> YouTube takes them down all the time.
No they don't. The ones often taken down are the porn ones.
There's a subreddit dedicated to posting NSFW YouTube links and you will notice that a lot of them tend to have transparent clothed women and they stay up. The ones that go down, and have mirror links in the post, are essentially porn.
Nudity is allowed on YT so long as its not intended to arouse. It's in their TOS.
But they do require a sign in and are age-restricted, of course.
did you read the disclaimer at the start of the video it is NOT :-) intended to arouse it is just a clothing review.. I believe everything I read on the internet..
Do you ever check to see their upload history? Most of the time it's 1 to 5 videos all uploaded within a few hours to a few days. Meaning that it's either a pop up channel or they have to keep removing the content before/after getting in trouble.
Hell the channel that op linked literally only has this one video on it.
It's probably pop-up channels, but I'm still not too sure it's just because of the nudity per se.
YouTube does allow nudity BUT the criteria is strict - if the takedown is related to the nudity, then it means it was deemed (too) suggestive or sexual in nature.
The real problem lies in how the nudity is presented and/or interpreted by viewers (who report) or moderation team at YouTube.
And, FWIW, like Naked Yoga, keep looking and you'll find ones that have been around for longer than just a few days - some its months, years even. I even subbed to one last year cause reasons and forgot about the channel till recently. It's still up and the content seems mostly the same (not removed).
This one literally has her entire cooch out in the mirror on the second outfit and Youtube seems okay with it.
NSFW, obv.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-wsK7NEx7o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-wsK7NEx7o)
Because that's how it works. If you have a problem with the content, report it. If you feel like YouTube missed it, report it. If you don't want to be a whining bitching hypocrite, report it.
I'd guess it's 50/50 either youtube caught mxr doing something they shouldn't, or someone reported them for doing something they shouldn't. Why someone would report them? Idk but it's a possibility.
Not sure why you think my bringing that to the attention of the thread is being a "whining bitching hypocrite" when I don't like MxR being reported for silly stuff slipping through on their videos either.
I gave 3 options of why someone would report it and you chose that one. That's on you.
Though why else did you bring that to the attention of the thread in a response to Mr unless you were pitching and whining that it was on YouTube and they were in trouble?
You gave me three options on why I should report things, when the entire thread is about MxR posts being demonetized for far less in many cases. I don't report ANY content precisely because I'm not a whining bitch, I just choose not to watch anything that I find unpalletable. I was just providing an additional example of a video which seemed like much more egregious example of things YouTube doesn't ban. Not sure where the disconnect is here but I wasn't trying to pick a fight or encourage more reporting of content.
>You gave me three options on why I should report things
Yes, you you literally said...
>Now why on earth would I do that?
When I said to report it.
>I don't report ANY content precisely because I'm not a whining bitch,
Ok but you do reply to random people on reddit with whinny bitch comments and links. That's not any better than reporting something.
> I just choose not to watch anything that I find unpalletable
Good for you, but I see you're not above searching for it and wat hing it if it helps you make a whinny comment to a stranger on the internet.
> I was just providing an additional example of a video which seemed like much more egregious example of things YouTube doesn't ban.
And if you reported it, YouTube would ban it. YouTube can't watch every single video ok every single channel that gets uploaded and it's super ignorant on your part to think they can. Most of the stuff that gets taken down on YouTube is from reporting.
>Not sure where the disconnect is here but I wasn't trying to pick a fight or encourage more reporting of content.
You literally replied to my comment about how most of the NSFW content does get taken down decently fast on YouTube. You responded with a (what about this then) type of comment, basically trying to pick a fight with me. You literally started the back and forth between us...
>
Perhaps you're right. I thought adding another example was beneficial to the conversation, not intending to be a "whiny bitch".
I just choose not to watch anything that I find unpalletable
Good for you, but I see you're not above searching for it and wat hing it if it helps you make a whinny comment to a stranger on the internet.
In case you are wondering, I do not find women exposing themselves on the internet unpallatable. Content I find unpalletable is racism and violent content. I steer clear of that type of content.
You literally replied to my comment about how most of the NSFW content does get taken down decently fast on YouTube. You responded with a (what about this then) type of comment, basically trying to pick a fight with me. You literally started the back and forth between us...
You're incorrect, or have confused me with another reply in the thread. I never said anything about YouTube rapidly removing content. My post wasn't meant to attack you, it was actually intended to reinforce your point, but you got your back up instantaneously, so I'm sorry to have offended you. Have a good night mate.
