Major Changes Going Forward

This is the place to check for rules, updates, and special announcements.
Locked
DevilishlyUnearthed
Senior
Senior
Posts: 1469
Joined: Thursday August 09, 2012, 18:45 EDT
Gender Identity: Prefer not to answer
Sexual Orientation: Prefer not to answer
Preferred Role: Prefer not to answer
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 21

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488856

Post by DevilishlyUnearthed » Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:07 EDT

Butter...you are so wrong.

It is not illegal. Like...it actually isnt illegal. At all.

They only way I can rationalize your response is to suggest that...

in a scenario for some dumb reason a person was interacting with minors in a way that was sexually gratifying (illegal) was caught and their computer was confiscated with a history of videos showing said minors getting wedgied then...yes. That is illegal.

But omg dont touch minors with an intent for sexual gratification. Thats illegal and just dont it.

What goes on here...not illegal. Just...say it. Its not illegal.

If it is...example? Like an actual case we're someone had a collection of videos of minors doing nothing sexual and it was crime. Present it to me if you will.

Bottom line. Dont touch minors or share vids of minors in actual sexual situations.

Oh but none of that happens here. So....issue?
User avatar
Butter
Professor
Professor
Posts: 1747
Joined: Tuesday March 20, 2012, 13:29 EDT
Gender Identity: Male
Sexual Orientation: Gay
Preferred Role: 100% Nerd (Receiver)
Location: South East of England
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 18

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488857

Post by Butter » Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:17 EDT

You want an example? Here's a personal example. My road, in fact the house opposite mine, has a pedophile living there, or used to live there. I am not clear of the details as I was a baby when he was caught, but he had many images and such of children on his computer. And you want to tell me that getting off on children doing non-sexual things is not illegal? Please, educate yourself on law.

I am going to stop arguing with you as it is like arguing with a brick wall at this point. I look forward to seeing you try and claim your victory here but I think you should grow up and accept the changes.
Just your local dairy product. Pronouns: Buttery One, Butterball, Butterboy, Baby Butter, Land O' Lakes, Buttery Kitten.
Message me for information on the WH UK skype group! :)
Image
User avatar
Vinnie
Freshman
Freshman
Posts: 201
Joined: Friday October 21, 2011, 23:48 EDT
Gender Identity: Male
Sexual Orientation: Straight
Preferred Role: Loner (Selfer)
OK to "cold PM?": Yes
Age: 24

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488858

Post by Vinnie » Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:18 EDT

DevilishlyUnearthed wrote: It's not illegal what is shared here. So thats not a defense for anyone to justify the rules being changed in regards to sharing videos/media.
We're all coming here because we have a sexual attraction to pulled underwear. The original intent of the picture/video may not have been illegal but the way we are using them is. Removing those sections is also to help separate us from the harassers on other sites that trick kids into making content for their sexual fetish (which is a great way to attract attention from people you'd rather not attract attention from).

This site isn't hidden, a few months back we had a podcast stumble upon here and start looking through the threads for laughs. They seemed to take it pretty lightly but it could have been way worse. You just can't have a site where a bunch of adults talk about getting off to wedgies in one thread and in another have loads of pictures of 13-year-olds getting wedgied. The fact that you can't understand this, or don't want to accept that it's wrong, is making it look like you're possibly one of the people who brought these changes about.
I write, post, and...that's about it.

http://anticherry93.deviantart.com/art/ ... -338556364
It's a list...O' wedgies...
http://anticherry93.deviantart.com/art/ ... rry93&qo=0
Help for all those who can't quite get their underwear far enough up their butt.
User avatar
Dead Draw Domination
Senior
Senior
Posts: 7275
Joined: Monday October 29, 2012, 20:00 EDT
Gender Identity: Female
Sexual Orientation: Bisexual
Preferred Role: 90% Nerd
Location: The Velvet Room: Between a dream and reality
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 21

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488859

Post by Dead Draw Domination » Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:19 EDT

