Do JUBbers ever get tired of seeing boys who look like 15 or 16 in the Porn forum? (rant)

[pat grimshaw]

… You apparently aren't much of a reader.…It would do you well to brush up on both your reading skills.…

…I likes me'men …

^ I don't understand this clause

 

[hungkee]

And for the record, I'm not trying to be either mean or condescending in this thread (hell, who needs to try)!

I'm actually a terribly adorably person.

But while those who think such youthful models are unappealing (to gross to pedo-fantasy) might feel offended, I think its very offensive to have every one of these sorts of discussions hover around the concept that so many gay men have pedo-impulses (somehow fueled or sated by Barely Legal models - no matter how legal it may be).

And that discussion running concurrently throughout this entire thread does exist (in this thread). I don't think I'm seeing things.

In that sense, I think its insulting to the millions of gay men who may enjoy what is typically described as Barely Legal or young twink porn.

I think its a topic which must stop haunting gay men or making them somehow paranoid or questioning of their true intent or desires.

In that way, I HIGHLY doubt that hetero guys are continually told to steer clear of porn girls between the ages of 18 and 21.

I mean, they aren't being told to look only at cougars else be suspected of being little girl molesters.

That would be the insult and the oppression of gay men to which I make veiled and not so veiled reference when reading these sorts of threads in gay forums.

Its similar to how gay men are continually reminded to use a condom while on straight sites the issue never comes up.

Yet as we all know, ladies get HIV, too. And straight porn production has been shut down due to AIDS scares.

But again, that's another subject.

 

[hungkee]

^ I don't understand this clause

Its Popeyespeak.

 

[altlover85]

And again, do gays live in a bubble? As not to even concern oneself with what the hetero world does or thinks about the issue of 18 year-old GIRLS?

I sure don't live on Planet Gayball in which I have no sense or interest in the wider society (of which we are members).

I think you're engaging in a bit of hyperbole. I don't care enough about the straight world to go on straight porn forums to see what people there think of barely legal porn. I would assume that there would be people who would be uncomfortable if they found out that their friend or family member was into barely legal porn, but I don't have any evidence of this.

The fact that women CAN screw with most any young guy is different than that young guy looking 15-16 (even if 18). So does it make the adult woman having sex with an adult 18 year-old who could do Barely Legal gay porn a pedo? It doesn't change his age or physical characteristics whether he's getting head from a woman or a man.

I don't think it makes a man or a woman who does this a pedophile or ephebophile.

But while those who think such youthful models are unappealing (to gross to pedo-fantasy) might feel offended, I think its very offensive to have every one of these sorts of discussions hover around the concept that so many gay men have pedo-impulses (somehow fueled or sated by Barely Legal models - no matter how legal it may be).

And that discussion running concurrently throughout this entire thread does exist (in this thread). I don't think I'm seeing things.

In that sense, I think its insulting to the millions of gay men who may enjoy what is typically described as Barely Legal or young twink porn.

I think its a topic which must stop haunting gay men or making them somehow paranoid or questioning of their true intent or desires.

I think it's insulting too and that it should stop haunting gay men. I think time will improve that.

In that way, I HIGHLY doubt that hetero guys are continually told to steer clear of porn girls between the ages of 18 and 21.

I doubt it's talked about very much at all, but again I have no evidence for that. It doesn't come up very often in conversation with my straight friends.

 

[ChickenGuy]

Posters here are speaking out against porn films in which MEN don't look the way they would hope, and thus casting a label of "pedophile" on anyone who could be attracted to them, even knowing that they are men over 18.

Re-read the thread and you'll clearly see where the OP himself fluctuates being being concise in his terms pertaining to Barely Legal porn (and the fact he personally doesn't like it) to posts in which he's rather accusing fans of such material of being suspect or thisside of pedo.

Why is everyone suddenly throwing the word paedophilia around? I never used the word, nor do I equate what I'm talking about with paedophilia.

Maybe NOW you MIGHT be able to read what I said, but I doubt it.

Paedophilia is a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent girls and boys, let's say from age 5 or 6 to about 11 or 12.

