rawTOP

In case you were wondering why all the videos you uploaded to [insert big tube site here] were deleted, here's what happened… The History Behind What's Going On Going back a ways, there are groups who are dedicated to getting rid of porn on the Internet (or at least as getting rid of as much of the porn as possible). Exodus Cry is one of the main groups trying to get rid of porn. A couple years ago they did a campaign to get state legislatures to declare porn a "public health crisis". A few states signed on, but overall it wasn't terribly successful. So now they've changed strategies and they took aim at PornHub saying that PornHub was being used to traffic underage girls. There was an article here and there with those claims but it didn't get traction. Then they got Pulitzer prize-winning journalist Nicholas Kristof at the NY Times to write an article on it. Apparently they spoon fed him information and he didn't really check the general validity of the claims before publishing his article. (Read more about it here.) But once that article was out things started happening. The other piece of background that you should know is that PornHub is owned by a company called MindGeek. Today MindGeek is an an enormous company, but it has a very shady past. It started as Manwin back when tube sites were just coming out as a thing. Manwin operated out of countries that had no extradition treaties and they encouraged/enabled people to upload videos they didn't have rights to. So their tube sites were filled with illegal content (illegal for copyright infringement mostly). Those tube sites decimated the porn industry. Suddenly people didn't have to pay. Lots of producers went out of business. People like me who sent traffic to sites run by producers went out of business. Anyway, their business was so illegal that the owners would get indicted and around that time the business would be sold to someone else. They they would get indicted and the business would be sold again. Some of the owners later went to prison, others are still on the run or out of reach of the law. Anyway, about the 3rd or 4th time that happened the company was sold and renamed MindGeek. The owners of MindGeek decided to clean up their image. So they hired an army of lawyers and stayed (just barely in some cases) on the right side of the law. Anyway, Manwin had bought up a lot of the big tube sites that they didn't already own. And MindGeek continued buying. Last I knew they owned 5 of the 8 top tube sites. Then as the producers who were having problems and were going out of business because of all the illegal content on MindGeek's tube sites started going out of business, MindGeek started buying them up. The producers were in a constant battle to get illegal copies of their videos off the tube sites, but once the same content was owned by MindGeek all that illegal content magically disappeared giving MindGeek a huge advantage – they didn't have to fight the big tube sites, because they were the big tube sites. These days MindGeek owns most of straight porn, and some really big names in gay porn. Men.com, Sean Cody, Reality Dudes – they all belong to MindGeek (and many many more). The other thing to know is that there's what's legal, and then there's what MasterCard and Visa (and their shareholders) want to be associated with. The Visa/MC standard is stricter than what's "legal". By having a "premium membership" for PornHub, MindGeek was agreeing to be held to the higher Visa/MC standard. The problem was that when customers bought a PornHub Premium membership it allowed them ad-free access to PornHub. PornHubPremium.com is a "clean" site – MindGeek has vetted every person and company that's uploaded to the premium site. And those people are contractually obligated to have signed model releases and age verification documentation on file. But none of that is the case for PornHub.com – MindGeek has no clue who's behind the random email address the person provided. Yes, their terms of service probably say the person has to own (or have a license for) the video and everyone has to be 18+, but given that they don't really know who the uploader is, there's no way to enforce any of that. Because the premium membership included benefits on the non-premium site, what was going on on PornHub.com became Visa and MasterCard's business. If that hadn't been the case then it might have all blown over since the premium site was clean. What's Happened In The Past Couple Weeks The shit started hitting the fan when Kristof's article appeared in the NY Times. That got MasterCard and Visa to start investigations. Within a few days MasterCard terminated their relationship with PornHub, and Visa followed suit later the same day. Because of those investigations MindGeek is in crisis mode – they need the money they get from credit cards. Visa and MasterCard are continuing their investigations and they're looking at more than PornHub – they're looking at everything MindGeek owns. If Visa/MC isn't happy MindGeek could lose credit card processing for all their sites – including their paysites (Men.com, Sean Cody, Reality Dudes, etc.) MindGeek has been working hard the last few years to change their image. They're now so large and have so much legal content that they don't need the illegal content that made them into a huge company. And that illegal content is what got them in trouble with Visa/Mastercard. Unfortunately they can't tell the difference between your personal video (that's legal), and the illegal video that someone else uploaded, so they just deleted everything that wasn't uploaded by someone who they've vetted. And because they had put all their tube sites under the umbrella of the "PornHub Network", this is also affecting PornMD, RedTube, XTube and YouPorn. Oh, and GayTube got shut down completely! All in all they deleted just under 80% of the videos on their sites(!!) It was a massive purge. Final Thoughts – Putting Things In Context 1) For starters this all started because some people said that there was Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM) on PornHub. And yes, mixed in among the millions of videos they had on their sites, there was a little bit of it. BUT we need to put that into context. The Internet Watch Foundation has documented the following number of cases on the various big internet platforms… Facebook – 84.1 million cases of CSAM Instagram – 4.45 million cases of CSAM Twitter – 1.47 million cases of CSAM PornHub – 118 cases of CSAM In other words, the "big tech" social media platforms have a MUCH MUCH bigger problem with child porn than PornHub. But Exodus Cry didn't go after those platforms, they went after PornHub, because none of this is actually about child porn. Child porn is just the pretext to go after porn in general. The problem was the publicity got Visa/MC to re-examine the other (non-CSAM) illegal content on PornHub's sites (e.g. pirated porn). Once they were under a microscope for one thing, everything had to be cleaned up. 2) Another takeaway is that this wasn't about you. It wasn't about PornHub not liking a particular fetish, or whatever. This is about the commercialization of formerly free tube sites by a large corporation and what happens when you start using Visa/MC to sell memberships (or products) on your site. This is about Visa and MasterCard's rules. 3) Another thing to remember is that, while this may be painful for a time, ultimately it's really good that PornHub deleted all those videos. The big tube sites decimated the porn business. Lots of producers went out of business, and most of the people like me who got commissions by promoting sales on legal porn sites just went out of business and disappeared completely. 10 years ago there were three gay webmaster forum sites that were all really active with discussion. Today there's one and it's lucky if it gets 1 or 2 people posting comments in a day. By deleting all those videos the playing field is considerably more level. So it sucks that your videos are gone, but ultimately this means a better, healthier porn industry.