And since I've posted here and have relinquished my lurker status for this thread. Could someone please explain to me the point of arguing this? It's done. It happened. It doesn't seem like it's changing anytime soon, so like why even? It's useless. Useless useless. Mudarana muda muda. MudaMudaMudaMudaMudaMudaMudaMudaMudaMudaMudaMuda


phpBB [media]
Image
Higher than a motherfucker dreamin of you as my lover~
Hart is bestie tho
DevilishlyUnearthed
Senior
Senior
Posts: 1469
Joined: Thursday August 09, 2012, 18:45 EDT
Gender Identity: Prefer not to answer
Sexual Orientation: Prefer not to answer
Preferred Role: Prefer not to answer
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 21

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488860

Post by DevilishlyUnearthed » Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:21 EDT

Butter wrote:You want an example? Here's a personal example. My road, in fact the house opposite mine, has a pedophile living there, or used to live there. I am not clear of the details as I was a baby when he was caught, but he had many images and such of children on his computer. And you want to tell me that getting off on children doing non-sexual things is not illegal? Please, educate yourself on law.

I am going to stop arguing with you as it is like arguing with a brick wall at this point. I look forward to seeing you try and claim your victory here but I think you should grow up and accept the changes.
that's not...anything. Thats another scenario. What 'images' did he have? kids smiling? Thats not...illegal. omg. If it was actual sexual interactions than...yes. But if it's anything we're discussing here...its not.

You're second statement is a more...well thought argument than the "its illegal" one. Cause its not.

You keep saying "the law" yet you seem very evasive to show where it explicitly states where sharing links to minors in a wedgie situation uploaded by them willingly with no influence from anyone... is illegal.

Please...still waiting.
Last edited by DevilishlyUnearthed on Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:27 EDT, edited 1 time in total.
DevilishlyUnearthed
Senior
Senior
Posts: 1469
Joined: Thursday August 09, 2012, 18:45 EDT
Gender Identity: Prefer not to answer
Sexual Orientation: Prefer not to answer
Preferred Role: Prefer not to answer
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 21

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488863

Post by DevilishlyUnearthed » Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:24 EDT

Vinnie wrote:
DevilishlyUnearthed wrote: It's not illegal what is shared here. So thats not a defense for anyone to justify the rules being changed in regards to sharing videos/media.
The original intent of the picture/video may not have been illegal but the way we are using them is. Removing those sections is also to help separate us from the harassers on other sites that trick kids into making content for their sexual fetish (which is a great way to attract attention from people you'd rather not attract attention from).
but thats not...what I'm saying.

Again...interacting with minros online or off with the intent for any kind of sexual gratification or coercion is illegal. Which is why upping the age restriction and removing the buddy section is perfect.

Sharing videos...isnt. not illegal. Not criminalizing. How these videos or pictures of minors in non sexual situations are used (unless you're copying them copyright copyright) is not illegal.
User avatar
Vinnie
Freshman
Freshman
Posts: 201
Joined: Friday October 21, 2011, 23:48 EDT
Gender Identity: Male
Sexual Orientation: Straight
Preferred Role: Loner (Selfer)
OK to "cold PM?": Yes
Age: 24

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488865

Post by Vinnie » Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:32 EDT

This is a site where wedgies and underwear are viewed and talked about in a sexual manner. You cannot post pictures or videos of kids in their underwear or getting wedgied to a site where wedgies and underwear are used in a sexual way. Pretty much everyone here has spelled this out for you in the simplest way possible and yet you still try to convince us otherwise.
I write, post, and...that's about it.

http://anticherry93.deviantart.com/art/ ... -338556364
It's a list...O' wedgies...
http://anticherry93.deviantart.com/art/ ... rry93&qo=0
Help for all those who can't quite get their underwear far enough up their butt.
Rome
Senior
Senior
Posts: 16104
Joined: Tuesday August 17, 2010, 17:59 EDT
Gender Identity: Male
Sexual Orientation: Gay
Preferred Role: 90% Bully
Location: 'Murica! Kansas to be exact
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 19

