Is This Okay? Innocent GF Clips4sale Studio

[ElSoup]

I recently came across this studio and didn't know what to make of some of it's content. One clip in particular I found to be rather non consensual. The producer themselves says that the woman in the video is not aware of what a fetish is. Thoughts?


Here's a direct quoted description.
"Don't buy this video if you're expecting to see an aspiring actress or model. This girl is not a pornostar, this girl is not a model, she is the girl next door, she is a very sweet Latina girl.She is not a fetish model. She doesn't even know what a fetish is! She is a very innocent, virginal and religious girl. And she is HORRIBLE ticklish.Though she doesn't understand why, Marta thinks she is a part of a scientific study to see the body's reaction to tickling. She didn't even think to ask why we requested her permission to publish the videos. From being tickled hard by an uncle when she was very young, Marta is really terrified of being tickled. This uncle tickled her very hard, many years ago. Probably because this lovely Latin girl is very very ticklish! Marta is so innocent; she has no idea what a tickle video is… but she will learn!"

https://www.clips4sale.com/studio/1...cklish-marta-tickled-crazy-part-1-full-hd-mp4

 

[Cosmo_ac]

I think we've had these discussions before. Generally speaking, the idea of somebody who doesn't know what they are getting into is highly suspect, because of the possible lawsuits, the fact that word would get around to other models, etc.

Generally speaking, they are selling a fantasy with clips like this.

 

[ticklishmikey]

I think we've had these discussions before. Generally speaking, the idea of somebody who doesn't know what they are getting into is highly suspect, because of the possible lawsuits, the fact that word would get around to other models, etc.

Generally speaking, they are selling a fantasy with clips like this.

Agreed. It is very possible the women are not models and just some every day women looking to make some extra money, and also very possible they never heard of tickle fetishes beforehand. But if word got around that they were actually tricking women... it would not go over very well.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[gnomes101982]

I don't believe anything is non-con after the most famous non-consensual video (Tickling Paradise) was debunked when someone on here was able to provide footage of the same woman doing an earlier audition video for tickling shoots. After that, I'm convinced non-con is non-existent.

 

[nosforatiop]

Looking at the pic collage she doesn’t seem all that upset or panicked.
As others have mentioned your facing a lawsuit and assault charges if you non-consensually
tied them up and tickled them.

 

[Machiavelli]

Why would someone choose to sell a video of their crimes on clips4sale rather than selling it privately?

 

[VegLife]

So that dudes first few videos are high suspect, he basically checks all the lists of red flags. Now hes putting out what looks to be just fantasy content.

Its more than just a video description too he was in the forum talking about how he sways a bunch of poor women and tricks/bribes them into signing off on the video after they see what it is. He also says he cant say what he did publicly but will tell you how he did it if you DM him.

Sooooooo thats just ridiculously irresponsible to go around saying whether its true or not so take that information how youd like

 

[turtleboy]

It's probably just bullshit hype - understand that a lot of what you read is just marketing. A lot of models aren't actually 'models', and that doesn't matter at all. The chances of her believing she is taking part in a scientific study however, are very slim. That said, it goes against the guidelines as you can't imply non-con anything at all now, even if you state that it is just fantasy. You can't do a clip where a model pretends to sleep or is knocked out as they have banned anything to do with the vaguest non-consensual and voyeuristic content - even if it is not sexual and clearly a role-play. TBH, there's very little that is acceptable within the current C4S guidelines. I actually have no idea how they got the keywords 'virgin' and 'teen' in there since neither of those are allowed anymore.

 

[Phineas]

Why would someone choose to sell a video of their crimes on clips4sale rather than selling it privately?

I dunno. probably for the same reason smoothbrains uploaded rape videos to PornHub.

To the OP, if you're concerned about the studio's content, report it to Clips4Sale. While I'm inclined to agree with the others that it's probably just hype, you never know for sure because there are some sneaky sick fucks in this community.

 

[lostphilosopher]

I don't believe anything is non-con after the most famous non-consensual video (Tickling Paradise) was debunked when someone on here was able to provide footage of the same woman doing an earlier audition video for tickling shoots. After that, I'm convinced non-con is non-existent.

While I generally agree with your opinion I'm about to make a potentially controversial statement, which I would also like to emphasize is just my opinion.

I believe some of Kujmans content was legit noncon. What little of his stuff I've seen disturbs me.

Again, just my opinion. Not trying to start a comment war.

 

[gnomes101982]

While I generally agree with your opinion I'm about to make a potentially controversial statement, which I would also like to emphasize is just my opinion.

I believe some of Kujmans content was legit noncon. What little of his stuff I've seen disturbs me.

Again, just my opinion. Not trying to start a comment war.