It's coming. I know I've said that for a while, but I really see it happening in 2021. (Long story – I won't bore everyone with the details). CumdumpNetwork.com will be a Craigslist style hookup site for quick, anonymous pump-n-dumps (anal, oral and even vaginal). Only bottoms will have profiles. PublicUrinals.com will be the same idea only for loads of piss. BBBH.men will be a hookup site for bareback sex PozPigs.com will be for poz guys and neg guys who are looking to have sex with poz guys. (Neg guys on the site won't see each other – they can only chat/hookup with the poz guys). OralPigs.com will be for guys just looking for oral TwistedPigs.com will be for "hardcore fetish" (fisting, watersports, BDSM, etc.) PuffPuff.Cloud will be invite-only for guys into chem sex SpunkBuds.com will be for vanilla sex FemPigs.com will be for anything fem – cross-dressers, "lady boys", trans fem, and cis females. So Cumdump Network and Public Urinals will the type of site it sounds like you're looking for. [Speaking of trans – trans guys are welcome on all the sites, it's just fem stuff that's limited. The limitation exists because fem attracts straight guys and straight section on here gave me huge grief in the past. I'm not really all that interested in having straight guys as members – or rather I know enough to know that I need to take that part slow until I understand how to deal with them properly.] While it may seem like all of that is off-topic in a thread about chat, it's actually perfectly on-topic. Once I finish up some account features on the new sites, I'll turn off the existing chat and enable a similar type of chat on each of those sites (with the exception of Cumdump Network and Public Urinals, which won't ever have group chat). Then I'll tweak the code for group chat to have a 1-on-1 messaging and slowly build out new features on the sites to make them more complete.

No. The fetish forum is not chem-friendly.

I've changed "mainstream fetish" to "softcore fetish". I think that should solve some of the objections above.

Would "softcore fetish" be a better term (since the non-mainstream fetish is defined as "hardcore")? Or is there a better term to use? (Please suggest if you can think of a better term). BootmanLA sorta hit the nail on the head when he said "hearing that an acquaintance does enjoy it, is not particularly likely to be squicked out." To me, work environments are probably the ultimate test. If a straight (and straight-laced) boss learned about your fetish, would it affect your chances of promotion or bonuses, etc.? If they learned you were into sports gear fetish, almost certainly not unless they think your fucking the 15 year old high school soccer star. Foot fetish, they'd probably think "that's weird, but whatever", so probably not. Furries / cosplay fetish, they'd get a laugh out of it, but again probably not. But hardcore BDSM, being a fisting bottom or a piss bottom, or large gauge genital piercings, or brandings – those could seriously affect your career if they were found out by certain people. I make the distinction because of how I market porn. Certain fetishes I can show on "mainstream porn" sites, and other fetishes need to go on a site dedicated to hardcore fetish. In other words I make the distinction based on the fetish's need for a "safe space", or how likely it will be to turn off the target audience of the mainstream site. But certain fetishes cross the boundaries. A twink with a pink fluffy "whip" casually hitting his sex partner – that's not really "hardcore" or true BDSM. It depends on if you're "playing at" the fetish, or actually truly doing the fetish.

