Hardcore?
 

Is a squirting pussy in a banner considered hardcore?

I would say yes.

If you mean, is a wide open, smiling pussy gleefully expressing it's orgasmic delight with a stream of sticky fluids an explicit image that might not belong on a warning page? Probably.

If not, then how did said smiling wet pussy achieve the uber-wet orgasm? Did she use a flesh dong, or a rubber dong, or did she use her fingers? ;)

LOl Fingers. I always figured "exchanging" bodily fluids, any kind of penetration, etc. was hardcore. A solo girl using her fingers I thought was OK. It's not a close-up and it's animated so you really can't see the labia or any other details, but I thought I would get a general idea of what other webmasters thought.

*oops*

I just took a REAL close look and at the VERY bottom of the image and I think I can see... yeah, it's hardcore. Guess I'll change that one :D

Here's the quintessential test for warning page safety:

Would you feel comfortable showing that page to your kids? Or if you don't have any, your prudish best friend's kids?

LOL If I built sites that way my warning page would have only a warning, no sales text, and an enter link. The text can be, and usually is, more explicit than images. It's hard to sell squirting pussy porn without saying "squirting pussy" LOL The term squirting pussy, to a minor, is almost as bad as seeing an image of it. I guess link lists that say "no hardcore on the warning page" don't consider text to be hardcore |huh I know this is true 'cause I've seen it. No images at all, but text like "Our big cocks penetrate their asses..." and "Come watch those two gorgeous lesbians licking their pussy...". I don't think there are many webmasters that make sites that don't SAY something hardcore, so that test won't work for me and 98% of all other webmasters. Oh shit, I hope I didn't open a can of worms where link lists aren't going to allow hardcore text on warning pages ...
|couch| ...

Lol! Very true, but I meant visual communication.

You're right, the free-form expression of words can imply far more explicit acts than images, but it is still an implied message. You, as an adult with an active sex life and past sexual experiences, still have to take those symbols (words) and interpret them.

In the time it takes to figure out what those symbols mean a person should be able to figure out if the site's content is right for them. An image communicates on a different level.

Furthermore, it may be difficult to explain to an innocent why a page has big bold letters that say "GAPING WET VAGINAS!!!" but I can't think of any LL owners who've said this isn't appropriate on a warning page. ;)

Well done Virgo! Words are extremely powerfull and the images those words can create are boundless. It's the imagination of those words that create the image which is different in every persons mind.

Cheers

I don't know about the kiddie rule, because then I wouldn't put even an exposed breast there. I try to avoid complete frontal nudity of both men and women, just to be on the safe side. I guess that would rule out a squirting pussy ;)

I have to say I'm extremely confused by LLs that demand that any site that they link to has softcore banners on the Warning Page. Frankly, it doesn't make any logical sense at all and none of the real big LLs that I can think of demand it.

If I'm sending traffic from my Links pages, the chances are they've already seen hardcore content or been through my Warning Page - it's not going to be a surprise to them they're going to a sex site. Linking to a site with hardcore on a Warning Page certainly isn't going to get me in (any more) trouble.

As far as I'm concerned, it's your site, your risks. If you want to put hardcore on your Warning Page, that's your decision.