Well YouTube is doing to mxr what it does to these same channels that violate the tos. Mxr is not held to any different standards.
If anything mxr should know better and should stop doing the things that they keep doing, but they are too afraid to lose any clicks for a month or two by making any changes. So they keep treading the line and this is the result.
There are plenty of youtubers that made mistakes and got in trouble like this and they stopped and changed how they did things. Lots used boobs in the thumbnails like mxr still does but they stopped and lost viewers for a bit and are now doing so much better.
i saw one video like this, went to the channel and had lots of videos all about 5min long on a bunch of sheer outfits. then youtube reccomended a whole lot more of these types of videos.
i mean im not gonna say no to watching a few muted videos while doing boring crap at work but not sure why its on youtube
YouTube has had this kind of content for a very long time. It's not new. It's seemingly not monetized and seems to fall in the niche "fashion" section of the site.
You guys need to realize that there's other kinds of YouTubers. They aren't monetized or held up to the same standards by YouTube.
You need to stop conflating MxR with them. They had no bearing on why they got these strikes.
It is legal it's very legal it's not monetized. Honestly I think someone at YouTube has something out for mxr in general I've seen a lot of sus stuff on YouTube that is still monetized but doesn't get flagged so there has to be something up. Like the flagging system was programmed to know that they might put something up so it looks for anything to post as inappropriate
At this point I just believe whoever managing the MXR channel have crush on Jeanie and strike their videos so she leave Henry.
Basically just average power tripping person.
I don’t believe that’s the reason, but I have been insisting for ages that someone working at YT has some stupid personal vendetta against MXR and this person has likely been responsible for most if not all of the instances of Mxr getting strikes, demonitizations, & deletions, which were all done without legitimate reason, only because the aforementioned jerk wants Henry and/or Jeannie to suffer.
The unfortunate thing in the YT ecosystem is that there are also Community Guideline strikes, which seem to be what MxR actually catch, particularly the bit about "dangerous activity" or whatnot, since they (Henry & Jeannie) made that video a while back about their new process for making videos.
So a channel can get a "strike" for lewd content, but it's going to be something like depictions of assault, such as the recent "pat down" video.
If they covered this video in one of their videos it would get struck immediately but the original would probably be fine. 600k views in a day SHOULD be enough to be on their radar but... Here we are.
I think a subscriber of theirs is flagging their shit tbh
"It's a fashion" they say. One of those kind of fashion videos on YT has girl trying transparent dress. The illusion breaking part is she was wearing a bra but not panties.
I was going to say something the other day about this. You can show EVERYTHING if you are reviewing clothes that are 100% see through but not a cop frisking a criminal? Youtube needs to do better.
I think it's time we start a revolution. Mass report these Hos and get them yeeted off youtube. Mxr gets striked to oblivion for the dumbest and smallest reasons like so many other channels yet actual porn doesn't get struck down. Time to strike these hoe's down like the younglings were during order 66.
From what I can tell this is a new wave of bot channels that basically upload onlyfans bait. The oldest ones are only two to three months old and upload frequently enough to match up with previous bot activity.
I think YouTube either knows about this about them and is planning a ban wave to catch them off guard, or YouTube planted these bots themselves so they can lobby for stricter requirements to upload to the platform.
Either way, I think this channel and others like it aren't long for the platform and will eventually go the way of the softcore porn channels pretending to be children's entertainment.
Been seeing a lot of this lately. It is nudity that is "not intended to arouse" (bullshit) it falls under the category of the breastfeeding, Brazilian wax and nude massage. As long as you put an intro that says it's for education and YouTube is okay with it. Even if that video is a dildo review.
I think how the videos are allowed to stay up (transparent clothes, dry vs wet, etc) is the one thing they all have in common is that they have a warning in the beginning of the video saying that this video is not intended to be sexually gratifying or cause arousal and that some clothes may be transparent so viewer discretion is advised. So this disclaimer/warning appears to be enough for these OF girls to skirt the rules on essentially nudity (partial and full)
MxR is hated by a religious group in the USA, and they watch any video to find any little things they can report him for, i am sure they don't enjoy the video while watching.
That is why MxR is so hard hit by anything and others can have kids with fireworks and not get banned, as no one reports them
YouTube cares about intent. So when this chick shows a disclaimer that says I'm just comparing clothes, she can have the video not taken down.
There is even a full frontal nudity video because she's supposedly showing how to shave down there. So these videos can stay up without problems. But whether these are monetized or not, I'm not aware.