Given that when I was younger I was a member of GMSMA (Gay Men's S/M Activists), there at least used to be a vibrant BDSM community. It's waned as being gay has become more acceptable and the hyper macho type has gone out of "fashion". And the fashion component of it isn't to be discounted. I remember getting close to some hot guys at the LURE (NY's top leather bar), only to realize they were actually rather fem/campy when I heard them speak to friends. To them the leather scene was theater. But them participating in that "theater" gave a physical space for people who were more serious about it to express themselves. Now those physical spaces are gone for the most part. IML, MAL, CLAW – the community still exists there (believe it or not those events aren't just about being a cumdump for a weekend – they actually have other things going on). But I get the sense that the leather / BDSM scene is more of a thing in red states where being gay is still a bit edgy.

Hucows is hetero. Posting hetero content anywhere but in the hetero section will get you (temporarily) banned. The fetish section is only for gay masc content.

Realize that unless you do many of the steps above, VPNs have data on all your browsing and they sell that data to the highest bidder. VPNs can get you around blocks, but most of them do not increase your privacy.

Well, some of the bigger fetishes (Watersports, Fisting & BDSM plus poz fetish and fem fetish) do have their own sections. But there are a lot of other fetishes out there, which is why I have the broad, general categories of "Hardcore Fetish" and "Mainstream Fetish". As far as fantasy/fiction… There's a fiction section for both hardcore and mainstream. Put your stories there if they focus on the fetish. If they just make a passing reference to the fetish, then they can stay in the main fiction sections.

You'll have to make that change before uploading it. What's happening is that the image was captured as you see it on the site, but whatever took the pic inserted metadata saying that a rotation was required. This site doesn't honor the metadata. Typically when you bring things into an image editor and resave them they're saved in the proper orientation without the rotation metadata.

@daemien – thanks for bringing that up. I've had a watersports section here for a long time, but I was missing sections for all the other fetishes. I've just created a Fetish Forum which I've broken down into… Hardcore Fetish (watersports, fisting, BDSM and other topics with an "ick factor" like large gauge and temporary piercings) Mainstream Fetish (things with no "ick factor" like foot fetish and sports gear fetish) Poz Fetish should continue to go in the Backroom. Fem-oriented fetishes should go in the Trans Fem & Cross-Dressing section.

Very important! The site cannot host obscene content or promote obscene sexual activities. Scat, blood sports, snuff (killing), etc. are considered legally obscene so those topics are prohibited on this site. Legal obscenity is a murky topic. If in doubt, shoot a moderator a question before posting. That said, it's completely OK to discuss issues surrounding obscene activities (e.g. how to deal with sex partners that may be into scat or blood sports when you're not into them). It's the promotion of obscene activity of posting of obscene content that's the problem.

I believe so, but can't say for sure. I still use Safari on iOS.

