young", at some point some of those models will be challenged legally.

[Xstr8guy]

You may be suffering from what is commonly called Max Syndrome. It is a condition whereupon inspection by credit card billers, they are alarmed by the whole feel of your site tour. They may find that the combination of text and images may suggest to viewers that you attempting to sell them psuedo CP. In most people's minds, pseudo CP is just as bad as real CP.

The cure... take a step back and try to view your tour through the eyes of a pervy ****. Is there anything that might appeal to their deranged minds? If so, remove it immediately!

[samebb]

You may be suffering from what is commonly called Max Syndrome. It is a condition whereupon inspection by credit card billers, they are alarmed by the whole feel of your site tour. They may find that the combination of text and images may suggest to viewers that you attempting to sell them psuedo CP. In most people's minds, pseudo CP is just as bad as real CP.

The cure... take a step back and try to view your tour through the eyes of a pervy ****. Is there anything that might appeal to their deranged minds? If so, remove it immediately!

Lol good post. No i fully support billers, and are happy to remove anything, or provide details of models they are unhappy with ect. I think its good to have that in place to prevent illegal content.

When i look at my tours, i see guys like me, and i assume that isnt what a **** would like? I dont believe im trying to sell pseudo CP, or anything close to it. I never try to word things or targetted anything to anyone but genuine twink surfers. I dont see any problem is in guys who are 18 and look 18 being on sites, cus hey, i bet their are a lot of surfers out there who are 18 themselves, have a whole new world of porn they can access with their shiny new credit cards, and want to see guys their own age.

Max Syndrome, haha, no. I have nothing again billers being careful on protecting their clients and company.

[Dzinerbear]

So is the only worry the fact that, other webmasters are going to accuse you of publishing underage content?

I guess it really depends on the individual.

First of all, let me say that webmasters are trusting that site owners have done the right thing and that they haven't shot underage models and they have the proper ID. But the fact that you have a 2257 address, regardless of where it is, means squat to me. I live in Canada, once I've been approved by the biller I could change my 2257 address to 123 Mary Lou Had a Big Fat Poo Street, Toronto Ontario, M5A 1T6 and none of you people would be any wiser.

If I don't have the records, or if I have shot underage content, then I'm assuming this holds some kind of legal implication for everyone who promoted it. A judge isn't going to accept, "I didn't know, I thought it was legal" any more than they would accept, "I didn't know it was cocaine." Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the judge would say, "Okay, well you thought it was legal, you had the links on your site, I'm going to let you go," but I'd be surprised if that were the case.

Having said that, I generally look at the content and if if it's looking too young, I just take a pass on it. I simply don't need the hassle.

Truth be told, I took a pass on your sites because (a) there were a lot of young looking guys that made me uncomfortable, and (b) I couldn't figure out heads or tails in that whole Reese Dylan mess. I had no idea who was telling the truth and whether I'd end up getting ripped off or not, so I just trashed all of your links. Probably not a big loss for you because I don't think I ever sold a membership off my link list. But still, maybe it'll help you to know this. (And btw, every time you dig at Reese Dylan, even in an oblique or cloaked kind of way, it reminds me of the whole situation. You should probably just drop it and never talk about it or reference it ever again. People will forget. But if you keep reminding them, then people like me will always remember why we stopped promoting you. Just my .02 cents.)

Same thing when I'm approving galleries. If he looks too young ... the gallery doesn't get approved. I don't need the hassle. Yes, I know the biller has approved the site, but that doesn't help me when I've got the police raiding my place because they suspect me of doing something wrong. In the porn world I think the law is "Guilty, until you've sold your house to prove your innocence." And after they've had my computers for a couple of years and I've spent thousands of dollars proving I did nothing wrong ... no thanks.

Finally, having said all of this, my line is different that my buddy's xstr8guy. He's practically smashed me over the head for some of the stuff I've said is okay. I understand that there are cultural differences and that Asian guys can actually be 25 and look 15. I realize that Russian guys also take longer to mature. But he also has a point, if you're promoting models who appear underage, what are you actually promoting? Aren't you saying in some way that it's okay to find underage guys attractive, that it's okay to have sex with them? You're selling the fantasy, how far off is the reality?

I don't know, it's such a messy line and more often than not, I just prefer to stay away from it.