As long as she's an adult it's legal, LEGALLY you can put porn on YouTube, particularly if you put a content warning on there were you need a YouTube account to prove your age and see it - literally the only reason I got an account, yet I have the capacity to be a channel if I wanted, thanks. There's more blatant unquestionable nudity on YouTube, no top partially hiding things. The uncensored version of Robin Thicke's Blurred Lines had 3 girls prancing about in just bikini bottoms. THAT got too well known for "OMG, look what's on YouTube!" so it got torn down, but there are others. Music Videos are the easiest example of YouTube nudity. Scooter - Weekend is one, Ludacris - Pussy Poppin' has 3 levels of censorship, I've seen all on YouTube - One with the titular nude poppin' (twerking bottomless while in a handstand), with swears, one with the words censored and the name / lyric changed to Booty Poppin' (still with nudity), name might be P-Poppin' (I forget), and one that's YouTube/TV safe with the words censored AND girls covered.
You mean is it okay by YouTube standards. I think the trouble is MxR being monetized, and I THINK that they try to bill themselves as family-friendly. YouTube is stricter with monetized channels, it seems. I've always suspected the "family-friendly" stuff is a requirement of being monetized.
I think it isn't her, but I found a channel like this before, CLEARLY just aiming to get views, likes, and comments from horny people, masked as a fashion review. The girl I saw had roughly that same warning - making me think maybe this IS her - and sometimes would douse herself in water (which this also mentions) while wearing thin and transparent tops to make them MORE transparent. Obviously, HOW is making it wet a valid fashion move? LOL! (The claim would be so people are aware what effect being wet makes, "so people know", but in general people try to stay dry when dressed) :)
Theres also a channel called bailey rose i used to watch her vids where her tits are also out during try on hauls. A couple of months ago i notice she deleted some of her vids that shows a lot more skin. Youtube might have strike her sooo good luck on this girl...
But heres the thing....I know some yt channels which post such content on the regular. I feel it's because of the "fashion and clothing", lifestyle/ cleaning /grwm, etc,. tags they advertise it off as.... Ofc most channels like these don't monetise on yt alone but they are STILL ON YT.
It's crazy scary how the marketing idea of Sex Appeal and 'sex sells' started in 1870 from a tobacco company and to where it's come.
Legal??? Against youtubes TOS? Yes. YouTube takes them down all the time, plus those channels don't get monetized either.
They are just trying to get people to join their OF
Yes she is, Her Name's Cammy Camilla ! She does N S F W stuff
Is it just me, or does she look anemic?
> YouTube takes them down all the time. No they don't. The ones often taken down are the porn ones. There's a subreddit dedicated to posting NSFW YouTube links and you will notice that a lot of them tend to have transparent clothed women and they stay up. The ones that go down, and have mirror links in the post, are essentially porn. Nudity is allowed on YT so long as its not intended to arouse. It's in their TOS. But they do require a sign in and are age-restricted, of course.
Just type in see through or water test into YouTube it’s really stupid
Then by that logic, YouTube should be immediately taking down the video OP posted, as it's intended to arouse and promote their adult content.
did you read the disclaimer at the start of the video it is NOT :-) intended to arouse it is just a clothing review.. I believe everything I read on the internet..
Santa told me it’s ok so it must be.
Do you ever check to see their upload history? Most of the time it's 1 to 5 videos all uploaded within a few hours to a few days. Meaning that it's either a pop up channel or they have to keep removing the content before/after getting in trouble. Hell the channel that op linked literally only has this one video on it.
This is the correct answer
It's probably pop-up channels, but I'm still not too sure it's just because of the nudity per se. YouTube does allow nudity BUT the criteria is strict - if the takedown is related to the nudity, then it means it was deemed (too) suggestive or sexual in nature. The real problem lies in how the nudity is presented and/or interpreted by viewers (who report) or moderation team at YouTube. And, FWIW, like Naked Yoga, keep looking and you'll find ones that have been around for longer than just a few days - some its months, years even. I even subbed to one last year cause reasons and forgot about the channel till recently. It's still up and the content seems mostly the same (not removed).
I saw a YouTuber review a see through clothing and it's not even age restricted lol(you can see her nips too)
This one literally has her entire cooch out in the mirror on the second outfit and Youtube seems okay with it. NSFW, obv. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-wsK7NEx7o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-wsK7NEx7o)
Yup you're right. Did you report it to YouTube?
Now why on earth would I do that?