The government of Thailand has blocked 190 porn sites. Presumably more will be blocked in the future. Other countries are talking about age verification systems, etc. While it may seem trivial to fight to see porn, the same blocking mechanisms they use block porn they can use to block political discussions, access to objective news, etc. Here's a rundown of how governments and corporations block you and what you can do to circumvent the block. Even if you don't need these technologies, it's good to support them because other people do need them… DNS Blocks ➜ DoH (DNS over HTTPS) The most common way to block a website is to block it when you first try to connect. When you type in "breeding.zone" into the address bar, your computer needs to convert that domain name into an IP address. So it asks what's called a DNS server to tell it the IP address. If your government tells your ISP to block Breeding Zone they'll simply return a "I don't know the IP for that site" and you can't connect. So you might think, "I'll just ask a different DNS server". The problem is that some ISPs won't let you talk to any DNS server except theirs – they block the port for DNS on their connection to the Internet so you can only talk to DNS servers in their network (which they control). The solution is DNS over HTTPS (DoH). It makes DNS requests look like regular web requests so your ISP can't tell you're talking to a DNS server outside their network. Ideally DoH should be configured in your OS. When it's configured in your OS everything on that device will use it. Supposedly it's possible with iOS 14, but I can't figure it out. And configuring it on MacOS won't be possible until v11 (which is about to be released). I'm not a Windows or Android person, so not sure about those. So, for now, the one way you can use DoH is to use Firefox. In Firefox go to Preferences, search for DNS and simply turn on DNS over HTTPS. It's actually really simple. For this reason I strongly suggest everyone use Firefox. AFAIK, it's the only browser that has really embraced DoH. UPDATE: You can also turn on DoH in Chrome. At least I think it's DoH, it might be DoT (which can be blocked). They call it "Secure DNS" and don't say which type of encrypted DNS they use. To turn it on in Chrome, go to Settings ➜ Privacy and Security ➜ Security, then under "Advanced" you'll see "Use secure DNS". Toggle the option if it's not already toggled, then choose one of the providers listed under "With", and you're done. Packet Inspection ➜ ESNI (Encrypted Server Name Indication) Once you have an IP address each time your computer requests something from the site it will encrypt the request if you're using HTTPS, but the one piece of information it can't encrypt is the server name (e.g. "breeding.zone" – essentially the domain name) – it's sent in clear text because there are usually multiple sites on each IP and the encryption certificates are for each site, not for the IP. Sending the server name in clear text allows the server to know which encryption certificate to use to decrypt the request. What this means is that your network provider can look at the packet, see the server name and block your request at that point. It's a lot more work for them than blocking you at the DNS level, but they can do it. Encrypting the server name requires "ESNI" (Encrypted Server Name Identification). Not all sites are configured to use ESNI, but you can tell Firefox to use it when supported if you do the following… In the address bar type "about:config". It will ask you if you're sure you want to go further, say yes. Then type in ESNI and you'll see a few lines of information. The top one will have the word "false". Double click on that word and it will turn to "true". Once you do that ESNI is enabled. Blocking IP Addresses The last way network providers can block you from seeing sites is to block the entire IP address. To do that they need to resolve the IP address themselves and then block the IP for the site. There's nothing YOU can do to stop this. But hosting companies can fight it a few different ways. They can mix desirable content and undesirable content on the same IP, so if the IP is blocked they're blocking stuff they didn't want to block. Or they can constantly change the IP address, so it's a huge game of whack-a-mole and the government / corporation can never keep up with all the changes. That's difficult with IPv4 (IP addresses that consist of 4 numbers separated by periods) because IPv4 addresses are pretty limited, but it's completely doable with IPv6 (IP addresses that consist of 8 alphanumeric strings separated by colons). There are literally billions of available IPv6 addresses. I'll update this post as more information becomes available, but for now, use Firefox and tweak the settings to protect yourself.

Self-hatred is definitely a thing… 41% of LGB Republicans wished they were heterosexual and 38% see their being gay as a personal shortcoming… https://www.out.com/politics/2020/11/02/almost-half-queer-republicans-wish-they-were-straight

Well, it's starting… The day after the election (11/4) the Supreme Court will hear a case where a Catholic adoption agency is saying their first amendment religious rights trump the City of Philadelphia's anti-discrimination laws. The Catholics had a contract with the city to handle adoptions for the city. When the city had children it needed adopted they would contract with various agencies to get them adopted. The Catholics refused to place kids with gay families. Since they were doing work for the city (not independently) the city canceled the contract when they refused to abide by the city's law and place kids with gay parents. So far the courts have ruled consistently for the city and against the Catholics. The case isn't about whether Catholics have the right to discriminate when they do adoptions on their own. Saying the city can't demand the city's own contractors abide by the city's anti-discrimination laws when those contractors are performing governmental duties on behalf of the city would be a pretty big landmark decision. https://www.washingtonblade.com/2020/08/19/supreme-court-sets-nov-4-to-hear-if-adoption-agency-can-reject-lgbtq-parents/ https://www.aclu.org/cases/fulton-v-city-philadelphia I'm sure Alito and Thomas will find some justification to side with the Catholics. Where Barrett sides will tell us a lot about how she will be as a Supreme Court justice – whether she's a worst case scenario, or something a bit more moderate. Remember they don't actually have to get rid of gay marriage to put us back to second class citizens. They can just keep chipping away at our rights until our we as a community simply don't have equality.

For those of you using an email service run by Apple (@icloud.com, @me.com), just realize they censor emails based on the content of the message. They don't appear to allow emails with adult content to be delivered.

