Google bans the word twinks !!

[basschick]

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.

[IntenseCash.com]

Damn that sucks. It mean young boy not like ita which meant underage girl.

Mark

[gaybucks_chip]

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.

[Lee]

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

[Lee]

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.

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.

Regards,

Lee

[Lee]

the thing is you expect ccbill and google to fight this

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.

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