A paedophile is TURNED OFF by the child entering puberty and adolescence.


THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT PAEDOPHILIA. SO STOP USING THAT WORD, AND STOP ACCUSING ME OF LABELLING JUBBERS AS ONES.

 

[hungkee]

THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT PAEDOPHILIA. SO STOP USING THAT WORD, AND STOP ACCUSING ME OF LABELLING JUBBERS AS ONES.

I don't know if you're being completely forthright regarding the tone and content of your own posts in this thread. RE-READ many of them where you clearly state in some and imply in others that there is something suspect in Barely Legal porn.

I mean, I know you keep trying to say that all you put forward was the notion that you personally aren't in young legal twinks (one model, in fact, reminds you of your cousin, you said).

But in several other posts of yours you are clearly insinuating that there is something pedo or kiddy or teen molester-ish about Barely Legal porn...(paraphrasing): "no matter how technically legal it might be" as you repeat a few times.

So while you may be trying to say only one thing about the subject, you have actually thrown out a lot of other weighty insinuations or vague accusations in several of your posts.

Just re-read them and maybe you'll objectively see what others are seeing in your posts. Perhaps you didn't intend for them to "read" that way or to communicate any other ideas. But they did.

 

[ChickenGuy]

FOR FUCKS SAKE.

I'm sick to death of trying to explain this to brainless morons who refuse to even TRY to understand my point, and KEEP ON AND ON throwing accusations at me. If you're so clued up on my posts hungkee....

THEN QUOTE ME WHERE I'M

'clearly insinuating that there is something pedo or kiddy or teen molester-ish about Barely Legal porn'

YOU'RE IMAGINING IT IN YOUR HEAD BECAUSE YOU DISAPPROVE OF WHAT I'M SAYING.

NOW QUOTE ME WHERE I SAY IT, OR STOP YOUR FALSE ACCUSATIONS.

*sigh*

This is the last time I'm going to try to explain this.

There is a legal age limit of 18 in porn. That age limit is in place to stop 'underage' BY WHICH I MEAN 15-17 YEAR OLDS appearing in porn. Why are 15-17 year olds barred from porn? Because general society including myself consider it too young. Also because IN MY PERSONAL OPINION it is unhealthy for men about 50 or 60 or 70 to be jacking off to and lusting over 15-17 year-olds. Also IN MY PERSONAL OPINION 15-17 year-olds shouldn't be displayed sexually online in webcams, porn sites, etc. NONE OF THIS IS PAEDOPHILIA. Paedophilia is concentrated around age 5-12 on average.

Now let's go back to the legal age limit. What is the point of creating this legal age limit if porn companies are FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES circumventing it? They circumvent it by seeking out 18-year-olds that look 15 or 16. They are INDISTINGISHABLE from 15-16 year olds. And porn is about APPEARANCES. Porn is about WHAT YOU SEE.

It's in my view lazy and irresponsible to just trot out the excuse "Oh, but he's legal age. End of story." It is also an extremely convenient excuse for creepy old men who get off on 15-16 year-olds. (NOT paedophilia, and NOT accusations towards JUBbers, just in case you throw that at me.) That's not doing anything but turning a blind eye to the whole problem. If all the JUBbers on here are so furious that I've brought up this issue, are they then supporting the dropping of the porn age to 15?

Now in an ideal world, porn companies would be responsible, and (gasp) choose 18-year-olds that looked 18. Of course many of them do, and most of the models DO look 18. NOT ALL OF THEM. Why? Because unethical and immoral porn companies are chasing some 18-year-olds PRECISELY BECAUSE they look underage. And that is WRONG.

THERE IS NO POINT OF BELIEVING IN A LEGAL AGE LIMIT IF WE AS A GAY COMMUNITY JUST IGNORE THIS PRACTICE AND MAKE EXCUSES FOR IT.

There is no easy solution, because it would require a rather arbitrary law beyond the legal age limit which concentrates on physical appearance. I BELIEVE THAT PORN COMPANIES SHOULD BE HELD MORE ACCOUNTABLE ABOUT THIS.

