Younger & SMOOTH

Welcome to the new (and temporary) Younger and SMOOTH thread!

I've moved the 'old' thread to Mod Towers as there has been some concern over some of the images posted while I've been out of action for the past few months.

We're currently discussing some of the sites. Many have closed down and we are unable to verify their U.S.2257 compliance, some are not 'primary producers' and some use images that are pre 1995 and exempt, or from freelance photographers who have failed to maintain records. These complications can be a minefield for us and it is expected that a number of sites will be added to the Prohibited Content list. We will of course notify you which ones they are so that you can post safely within the Code of Conduct.

Whilst the title of the thread is 'Younger and SMOOTH', it had become clear that the images were getting younger and younger, hence I would also like to draw your attention to the Code of Conduct Rule 2 which states:

Quote:

---

Please do not post or link to erotic pictures, movies, or stories where the subjects appear to be, or are described to be, under the age of 18...

---

The last thing I want to do is spoil your pleasure, but my first priority has to be in assisting the site owners keep the site legal so that we can all enjoy many more hours here! *|*

So please continue posting and I'll merge the old thread back with this once its been sorted!

In the meantime, thanks for understanding - and here's a few to start you off!

Dave
(*8*):kiss:

Quasar, I know you guys have to do what you have to do, but I LOVED this thread!
Now, about the "looking young" thing, if the guy IS 18 or older, and just LOOKS younger, why is that prohibited? And, it seems to be a kind of open-ended thing, I mean, who determines that a particular guy "looks" young? As long as the guy is legal, why does the appearance matter? I mean, if you get carded at a bar or club because you LOOK young, as long as your ID is good, they don't toss you out because you "look" young.
I could understand pictures of guys that were prepubescent, but all of the guys in that thread, although younger in appearance, were all sexually mature, and clearly not children.
Well, I hope you get it all sorted out, and restore the images, because that thread was wonderful!

I agree with much of what you've said. However if I could just give some background it may be a little easier to see where I'm coming from.

You'll be aware that all adult sites must contain a statement of compliance to a piece of American legislation U.S. 2257. In essence, it is a statement by the site owners that thay have proof of ID records and documentation to confirm that all images involve persons over 18, and that the models were over 18 at the time of the creation of said images etc.

Some of the sites from where the images originated are Eastern European and whilst there is no local requirement to comply, these sites are available in the US and therefore most of them have now got US 2257 Compliance statements on their sites.

The complication for us is sorting out who is genuinely compliant and who is simply saying they are. The worry is that some of these models who look young for 18, do so because they probably WERE younger than 18 when these sites took advantage of international internet growth and more commercial opportunities in Eastern Europe. Problem is that many of the sites I have an issue with are no longer in business - coincidence? Or enforced closure? - and it is simply impossible to check for proof of age (and even that is no guarantee!)

I accept that there are many 15yr olds that can pass for 18, and vice versa, and it is this latter situation that is the problem. The reason for the CoC rule 2 quoted above is that we do not now, and never will condone or encourage child exploitation within the adult industry.

The plan IS for the original thread to return - but it WILL be minus numerous images, and there will also be an increase in the number of Prohibited Content sites.

I can see where you're coming from there. I guess there are sites that are problematic in that regard, and as a site, you have to be in compliance with laws.
There are a lot of people, me included, who love the images of younger guys. Not "young" like in underage, but young in appearance. There is a definite difference between pedophilia and pederasty, the former is just wrong, and rightfully illegal. But the latter, while distasteful to many, is not illegal, just a preference. And many performers with this kind of look actually use it to their advantage, while they have it. Nothing wrong with that.
Well, I hope you can straighten it out...because this was the best message board thread ever...

Q

As the "starter" of this thread, I appreciated the email telling of the situation. I totally understand where you/JUB is coming from, and I certainly don't want to break any laws, or post inappropriate pictures.

I hope the thread dosen't shrink TOO much. ..|

Secondly, is that you in your avatar? If so, your mighty fine looking. Why are there no pics of you in your gallery? Please? ;)

And lastly, you are an excellent artist....your drawings are amazing. I may be jumping on the band wagon late, but are you "published" anywhere? Do you sell any? Just curious.

Thanks for all the work you do here at JUB !

