YouTube, snuff films, and underage girls

Today’s Vent on Hot Air was a continuation of Michelle Malkin’s expose on the seemingly inexplicable actions of YouTube in banning the videos made by Conservative YouTube users in response to pro-jihad videos, which remain available to this day. As always, Hot Air does an excellent job covering an important story that isn’t being widely circulated in the main stream media, though to be fair the New York Times does cover the story in it’s own left of center way.

But while the question of who does or doesn’t get “flagged” on YouTube might be interesting, and in fact telling of the kinds of people employed by YouTube to oversee such matters, what seems to be lost in this discussion is the most important question; is YouTube breaking the law?

The production and distribution of snuff films is illegal in the United States and while YouTube isn’t producing the films, they are providing a vehicle for their dissemination. Of course YouTube puts the responsibility of policing content on users, telling YouTubers on their safety tips page to use the flagging system as way of keeping YouTube “safe.” This shifting of responsibility is unacceptable, especially from a company that expects advertisers to have a campaign budget of at least $25,000.

YouTube is a business that is profiting from depictions of Americans being murdered and Islamic propaganda films. YouTube knows full well that these videos are there, and more importantly that they have a significant audience. It is that significant audience that helps them generate the numbers necessary to charge $25,000 for ad space. They must take the responsibility to police their site, immediately take down Jihadi snuff films they find and ban the users who posted them.

Adult magazines and websites must ensure that their models are of age, and that none of their advertisers are selling illegal products. When it is found that those magazines or websites are not living up to their responsibilities they are penalized. YouTube should operate under the same standards, and if they’re not taking sufficient pains to avoid supporting America’s enemies, they should suffer the consequences.

But they won’t. YouTube, like many Internet-based businesses operate in a vacuum, largely sheltered from scrutiny by law enforcement agencies who simply don’t have the time or resources to monitor the millions of videos being posted on the Web every month. This lack of governmental oversight is essential to our freedoms, but comes with an increased responsibility of citizens enjoy those freedoms. YouTube refuses to live up to that responsibility, choosing to put earnings ahead of patriotism, morality and good taste.

YouTube has a similar situation with underage girls posting videos that pedophiles will find titillating. On their safety page YouTube welcomes teens aged 13-17 and having given the kind of perfunctory advice about Internet safety they receive in school, allows them to post videos with titles like “hot teens kissing.” Adolescent girls posting videos of themselves dancing, sometime salaciously, are greeted in the YouTube community with comments like “ur both hottt…wish i was there :P” from Nawtnood whose YouTube channel page features disturbing videos of very young girls performing simulated fellatio during the end of a “dance.”

YouTube must know that pedophiles would use their service if teens 13-17 are invited to join. They know many of those same children may post inappropriate videos of themselves. They also know that those same videos will generate huge amounts of traffic, and allow them to charge more from advertisers, thus they do nothing.

YouTube bans conservatives, likely because they generate less traffic then the jihad channels, so when forced to chose sides in the “war” between pro-American and anti-American customers, they chose the side that helps put more money in their wallets. Therefore I respectfully disagree with the staff of Hot Air in their quest to make YouTube more “fair.” They are certainly not being fair to the underage girls they exploit, or the families of servicemen and women whose deaths were filmed and used as recruiting tools. What all Americans should be doing is demanding YouTube be held to account for its actions which seem, on the face of it, illegal.

19 thoughts on “YouTube, snuff films, and underage girls

  1. “YouTube must know that pedophiles would use their service if teens 13-17 are invited to join.”
    Why would they? Paedophiles aren’t interested in adolescents. Get your facts right – ignore what the New World Order media tells you. Paedophiles are only interested in pre-pubescents. And who decided 18 should be the adult age?

  2. People with morals and the ability to differentiate between right and wrong set the statutory age deviant. Clinical definitions aside, what we are talking about are people for whom normal sexual relationships with a peer who is their equal is impossible. Pedophiles and ephebophiles both are misogynists and sadists who seek relationships with people they can control sexually to cover up for their own inadequacies and defects of character. You like little girls because you hate women, and seek to take out your aggression toward the women who no doubt spurn you on some kid.

