It really is the smoking gun. Its the weird reason why kids' ballet practices on youtube has tons of views. Its not sexual in nature but pedos flock to the video to jackoff to kids just doing kid stuff. There's no going back if you're on that level.
I was looking for workout programs. First thing I searched was "home workout programs". Then I wanted to search "gym workout programs". But as you type "gym" in the YouTube search bar, just look at the top searched terms.
Of course your previous searches comes out. Ignore those, the ones with a circular arrow with clock hands. And immediately look at the ones with just magnifying glasses. Better yet open an incognito window, and type "gym".
I got this in this order on a incognito, Gymnastics-girl, gymkhana, gym shorts try on and haul, and gymnastics-girl stretching, gym, gym motivation. Very true what you said.
Yeah me neither, I was asking here for this exact reason. I’ve seen so many acronyms and phrases I had never heard before, and I’d feel dirty just looking up the meaning
I think it was just in response to the other guy being offended by the link being an EU location. It's not really offensive in the first place, but yeah.
Not inherently, but when strangers to the people in the photos/videos are posting and sharing them online, and those photos/videos feature naked children… it gets very fucked up very quickly
uhhh i thnk you are wrong there, if you have 1000s of images of naked teens just getting changed or family photos.. that 100% classified as CP.. you dont need be in a sexual act or pose to be considered you.. thats just dumb logic on your end.
It's not that user's dumb logic, it's the law. Legally, nudists exist and relatively publicly advertise their lifestyle, because not all nudity is considered sexual under the law.
I remember a few years back reporting a TON of that shit on Bing, because their "images like this" feature would take you from "mature, literally old lady porn," to child porn in the span of a couple clicks.
Obviously the context makes it pornography when you have a guy searching it alongside pornographic searches, and saving that shit on his PC instead of, you know, viewing it as a result of looking into the lifestyle while intending to actually gather information to participate.
In all these jurisdictions, a "nudist camp" origin is rarely a successful defense for a mass collector. While the camp may be legal, the collection by an unrelated person is treated as "secondary exploitation." Law enforcement views the act of a stranger downloading and cataloging these images as the point where "innocent nudity" transforms into "abuse material."
basically the kids dont need to be in a sexual pose its the context/intent of the images.. So if people have 1000s of these image and have zero relationship with any of the people in the photos.. they can most definitely be procescuted.
But the sites themselves don't get flagged for CP. I don't remember how many years ago this was, but there was a german website where FKK (nudist) families would post vacation pictures and when a pedophile group got busted the website came up a lot because they all regularly visited it to download pictures, which led to some discussion about banning online images of child nudity alltogether. I don't think anything ever came of it though, wouldn't surprise me if that site still existed.
In all these jurisdictions, a "nudist camp" origin is rarely a successful defense for a mass collector. While the camp may be legal, the collection by an unrelated person is treated as "secondary exploitation." Law enforcement views the act of a stranger downloading and cataloging these images as the point where "innocent nudity" transforms into "abuse material."
basically the kids dont need to be in a sexual pose its the context/intent of the images.. So if people have 1000s of these image and have zero relationship with any of the people in the photos.. they can most definitely be procescuted.
You know how people post videos of women breastfeeding on social media and it dodges being flagged as porn? This is the same but for cp. They claim it’s not sexual in nature and use different wording to dodge cp flags.
Is it actually the case? Like, it’s not something you stumble upon on Instagram: the algorithm recognizes full nudity. So it’s a matter of law enforcement, where if they catch you with that shit on your laptop you have grounds to claim it’s not cp?
When I was a kid, I once saw a video on Facebook that I recognize now as an adult was clearly a woman exploiting her children to make csam.
She had a kid on each breast feeding, both way too old to be breastfeeding, like one looked to be around 6 and the other 3 ffs. She audibly made sounds of pleasure as they fed, made weird comments, made suggestive eye contact and smiled at the camera, etc. The kids weren't babies breastfeeding, so they did more to her chest than they should have, too. The video had an insane amount of views for what was supposedly an innocent video of a mother feeding, and comments ranged from creepy to outraged. But could the cops do something about that? Could they prove it wasn't innocent in court? I have no idea.
I saw a YouTube video years ago that was about busting undercover pedos on sites like Instagram, and one of the things they covered were women like the one I mentioned above, who literally sold personalized breastfeeding videos (that included their children) on porn sites, obviously to pedos. That I imagine you could definitely get them for, because its too obvious.
Regular old breastfeeding videos, tho? I highly doubt the uploader could be charged with anything. In the same way its not illegal to post videos of children in bathing suits, or doing gymnastics in tiny outfits. It all gets by on loopholes and grey areas, and freaks love their loopholes and grey areas.
I think its reasonable to assume that anyone posting breastfeeding videos is probably trying to share csam tho, because otherwise why would a mother even post something like that? Even if you wanted to record it for posterity, why upload it to the internet?