Thank you for your comments. Unfortunately, the avatar is currently my crush Christian Klien who is a Formula 1 driver - the same guy in my siggie. I only put my pic up if I need to scare away any minors that might have slipped through the JUB net! :lol:

Yes I do occasionally sell my drawings however I'm not published anywhere - but an artist friend of mine is taking some of my work to London to show his agent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quasar

---

Daaaannnng! Bells and whistles. :D

NO NO NO..........that's BALLS and whistles........ :p:p ....... :D

^ I stand corrected. :D :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Surfer

Daaaannnng! Bells and whistles. :D

---

I have to agree, this one is Superb!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quasar

Thank you for your comments. Unfortunately, the avatar is currently my crush Christian Klien who is a Formula 1 driver - the same guy in my siggie. I only put my pic up if I need to scare away any minors that might have slipped through the JUB net! :lol:

Yes I do occasionally sell my drawings however I'm not published anywhere - but an artist friend of mine is taking some of my work to London to show his agent.

---

This blonde guy is nice...

Apparently, someone else likes young and smooth! Nice pics, Q.

(I see why you like your "crush")

Here are a few from my collection.....enjoy

Oh, did I mention that Christian was smooth??? G-rated only - but what the heck!!!

Was getting a bit edgy the other thread, however, a fresh start you say? Lets weigh in :P

sad thing is, almost all of my collection is of hairy guys :( soooo, see ya in the Young(er) and Furry thread ;) Also, Q, i have stared at your avatar for hours wondering who that was ^_^

Bit strange posting this evening. This thread is the key reason joining JUB. Agree with everyone and want to follow the standards and guidelines that JUB has established. Hope we can move forward.

Here's a few smoothies for the evening.

I have to agree with q, the thread was getting a bit creepy and out of hand.
i love christian klien he's very cute.

One thing I appreciate about JUB is that they keep things clean and legal. So, I'm glad to know that they're "on the case" as it were. I'm all for LEGAL content.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulo999

---

BEAUTIFUL Paulo! :drool:

enjoy it
have a nice day
:D

Thanks, Quasar. I like 'em young and smooth, but I, too, was feeling very uncomfortable with the thread. You handled the issue perfectly and adding a few pix was the perfect grace note.

Why, btw, "and temporary"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobobo

Thanks, Quasar. I like 'em young and smooth, but I, too, was feeling very uncomfortable with the thread. You handled the issue perfectly and adding a few pix was the perfect grace note.

Why, btw, "and temporary"?

---

Thanks for your (and everyone elses) understanding and messages of support for cleaning up the old thread.

I say 'temporary' simply because the old thread will re-appear as there are too many good posts to waste. Many people have spent much time and effort in sourcing images and it would be unecessarily harsh to simply delete nearly 3500 posts en blocke. With more than 350,000 views it was also one of the most popular threads on JUB.

When I've finished cleaning the 60+ pages, it will be merged back with this thread. ..|

oh my, the guy with the drink in his hand MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

I love this picture! His cargo shorts' button open is very inviting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WIZZARD101

oh my, the guy with the drink in his hand MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

---

that's Dylan from Corbin Fisher aka Brett Swanson from Randy Blue - get's my vote for twink of the year 2009!

Who is ?!?!??!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flashgordon85

Who is ?!?!??!

---

Turk Melrose / Turk Mason

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkeye7

---

Who is this lovely piece of perfection?

-d-

Some evening smoothies.

Hope you all have a great day!

Thanks for keeping this post legal I love fit slim smooth lads but I don't want to look at underage lads, so thanks for the work the site is doing to make sure we can all enjoy and know the content is legal.

Holy crap....what a cock.........body.........everything

I have to say that having been a frequent viewer of the old thread I now feel a bit uncomfortable about the possibility of having downloaded illegal or unlicensed content.

What sites or pictures were in question anyway?

Any of these catch your eye?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cyravance

I can see where you're coming from there. I guess there are sites that are problematic in that regard, and as a site, you have to be in compliance with laws.
There are a lot of people, me included, who love the images of younger guys. Not "young" like in underage, but young in appearance. There is a definite difference between pedophilia and pederasty, the former is just wrong, and rightfully illegal. But the latter, while distasteful to many, is not illegal, just a preference. And many performers with this kind of look actually use it to their advantage, while they have it. Nothing wrong with that.
Well, I hope you can straighten it out...because this was the best message board thread ever...

---

I just want to point out how interesting I think this comment is. For the sake of the internet and legality and the adult industry, I agree that nude pictures of people under 18 should not be posted. But I have to laugh a little when people who openly admit to liking "younger guys" act as if the arbitrary notion of 18 is where their taste stops. The eroticism of a lot of twink porn is that the models do "look" younger than 18, even if they are just 18 or older. So in that sense, yes, we/you do like images of people who appear to be under 18. Pederasty didn't exactly begin at 18. I'm just saying that if you're going to own up to liking younger guys, we should at least admit that the 18 mark is because of legal matters and not necessarily morals or aesthetics. For example, the age of consent where I live is 16. I'm within 5 years of that. I could fuck a 16 year old, and it would still be legal, but I couldn't legally look at pictures of a 16 year old online. But I'm not going to act like a 16/17 year old really looks that different than an 18 year old. (I'm not saying I do fuck 16 year olds, although it wouldn't be illegal - but I actually just recently made a thread about how I'm starting to find younger guys less attractive than usual).