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488867

Post by Rome » Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:36 EDT

I think that since we're at the point of name calling that this has gone on for long enough. I am seeing immaturity on both sides and it is not cute. Please lock it.. for the children!
Image Image Image
the man above me is flawless and MINE I generally enjoy socializing and I don't bite too hard :-P I have a kik and skype and shit.. If you want it just meesage me. http://ask.fm/Willbemrhutch98 Ask me questions!
DevilishlyUnearthed
Senior
Senior
Posts: 1469
Joined: Thursday August 09, 2012, 18:45 EDT
Gender Identity: Prefer not to answer
Sexual Orientation: Prefer not to answer
Preferred Role: Prefer not to answer
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 21

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488868

Post by DevilishlyUnearthed » Saturday June 13, 2015, 18:37 EDT

Vinnie wrote:This is a site where wedgies and underwear are viewed and talked about in a sexual manner. You cannot post pictures or videos of kids in their underwear or getting wedgied to a site where wedgies and underwear are used in a sexual way. Pretty much everyone here has spelled this out for you in the simplest way possible and yet you still try to convince us otherwise.
But it's under the guise of "illegal" which its not. It just isnt. Like actually isnt.

If you are reaching out to minors with the intent to get them produce wedgie related content...dont. Thats a mess you shouldnt go near with a ten foot pole. that is illegal. You are being a predator.

But sharing and viewing their..."work" that they produced themselves and distributed themselves willingly online for others to enjoy.... is fair game.

What you have just described is only a "law"....here. Like actually you just described the rule change only for this site. Only here is it incriminating to share videos or pictures of minors in non sexual situations that were uploaded and produced freely by them.

So if you admit that then...sure you're right. If not and you are still suggesting its illegal...where.
User avatar
Vinnie
Freshman
Freshman
Posts: 201
Joined: Friday October 21, 2011, 23:48 EDT
Gender Identity: Male
Sexual Orientation: Straight
Preferred Role: Loner (Selfer)
OK to "cold PM?": Yes
Age: 24

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488869

Post by Vinnie » Saturday June 13, 2015, 19:52 EDT

18 USC Sec. 2252. Certain activities relating to material involving the sexual exploitation of minors
Spoiler:
(a) Any person who—
(1) knowingly transports or ships using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce by any means including by computer or mails, any visual depiction, if—
(A) the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and

(B) such visual depiction is of such conduct;
(2) knowingly receives, or distributes, any visual depiction using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or that has been mailed, or has been shipped or transported in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, or which contains materials which have been mailed or so shipped or transported, by any means including by computer, or knowingly reproduces any visual depiction for distribution using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or through the mails, if—
(A) the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and

(B) such visual depiction is of such conduct;
(3) either—
(A) in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or on any land or building owned by, leased to, or otherwise used by or under the control of the Government of the United States, or in the Indian country as defined in section 1151

(B) knowingly sells or possesses with intent to sell any visual depiction that has been mailed, shipped, or transported using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce, or has been shipped or transported in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, or which was produced using materials which have been mailed or so shipped or transported using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including by computer, if—
(i) the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and

(ii) such visual depiction is of such conduct; or
(4) either—
(A) in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or on any land or building owned by, leased to, or otherwise used by or under the control of the Government of the United States, or in the Indian country as defined in section 1151

(B) knowingly possesses, or knowingly accesses with intent to view, 1 or more books, magazines, periodicals, films, video tapes, or other matter which contain any visual depiction that has been mailed, or has been shipped or transported using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, or which was produced using materials which have been mailed or so shipped or transported, by any means including by computer, if—
(i) the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and

(ii) such visual depiction is of such conduct;
Main part to focus on is at the bottom:
knowingly possesses, or knowingly accesses with intent to view...(i) the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and

(ii) such visual depiction is of such conduct;
Again, people come here because of a sexual fetish. You know linking content here will be viewed in a sexual way, thus linking content involving minors is a no go. Linking content involving people 18+ could be a violation of privacy or unwanted sexual attention (sexual harassment).
I write, post, and...that's about it.

http://anticherry93.deviantart.com/art/ ... -338556364
It's a list...O' wedgies...
http://anticherry93.deviantart.com/art/ ... rry93&qo=0
Help for all those who can't quite get their underwear far enough up their butt.
DevilishlyUnearthed
Senior
Senior
Posts: 1469
Joined: Thursday August 09, 2012, 18:45 EDT
Gender Identity: Prefer not to answer
Sexual Orientation: Prefer not to answer
Preferred Role: Prefer not to answer
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 21

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488871

Post by DevilishlyUnearthed » Saturday June 13, 2015, 20:05 EDT

Vinnie,

thank you for taking the time to research this.

