Crying About Meat Rack Babies

We recently posted this ad on our facebook page and received some positive feedback and a few scathing comments from some weak-kneed people.

Here’s the ad:

Here are screen shots of the facebook comments:

Leave us a comment and tell us what you think!

Grab the Pre-Release scene now from RETURN TO MEATRACK.


A late-breaking update from Facebook!

  1. Sort of puzzled here. Everyone is yelling about censorship, laws relating to images of children, art and Magritte. Others are telling us how much they want to fuck the little boys in the image.

    Sorry, guys, I thought this website was for men interested in … well, men. Yes, full-grown, adult men with all the signs of fully-developed male sexual maturity.

    I am absolutely not interested in images of little boys of any description. Yes, maybe as works of art – but I do not come to TIM to look for works of art depicting childhood scenes. I come to TIM in search of images of men.

    And so, little boys are a turn off for many reasons. And I absolutely do not want to read messages from unknown persons (although \"Truffaut\" is far from inconnu, I admit) telling everyone how much they want to \"fuck\" those children. I can only imagine they deliberately want to shock and disgust me and others. And they are succeeding.

    We live in a world in which straight men are bombarded with porn which bludgeons them to be interested in very young females – rather than mature women. Maturity in women is seen as a turn-off: growing older is the wrong way to go. Why should we reproduce this in the gay world? As a man who loves men, I want porn and erotica which confirm and express what I like – men. Adult men. Fully-developed mature men. Male maturity, fortunately, is already valued in our world – and I hope that\’s the case here on TIM too. Giving us images of little boys in any form on this site isn\’t sexy, it isn\’t pushing the borders, it isn\’t adventurous or subversive. OK, nor is it necessarily an invitation to engage in child abuse or to endorse paedophilia (although some people on this website do seem to interpret it that way). As for artistic renderings of childhood idylls and the works of René Magritte, I can look for those elsewhere.

  2. Oh, give me a break. I really don’t see the TIM guys lambasting anyone in this post. I think weak-kneed is a pretty fair characterization.

  3. Oh, give me a break. I really don’t see the TIM guys lambasting anyone in this post. I think “weak-kneed” is a pretty fair characterization.

  4. Really bad idea to make a post on your official blog lambasting fans who disagree with you. I hope you realize that you exsist because of them, and if you post an image that CLEARLY divides your fans down the middle, perhaps you should realize that it might not be the best course of action.

    I’m not an expert in PR, but when large companies do something that enrages half their clientele, they apologize or just remove the ad, because it’s not worth it loosing 30% of your fanbase if the ad only gains a nominal amount.

    Also, jesus christ. Did you SERIOUSLY post .jpg’s of people’s names who dissent against you? True they are posting on a public forum, so their names are common knowledge, but that is in really bad taste. You’re acting like the PR rep for a 5 year old child who had their first taste of a different opinion. Calm down and be the better person.

  5. ….Really. It reminds you of Magritte’s “This is Not a Pipe”. First off, the painting is called “The Treachery of Images”. Second, the painting is about the representation of a pipe, it is commentary on the perception of images as reality. So you could say, oh, well these aren’t little boys. They are just painted images of little boys.

    However. Check the laws in most countries, images and depictions of children are not allowed to be used in pornographic advertisement. 3D models of little children aren’t children, but computer generated images… but legally we aren’t allowed to put them in a sexual context.

  6. Dink Flamingo??? Are you fucking seriously telling me there is a guy who calls himself Dink Flamingo?

  7. I think those people kind of miss the point. But I guess not everyone has an eye for art like I do 😛

  8. I think those people kind of miss the point. But I guess not everyone has an eye for art like I do ;P

  9. Love it. I want to fuck the kids. WHEN DO I GET TO FUCK THE KIDS!!!! Is that baby Dawson?

  10. Well, like a lot of the folks that have commented, this has gone a little far. I understand trying to be provocative to generate publicity but is business really that bad.

    Between this and Dink Flamingo at Active Duty promoting white supremacy…you guys are taking all of the porn out of porn? Did you and Dink Flamingo have some type of meeting on how generate sales through bad marketing?

  11. Reminds me of René François Ghislain Magritte’s “This is Not a Pipe.” It’s just a fucking image guys – and a nice one. As in, “no children were harmed in the creation of this ad.”

Comments are closed.

Previous Article

TIM Marked Man - Trevor

Next Article

02-02-12 TIMSuck Exclusive Scene: Brad McGuire & Seth

Related Posts