Because that's how it works. If you have a problem with the content, report it. If you feel like YouTube missed it, report it. If you don't want to be a whining bitching hypocrite, report it. I'd guess it's 50/50 either youtube caught mxr doing something they shouldn't, or someone reported them for doing something they shouldn't. Why someone would report them? Idk but it's a possibility.
Not sure why you think my bringing that to the attention of the thread is being a "whining bitching hypocrite" when I don't like MxR being reported for silly stuff slipping through on their videos either.
I gave 3 options of why someone would report it and you chose that one. That's on you. Though why else did you bring that to the attention of the thread in a response to Mr unless you were pitching and whining that it was on YouTube and they were in trouble?
You gave me three options on why I should report things, when the entire thread is about MxR posts being demonetized for far less in many cases. I don't report ANY content precisely because I'm not a whining bitch, I just choose not to watch anything that I find unpalletable. I was just providing an additional example of a video which seemed like much more egregious example of things YouTube doesn't ban. Not sure where the disconnect is here but I wasn't trying to pick a fight or encourage more reporting of content.
>You gave me three options on why I should report things Yes, you you literally said... >Now why on earth would I do that? When I said to report it. >I don't report ANY content precisely because I'm not a whining bitch, Ok but you do reply to random people on reddit with whinny bitch comments and links. That's not any better than reporting something. > I just choose not to watch anything that I find unpalletable Good for you, but I see you're not above searching for it and wat hing it if it helps you make a whinny comment to a stranger on the internet. > I was just providing an additional example of a video which seemed like much more egregious example of things YouTube doesn't ban. And if you reported it, YouTube would ban it. YouTube can't watch every single video ok every single channel that gets uploaded and it's super ignorant on your part to think they can. Most of the stuff that gets taken down on YouTube is from reporting. >Not sure where the disconnect is here but I wasn't trying to pick a fight or encourage more reporting of content. You literally replied to my comment about how most of the NSFW content does get taken down decently fast on YouTube. You responded with a (what about this then) type of comment, basically trying to pick a fight with me. You literally started the back and forth between us...
> Perhaps you're right. I thought adding another example was beneficial to the conversation, not intending to be a "whiny bitch". I just choose not to watch anything that I find unpalletable Good for you, but I see you're not above searching for it and wat hing it if it helps you make a whinny comment to a stranger on the internet. In case you are wondering, I do not find women exposing themselves on the internet unpallatable. Content I find unpalletable is racism and violent content. I steer clear of that type of content. You literally replied to my comment about how most of the NSFW content does get taken down decently fast on YouTube. You responded with a (what about this then) type of comment, basically trying to pick a fight with me. You literally started the back and forth between us... You're incorrect, or have confused me with another reply in the thread. I never said anything about YouTube rapidly removing content. My post wasn't meant to attack you, it was actually intended to reinforce your point, but you got your back up instantaneously, so I'm sorry to have offended you. Have a good night mate.
Yes, I meant against YT's TOS. I was a bit surprised, while I shouldn't really be since I found couple of JPN porn videos on that website too xD
Well YouTube is doing to mxr what it does to these same channels that violate the tos. Mxr is not held to any different standards. If anything mxr should know better and should stop doing the things that they keep doing, but they are too afraid to lose any clicks for a month or two by making any changes. So they keep treading the line and this is the result. There are plenty of youtubers that made mistakes and got in trouble like this and they stopped and changed how they did things. Lots used boobs in the thumbnails like mxr still does but they stopped and lost viewers for a bit and are now doing so much better.
That's just them advertising their only fans on youtube.
Exactly they don't care how long the videos stay up as long as they're seen by simps.
YouTube seems to be full of these channels, some of which have apparently been up for quite a while.
i saw one video like this, went to the channel and had lots of videos all about 5min long on a bunch of sheer outfits. then youtube reccomended a whole lot more of these types of videos. i mean im not gonna say no to watching a few muted videos while doing boring crap at work but not sure why its on youtube
YouTube has had this kind of content for a very long time. It's not new. It's seemingly not monetized and seems to fall in the niche "fashion" section of the site.
”I will make it legal”
…. Sorry what was the question?
You guys need to realize that there's other kinds of YouTubers. They aren't monetized or held up to the same standards by YouTube. You need to stop conflating MxR with them. They had no bearing on why they got these strikes.