However...this does not apply to what's being shared here as...the original content is not inherently sexual or pornographic. The people in the content were not coerced or pressured to making the content. No outside influence or content was established for the production and distribution of the content.

There was no sexual intent and it is not sexual.

How its viewed is up to the viewee.

Again...if you're just viewing or sharing it (which is what the media forum is for) its not illegal.

Its not harassment because you are not directly interacting them (and you shouldnt) its not a privacy issue because they are distributing it freely.

The videos are not sexually explicit. Its a loophole.

And again....do not contact these people. That is harassment. We agree there.

But sharing and viewing. It isnt.

Again thank you for your research Vinnie. Appreciated.
Nameless

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488872

Post by Nameless » Saturday June 13, 2015, 20:07 EDT

Y'all are beating a dead horse.

Somebody should lock this. If people complain about that, let them.
User avatar
Captain Hammer
Professor
Professor
Posts: 26468
Joined: Sunday November 13, 2011, 11:36 EST
Gender Identity: Prefer not to answer
Sexual Orientation: Prefer not to answer
Preferred Role: Prefer not to answer
Location: I don't know, but its cold and really wet. I'm either in England or the bottom of a lake.
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 24

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488885

Post by Captain Hammer » Sunday June 14, 2015, 02:04 EDT

Given its now 17 pages and most sane people are up for locking it, I will.

But, ending points first:
DevilishlyUnearthed; yes, its illegal. Even ignoring the fact that its images of youths with the focus being their undergarments invading their genital regions (wedgies are considered sexual assault by US law, remember that?), but Child Pornography is defined as 'pornography that exploits children for sexual stimulation', not specifically 'sexual images of children', and, going by the COPINE scale (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COPINE_scale), the wedgie images would cross into 'Indicative Child Porn'; its non-sexual imagery but is being used for an inappropriate manner based on the context.
In other words, the video itself doesn't have to be sexual, merely used for such by the possessor. If you just recorded children playing in a park and used it for fapping, you'd still be arrested, and in this case, showing wedgie images would be.
I will note now that this is based specifically on UK law, and I'd rather not spend any more time searching the subject to find out what the US equivalent is (thanks for having me fill my search history with child porn laws; if I end up on a watch list, totally your fault for bugging us for 'proof its a crime'), but I think its safe to assume US courts would still consider this an offence.

So yes, totally illegal. Why you would think otherwise, to the point of aggressively arguing this, actually raises a few eyebrows.
If you still don't understand this or still wish to argue about it, I suggest PMing me and we'd discuss it, rather than continue beating this thread.
When you message me, please remember not to annoy me. Remember...
Image
Mick
Sophomore
Sophomore
Posts: 345
Joined: Saturday January 28, 2012, 05:21 EST
Gender Identity: Prefer not to answer
Sexual Orientation: Prefer not to answer
Preferred Role: Prefer not to answer
Location: Melbourne, Australia
OK to "cold PM?": No
Age: 29

Re: Major Changes Going Forward

#488887

Post by Mick » Sunday June 14, 2015, 02:39 EDT

I was going to add, from Wikipedia:
In 1994, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit ruled in United States v. Knox that the federal statute contains no requirement that genitals be visible or discernible. The court ruled that non-nude visual depictions can qualify as lascivious exhibitions
Which seems to cover images and videos of kids in their underwear, or having their underwear yanked up their butts.

Any way you spin it, putting "sexual gratification" and "children" in the same room is wrong on every level. Legally, morally, artistically, instinctually wrong.
Locked