Michael

[IdolKnights]

If you are XYZ soda company and needed to hire 25 people for your call center in Anytown USA, You would be fined for not hiring someone based on disability, gender, race, so on...

If you are a gay man and get fired from work for being gay, you would be pissed and what to do something about it.

If you were a woman and told "Sorry but this is a man's job-skill" all hell would break loose.

SO...

If a model is 25 and looks 15,the model "SHOULD" have some form of legal right to work. No dictation or discrimination to the job type.

I don't advocate sites with 15yo looking models BUT to tell them they can't work adult is like telling a black man "Niggers can't be trusted behind a cash register"

Sorry to be so blunt but it's a simple truth if you step out of the hole for a moment and look at the issue on a humanity level. But then again, what do I know, I'm not a democrat.

[Xstr8guy]

If a model is 25 and looks 15,the model "SHOULD" have some form of legal right to work. No dictation or discrimination to the job type.

You've GOT to be joking! Right?

[IdolKnights]

You've GOT to be joking! Right?

Nope.

But I didn't say I'm pro or that I want to see it. However, I am pointing out the right to work issues for someone 25 years old.

[Xstr8guy]

Nope.

But I didn't say I'm pro or that I want to see it. However, I am pointing out the right to work issues for someone 25 years old.

As 42 year old hairy man, then I have the RIGHT to appear on Corbin Fisher? I don't think BD is going to be too happy.

[IdolKnights]

As 42 year old hairy man, then I have the RIGHT to appear on Corbin Fisher? I don't think BD is going to be too happy.

Strange argument. Kind of a quick reply to skirt the issue as well.

You are now talking about a content issue in that the model should have the right to work and dictate the sites he is seen on. "I'm a twink and I should be on a chubby leather bear site" "I'm a thug and should be on a cowboy site"

There is a conflict of interest within the argument and because of such, makes the point easy to detour.

The point is not what site(s) the model should be on. The point is that the model should be able to work in adult if they are in fact, an adult.

[deanb]

Strange argument. Kind of a quick reply to skirt the issue as well.

You are now talking about a content issue in that the model should have the right to work and dictate the sites he is seen on. "I'm a twink and I should be on a chubby leather bear site" "I'm a thug and should be on a cowboy site"

There is a conflict of interest within the argument and because of such, makes the point easy to detour.

The point is not what site(s) the model should be on. The point is that the model should be able to work in adult if they are in fact, an adult.

And my grandmother who is obese should be allowed to walk a fashion runway if she wants... just now how it works, being an adult model, or any model, isn't not an employee at all.

[Xstr8guy]

Strange argument. Kind of a quick reply to skirt the issue as well.

I wasn't trying to skirt the issue. You argument is just so ridiculous, I was just trying to make light of it. Any website owner has the right to choose who is featured on their site regardless of the age of the model. If I had a twink site, it would be perfectly within my rights to refuse a legal-age model that appeared to be too young.

Btw, Right-to-work laws are state laws and have nothing to do with people's actual rights. They are union busting laws endorsed by the GOP... nothing more.

[samebb]

And my grandmother who is obese should be allowed to walk a fashion runway if she wants... just now how it works, being an adult model, or any model, isn't not an employee at all.

Sorry Dean thats not true at all. Here in the UK models are of all shapes and sizes, and with all the fear over size 0 models, the new wider models, with real sized, over sizes, tall+short models, modeling clothes for real people is majorly in at the moment.

[IdolKnights]

I wasn't trying to skirt the issue. You argument is just so ridiculous, I was just trying to make light of it. Any website owner has the right to choose who is featured on their site regardless of the age of the model. If I had a twink site, it would be perfectly within my rights to refuse a legal-age model that appeared to be too young.

It is a FULLY RIDICULOUS statement. I know that. As well as I would turn in sites I found with the content as something to be looked into. But still needs to be on the books as something to think about. If they are fully an adult who has to pay tax, they should have the right to work in adult, as an adult.

Btw, Right-to-work laws are state laws and have nothing to do with people's actual rights. They are union busting laws endorsed by the GOP... nothing more.

Right, I'm from florida and we are a right to work state.

Right-to-work as in Union form is simply that a union company cannot tell you no because you are not a union member. And the verse, you cannot turn away a union member in a nonunion situation.