## question

Post by Jay Feely » Sun Mar 06, 2016 6:45 pm

When kids are tied up and video of that is posted on youtube. people think it's sick, it's pedophile. But, why? especially since it's kids tying up kids?
You will have to subdue me to restrain me. I been a bad boy so make sure you torture me too with anything but pain.

### Re: question

Post by drawscore » Mon Mar 07, 2016 3:00 am

There are those that think a picture of a kid in a bathing suit is pornographic. There is no explaining the tastes or mindsets of some people. However, the image of a child bound (and gagged) is not, in and of itself, pornographic. If it was, there would be no TV programs or motion pictures, where the plot line calls for a child to be captured and tied up by Indians, outlaws, rustlers, burglars, kidnappers, pirates, or other nefarious characters.
As for the kids themselves, they are just acting out what they see on TV and in the movies. I did it myself, when I was a kid, and there was nothing sexual about it in any way, shape, or form. And there were always the arguments like "You were the burglar last time. This time, I'm the burglar, and I tie you up!"
Drawscore

### Re: question

Post by Jason Toddman » Mon Mar 07, 2016 7:33 am

Some people just plain have dirty minds and are easily offended/upset by anything that even remotely appears to be of a sexual nature. This is especially true of people who are adherents of a modern-day religion other than perhaps paganism.
I'm sorry if that sounds controversial or provocative, but it's also stone-cold fact.
Most definitions of what is pornographic is religion-based; especially western religion based (eastern religion not so much) because of its numerous sexual taboos. It is no coincidence that the free-love movement of the 1960s began with young people with no strong religious affiliation. This is in fact one of the major things religious people most often cite when they (erroneously) equate atheism with immorality. That is of course an extremely faulty supposition, but that's an entirely different topic... for Jump in the Fire at that
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

### Re: question

Post by SolidSnickerdoodle » Mon Mar 07, 2016 4:35 pm

I think certain people's qualms with it derive from the concern that not everybody on the internet is who they say they are. For example:
Person A uploads a tie up video to YouTube
Person B comments, requesting more tie up videos and suggests specifics challenges or ideas
Person C comes in and accuses person B of being a pedophile, duping children into tying each other up for his/her own sexual pleasure under the guise of "fun and games"
I've seen this type of interaction happen before, and I think it's the type of accusation that Jay is referring to. Honestly, I think it's a tad ridiculous. Going off of what Drawscore said, a photo, or video for that matter, of children tied up is not pornographic. No one is being hurt, no one is being taken advantage of, and nothing sexual or inappropriate is happening, so I really don't get this backlash.
Also, maybe this belongs in the pornography thread, but I really don't get all the subjectivity surrounding pornography. Pornography is the depiction or recording of sexually explicit actions or nudity. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.
There is only one God, and his name is Death. And there is only one thing we say to Death: Not today.

### Re: question

Post by AlexUSA » Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:04 pm

> SolidSnickerdoodle wrote:Person A uploads a tie up video to YouTube
> Person B comments, requesting more tie up videos and suggests specifics challenges or ideas
> Person C comes in and accuses person B of being a pedophile, duping children into tying each other up for his/her own sexual pleasure under the guise of "fun and games"

You can always tell whether Person B is a pedo or not though... if their profile pic is that of a screen shot from a video, 100% guarantee pedo... same based on their subscriptions. But it is true that Person B is not always one, and I have been surprised once by it.
I rite on a tabblit, so speling errurs will hap pin free quintly.

### Re: question

Post by SolidSnickerdoodle » Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:09 pm

> AlexUSA wrote:You can always tell whether Person B is a pedo or not though... if their profile pic is that of a screen shot from a video, 100% guarantee pedo... same based on their subscriptions. But it is true that Person B is not always one, and I have been surprised once by it.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here. Let's assume for a moment that an older man (or woman) decides to drop in and watch a tie up video. Let's say that person simply leaves a comment, not suggesting further videos or anything, just leaves a comment. Is it right for a person to jump in and criticize them for their interest in bondage, even if it is just observing other kid's actions?
There is only one God, and his name is Death. And there is only one thing we say to Death: Not today.

### Re: question

Post by AlexUSA » Mon Mar 07, 2016 5:41 pm

> SolidSnickerdoodle wrote:

> > AlexUSA wrote:You can always tell whether Person B is a pedo or not though... if their profile pic is that of a screen shot from a video, 100% guarantee pedo... same based on their subscriptions. But it is true that Person B is not always one, and I have been surprised once by it.

> I'm going to play devil's advocate here. Let's assume for a moment that an older man (or woman) decides to drop in and watch a tie up video. Let's say that person simply leaves a comment, not suggesting further videos or anything, just leaves a comment. Is it right for a person to jump in and criticize them for their interest in bondage, even if it is just observing other kid's actions?

Depends on the comment for certain, but such a person should certainly know better than to comment in the first place because he can see the video is one of children. But does another person have the right to attack for it? Not likely unless the comment is somehow out of line.
I rite on a tabblit, so speling errurs will hap pin free quintly.

### Re: question

Post by Jay Feely » Mon Mar 07, 2016 6:10 pm

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL9861 ... A4Y8gCfn9s
like this one, the first comment
You will have to subdue me to restrain me. I been a bad boy so make sure you torture me too with anything but pain.

### Re: question

Post by spd138 » Sat Mar 12, 2016 1:03 pm

It's a slippery road when kids are involved. Even if you don't get turned on by the video there are people that will. IMO kids should never be posting videos like that even if they are not suppose to be sexual in nature because there is alway going to be people to use it for that purpose. Second no adult should ever ask a kid especially if they don't know them for a video of any sorts. I got the feeling I'll get some hate for this but it's the truth

### Re: question

Post by Jason Toddman » Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:10 pm

> Jay Feely wrote:like this one, the first comment

Looked more like bullying than like a fun kid's game. Those guys tying him up were no kids, and the kid himself didn't look at all happy about it either.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...