    Degenerates like yourself love outrageous lefty conspiracies like the New World Order to hang your hat on. Well here’s a little truth for you, short eyes, there is no New World Order keeping you down, people aren’t being brainwashed into despising you b some sinister cult who knows children want to pleasure you and doesn’t like it. The truth is that people know instinctively that there’s something wrong with a man who wants to have sex with children. They know he is at best amoral social retard who has no qualms about taking advantage of some screwed up kid or at worst is like you a soulless piece of trash who should be treated like all trash; thrown in a bin and set alight.

    The gods curse you, and I will pray every day from now until my death that you are crippled, burned and castrated in a series of hilarious yet painful accidents.

  3. LOL very funny:). You are incredibly presumptuous and in regard to your last sentence, the feeling’s mutual. But I am making a serious point here. Didn’t 24-year-old Anna Nicole Smith marry a billionaire who was in his 80s? I’m sure most would agree that that is worse than a young man (or woman) sleeping with someone a few years younger, apart from far-right cranks such as you.

  4. That’s outrageous. Anna Nicole Smith was an adult capable of understanding the consequences of her actions. She already had a son to take care of and married a rich man to ensure a better life for her child. It’s a sad story, also one that involves two consenting adults who knew what the relationship was.

    I’m sure decent people would say sleeping with a person a “few years younger” is not the same especially because the videos your defending involve 12 and 13 year old girls. Maybe younger. Do you think 12 year olds should be having sex? Sex with adults?

    At least admit that your perverted desire for children is what it is, then it would be almost possible to respect you, though you’d still be deserving of shunning and scorn. Anna Nicole looked like a woman, the girls you masturbate to look like children. Your desire for them is motivated by sadism, when you picture them in your fantasies they’re crying. Were you to victimize one, you’d likely kill her afterward not because you’d be afraid of getting caught, but because it would be one more bit of power over another person which is the desire your deviancy is fueled by. The desire to have power over others.

    Woman avoid or reject you, but you find you can manipulate pre-teens because they don’t know what kind of soulless monster you are. You work at a menial job, if you work at all and you live with your parents or at their sufferance, isn’t that right? The sick sexual fantasies you have would be seen as a sign of how dangerously unstable you are by adults, but children are innocent, and unaware of how disgusting, degrading and evil your version of a relationship is. You desire children because they’re weak, pliable and ultimately submissive.

    An 80 year old billionaire marrying a statuesque blonde in her mid twenties is a far different dynamic than the one you dream of. It is interesting how you relate gold digging strippers to pre-teens in your mind though, which is how I divined just how sadistic you are. It proves that sex with children is about punishment, degradation and using weaker partners as whipping girls for the women who can’t love you (after all, you are unlovable) you are truly a monster.

    And by the way, using LOL if you’re an adult proves that you’re socially retarded at best, but I’m sure it’s indicative of a “man” who spends too much time in trolling “tween” chat rooms for vulnerable little girls to rape.

    I’ll see you jailed scum, mark my words.

  5. Jailed for what? I came on here and politely expressed my point of view. I also watched a video on YouTube which you linked to. In response you went on a crazed rant accusing of being a sadist, social retard, monster etc. Then you insinuate that I masturabate to crying children and that I would want to kill someone. No I don’t think 12-year-olds should have sex, or that I would want to with one, or kill one and nor do I wank over them either. I only saw the last video and the person who posted it said in the comments that one of them was 16. I should point out I am not a Yank and I don’t live in the USA. What about the bombs dropped on children in Iraq? Doesn’t that bother you? You call me a soulless monster and then say “The gods curse you, and I will pray every day from now until my death that you are crippled, burned and castrated in a series of hilarious yet painful accidents”. Oh the irony. I don’t know who you pray to but I assume you’re a devil worshipper. Only a soulless person like you could pray that someone be “crippled, burned and castrated in a series of hilarious yet painful accidents”

  6. Those girls aren’t 16, but if one were the other is still clearly much younger. And your original comment here and else where was in fact that you wished they showed their tits.

    You’re clearly Muslim, thus accepting of disgusting perversions of nature like adults and children having sex. Though not a devil worshiper myself, I have met a few and even they find you and your kind abhorrent. As do murderers and various felons, evil men all to be sure, but even they are so disgusted by child predators like yourself that perverts have to be kept separated from them in prison for their own safety. What does that tell you about your so called point of view?

    And if you think a comment like the one you left on my other post saying you wish those girls showed their tit is just polite debate you are indeed socially retarded.

