Young Jump, the older brother magazine of Shueisha’s Jump line of magazines, recently got its YouTube channel banned for featuring underage girls in bikinis.
Unlike the regular Weekly Shonen Jump, Young Jump Comics is known to feature series containing heavy violence and a fair bit of sexual content. The magazine often features gravure, which is essentially glamor models who pose in provocative swimsuits or lingerie marketed towards young men.
While gravure models show more skin, they don’t pose nude, and Young Jump reported getting its YouTube channel suspended for a week despite not showing any nudity or breaking any rules:
“In accordance with YouTube’s guidelines, Young Jump TV has been suspended for one week, so we have decided to release it on Young Jump Manga TV. We apologize for the inconvenience and thank you for your understanding.”
Young Jump Gravure followed with an update saying that due to YouTube’s guidelines policy, the channel had been essentially banned and that the release of its latest video had been suspended but would be released through its Young Jump BLUE Membership program.
Gravure in Japan has always featured models under the age of 18, but due to policies pushed by companies such as YouTube and the current political climate, it could become yet another part of Japanese culture to vanish soon.
“underage girls in bikinis”
Underage for what? Pretty sure that girls of any age can wear bikinis in public.
Youtube’s gotta obey their islamic masters after all.
Islamists with names ending in -berg and -stein?
oh and dont worry, the anti-woke crowd know of all the best spots to go look at underage girls in bikinis, you know, to combat wokeness or something
Bizarre comment considering every single recent scandal involving some ped getting exposed always turns out to be some LGBTBBQ virtue signaling woketard? Are we also forgetting that the same woketards are grooming children in schools? It’s like you think we’re still in the 2010s and gaslighting people will somehow work when creeps like you openly advertise your p♥♥o intentions on the streets and all over social media because your caste of freaks is somehow simultaneously a protected group with more privilege than most but also severely oppressed.
weird because every time I watch predator hunter channels they’re busting fat old conservative men.
They are simply insane, on a DNA level. They are indeed child trafficking kings, child abuse kings, and just all around narcissistic psychopaths.
Here is what I think when I see the gravure shot of the article:
“They’re cute.”
But since they are unironic, aka sincere child diddlers, they must think that I (or anyone) sees real youths like total sex objects too.
There is actually an area that is simply ‘pretty’ without being immediately sexual.
Not that that would be anything bad in this case since they’re all clearly post pubescent, with tits and everything, but they are truly hypersexualized and get off the best on the ruination of innocence and defenselessness, they want to taint as much innocence and goodness, and beauty as possible.
And they want to paint anyone who goes “yeah these girls sure are cute/pretty in those swimsuits.” on the same level as them.
Just like they want to liken anyone who wants to remove THEM from communication platforms as “just as bad”.
No. Removing “wokies” (aka chiefly ashkenazi jews) stops a further decline in censorship and bannings.
If THEY sit at the levers, they ban anyone and everything.
This is not the same.
A ghoul coming in through your window to eat your family does not make you equivalent to that ghoul when you banish it. You warded off a predatory, unholy beast.
That’s not the same thing as sliding into something cohesive (like a family) and start eating everyone in it alive.
But that’s what they always try to do.
They censored/banned this because even prepubescent children are sexual objects to them.
So they think they can ban this kind of thing on the premise that everyone else is as degenerate as them.
But they’re not all as degenerate as them. Even if you flat out rubbed one out to these gravure girls, they’re still post pubescent, they have in their bodies actual sexual attributes. But I doubt anyone goes as hard on these as they go on post pubescent children who don’t even have ANYTHING except some cuteness/prettiness but nothing more.
Even lolicons aren’t as bad, I’ve been on the internet for like 30 years or so now and even fully Comic LO tier s♥♥t is still more unrealistic (i.e. giving children looking characters more suggestive bodies) than actual children.
Which these monsters despoil on the regular.
@earthdragoon:
I didn’t say they were wholesome, I just don’t get a sweaty child trafficking boner from them, like so many faggots seem to want to make “the right” and “bigots” look.
When in reality they get a stiffy from even seeing a six year old in a onepiece at the beach to the extent where they wish they had an unmarked van at the ready at all times, and then eventually, they do.
To me, these girls are just cute. But maybe you missed (on purpose) the parts of my comments where I touched on the fact that they’re all post pubescent, with tits and everything, and thus have sexual assets on them.
I just don’t get turned on by it, again, contrary to what the ‘anti bigots’ (I am a staunch and open antisemite against ashkenazim jews after all, which they find bigoted, when in reality it’s just basic goodness) with 10TB of snuff and BDSM CP on their harddrives want people to think about people like me.
going hard on post pubescent = pre pubescent, of course.
Got some gin and tonic in me…what were the brits thinking in creating this kind of vile concoction, and what was I thinking trying it?
“My heckin’ sluts wearing next to nothing are so cute and wholesome and totally not sexual.”
Really, shigger?
f♥♥k off, kike
Work from your house for two to six hrs every day, and start getting averaging 1000-3000 bucks at the end of every week. Read more information here…..____ℂ𝕆𝕀ℕ𝕊𝟚𝟝.ℂℴℳ
Uoh, underage bikini girls. What you can see at any beach or pool, but Google feels like they must “protect” us from it.
This is getting ridiculous. Are we going to go Reverse Muslim: Putting minors in Burkas until they’re 18?
what do you think christian nationalism is? its sharia law but white
Of course they’d ban this, after all, children even younger than that are 100% sexually attractive to them, in real life, no less.
They’d be fine with transkids jiggling in G-strings though.
Yeah, mainly because that’s disgusting in any conceivable capacity.
Which they know. They know what’s sexy, that’s why they don’t put any of that in videogames and co anymore.
So nothing illegal was done, but YouTube decided to do their usual thing and remove anything they don’t like. I’m pretty sure there are tons of videos of beaches with kids in swimsuits. Hell I can’t think of a couple of music videos like Stacy’s Mom which violate the rule they just made up.
capitalism is a dictatorship after all
“its a business not a democracy”
f♥♥k off to Venezuela.