YouTube considers showing feet as adult material

Natedogg_M · Post by **Natedogg_M** » Thu Mar 02, 2017 4:32 am

Recently a channel on YouTube was censored as having adult content. The site is a pantyhose channel that has models wear a pair of hose/stockings and then they give their opinion of what they wore. There is nothing sexual about the reviews and it left the creator of the channel upset that his channel was being flagged as adult content. He shut down his channel for about a week due to frustration but recently posted his 1st video since his channel was flagged. I have read the comments of people that were angry about what had happened and what could be a cause. On his most recent post the woman reviewing did not do a closeup of her stocking feet. A few of the people commenting believe that the models showing their toes was the cause of the change to adult content.

I wanted to open this to the group, do you think that merely showing your toes in a presentation of something nonsexual warrants an adult flag? Also, why are toes looked at as adult material and a model in a g-string is not? I just don't understand the standards of "adult content"??

Feeture Feature · Post by **Feeture Feature** » Thu Mar 02, 2017 3:34 pm

If models reviewing pantyhose are adult content, then so are the shopping channel hosts and models for bedding, massagers, foot care products and anything where they might remove shoes. Totally silly. Might as well have the Saudi or Iranian morality police haul off women who dip or dangle in public (I don't think even they consider feet adult content unless used sexually).

llama · Post by **llama** » Thu Mar 02, 2017 7:09 pm

it is my opinion that YT does not individually look at each flag on a case by case basis. If something is flagged erroneously, there is no review or appeal. There are probably thousands of flags on any given day for all types of videos for YT to review them. Therefore a flag "sticks"

As for who is flagging the foot videos, I have no evidence but it is my guess it is people who know feet *can be* sexualized or possible competitors of others footchannels that try to eliminate the competiton for views that are commercialized for profit.

I dont think feet and toes should be flagged but I don't think there is anything we can do to stop it.

Natedogg_M · Post by **Natedogg_M** » Thu Mar 02, 2017 8:09 pm

I agree with you both. Sadly it doesn't seem like there is anything that can be done to stop this.

Tomi · Post by **Tomi** » Thu Mar 02, 2017 9:59 pm

To categorize feet/toes as an adult material is childish and ridiculous.

Feeture Feature · Post by **Feeture Feature** » Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:37 am

I don't really pay much attention to YouTube practice as I never uploaded anything. Does it make a difference if the uploader indicates video should be age-restricted? Still a silly requirement in regards to feet but could it stop channels from being flagged?

Natedogg_M · Post by **Natedogg_M** » Fri Mar 03, 2017 6:53 am

Feeture Feature wrote:I don't really pay much attention to YouTube practice as I never uploaded anything. Does it make a difference if the uploader indicates video should be age-restricted? Still a silly requirement in regards to feet but could it stop channels from being flagged?

The videos that were flagged required a $.99 payment to watch them. Its not much money but more the principle of paying for something that doesn't deserve payment.

Post by **nyllover** » Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:54 am

That changes the whole story. Asking money to watch a video on YouTube gives them a higher attention from YouTube team. They must have thought "why would anyone pay to see a review of a product, unless they get pleasure watching the video?"

Let's don't pretend we are blind...those reviews were done targetting NOT women that would wear nylons...but male watching the models

Footsiefreak · Post by **Footsiefreak** » Fri Mar 03, 2017 7:22 pm

[youtube][/youtube]

Something like this I would LABEL adult content but just harmless shoeplay is RIDICULOUS

Natedogg_M · Post by **Natedogg_M** » Fri Mar 03, 2017 9:34 pm

Footsiefreak wrote:[youtube][/youtube]

Something like this I would LABEL adult content but just harmless shoeplay is RIDICULOUS

I love this example! How is this not flagged when the intent is purely sexual, but modeling stockings so women can know if a product is worth buying is flagged? (I know that many men watch the videos but the women are clearly giving their honest opinions to women that would buy the product) This is just CRAZY!! BTW, he has started posting reviews again and the models will go shoeless they are just not doing toe closeups or attracting attention to their toes. I did see on one of the new reviews it was age restricted (I have my age in my profile) but at least it wasn't asking for us to pay.

Post by **nyllover** » Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:25 pm

Guys, that video is live since just a few weeks. Obviously YouTube can't check every single video, but they go after either flags (people flagging videos) or...money. Meaning if a video or a channel starts to be "big", they will keep an eye on it.

llama · Post by **llama** » Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:31 pm

nyllover wrote:Guys, that video is live since just a few weeks. Obviously YouTube can't check every single video, but they go after either flags (people flagging videos) or...money. Meaning if a video or a channel starts to be "big", they will keep an eye on it.

exactly Nyllover

I also find it ironic that everyone is arguing that feet aren't sexual when we obviously find them so. If YT doesnt want videos on their website that people are masturbating to, its their right to delete them. I have been dowbnloading videos as soon as they appear for years knowing that some tend to disappear quickly. Most I will probably never watch again but at least I have them

pumplover · Post by **pumplover** » Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:17 am

llama wrote:
nyllover wrote:Guys, that video is live since just a few weeks. Obviously YouTube can't check every single video, but they go after either flags (people flagging videos) or...money. Meaning if a video or a channel starts to be "big", they will keep an eye on it.

exactly Nyllover

I also find it ironic that everyone is arguing that feet aren't sexual when we obviously find them so. If YT doesnt want videos on their website that people are masturbating to, its their right to delete them. I have been dowbnloading videos as soon as they appear for years knowing that some tend to disappear quickly. Most I will probably never watch again but at least I have them

Same here. I've been archiving as much as I can.....which reminds me..I need to go and re-download the Accounts Girl series before I forget.

Natedogg_M · Post by **Natedogg_M** » Tue Mar 14, 2017 5:16 am

I just noticed that the actual porn/spam video that Footsiefreak posted has been removed from Youtube. The Youtube police are out!!

I agree with Llama and pumplover. I have been archiving all the videos I can, I was mostly just referring to the videos that Youtube was charging to watch. Those I am unable to archive without paying for them up front

Footsiefreak · Post by **Footsiefreak** » Wed Mar 15, 2017 3:29 pm

Natedogg_M wrote:I just noticed that the actual porn/spam video that Footsiefreak posted has been removed from Youtube. The Youtube police are out!!

I agree with Llama and pumplover. I have been archiving all the videos I can, I was mostly just referring to the videos that Youtube was charging to watch. Those I am unable to archive without paying for them up front

Well of course it was deleted anything I like gets deleted. Obviously there are moles in this site sad to say now I gotta be cautious what I post here from YouTubE