Do you think this should be allowed???
 

Honest discussion peeps...

Do you think photos like this should be allowed on girlfriend sites?
Positively underage content..

Everytime I see a photo like this promoting an adult site it pretty much
makes me sick to think these people are in the same business as I am...

http://3xtom.com/private/dump/ph_005.jpg

I can't see the pic but it might be best that it's not linked here.

I think if you are selling an exgf site you are selling access to adult content and as such you should have 2257 docs for all of the content on your site just as any other adult content site on the web.

As I mentioned in another thread on this topic recently, there is more than enough legal content out there that there's no reason to post stolen content in that manner.

I mean it is just a girl in a cheer outfit but to have it on an adult site i would think is still a big fat fucking NO NO....

Nope. And any program I find using content like that (that I promote) I pull links down immediately, no matter how good conversions are.

Someone posted some galleries here yesterday for realteeniegfs.com and it was obvious to anyone here who looked at them that the girls, even though not at all naked were underage.

Promoting porn with these images and associating these kids with that is not right.

I wasn't surprised to find out it was an I$/SoloConverts project.

just start pushing the real teens like teensatwork.com and teenslikeitbig.com

When working affiliate applications, I also see a lot of goth/emo sites that have pictures ripped straight from photobucket. It would be lovely to see some of these places popped for 2257. If it's going to be a law, it might as well be doing some good.

Didn't you just post that pic on an adult site?

A lot of the underage pics on those sites are not nudes and would not fall under 2257. Many of them are also photochopped facials and so forth.

I think it would be awesome if some of the parents of the kids would find this stuff and sue the living hell out of those who are using it.

Agree, and I agree with Tom.

But with that said, I see plenty of programs here releasing content featuring girls in bobbi socks and pig tails, licking huge lollipops and cuddling stuffed animals...
Simulation of what exactly? Selling to who??
Show me the threads ripping these cats and I'd feel better about it. Or just explain to me why that shit is ok... Maybe I'm missing something:helpme

I hit it?

it's going to blow up one day in the face of the ENTIRE industry one day - only a matter of time. parents do contact ex-gf sites, they won't tell you about it, parents don't go public because of course they don't want to be embarassed further. but one day you'll get a parent on a crusade who will go very public.

Sharp as usual... :1orglaugh

one is fantasy with legal aged models who've signed model releases and been financially compensated - the other is the exploitation of underage minors who have given nobody permission to use their own photos and videos.

in Canada it is a crime to take a legal aged model and shoot her in such a way to make her look underage.

I can't see the problem here. You see some hard porn here ? Or at least some hidden part of her body. You'll have to prohibit all underage beach pictures promoting travel, holidays etc.

This photo was on a gallery right next to lesbians, a facial, and a girl taking it in the ass
all promoting an ex girlfriend site...

I see nothing wrong with the photo
just the way the photo was used..

Doesn't look underage to me, but you never know

Speaking of underage...Tom your avatar keeps getting younger and younger chronilogically. By the end of the year it's gonna be pics of you taken with an ultrasound as a fetus in the womb. :1orglaugh By next year, it'll be pics of your parents dating. lol

No. I think of age for consent and age for being in porn are two very different things. I'm against most age of consent laws because they're not grounded in fact and they're private matters - porn is public.. very public.

I agree the photo and photos like it are being used pretty distastefully and that the photo alone is harmless.

This is certainly a problem, though probably legal.

A few years back one of the GFY members was busted in Arizona for his 13-17yo teen "modeling" sites where the girls were in bikinis and lingerie. Everyone thought he was a piece of shit for it... but I'm pretty sure he got off after a lengthy legal battle

These girls didn't sign up to be on that site, or any other adult site. They shouldn't be presented next to hardcore nude pics.

If you think that is bad... start following links on so called "High Quality" no skim teen tgps owned by some of the top posters on this forum... not to mention CJs run by some of the same (top posters).

hahahaha

I was wandering when someone would bring that up ... :thumbsup

Oh god I know ...

Last time i tried looking for some new programs to promote I just about had to wipe my computer just to feel safe....

Simple, If you feel the way you do then report them. Posting it here then moving on is not going to resolve the problem you brought up.

The entire GF niche makes me kind of sick to be honest. Shady as fuck the entire niche. Without a doubt underage girls on the vast majority of them, aside from a small handful of sites with properly licensed content.

I've been patiently waiting since the whole GF explosion for some rich angry daddy to take up a vendetta when he comes across his little 16 year old girl dancing on some pornsite in her bra and panties to the latest Britney song... :2 cents:

What age did Sarah Peachez start doing the whole teen model thing? I remember beating my wiener to her when I was like 16 and she wasn't even old enough to do porn yet...

Always kind of giggle when I see her name pop up around here thinking back to that. Now she's sucking cock on cam, been doing the webmodel thing since she was what 15-16? Obviously there were 40 year old + dudes beating off to her then.

Was she just counting down til her 18th birthday so she could whip her tits out the whole time? :1orglaugh

Damn it, you just had to ruin my fantasy of Bubba shooting some baby batter up their asses, didn't you? :1orglaugh

Okay, 2257 non nudity point duly noted.

I'll adjust my fantasy to one of the girls having an uncle named Billy Joe Ray Bob who teaches people running those sites the fine art of Shotgun Sodomy.

She could easily be 18 with minimal boobage. She is super airbrushed for that youthful glow.

I can't get too detailed or Eric will ban me, but I feel like half the industry came in my niche and took a giant shit on it.

Stick with the few legal out there with ID's and docs like...... me of course :)

:2 cents:

nope, unless theres 2257 docs and its a genuine legal girl who just looks underage, one of those fantasy things ive never understood, always gone for the more mature woman, keeps me outta trouble

to be honest she looks 18.

i wonder if 10 years ago if we would be bothered by such pics.

i mean i looked at it, its not turned me into a pedo. its not made me want to have sex with kids.

i wonder if that britny spears vid could be made these days (the one where she is in the school girl outfit).

It all reminds me of that spate of non-nude pre-teen sites that were springing up a few years back. I don't want that sort of traffic to my sites.

No, that is not okay.