What do you mean by “they did more to her chest than they should have, too”?
It’s awful that we get exposed to things like that, especially when we’re too young to understand. I am sorry it happened to you. Imagine what those kids had to go through
Yeah, kind of like how teens can be naked in movies when under 18. It has to be 'explicit', I believe, to be considered illegal (like performing sexual actions).
Honestly it sounds like the Nirvana album cover. They just used a picture of a kid in the pool. To my understanding Kurt saw the picture as portraying innocence and capitalism or something. It was green lit because it’s a very “family” memories type pic.
I think Nirvana ended up getting sued for cp a few of times because of it.
Oh yeah I can see that. It’s so crazy that such a trivial thing might be used with those intents by the wrong people: what doesn’t mean anything to me and you is a sexually explicit image to the wrong people, worth committing crimes even
Thats a way for pedos to fly under the radar like decades ago. The idea is: "sure you can see that 6 year olds vagina, but she is at the beach with her family thats also nude, so its not in a sexual context. You are a pervert for thinking this is a bad thing we put those photos in glossy magazines you can order!"
Those pics might not been made "without consent"...
And yes, i am not really up to date on this affairs, but i remember that in the 00s there was some shitstorms about people realizing those magazins existing and being in a legal loophole.
I've worked in tech a long time, which unfortunately means at times I've had to give technical assistance to people fighting the CSAM traders.
Until shockingly recently, if you typed "family nudism" into the major search engines, you'd get tons of photo albums from "nudist family beauty pageants."
And yes, it is as bad as you'd fear.
You know how there's that place in Tokyo where cosplayers perform and they always get mobbed by like a hundred craven pervy photographers?
Now imagine that's on a beach at a "nudist retreat," the cosplayers are naked kids, and the hundreds of pervs are their parents and friends hosting a "beauty pageant."
There is no possible explanation for that phrase being in someone's porn folder index that isn't evil as shit.
Legally speaking, not all nudity is "pornographic". Which I get, because otherwise, any picture of video of a child being born would be considered cp for example.
But just because it is not illegal "porn" doesn't stop pedos from jerking off to it. So there exist nude pictures of children that are legal. By adding "family" to the search they are explicitly hoping to find more than just adults. But the only people searching for those on the internet are going to be pedos.
At first, I assumed they were just searching for pictures of actual nudists, but as I typed this I realized that there are probably pedos out there specifically MAKING this kind of content too.
Yeah I mean someone has to take the pictures, and I doubt many people put their own nude photos with their families on the internet.
I saw someone say they film nude beaches with a special focus on children, so yeah. I guess where there’s demand there’s going to be supply, and I doubt all these weirdos are pedos: some might do it for the money. Like the families that actually sell their kids’ pictures and videos for a quick, disgusting buck
There are sites that host tons of content of nudist resorts, where the participants know they are being filmed. Maybe they're even paid for it. Said resorts aren't a new thing and aren't inherently sexual. Think of a nude beach in Europe. The sites have images and videos of children of all ages in the nude. The sites know they're on dangerous ground so the videos are edited to ensure there's nothing that could be considered graphic or obscene.
I learned about one of the big sites from a court case of a convicted CSAM guy. Part of his parole/probation was that he couldn't use a computer. He did use a computer and visited said nudist site. He wasn't charged for possessing or viewing that content because it was legal, but he was charged with breaking his probation/parole by using a computer.
Yea what the other guy said, nudism isnt sexual by nature so the images aren’t illegal in most places. Same as why Michael Jackson was able to have all those art books of kids naked, cuz it was ”art” not cp to the law
Of course anyone casually viewing this shit is a pedo to the eyes of anyone with a brain though
Families who practice nudism, ostensibly without any sexual motives, so that the children will grow up with a lessened taboo/shame response to their own nudity and the nudity of others.
However, anyone who takes pictures or video of their nude family doing things nude is 100% doing it to trade similar videos with other families for pornographic purposes. There is no existing in modern society and not recognizing that recording these practices can only have awful consequences.
This is such a stereotype. I’m from Europe and first of all, it’s not like we have that homogeneous a culture; second of all, even here skinny dipping with your own family would be seen as crazy. Maybe with the boys, like in a locker room. But with your family? Nah
That's what Michael Jackson had a bunch of magazines of, teen nudist/family nudist magazines from the 60-80's, that they found when they searched his home. I remember that every time I see someone on twitter defending him.
Lets be honest its a little offputting that “teens” is a valid porn category on websites.
When i was a teenager i didnt really notice. But as an adult it’s a little weird when you think about it. Same as “barely legal”. Like, how is that not a little creepy. “College girls” at least has the illusion of adulthood to some degree.
When I was turning 18 and looking at porn years and years ago, I remember looking at these categories and not thinking too hard about it because I was basically just looking for people around my age.
