New Law Focuses on Website Featuring Underage Girls

[DannyCox]

As a few here know, we've never promoted any "Teen" sites, even if the girls were 18 or 19. That's just too young to get involved in this industry and just feeds the CP guys. But, I tend to just shut up about it these days as the hypocrites in this industry think it's just fine to throat-gag a girl on her 18th birthday when the day before they were too young. Never knew that a single day in a life brings about a new maturity!

I used to think it was funny when Helmy used to promote seventeen.nl from his ASACP page! His defense....well it's legal over there. I know 18 is legal, but I just don't find it acceptable.

[Hell Puppy]

Originally Posted by DannyCox

As a few here know, we've never promoted any "Teen" sites, even if the girls were 18 or 19. That's just too young to get involved in this industry and just feeds the CP guys. But, I tend to just shut up about it these days as the hypocrites in this industry think it's just fine to throat-gag a girl on her 18th birthday when the day before they were too young. Never knew that a single day in a life brings about a new maturity!

I used to think it was funny when Helmy used to promote seventeen.nl from his ASACP page! His defense....well it's legal over there. I know 18 is legal, but I just don't find it acceptable.

This is one of those really tough gray areas. The law on this side of the Atlantic is black and white, 18 is the line that is drawn. 17 years plus 364 days is too young. One extra day makes it "legal". The gray area is "right and wrong" or morality.

Some think a 14 year old in a bikini is perfectly acceptable, others think a 19 year old that looks 16 is NOT acceptable. Although the law is pretty clear, certainly anyone pushing either of these is more likely to catch heat and get visits from men in dark suits wanting to see 2257 docs. Like many things in this business, ultimately everyone decides what their risk tolerance is.

Again, I'm one of those guys who has left a lot of money on the table over the years because I wont compromise my own sense of what's right and what's wrong. I'm always fully aware that there are many out there whose morals I offend by merely posting naked pics on the internet, but ultimately it's about what I can do and still sleep well at night.

Dating all the way back to the BBS era, I've always had what I call a "no pigtails" rule. By that, I mean if you're doing anything that in my mind appeals to the pedos out there, I wont touch it. 21 year old in pig tails and a lollipop aint working for me.

That said, I dont have a hard and fast rule on age. I do like some of the teens out there simply because they are smoking hot with nice smooth skin, firm tight bods, etc. But I know "ripe" when I see it. I cant really document it or even describe it. But if she looks like a "little girl", I wont touch it. If she's a "hot young lady", I'm ok with that....if she's at least 18.

It gets more complex if I'm personally involved with shooting it. I wont shoot anyone who I think is too immature to grasp what they are doing or if I feel they are doing it totally out of desperation for cash or whatever. I've shot 18 year olds, I've turned down 25 year olds.

I sleep well.

[Toby]

Originally Posted by Hell Puppy

...I've always had what I call a "no pigtails" rule. By that, I mean if you're doing anything that in my mind appeals to the pedos out there, I wont touch it. 21 year old in pig tails and a lollipop aint working for me...

I had to smile as I read that. I have a similar unwritten "no pigtails" policy when reviewing submitted galleries. Fortunately I don't see much of it in the fetish niches.

I also have a written policy in my submit rules that addresses the issue.

9. No galleries with content implying underage status of models will be listed. This includes, but is not limited to, sites that target a 'borderline underage' audience. If the models appear to be too young or are marketed to be too young for porn then your gallery will not get listed. This includes legal non-nude under-eighteen models. This type of content is not welcome here. Do not submit these types of sites.

Not only is it of no interest to my target audience, I don't want it anywhere on my sites.

[ali25extreme]

Originally Posted by Toby

I had to smile as I read that. I have a similar unwritten "no pigtails" policy when reviewing submitted galleries. Fortunately I don't see much of it in the fetish niches.

I also have a written policy in my submit rules that addresses the issue.
Not only is it of no interest to my target audience, I don't want it anywhere on my sites.

Glad to hear that!

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by Toby

I had to smile as I read that. I have a similar unwritten "no pigtails" policy when reviewing submitted galleries. Fortunately I don't see much of it in the fetish niches.

I also have a written policy in my submit rules that addresses the issue.
Not only is it of no interest to my target audience, I don't want it anywhere on my sites.

In reality, you would do better to have a ban on short, small breasted girls with shaved pussies and undeveloped hips. A 20 year old with pigtails and a lollipop doesn't appeal to the pedos.

[Toby]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

In reality, you would do better to have a ban on short, small breasted girls with shaved pussies and undeveloped hips...

I think "If the models appear to be too young" pretty much covers all that and then some.