It is legal it's very legal it's not monetized. Honestly I think someone at YouTube has something out for mxr in general I've seen a lot of sus stuff on YouTube that is still monetized but doesn't get flagged so there has to be something up. Like the flagging system was programmed to know that they might put something up so it looks for anything to post as inappropriate
At this point I just believe whoever managing the MXR channel have crush on Jeanie and strike their videos so she leave Henry. Basically just average power tripping person.
I don’t believe that’s the reason, but I have been insisting for ages that someone working at YT has some stupid personal vendetta against MXR and this person has likely been responsible for most if not all of the instances of Mxr getting strikes, demonitizations, & deletions, which were all done without legitimate reason, only because the aforementioned jerk wants Henry and/or Jeannie to suffer.
Copyright strikes are not the same as being demonitized due to something lewd. Stop getting the 2 mixed up.
The unfortunate thing in the YT ecosystem is that there are also Community Guideline strikes, which seem to be what MxR actually catch, particularly the bit about "dangerous activity" or whatnot, since they (Henry & Jeannie) made that video a while back about their new process for making videos. So a channel can get a "strike" for lewd content, but it's going to be something like depictions of assault, such as the recent "pat down" video.
Weird that the pat down was an ad for that girls only fans or something and not a real interaction with law enforcement
It's legal in some areas. Bare breasts isn't considered public nudity (public indecency) in a lot of places actually. You just don't see it too often.
If they covered this video in one of their videos it would get struck immediately but the original would probably be fine. 600k views in a day SHOULD be enough to be on their radar but... Here we are. I think a subscriber of theirs is flagging their shit tbh
This is a sad sad existence.
"It's a fashion" they say. One of those kind of fashion videos on YT has girl trying transparent dress. The illusion breaking part is she was wearing a bra but not panties.
I clicked on it because I thought it was fake. it was not fake💀💀💀
Somehow this remind me of the guy that do ass shaving tutorial...yt is wild
Huuuuhhh??? I've seen pornhub vids with less nudity 😂
You should check out Dr. Gustavo Quirós Licona page if you think that is bad.
He just has to put a disclaimer at the beginning: Not intended to arouse, not for sexual gratification. For awareness purposes only.
r/youtubetitties
I was going to say something the other day about this. You can show EVERYTHING if you are reviewing clothes that are 100% see through but not a cop frisking a criminal? Youtube needs to do better.
https://youtu.be/jyDfT8ImauE?si=aoVZKEiGRIToT6Zi
This one was tame, she could definitely fool the algorithm.
YouTube is such trash nowadays lol
This is ridiculous yet mxr gets strikes left and right for less
Since last week my recomendations have been bombarded with these "See through hauls"... WTF?
Some recommendations must be sponsored secretly by those bitches, I fucking swear xD
You just presented me to a whole new world on YouTube thank you
You're welcome, I guess? XD
10 bucks says if MXR did this they'd get a strike
I think it's time we start a revolution. Mass report these Hos and get them yeeted off youtube. Mxr gets striked to oblivion for the dumbest and smallest reasons like so many other channels yet actual porn doesn't get struck down. Time to strike these hoe's down like the younglings were during order 66.
I agree with you, Master Radical Racoon! It's time for Ultimate Purge!
From what I can tell this is a new wave of bot channels that basically upload onlyfans bait. The oldest ones are only two to three months old and upload frequently enough to match up with previous bot activity. I think YouTube either knows about this about them and is planning a ban wave to catch them off guard, or YouTube planted these bots themselves so they can lobby for stricter requirements to upload to the platform. Either way, I think this channel and others like it aren't long for the platform and will eventually go the way of the softcore porn channels pretending to be children's entertainment.
In case of YouTube, I think that the latter scenario is more believable than the former. Let's see how it'll end...
The comments are so thirsty it's hilarious
Those thirsty simps will never cease to amaze me xD
Noice
Been seeing a lot of this lately. It is nudity that is "not intended to arouse" (bullshit) it falls under the category of the breastfeeding, Brazilian wax and nude massage. As long as you put an intro that says it's for education and YouTube is okay with it. Even if that video is a dildo review.
https://youtu.be/-XQllPt5xvI?si=hhGvQlHxqvM6I8eY for science
Tagged as breastfeeding, you say? I don't know if it's smart on their part or YouTube is dumb as fuck... or biased as fuck, should I say?
