Met-Art Safe or Stay Away ?

backoffbitch · 2005-07-07, 08:36 PM

I'll put my 2 cents in here.

I signed up to MET last month.

After going through the first 3 years of their archives I had seen enough preteens to make me cancel my membership.

When I asked them about it, they denied it all and said they couldn't find any and claimed they only go back two weeks in the archives (bull). Why does it say 1999 in the archives then?

I even told them specifically one set that I remember that had a 10-12 year old girl in it. It was very obvious,,, no hips, no tits, no hair, nothing. She is a child. That whole guest photographer set is all children from that particular series (attitude series). He then responded that it doesn't exists. I even offered to give him a url to it if he gave me a temp pass to get back in. Again, denial.

In total I'd say that 10 percent of the early years is all children.

While perfectly legal and non-explicit, it does NOT belong in a site being promoted by pornographers.

I suggest not touching them. Preteens and porn do NOT mix and opens yourself up to all kinds of trouble.

MeatPounder · 2005-07-07, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by backoffbitch

I'll put my 2 cents in here.

I signed up to MET last month.

After going through the first 3 years of their archives I had seen enough preteens to make me cancel my membership.

I know I saw the same thing looking through their site, thus my post about there definately being children on their site.
Admitted the images I saw were beautiful photographs, with out being overtly sexual...but still children under the age of 18 naked, and several with spread legs.
Again...quite possibly completely legal even in todays political climate, but not something I will continue to promote.

Just because a books cover is PG, does not make the content of the book safe.

Quite honestly even if they cleaned the whole site out and took all the definate pre-teens out I wouldn't feel safe promoting them without signed and dated proof every girl on their site was off legal age at the time of the shoot. Which being overseas they feel they do not need.

2005-07-07, 08:36 PM	#1
backoffbitch No matter how good you are at something, there's always about a million people better than you Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: New Brunswick Posts: 234	I'll put my 2 cents in here. I signed up to MET last month. After going through the first 3 years of their archives I had seen enough preteens to make me cancel my membership. When I asked them about it, they denied it all and said they couldn't find any and claimed they only go back two weeks in the archives (bull). Why does it say 1999 in the archives then? I even told them specifically one set that I remember that had a 10-12 year old girl in it. It was very obvious,,, no hips, no tits, no hair, nothing. She is a child. That whole guest photographer set is all children from that particular series (attitude series). He then responded that it doesn't exists. I even offered to give him a url to it if he gave me a temp pass to get back in. Again, denial. In total I'd say that 10 percent of the early years is all children. While perfectly legal and non-explicit, it does NOT belong in a site being promoted by pornographers. I suggest not touching them. Preteens and porn do NOT mix and opens yourself up to all kinds of trouble. __________________ I'm hot behaving badly.