Those motherfuckers also rejected my Nazi rape torture site even tho the people displayed were all of legal age. Well, most of them. Those ARS motherfuckers :BangBang: :ak47:

Still going on about this :mad:

I admit it wasn't the smartest thing to do, listing the term lolita, I realise this now and removed it period. Point taken. Call it a newbie mistake, many people admitted in this thread they also made that mistake in the past and took care of it. I have been in this business for 3 months now, call it my first mistake.

Term young girl, young chick etc...

pinkworld.com todays page january 26:

line 11: Movies of a pretty young blonde stuffed by two big cocks

line 21: Movies of a young little tramp drilled by a big monster cock

line 22: Movies of a hot young girl getting fucked and facialed

line 23: Movies of a young chick big with natural breasts giving a handjob

line 30: Movies of a young shy girl getting her cameltoe pussy banged

So give it a break, one could keep going on about this. Pinkworld is an example to me or should be for any tgp owner. Let's see how you do if you have to keep coming up describing the same thing over and over. :winkwink:

Visa will not approve sites that have certain terms on them. Sponsors will then not approve webmasters that promote them that use such terms either. Call it "variety" or whatever the hell else you want, you are still going after the people looking for underage pron by using those terms and a lot of sponsors will deny you if you use them. I don't blame them, not in this day and age.

Lines 11, 21, and 23 do not necessarily refer to young GIRLS. A 20 year old can be considered a "young" blonde or tramp or chick. A 40 year old can be a blonde, tramp or chick, but never a GIRL let alone a YOUNG one. As far as the others to well write Pinkworld and tell them what you see or report them to their sponsors.