Anyways, just thought that was an interesting topic.

Sixty-some pages of pix and comments show this is not an uncommon interest (and, again, Quasar, thanks for considering those who have posted. You handled this amazingly well. I wonder what do you do for a living.)

But back to the point. Yes, the law is arbitrary. It always is. And there's no way of visually determining whether someone is is 17 or 18. But there's a clear division point that I feel was too often breached and which turns me off instantly--puberty.

The "Pauly" Pics, can't tell if he's smooth or not :S if not i'll get rid lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobobo

But there's a clear division point that I feel was too often breached and which turns me off instantly--puberty.

---

Are you suggesting that there were pictures of prepubescent males on the old thread?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobobo

Sixty-some pages of pix and comments show this is not an uncommon interest (and, again, Quasar, thanks for considering those who have posted. You handled this amazingly well. I wonder what do you do for a living.)

But back to the point. Yes, the law is arbitrary. It always is. And there's no way of visually determining whether someone is is 17 or 18. But there's a clear division point that I feel was too often breached and which turns me off instantly--puberty.

---

Yeah, I agree. Although, I didn't look at the old thread in a while, so I'm not sure if the younger and younger trend is dramatic as it sounds. I'd like to hope not... was anyone actually posting explicitly underage kind of stuff, or just that vaguely questionable Eastern European kind of stuff that plastered over every single twink TGP online?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saymyname

I just want to point out how interesting I think this comment is. For the sake of the internet and legality and the adult industry, I agree that nude pictures of people under 18 should not be posted. But I have to laugh a little when people who openly admit to liking "younger guys" act as if the arbitrary notion of 18 is where their taste stops. The eroticism of a lot of twink porn is that the models do "look" younger than 18, even if they are just 18 or older. So in that sense, yes, we/you do like images of people who appear to be under 18. Pederasty didn't exactly begin at 18. I'm just saying that if you're going to own up to liking younger guys, we should at least admit that the 18 mark is because of legal matters and not necessarily morals or aesthetics. For example, the age of consent where I live is 16. I'm within 5 years of that. I could fuck a 16 year old, and it would still be legal, but I couldn't legally look at pictures of a 16 year old online. But I'm not going to act like a 16/17 year old really looks that different than an 18 year old. (I'm not saying I do fuck 16 year olds, although it wouldn't be illegal - but I actually just recently made a thread about how I'm starting to find younger guys less attractive than usual).

Anyways, just thought that was an interesting topic.

---

Exactly! For example, I OPENLY can't wait for guys like Nick Jonas and Justin Bieber to pass the 18 requirement, but I adore them NOW.

I love these pictures and appreciate Q keeping the thread up and running legally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NickCarterFan

Exactly! For example, I OPENLY can't wait for guys like Nick Jonas and Justin Bieber to pass the 18 requirement, but I adore them NOW.

---

Not only is Bieber underage but he looks even younger than he is as well......... barely looks (or sounds) as though he has hit puberty.

A few more for the collection....

btw what is a normal amount of porn to have? I just realised I have over 2000 pictures and 68.5GB of porn in total... mainly videos I have downloaded from various paysites.

..........

.................

................................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saymyname

Yeah, I agree. Although, I didn't look at the old thread in a while, so I'm not sure if the younger and younger trend is dramatic as it sounds. I'd like to hope not... was anyone actually posting explicitly underage kind of stuff, or just that vaguely questionable Eastern European kind of stuff that plastered over every single twink TGP online?

---

No, there were no prepubescent guys on the thread, that would be an instant turn-off, not to mention incredibly illegal.
There WERE guys who looked young, and if some of the images came out of Eastern Europe it is possible that some of them were not exactly of legal age, so I understand JUB wanting to check into things in order to insure compliance. I DO hope that most of the images will be eventually restored.
I had made the comment about pedophilia vs. pederasty because a lot of people don't realize that there IS a difference. Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to children, it is wrong and illegal. But there are people, both gay and straight, who are attracted to young, but sexually mature people. It isn't so much the numerical age where the line is drawn, but the physical maturity. However, under law there must be a number in order for the laws to be consistent, it is generally 18.
Someone who likes the young look isn't a pedophile, as distasteful as it may be to some, it is not in the category of pedophilia, anymore than a 50 year old guy who marries a 20 year old woman is a pedophile. There may be a lot of things you'd want to call him, but pedophile wouldn't be appropriate.
But, whatever age the young men in this thread actually are, they were all sexually mature, there were no prebuescent boys pictured.