    And are we supposed to really believe you care about children in Iraq? Name three. You’re only upset that yo didn’t get to rape them before they died. Iraq, Anna Nicole? These thing excuse your desire to have sex with children? When ever something horrible happens in the world it’s an excuse for a grown man to defile a child satisfy his twisted fetish?

    What do you think happens to these children who are molested by cretin like you? Do they skip off with this pervert and get married? Do they live happily ever after? Something 75% of unwed teenage pregnancies are the result of children being raped by older men. Studies show that many of these children go on to other abusive relationships, or turn to drugs or end up doing porn. Does this sound like something that is harmless?

    Stop back pedaling short eyes. Your shame will be left here for all the world to see, Your I.P. submitted to authorities so that someone in England or Canada or whatever barbaric country spawned you will know they need to keep an eye on you, and to groups like Perverted Justice who set up pedophiles like you in the teen chat rooms you frequent. You know the one I’m talking about.

    As an aside, that isn’t what irony means. Moron,

  7. you all are really pathetic…REACTIONISTS
    ultimately the content of our media technologies can only be monitored by adults…so thirteen year olds making out and expressing their god giving sexuality cannot be banned…but there parents can…so…the question of good or evil cannot be imposed on media…because everything expressed through media is ultimately expression of thought….and this cannot and should not be banned.

    anyhow….i find that these materials should be allowed to be distrubted freely because therefore they CAN BE TRACKED DOWN. so if our society deems certain material IMMORAL its better to have an electronic medium than a real medium (like a back alley of a dirty city or blackmarket) where degenerates can be identified and processed…ever since the internet surfaced many potential and real pedophiles have been caught.

    besides…a slutty girl is gonna do what she is gonna do…and its up to the parents to provide boundries for the children…so fuck off conservativ e…IGNORANTS..yiou al simply dont see the big picture…

    as far as Jihad videos go…give me a fucking break….the only people really afraid of terrorism is you dumbasses that bought the fear our media sold through right wing media monguls…in order to profit by forming countless security agancies with no real purpose…any human activity caught on film can be used to study and to implement prevention strategies…and the government shouldnt be the only one with access to such material. if we continue to have free media access then we can make moral decisions for ourselves…so bring on the violence,sex and perversion….its only a reflection of what really goes on in YOUR mind anyhow…

    jihadist muslims are as stupid as pro-war and censorship conservative christians….you all are RAdical…bitches

  8. Spoken like a grown man with a MySpace page. Knock off the high minded excuses, and admit that you’re into little girls. The idea that you need to see something before making a moral judgement about it is asinine. Are you saying that we can’t agree drowning infants is bad until someone shows us a video or we see it first hand? Rape and murder?

    Snuff films, including the Jihadist ones, are made to give sexual sadists something to maturbate to. Having free access to footage of people dying doesn’t allow “prevention strategies” but it does increase the hits to a site, and thus increase advertising profit and that’s what YouTube’s about. As to your other points:

    The media doesn’t make me afraid of terrorism, terrorism does. I traveled through the WTC frequently in my life and by luck was in another state on 9-11 my mother worked on Church street, adjacent to the WTC complex, she was lucky to survive, but the people I used to buy sodas and snacks from weren’t.

    I would be a reactionist without an s, because there is one of me. Reationist is also a meaningless, empty phrase ignorent people throw about to try to offend others.

    I’m not a Christian, this is yet another attempt at being insulting by someone deeply offended that I’d prefer he not have access to provocative videos of underaged girls to jerk off to. You don’t have to be a Christian to think adults should be attracted to adults and feel protective of children. You just have to have a soul.

    The fact that you describe children as “slutty” proves you’re one of the worst people in the world. These are children man! No matter what they’re wearing or doing, if you can see a 13 year old and think “oh, yeah, she’s a whore” there’s something wrong with you, not the child. You should be able to see a young girl, say to yourself “she’s too young” and move on sans masturbation. Can You?

    You’re entire arguement is paper thin. You need to study perversion at home alone in the dark because it’ll help stop perversion? You’ll help develop stategies against snuff films and pedo-porn by immersing yourself in it? I guess those strategies will be written up between marathon masturbation sessions, huh?