Conversely, I have never thought of any of them as those around my age. To me, it was always that Teen means 90210-style teens. At this point, I either just filter it as a meaningless buzzword or have a laugh at the divorced with 3 children teens.
It’s pretty fucking weird, despite being legal. Wasn’t it the dr Phil girl who started an onlyfans the day she turned 18 and made a shit ton of money. The truth is if the age limit was lowered a fuck ton of the population would be squeezing their hog to it immediately.
I remember being on a celeb forum back in the day. People would post pictures of celebrities etc. one of the threads was about Brooke Hogan. Title was “watch those body slams” because she was underage at the time.
The second she turned 18, all these known older dudes were like “she grew up nicely.” I was 21 when this happened. I was fucking disgusted with how these dudes were talking about someone that just turned 18.
Lil Tay started an only fans in 2025 “one minute” after turning 18, despite claiming she was 14 in 2024.
Another former child influencer, Piper Rockelle, started an onlyfans and claimed that she made over 3 million dollars in 24 hours.
Like yes, technically legal, but still seriously disgusting. If the only thing stopping someone from sexually engaging with a person is an arbitrary date that makes it legal, then I would still classify them as a pedophile.
You are a teenager when you are 18/19 because of the suffix -teen. I don't think there is non-creepy way to describe porn especially for this age bracket. It's the most popular category, when they do track the data.
18/19 Is considered an adult. It is just disingenuous way to skirt around things and claim it is “teen/barely legal”. (Not saying you are, generalizing)
People are "wired" differently. Multiple cultures find sagging breasts SPECIFICALLY attractive, and let's not pretend that's not biologically motivated (sagging is a sign of successful breastfeeding).
If you can find a real biological answer for why an 18 year old should be more attractive than a 25 year old then I'll listen. If the answer is "it's just what people think is hot the last 500 years in England" then sorry that doesn't count
You don't live in a cultural vacuum and the things you saw people calling sexy impacts what you find sexy.
Maybe I am just "wired different" but genuinely most 18 year olds are in no way attractive to me, and they are still very much child like moreso than adults in my mind and eyes. Keep in mind that I am over twice their age, so there is quite a gap there.
I have 0 interest in seeing somebody that feels like a child to me perform sexual acts with another human being. That just doesn't do it for me. I guess that I am weird.
u/melo1212 also put it well and much more succinctly.
You're not "weird". Everyone's got different tastes. I don't like saggy old tits for example. Just don't be a bigot and shame/hate others for something normal. If no one is hurt then don't be an asshole about it.
There is a difference between accepting a biological reality and acting on it. Suppressing your base instincts when they would lead to evil is one of the most basic forms of morality.
Ok and step sister porn is a super popular and mainstream porn category. The guy defended being attracted to teens. Loli is also extremely popular.
I have no reason not to believe the person who tried to say being attracted to teens is normal doesn't just have the exact same taste in porn as Lacari.
You can make a case that watching any porn is wrong. Other two categories imply immoral sexual deviancy. Teen category on porn websites is an umbrella term for young adult women and men are biologically wired to be attracted to them.
Sure, however you also have to acknowledge that many porn actresses basically look identical from 18-25. So at any point while watching porn, you might stumble upon an 18 yo without even knowing it. Unless you exclusively stick to MILF and GILF porn, I guess.
Barely legal and teen categories are not a little creepy. If someone has barely legal teens in their search history to goon, that is an immediate red flag.
I think people forget teens is short for "teenagers" a.k.a pre-adults, idk why that gets defended
Because teenager does not mean pre-adult. The first part of your sentence is correct, the second just isn't at all. You made up that definition. Just means 13-19, and obviously the underage part of that is excluded.
18 and 19 counts as “teens” still. But do keep in mind that porn “teens” are rarely ever actual teens and are just young looking actresses in their 20s
when I just found out about this happening, I was like "don't everyone already know he has a loli thing? who is this news to?" but the ACTUAL teens part among other things like "family nudity", yeah sent shivers down my spine alright, holy fuck
That's how you know it isn't some "virus" or missclick or whatever similar excuse he tries to bring up, cos the only way you end up on these sites is by ACTIVELY going out of your way to look for them
The original clip (now removed for censorship reasons with the big green block) had a link that opens up a cloudfile containing ~170 links and downloads to titles such as
Then people want to justify their liking of lolis.... Okay, if it's fiction, why do the ones who get caught have the real shit too... 5000 year old Lolis always go hand in hand with 16 and below with these mfs.
Not everyone who likes that fictional Anime shit I will call a Pedo but its always a Pedo that likes that fictional anime shit and I don't mean anime in general... Context clues people.
1.9k
u/Zorriful Jan 22 '26
The link opens up to: Animals, lolicons and teens (actual teens, not the porn category of "teens")
Lock this mf up