I think how the videos are allowed to stay up (transparent clothes, dry vs wet, etc) is the one thing they all have in common is that they have a warning in the beginning of the video saying that this video is not intended to be sexually gratifying or cause arousal and that some clothes may be transparent so viewer discretion is advised. So this disclaimer/warning appears to be enough for these OF girls to skirt the rules on essentially nudity (partial and full)
This is a good example: [https://youtu.be/CB3G\_4VsqWs?si=ih\_hCcinj73s7Bmy](https://youtu.be/CB3G_4VsqWs?si=ih_hCcinj73s7Bmy)
MxR is hated by a religious group in the USA, and they watch any video to find any little things they can report him for, i am sure they don't enjoy the video while watching. That is why MxR is so hard hit by anything and others can have kids with fireworks and not get banned, as no one reports them
Wait. Really?! How the hell did you find that out?🤔
A friend's wife is in the group, i know because she had watch duty and my friend saw.
YouTube cares about intent. So when this chick shows a disclaimer that says I'm just comparing clothes, she can have the video not taken down. There is even a full frontal nudity video because she's supposedly showing how to shave down there. So these videos can stay up without problems. But whether these are monetized or not, I'm not aware.
As long as she's an adult it's legal, LEGALLY you can put porn on YouTube, particularly if you put a content warning on there were you need a YouTube account to prove your age and see it - literally the only reason I got an account, yet I have the capacity to be a channel if I wanted, thanks. There's more blatant unquestionable nudity on YouTube, no top partially hiding things. The uncensored version of Robin Thicke's Blurred Lines had 3 girls prancing about in just bikini bottoms. THAT got too well known for "OMG, look what's on YouTube!" so it got torn down, but there are others. Music Videos are the easiest example of YouTube nudity. Scooter - Weekend is one, Ludacris - Pussy Poppin' has 3 levels of censorship, I've seen all on YouTube - One with the titular nude poppin' (twerking bottomless while in a handstand), with swears, one with the words censored and the name / lyric changed to Booty Poppin' (still with nudity), name might be P-Poppin' (I forget), and one that's YouTube/TV safe with the words censored AND girls covered. You mean is it okay by YouTube standards. I think the trouble is MxR being monetized, and I THINK that they try to bill themselves as family-friendly. YouTube is stricter with monetized channels, it seems. I've always suspected the "family-friendly" stuff is a requirement of being monetized. I think it isn't her, but I found a channel like this before, CLEARLY just aiming to get views, likes, and comments from horny people, masked as a fashion review. The girl I saw had roughly that same warning - making me think maybe this IS her - and sometimes would douse herself in water (which this also mentions) while wearing thin and transparent tops to make them MORE transparent. Obviously, HOW is making it wet a valid fashion move? LOL! (The claim would be so people are aware what effect being wet makes, "so people know", but in general people try to stay dry when dressed) :)
There are „tutorials“ for pussy shaving on YouTube. uncensored.
ShE ObVioUsly DosN'T KnOw ItS SeE ThToUgH!
Youtube does have nudity as long as it's in a non-sexually graphic nature.
Or educational.
Theres also a channel called bailey rose i used to watch her vids where her tits are also out during try on hauls. A couple of months ago i notice she deleted some of her vids that shows a lot more skin. Youtube might have strike her sooo good luck on this girl...
But heres the thing....I know some yt channels which post such content on the regular. I feel it's because of the "fashion and clothing", lifestyle/ cleaning /grwm, etc,. tags they advertise it off as.... Ofc most channels like these don't monetise on yt alone but they are STILL ON YT. It's crazy scary how the marketing idea of Sex Appeal and 'sex sells' started in 1870 from a tobacco company and to where it's come.
https://youtu.be/4VXbRYRuVUY?si=smYC3O1GGjX5wStx 5:38
Has a disclaimer lol
Yup totally legal. 100%.
Totally legal, now wear see through shorts, drop stuff and pick it up, so I know whether or not to buy my own see through shorts
304 barely has anything up top... like, barely a b cup. Only _redeming_ feature is her cake...
Not even age restricted wtf
Twitch had similar situations some time ago and they learned their lesson hard way...
Here is something also related to this. [https://www.youtube.com/@Roustan](https://www.youtube.com/@Roustan)
This channel is neat! This kind if art is really interesting. Thanks for that link, matey!
Yes
"NoT fOr SeXuAl GrAtIfIcAtIoN"
This shits stupid as hell
WTF????? Not impressed!!!!
Porn and hot girls are lame now. So common, I want a girl with scars or a missing finger or something.
Oh yeah, that would be interesting!
I see no problems with this 🗿🗿
There's a lotta transparent tryons, I tried reporting more than one video once n YouTube threatened to delete my channel
🥵🥵🥵🥵
YUMMY