  9. hello sex sells it is a part of the every day life and kids young as 12 whant to grow up fast and sex is a big part of that i kno of boys & girls as young as 6-7 engaging in sexual conduct why they wanna grow up be liked ore kool but i dont think we should blam youtube them sellves i have youtube my self an i think its our own responcibality to watch what we do because i kwow of over 41 me over the age of 17 all the way to 33 trying to sleep whith under age girls such as my self im 15 and i told them my age but they dont care we bring this on our selvs in the actions and things we do every day so its not Tou tubes falt 4 giving the public what they want because they dont post the videos we do and the responcerbilaty is ours

  10. i would just like to add that YouTube looked to see if they had any convicted sex offenders on their web site. They had 29,000.”

  11. Rob Taylor is projecting his perverted degeneracy onto others. You are transparent, Rob. Get help!

  12. Rob Taylor is projecting his own perverted degeneracy onto others. You are transparent, Rob. Get help!

  13. Explain. How is my objection to a company allowing virtual child porn and SNUFF films on their site simply because it’s more proftable “projection?”

    I don’t think you know what projection or degeneracy is. Projection is you, a pervert, telling me to “get help”, while degeneracy is your inability to see anything wrong with exploiting young girls and showing peoples deaths for entertainment.

  14. Rob your article was interesting and on snuff films made some valid points. However the part on paedophilia was very poor. It was ignorant and it seems that you did no research on it at all. Also your replies to Rash just makes you look like a stupid Internet tough guy. There was nothing in there that could be construed as him being a paedophile.

    Youtube should be taking down snuff films if there aren’t already making an effort to do so and banning the people who post them. There are plenty of places on the Internet where that material can be obtained and it shouldn’t be on one of the most popular sites in the world.

    Governments should not get involved though as the freedom and lack of regulation of the Internet is its strongest feature. This is sadly not the case with your government though as shown by the recent bill banning financial companies processing payments to offshore gambling books,

    Youtube does not promote or encourage paedophilia in any way. They do not allow people under 13 to register and so it is very unlikely that there would be anybody under this age featuring in sexually proactive videos. If there were I would assume they would remove the offending content, which seems reasonable considering the video and user you linked to are now down.

    As for videos featuring 13 to 17 year olds you are on very shaky grounds if you consider this paedophilia. The medical term for attraction to pubescent teens is ephebophilia and only in cases where the person’s main attraction is teens. This is not classed as a paraphilia and is not listed as a mental illness on the DSM. It is also believed to be quite common in the population due to many studies carried out. Paedophilia is classed as attraction to pre pubescent persons and as such it can not be stated on medical grounds that youtube contains content that would attract paedophiles.

    It is also highly controversial to make the argument on legal grounds. Youtube is viewed in a huge number of countries throughout the world and all of these countries have different attitudes and legal systems. For instance in most of the US the age of consent is 18 but in the UK it is 16. Surely this should mean that US citizens should view a huge number of British residents as disgusting paedophiles! British citizens surely shudder in disgust at South Korean women who engage in intercourse with 13 olds, as they are legally entitled to do so. This clearly shows how non-valid it is to argue on legal grounds about youtubes content. This fact is backed up when you consider how backward and hypocritical much of the criminal law is in western countries, which is nicely illustrated by drug prohibition laws.

    It is clearly shown from the above that youtube does not contain paedophilic content as the only reliable method to judge this is on the medical definition of paedophilia, which the site does not tolerate. It does contain some content that would be attractive to people primarily interested in adolescents but as stated above this can’t be considered paedophilia on either legal or medical grounds.

    If you would like to discuss this matter further I would be happy to especially as this the longest and most thought out piece of writing I have produced since I left university.

  15. Are you serious. The age of consent in many places is 16, including quite a few states here, but most adults who sexually and emotionally healthy don’t have sex with them. These low ages of consent are barbaric holdovers from times when the life expectancy was low and death at childbirth was common.

    But that’s an aside. Saying there are no 13 year olds on YouTube because they aren’t allowed to register is either disingenuous or indicative of a profound misunderstanding of the Internet. Is YouTube sending out police to ensure the users ages?

    Adults “interested” in adolescents are taking advantage of children. I have worked with adolescents for years and at 36 I can tell you that a 16 year old girl not only looks to young for me, but having had to be in the endless conversations about their teen concerns, I find adolescents endlessly boring. And I like kids, don’t get me worng, but I fail to see how it is possible for you to claim I’m backward for wanting to have romantic relationships with an equal, someone my own age who shares a similar amount of life experience.

