pregphil is right not really good for the forum but bright side more bellies look at

There is a forum loaded with birthvids and pics, so if you want to join us: hXXp://hidden-desires.fullboards.com (replaced the http for a reason, to keep bots and backtracking out, as is usual on that forum whern you link stuff)

(October 31, 2013, 7:48 am)Hyperia There is a forum loaded with birthvids and pics, so if you want to join us: hXXp://hidden-desires.fullboards.com (replaced the http for a reason, to keep bots and backtracking out, as is usual on that forum whern you link stuff)

I second this recommendation. Birth content isn't something I'm fond of personally, and as stated by pregphil I'm not comfortable hosting it, but "hidden-desires" exists to fill that void. Check it out.

Watching the woman react to labor is what birth fetishists are more focused on, thus an extension of the pregnancy fetish. Like those who enjoy lactation from the enlarged breasts and stretchmarks, to view a woman in labor/ give birth is going to arouse somebody. The birth fetishists might like when the woman moans, flexed her legs (or open) and can remind the viewer somewhat of an orgasm. I'm not into women giving birth at all, more into their pregnant bellies and bodily figure...and I viewed a few birth videos on youtube, that to me is a beautiful moment to watch if you're able to handle that.

Two words:

Anticipation

Transformation

Here's a question. I remember back at Expansion Mansion, similar rules were in place -- every effort was made to ensure that absolutely no children were in any of the generally-distributed content. It was pretty easy to handle that for pictures, with the occasional mishap here or there which was quickly corrected... it made some videos impossible to share, of course.

I do live in the USA and I'm aware of both the legal paranoia we deal with daily and the revelations about just how much the NSA really knows about us. What I'm not clear on is the actual law surrounding all this stuff. So, for example, is it illegal for there to be children mixed in with the sort of content we share around here, even though their presence is clearly a side-note we couldn't care less about? Or is it not necessarily illegal, but more of... if something went down and this community came under scrutiny, even though we're not into that shit, we'd be lumped in with the sick fucks who are (hence the extreme caution)?

I'm not trying to stir anything up. I'm genuinely curious because I've always assumed the rules were in place mostly because of the latter explanation, that we'd all be guilty at the Salem Witch Trials. I could scream at the top of my lungs that I just love the pregnant female form (and some things revolving around it, of course), but I'd still be condemned because, after all, "there were pictures of kids on that site too! Maybe he was after that all along!" ...which is obviously absurd, but I wouldn't put it past a prosecutor.

Is there anyone here with true insight into these matters? Opinions are fine, we all have them... I obviously do... but I'm looking for facts.

(November 12, 2013, 3:52 am)Akhenaten Here's a question. I remember back at Expansion Mansion, similar rules were in place -- every effort was made to ensure that absolutely no children were in any of the generally-distributed content. It was pretty easy to handle that for pictures, with the occasional mishap here or there which was quickly corrected... it made some videos impossible to share, of course.

I do live in the USA and I'm aware of both the legal paranoia we deal with daily and the revelations about just how much the NSA really knows about us. What I'm not clear on is the actual law surrounding all this stuff. So, for example, is it illegal for there to be children mixed in with the sort of content we share around here, even though their presence is clearly a side-note we couldn't care less about? Or is it not necessarily illegal, but more of... if something went down and this community came under scrutiny, even though we're not into that shit, we'd be lumped in with the sick fucks who are (hence the extreme caution)?

I'm not trying to stir anything up. I'm genuinely curious because I've always assumed the rules were in place mostly because of the latter explanation, that we'd all be guilty at the Salem Witch Trials. I could scream at the top of my lungs that I just love the pregnant female form (and some things revolving around it, of course), but I'd still be condemned because, after all, "there were pictures of kids on that site too! Maybe he was after that all along!" ...which is obviously absurd, but I wouldn't put it past a prosecutor.

Is there anyone here with true insight into these matters? Opinions are fine, we all have them... I obviously do... but I'm looking for facts.

Good questions. For my own protection and that of Preggophilia's visitors I spent a great deal of time reviewing criminal statute dealing with some of the more controversial aspects of this website (pregnant teens). I also consulted a lawyer on this question shortly after the site launched. Absolutely nothing we host meets any of the definitions of "child pornography" across the western world. This is true of the US, Canada, the UK, Australia, NZ, all EU jurisdictions and basically every jurisdiction of which I'm aware. Almost all of the content published on this website, particularly photographs, was released publicly by the individuals featured in the content itself (self-shots) and cannot be construed as sexually explicit or obscene. If we're in the wrong, which we're not, so is Instagram. I trust that Instagram has a good legal team. In the case of the US: for something to qualify as CP, photographs must be sexually explicit (feature nudity or intercourse) or focus unduly on genital regions (which pregnant bellies are not).

As to your second question, publishing pictures of clothed minors side-by-side with explicit content doesn't render the former illegal. So in other words, it's perfectly legal to publish clothed non-obscene self-shots of teenagers on the same page as hardcore pornography. This is something I choose not to allow as a precaution (teenage content is insulated), but doing so doesn't appear to violate any laws or cause what is otherwise legal content to become illegal.

My decision to not allow "birth fetish" content is based on three main reasons:

a) I dislike it. This website is for my own pleasure as well as its visitors and to be honest I'm repulsed by the sight of live births. It isn't something I wish to deal with or see when administering the forum.

b) I'm not sure of how much overlap there is between being attracted to pregnant females and being attracted to births. I'm sure there's some overlap, but I suspect it isn't very substantial. Almost everyone who is attracted to births is probably attracted to pregnant women, but I imagine only a small fraction of people who find pregnant women arousing are attracted to births. The aim of this site is to cater to people who are attracted to the pregnant form. Allowing the forum to be inundated by birth content would potentially alienate users who do not appreciate that stuff and I believe those people constitute the majority.

c) Your final point is an interesting one. I do think it's broadly within our interest to not feature birth content. This site isn't at risk of being shutdown because it conforms to the laws of the jurisdiction in which it's hosted (the US), but as an added precaution I can't tolerate content showing infants. This would attract unwanted attention and group us into a segment with whom we have nothing in common.

Awesome -- thank you. All that is actually a huge relief to me. I have always worried, perhaps unrealistically, that we're all just a phone call away from some crackdown circus wherein all our IP addresses are turned over to some faceless government agency that'll blanket-charge us for our mere association. I know, I know, it's probably ridiculous, but like I said... paranoia. Our (USA) legal system creates paranoia (at least in me) because I find it simply ruins lives more often than it provides true justice these days.

As for the birth content stuff, sorry, I should have clarified... I'm not questioning that. I probably should have made a new thread entirely to ask my question. I'm not upset by the lack of birth content and you really don't have to say anything beyond "well it's my site and I don't like it." Good enough for me.

GO TO
videoofbirth.com

FULL OF BIRTH VIDEOS !! <3

I have witnessed a birth. While I found the process magical, I would not say it turns me on.