Because we're a republic our national government can't lock things down the way a totalitarian system like China can. But there's a hell of a lot they can do… The federal government can insure adequate supplies of PPE, testing supplies, etc. The federal government can coordinate the distribution of a vaccine when it's ready (they're leaving this to the states). The federal government can aggressively determine the facts and disseminate those facts clearly and then market them to convince people to follow evidence-based health guidelines. The federal government can coerce state and local governments to follow certain guidelines by withholding funds that the states and local governments rely on. For example the federal government could withdraw federal money for schools that have in-person classes in areas that don't meet strict criteria for reopening. (This "power of the purse" is true of a lot of things and lets the feds call the shots in major ways). The federal government can give state and local governments the funds to do the right thing. Sometimes the state and local governments don't do things simply because they don't have the funds to do what really needs to be done. The federal government can lock down borders to limit the spread. (They were too slow doing it and now they're sloppy about enforcing it.) The federal government can test and quarantine everyone coming into the country. Local governments are actually less accountable. This is something Cuomo has encountered. He set health rules for the entire state and then there were notable violations and the local governments were like "Oh, that was just a one time deal and that bar is owned by so-and-so's cousin". In other words local governments are too close to their constituents. It takes someone who's more impartial to enforce this sort of thing.

When they start protesting outside restaurants at the beach that have signs saying "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" then maybe I'll take them seriously. "You must wear a mask to enter" is no different than "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service" – it's a health regulation. If they can put on a shirt and shoes, they can put on a mask. While it may be about personal rights, it's not about freedom. We have less freedom in the US today because of people who refused a short period of sacrifice so we could be free from the impact of COVID. People in New Zealand have freedom because they don't have to worry about getting COVID. We're not free. We can't travel to other states, let alone other countries. We can't visit our elderly relatives without worrying about killing them. We can't visit loved ones who are in the hospital dying. We can't go out to bars with friends without worrying about killing people, or getting killed. Ditto for bathhouses, circuit parties, large pride events, etc. Because of these people who keep talking about "freedom", we are not free. It's no surprise that the people who are fine with school shootings (their right to own assault rifles is more important than the lives of thousands of kids) are also fine with spreading COVID. Both indiscriminately and randomly kill innocent people. That's not freedom. It's not ethical. It's not moral. And it's not honorable. Do not let people like that define terms like "freedom" or "moral" – they don't understand either concept.

This is a false statement. Look at our experience here in NY with a Democratic governor and compare that to the red states that have followed Trump's advice. The differences are shocking. For example, North Dakota has an infection rate that's 13 times that of NY. Hillary's approach would have been much like Cuomo's approach or Canada's approach and a lot more people would be alive today if she were president. That's what your family is trying to say. Here's a reputable site where you can get good data about the state of COVID in the US: https://www.covidexitstrategy.org/

Just a reminder – false statements and promotion of conspiracy theories will earn you an infraction. "New Members" who do it will probably be banned permanently. In the case of false statements in this particular thread, it's election interference and in many cases it's advocating harm against the gay community. Neither will be tolerated on this site. https://www.glaad.org/trump

To be a little more specific… There were a few days where there were hundreds of new account registrations. They then used those accounts to send out spam private messages. The accounts were deleted and the PMs deleted as well. But in some ways the damage was done. People who had "send me an email when I receive a new PM" got the spam messages in their email inboxes. Clearly I can't delete email from your inboxes, so that couldn't be undone. Some of those users then reported those emails as spam to their email service providers. For example Google lets me see the percentage of emails that I send that are marked spam by their users. Most often it's 0%. Sometimes it's 0.2%, but it almost never gets above 0.5%. But this past Friday (days after I'd deleted everything I could) it spiked to 3.3%. Luckily it went right back to zero the next day, so Google should see it as an anomaly, not a meaningful pattern. The logical way to deal with all that was to simply turn off the messaging system for new users. This is (primarily) a forum site, not a private message system. So now if you come on here and immediately complain that you can't send PM, I'm gonna assume you're a spammer. Participate in the public parts of the community, earn some trust, and in time you'll be able to send PMs. Just not right away.

"New Member" isn't just about when you signed up, it's about whether you've participated in the community. So you ARE still a New Member. It says as much right under your (default) avatar.

As much as I liked RBG, her one major fault was not retiring when there was a president who would have preserved her legacy. That alone was an enormous mistake. So yes, let's hope Breyer doesn't make the same mistake. And fingers crossed that Thomas and Alito's seats become vacant.

What's really encouraging is that the logic used for the decision means that in many (if not all) cases "sex discrimination" now covers LGBT discrimination. They said if two people – one male, one female – are both in love with the same person and you treat one differently than the other because of their love of the other person, then that's discrimination based on sex because the only difference between them is that one is male and the other female. Sex discrimination is written into a lot of laws, so that's huge. I'm not sure Judge Barrett will uphold the precedent, but at least it's on the books.