    Adults who want to date teen girls, (and I’ve seen them) are without exception people who are deficient in some aspect. Mybe they don’t have much going for them and they think kids won’t recognize that, maybe they’re too immature to relate to an adult, or maybe their predators who want to take advantage of the inexperienced. But it is the adult who can’t form healthy relationships with other adults who is “backward”, the adult who prefers the company o non-adults who is regressive.

    Is England full of pedophiles? Uh. Yes, I’ve blogged that before, including a report from your own Times (or was it the BBC) where it was exposed that gangs of adult men were cruising malls for adolescents, “seducing” them (which involved plying them with your harmless drugs) then forcing them into prostitution. The same thing happens here by the way and most people forced into prostitution who aren’t illegal immigrants start off under 18 and are turned out by adults.

    Let me ask you something, most of the searchs that lead to this page involve soome combination of the term young, teen and rape. Is it your position that these people are normal? If your 16 year old daughter told you she was going to be nailing a 30 year old would you say “Well, he’s not a pedophile!” or would you think there was something wrong with the guy. What if she was 15? How about 13?

    The only thing your post clearly illustrates is the hypocritical desire by you to make a distinction between predatory behaviors that both, in my book, go back to a sadism on the perpetrators part. Men who rape children or groom, as the Brits say, 12 -17 year olds are both only interested in controlling another person and the young are the easiest control. It isn’t a natural of healthy interest, but an indication of a severe defect of character.

  16. it seems to me we have a bunch of people that think guns kill people like a moajority of morons do. So obviously dicks penetrate underage girls. ok so then cut off the dicks dicks. oh wait that wont work because guns dont kill people and dicks dont f**ck kids people kill and f**k duh wake up…. otherwise the few words i did pisspell when taking those spelling test require a recall because the pencil spelled em wrong not me you jack asses. oh and you know who ya are so dont think im talking to all of you.. God Bless All He knows Who They Are

  17. it seems to me we have a bunch of people that think guns kill people like a majority of morons do. So obviously dicks penetrate underage girls. ok so then cut off the dicks dicks. oh wait that wont work because guns dont kill people and dicks dont f**ck kids people kill and f**k duh wake up…. otherwise the few words I misspelled when taking those spelling test as a kid require a recall because the pencil spelled em wrong not me you jack asses. oh and you know who ya are so dont think im talking to all of you.. God Bless All He knows Who They Are

  18. I feel the desire to comment on the fact that young girls are being exploited on youtube for the sexual purposes and gratification of older men who are attracted to young girls. The first point I would like to make is that for ages, young women have been lying about just that, their ages. I have observed many videos of young girls who are clearly pre-pubescent, doing things that men have requested to see them do on their webshows. Taking it one step further, I felt inclined to see just who was watching these young girls wave various body parts in front of a camera, as youtube now has a feature which shows who is watching a video the most, by age and location, and to my horror, most of the videos of young girls on these webshows are being viewed by men between 25 and 54…. yikes!!! And I am fairly certain these men are not terribly interested in Jamie and Jennie’s Miley Cyrus Impressions.

    AND, Many 13 year old girls are pre-pubescent, and in my opinion should not be considered “fair game” just because some other countries where women are still considered sex objects and little else think it’s ok to have sex with a 13 year old sex slave.

    Dicks do penetrate people… dicks attached to people who make choices… by having this material so readily available for pedophiles to access… are we handing over our children? Doesn’t the mere suggestion that they are promoting pedophilia bother the powers that be over at the youtube headquarters?? It’s almost as through this is just becoming one more perversion that is acceptable in our society, we have already graduated to a plethora of mutilation and gore in our cinema, and on video games, there is nothing off limits these days. We are desensitizing ourselves (successfully) to a multitutde of inhuman evils, do we really want to make child molestation or exploitation one of them?

    And to the young woman, I am assuming it was a woman, who stated that “slutty girls” would be slutty no matter what… you’re a sorry excuse for a woman. Many young women act out in search of male approval and acceptance because society dictates that a woman is not desirable as more than a sex object, and to be of value to a man a woman should present herself as one. These girls are not old enough to understand that this is even what they are doing, so is it ok to exploit them further, or should we at least attempt to protect our children, save the next generation from some of the mistakes we made, and preserve some of their innocence so that this society has a chance of remaining intact for our children’s children?

Comments are closed.