Originally Posted by StinkyFingerz

Whats that a girl with a stuffed unicorn on her ass with a bedspread with hearts and shit on it?



VERY young looking boy with a young looking girl in a pool.



Amazing the hypocrisy...

Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude

Whats that a girl with a stuffed unicorn on her ass with a bedspread with hearts and shit on it?



A very young looking girl in a school girl uniform?

VERY young looking boy with a young looking girl in a pool.



Amazing the hypocrisy...

You are a real piece of work, equating my site with Little Lupe.

Only one of the photos of those you posted did I shoot. The one with Ariel, one of my spokesmodels, and the unicorn.

If you looked at it in context, you would see that it is a Valentines photo set in which she received a rose, a box of chocolates, and a stuffed unicorn. Nowhere was it implied that she was under 18. Only your mind sees that, since that is apparently what excites you and you go looking for.

Ariel appears in dozens of photo sets and videos on my site and she is never portrayed as underage. She recently graduated from college with a degree in computer science.

The young "boy"? His name is Peter North. You may have heard of him. The ID for the woman in that picture indicates she was in her mid-twenties when it was shot and she certainly looks it. She is not wearing pigtails or in any way suggesting she is under 18 in that "softcore" photo set.

I could go on, but I won't since you are apparently oblivious as to what constitutes a site that obviously panders to pedos, and one which caters to adults.

I have no problem with adult role-playing. However when the sole focus of a site appears to be pandering to those with an interest in underage girls, then I have a problem with it.

As a father, I would expect you might at least have some reservations, but I guess not.

Is shooting porn in Tennessee even legal?

ADG Webmaster

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

School girl uniform and pigtails on a young looking Asian girl.. What fantasy does that pander to??

Originally Posted by aico

LOL You tell us, you're the one who said you make your wife do it... fucking idiot.

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

School girl uniform and pigtails on a young looking Asian girl.. What fantasy does that pander to??

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Im not the one putting fantasy and role playing down, they are. Im pointing out hypocrisy. Funny you used the word "making" too. Are we now insinuating that Im forcing my wife to do things?

Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude

You are a real piece of work, equating my site with Little Lupe.

Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude

I have no problem with adult role-playing. However when the sole focus of a site appears to be pandering to those with an interest in underage girls, then I have a problem with it.

Originally Posted by Webby

Won't address the idiot - he's just too ignorant, clueless and clutching at straws and little to do with the "adult entertainment industry".



Totally agree with this!! When you look at the whole "package" as any jury would do, - and if there is only one sole purpose to that package, in this case to basically market to pedos - it is very hard to defend this.

It's clear why this is done by design - satisfying the fantasies of pedos is a huge market and the people involved also know this from their "success rate". All they care about is money - if dog fucking was legal (hell knows if it is in whatever countries) - it is poss they would purvey that. Bottom line - there is no judgement in publishing - it's clouded by dollar signs.

This "content" is illegal in a fair number of countries - would love to see a few asses in courtrooms trying to defend it in these countries. It may clean up the mainstream adult industry for a few years

Originally Posted by EBORG9

I had to step out for a couple of days...what round is it?

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

You continue to avoid talking about the quickbuck site. Why is that? Girls in pigtails on FUCKING SCHOOL BUSES. That seems to be outsider your blinders huh? Girls that ride school buses are nearly ALWAYS under 18, and normally are 16 or under. Yet you ignore that. Fucking fat cunt.

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

Quick Buck? You Mean, Implied Bestiality, and how old are most Babysitters?

Originally Posted by V_RocKs

She has made me a lot of money.

Originally Posted by Webby

As an alleged adult of 30 something years of age, and a father of, soon to be three children, - are you comfortable with boasting about 1:68 conversions to websites which convert on the basis of imaging of a model styled up to look around 12 years of age with pigtails, teddy bears, hairclips and coloring pens and a cock stuck in her mouth??

Originally Posted by NTSS

The moral of the story is...people that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones

Way to go stickyfingerz

Lots of major sponsors, in one form or another, do the same shit that TR is doing... IE: Lollypops, pigtails, teddybears, colorful clothing, bedding, funiture...etc

So what makes Little Lupe any different?

Also, I don't think these sites are what pedos are looking for...they know how to find the real sick shit online.

So drop it

Originally Posted by webmasterchecks

stickyfingers and webby sure have a lot of time on their hands to throw around childish insults.

sticky, remember that this thread is about littlelupe, not arlos sites. if there was a thread accusing hooper of presenting what looks to be underage content on one of his sites, the thread would be dead, because he is not doing anything the other 80% of people are not doing, its become the norm. i am not suggesting hooper is clean, just that he is dirty in his own, different way

when littlelupe.com came out, first glance at it and i knew it was triplexcash, only company i know that has the balls to put nursery rhythms on their 'teen' porn site tour.

lots of people bitching about how she looks underage, but they are putting their links up. have you seen a site go near the top 1000 in alexa within a week? freeones was on here bragging about that accomplishment a few months ago and it took them 10 years to make it

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Just to make it clear. I am not bugged by any quickbucks sites. He came in the thread ripping on Lupe, while having sites that use the same imagery.