My ONLY concern is the steady and unstoppable mainstreaming of legalising 15-16 year-olds in sexual activites. I'm not happy with porn companies pushing these pics on JUB. It's extremely distasteful and borderline objectionable. Obviously I'm not as socially progressive and liberal as most of the JUBbers on this forum.

That's me done. Now you can all howl your anger at me at throw all your false accusations at me all you want. That's all I've got to say, and I'm finished with this issue.

 

[looseliam]

wow - if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black. Brainless morons? Sod the fuck off.

You've got something wrong going on upstairs. I don't know if mum didn't pay enough attention to you, or when you were 16 no one wanted to shag you. But there's something that's for sure.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

 

[altlover85]

CG, your arguments just aren't logical.

A lot of what your saying is subjective and based off of emotion and opinion. That's why I had to respond to your thread because it didn't really make any sense. You are indicting people based off something that you personally dislike, but you aren't really convincing me that what you say is correct and I can't really understand where you're coming from. This confused me and since I opened the thread you created for the members of this forum, I felt that this should be vocalized.

I hope you're able to calm down about this. You generally seem like a nice guy.

 

[pat grimshaw]

^
I praise you, Topher! Blessed Are the Peacemakers!

 

[DigitalFudge]

It is so refreshing not having everyone come @ me for a change.



It's a bitch serving a hit thread isn't it, ChickenGuy?

I haven't the slightest clue what's happening tbh but I'm here for it.

 

[BFizzle]

Y'all gone learn today, and ChickenGuy gone teach ya.

 

[Telstra]

I don't know if you're being completely forthright regarding the tone and content of your own posts in this thread. RE-READ many of them where you clearly state in some and imply in others that there is something suspect in Barely Legal porn.

I mean, I know you keep trying to say that all you put forward was the notion that you personally aren't in young legal twinks (one model, in fact, reminds you of your cousin, you said).

But in several other posts of yours you are clearly insinuating that there is something pedo or kiddy or teen molester-ish about Barely Legal porn...(paraphrasing): "no matter how technically legal it might be" as you repeat a few times.

So while you may be trying to say only one thing about the subject, you have actually thrown out a lot of other weighty insinuations or vague accusations in several of your posts.

Just re-read them and maybe you'll objectively see what others are seeing in your posts. Perhaps you didn't intend for them to "read" that way or to communicate any other ideas. But they did.

I love the word "insinuating" in this video ...

 

[DigitalFudge]

Y'all gone learn today, and ChickenGuy gone teach ya.

It's [STRIKE]clear[/STRIKE] a mystery who here is jacking off to those [STRIKE]16[/STRIKE] 18 year olds

 

[BFizzle]

It's [STRIKE]clear[/STRIKE] a mystery who here is jacking off to those [STRIKE]16[/STRIKE] 18 year olds

I really have no clue what's going on. All these posts are tl;dr.

 

[DigitalFudge]

I really have no clue what's going on. All these posts are tl;dr.

At least when I write a dissertation ya'll know there will at least be a plot and a satisfying ending

 

[BFizzle]

At least when I write a dissertation ya'll know there will at least be a plot and a satisfying ending

Whelp. Maybe now that we're here someone will give us the Cliff's Notes.

 

[DigitalFudge]

someone will give us the Cliff's Notes.

Ugh



I am 15% sure this thread is about ChickenGuy being disgusted by 18 year old models that look younger than that and everyone else is dragging him because..... That's as far as I got


I have read three sentences per page.

 

[BFizzle]

Ugh



I am 15% sure this thread is about ChickenGuy being disgusted by 18 year old models that look younger than that and everyone else is dragging him because..... That's as far as I got


I have read three sentences per page.

Just another day on JUB.

 

[MissAnne]

I really dont think that CG is coming down on adults that look young. I also dont believe that he meant that baby faced 18 year olds dont deserve to be lusted after. I think that him and I are on the same page when I say that: The barely legal porn in which they dress the guys up in T-ball uniforms or make them have sex in a room with posters on the wall and elementary school book bags hanging up near the bed is disconcerting. Slapping their real age up there doesnt make it any less obvious of what group of people the directors are trying to reach.