I haven't actually seen this guy's stuff and if it's disturbing I don't really want to

 

[gnomes101982]

I dunno. probably for the same reason smoothbrains uploaded rape videos to PornHub.

To the OP, if you're concerned about the studio's content, report it to Clips4Sale. While I'm inclined to agree with the others that it's probably just hype, you never know for sure because there are some sneaky sick fucks in this community.

Exactly. I've reported sketchy underage stuff on pornhub a few times. There are some really creepy people that do these things and think they can slip through the cracks.

 

[brotherted]

I do think it's pertinent to separate an actual non-consensual act, which can be assault in this context, from a consensual act that's later marketed in a different way than the model expected. We're not condoning either of these to distinguish them as separate. That seems a tough concept for some.

Imagine a woman agrees and signs consent to appear topless in a video about breast cancer screening... then some years later, someone (maybe, say, a teenager in a basement?) somehow uploads that video to a porn site. Does the model have a right to pursue civil action against the porn site or teenager? Absolutely. But it's not a criminal matter. It's a tort matter.

The clip mentioned in the OP could simply be marketed in a way to present fantasy rather than reality, of course, but I want to entertain the premise. If someone truly consents to be tied and tickled in a video, then later that video is marketed differently than the model expected, it doesn't mean the law then goes backward in time and redefines the original recording of the video as criminal. If something is a crime, it's a crime when it's committed, not redefined as a crime afterward because of later decisions.

Put more succinctly, unexpected marketing of a video may be wrong and civilly actionable, but it's not assault.

 

[gnomes101982]

I do think it's pertinent to separate an actual non-consensual act, which can be assault in this context, from a consensual act that's later marketed in a different way than the model expected. We're not condoning either of these to distinguish them as separate. That seems a tough concept for some.

Imagine a woman agrees and signs consent to appear topless in a video about breast cancer screening... then some years later, someone (maybe, say, a teenager in a basement?) somehow uploads that video to a porn site. Does the model have a right to pursue civil action against the porn site or teenager? Absolutely. But it's not a criminal matter. It's a tort matter.

The clip mentioned in the OP could simply be marketed in a way to present fantasy rather than reality, of course, but I want to entertain the premise. If someone truly consents to be tied and tickled in a video, then later that video is marketed differently than the model expected, it doesn't mean the law then goes backward in time and redefines the original recording of the video as criminal. If something is a crime, it's a crime when it's committed, not redefined as a crime afterward because of later decisions.

Put more succinctly, unexpected marketing of a video may be wrong and civilly actionable, but it's not assault.

Are you not familiar with the "me too" movement???? Pretty much if a woman looks back on something and decides that in retrospect she didn't like the touching, even if she seemed to have no issue with at the time, it can lead to assault charges.

 

[Hiphophooray]

Are you not familiar with the "me too" movement???? Pretty much if a woman looks back on something and decides that in retrospect she didn't like the touching, even if she seemed to have no issue with at the time, it can lead to assault charges.

You are correct sir

 

[brotherted]

Are you not familiar with the "me too" movement???? Pretty much if a woman looks back on something and decides that in retrospect she didn't like the touching, even if she seemed to have no issue with at the time, it can lead to assault charges.

Just seeing this now.
Yes, I'm familiar with the #MeToo movement. There are no #MeToo examples where someone consented to an act being videotaped for distribution in one way, but then later got the act criminally prosecuted because the video was marketed differently, or even generally that she didn't like it in retrospect. Or... if you have one, please post the link.

I'm also struck by how people apply U.S. legal standards to the world, especially poor, third world countries. The original post cites a clip that says the girl was from a "South American country." Another model on the same site is said to be from Venezuelan and poor. If that's all true, i.e. producers with a cell phone camera are using as "models" South Americans living in poverty in these places, I hardly see how a feminist #MeToo legal action of any kind would be very high on their awareness radar.

I'm just keeping it 100 here.

 

[Dwarf26]

I don't believe anything is non-con after the most famous non-consensual video (Tickling Paradise) was debunked when someone on here was able to provide footage of the same woman doing an earlier audition video for tickling shoots. After that, I'm convinced non-con is non-existent.

Do you know what studio she auditioned for/how to check it out?

 

[Soles_Scream]

On Clips4Sale they require a signed model release and copy of the ID. On the release it states that the material will be used for adult content.

The producer appears to be selling the non con fantasy, which is alright.

Non con does not appeal to me, but there are some who it does appeal to. As long as it remains fantasy, I have judgements on it.

 

[Comfort Eagle]

Are you not familiar with the "me too" movement???? Pretty much if a woman looks back on something and decides that in retrospect she didn't like the touching, even if she seemed to have no issue with at the time, it can lead to assault charges.