Originally Posted by webmasterchecks

dude, your not kidding anyone here with this. it takes a lot of searching to find an over-18 model that looks that young and that company consistently comes out with sites that have the youngest looking models out there. on purpose.

and people bitch about it, but some of them secretly wish they had her, because of the traffic, young sells, alexa speaks for itself, paulo does not need to promote the site, it promotes itself.

they are getting flack for it, and they should, but they understand thats the cost of getting mass sales. thats just how it is, dont go against the grain

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Ok Jon, since you jumped back in. Would you promote that School Bus girl site, but not Little Lupe? Can you say the qb one isnt based on the same imagery little Webby is crying about?

Originally Posted by Jon Clark

Did you guys really stay up all night argueing about this...?








I don't promote teen anything

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

Cop out.

Originally Posted by Webby

Still going on??

This thread is too brain dead thanks to Daddy of the Year's lobotomy, but was fun

Dammit - screw this "adult entertainment" biz everyone needs to dump all adult sponsors and switch over to purveying images of little girls being fucked and pandering to sicko pedo fantasies - the "pedo entertainment" biz is much more profitable

Pity there is hardly more than a few valid posts (mainly from real webmasters) of any substance out of the whole of this thread - and not one who stood up and offered any legitimate defense of the site (apart from "it's legal" bullshit - it's not).



BVF:



Sure.. this is correct BVF - it was random - the "portrayal" could be.... anthing from 11 thru to what? Pushing 15?


AaronM:



You are very quiet my man


Another valid point...

NikKay:



You have mentioned the law in your post NikKay and this is relevant - not just in respect of US law, but elsewhere. To the north of you in Canada, "little girl fucking" is covered by the Child Protection Act where the portrayal of models to appear underage and involved in sexual scenarios is a criminal offense - same in a many other countries. It's considered to be pedo content already.

Basically agree with your comment above - any youngish model can look underage in a few random shots. This is clearly not a "few random shots", - the girl is styled to look as young as possible for the shoot and "decorated" with kiddy toys etc - all with one aim which is already more than clear.

My main "gripe" is firstly of pedo-pandering to human trash. Until a few years back, was kinda naive to this area until I got an "education" into the world of pedos and their victims from law. In the process met a number of victims and .. sheesh.. will never forget, but don't want to discuss here. Many pedo's themselves are victims who were abused and them proceed to abusing others - and some are just downright "evil" and have little thought to killing their victims.

Second "gripe" is this supposed to be the "main stream adult industry" - WTF Since when did "adult entertainment" involve portraying kids on imagery and pandering to the world's human waste??

Only my , but don't consider there is much difference between actual CP and the producing CP fantasies and claiming these are legal (which is actually untrue anyway) - all of them just crawled out of the same swamp

There are many ways of skinning a cat - and look forward to seeing this type of alleged "content" being hit - time and again

Originally Posted by Webby

AaronM:



You are very quiet my man

Originally Posted by AaronM

I think both of you could be using this time to make money rather than argue about a topic that has been beat to death already. Seems kinda counter productive to me.

If you don't think it's moral or legal then don't promote it. If you're OK with it then go on and make your money.

What else needs to be said?

Originally Posted by AaronM

If you don't think it's moral or legal then don't promote it. If you're OK with it then go on and make your money.

Originally Posted by Jon Clark

The most sensable post in this thread so far...

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

CP involves a CHILD that girl is an adult.

Originally Posted by sarettah

Now wait just a minute there. I think I said basically the same thing back on page 2

Originally Posted by Jon Clark

Sorry, I missed it...

Originally Posted by sarettah

As has been posted twice in this thread, 2256 (which are the definitions used throughout all the US cp statutes) says otherwise.

.

Originally Posted by sarettah

As has been posted twice in this thread, 2256 (which are the definitions used throughout all the US cp statutes) says otherwise.
.

Originally Posted by AaronM

That's nice.

The content was shot in a European country for a European company.

Originally Posted by webmasterchecks

on the flip side to that, that content is being sold in the US and the owners reside in the US

Originally Posted by AaronM

Really?

I was under the impression that the content was being distributed worldwide on the Internet. Lets see the documentation you have that shows where the owners live. I'd love to see it. OR are you making assumptions and talking out your ass?

Originally Posted by webmasterchecks

am i making assumptions about the owners living in the US? Absolutely

but id bet they do and hooper mentioned they did earlier in the thread and you didnt say anything then

and i believe that the govt can go after you if they can show that your distributing the content in the US, although i think most will say the probability of that is pretty small

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz

School girl uniform and pigtails on a young looking Asian girl.. What fantasy does that pander to??