Two YouTube Videos of Man In Panties False-Flagged as “potentially inappropriate content”

YouTube has severe problems with rampant false flagging of videos and they don’t have enough unprejudiced humans in their employ to review and unflag all the unjustly restricted videos. Innumerable videos are getting false flagged as “inappropriate” based on politics, theology and personal taste by prudes and bigots who have found false flagging to be an effective tool for suppressing expression which doesn’t conform to their own narrow-minded agendas.

Months ago two of my videos were false flagged and YouTube started to require viewers to log in in order to view the videos which were wrongfully put on restricted status.

Two of the auto-generated statements made by YouTube with respect to two of my videos are blatantly false.

Those two false statements are:

1) “This content may contain material flagged by YouTube’s user community that may be inappropriate for some users.”

2) “potentially inappropriate content,”

Contemporaneously, images of me male modeling ladies full brief panties, back view, stopped showing up on image searches.

The two videos are: “PICT_Male-Models-Vanity-Fair-Rose-Pink-Full-Brief-Panties-2.AVI“, which is a video of me doing a customer review of me wearing the same blouse and panties I was wearing in the image shown below (PICT0092.2-Male_Models-Vanity_Fair-rose-pink-full-brief-panties.JPG):

PICT0092.2-Male_Models-Vanity_Fair-rose-pink-full-brief-panties.JPG

and “PICT_Panty_Buns-Male_Models-Ladies-Pink-Nylon-Panties-7.AVI“, which is a video of me doing a customer review of me wearing the same blouse and panties I was wearing in the following photo (PICT0397_2-Panty_Buns-male_models-pink-nylon-panties.JPG:

PICT0397_2-Panty_Buns-male_models-pink-nylon-panties.JPG

Although YouTube’s lawyers may have been trying to cover themselves against libel claims by using the words “may” and “potentially”, the statements are still false and indisputably constitute sex discrimination.

Google’s YouTube may CONSIDER THIS AN APPEAL and request to have an UNPREJUDICED human restore both videos to unrestricted status.

One need only to view the YouTube videos by Victoria’s Secret, the YouTube No Pants Subway Ride 2011 by Improv Everywhere, and the numerous other videos of women in their ladies panties on YouTube to see that placing the two videos of me male modeling pink nylon panties on “Restricted” status is a blatant act of sex discrimination.

The falsely flagged videos in question of me (a man in panties) are embedded below:

PICT_Male-Models-Vanity-Fair-Rose-Pink-Full-Brief-Panties-2.AVI


Transcript: “The ladies full brief nylon panties that I’m wearing right now are Vanity Fair’s Memoir Rose Style 13001 Lace Nouveau full brief nylon panties. I love these panties and the color especially, which I wish that they still made. Um, as you can see, the gusset has a straight across rear seam, unlike the classic vintage Vanity Fair Style 13001 briefs which were manufactured years ago. These are my favorite panties.”

PICT_Panty_Buns-Male_Models-Ladies-Pink-Nylon-Panties-7.AVI


Transcript: “I guess you can see why so many women call me Panty Buns. Um, I’m male modeling a pair of Vanity Fair full brief nylon panties. They’re Lace Nouveau Style 13001 in Memoir Rose. I love being seen male-modeling ladies panties as a world famous male panty model. So you can just share it with every adult woman you know, um, and let me know what you think. You can let me know what you think at http://www.full-brief-panties-male-modeled.blogspot.com

What is really peculiar is the difference between Google’s publicly stated goals of freedom of expression and in opposition to censorship and their current flagging system on YouTube and Google Image Search.

The United Nations has on it’s website “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, which the U.N. adopted on December 10, 1948. Google has pointed out that recent censorship attempts sought to violate Article 19 of that document and quotes it as saying: “Everyone has a right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

Despite having decried this kind of censorship, Google’s YouTube Community aids and abets censorship when it comes to the false flagging of YouTube videos. Google’s flagging system allows a minority of extremist prudes to effectively censor whatever they don’t like. Those who have their photos and videos false-flagged have no adequate recourse. Ergo, Google’s own policy enabling the false-flagging of videos as “potentially inappropriate” violates the very rights they claimed to support when they cited Article 19 of the United Nations “Declaration of Human Rights”.

As of this date YouTube continues to have an unmanageable problem with political operatives and bigots false-flagging every video they don’t like and not enough unprejudiced reviewers to correct all the false flagging. When free expression and due process are increasingly subordinated to systematic attacks by a group of ideologues and there is inadequate capacity (not enough unprejudiced human reviewers) for appeals and redress, then perhaps Google and YouTube should consider eliminating the entire system of flagging. It appears the system only works for those who like to false-flag.

the content on this site constitutes free speech and expression protected under the Ninth, Fourteenth, and First Amendments to the of the United States. This site is not commercial, is not a business, does not sell any service or product or anything at all, does not receive or solicit any compensation.

ALL PHOTOS AND VIDEOS OF ME MALE MODELING LADIES FULL BRIEF PANTIES ARE FREE AND ARE RELEASED INTO THE PUBLIC DOMAIN for any and all purposes with the sole exception that any attempts to restrict the rights of others to publish and share them shall be null and void.

Net neutrality demands that dominant internet presence may not be used to stifle or censor unpopular views, images and videos. These photos and videos are to remain forever in the public domain. For YouTube to require the public to acquire a YouTube channel and log into it in order to view any of my videos violates net neutrality and infringes on the rights of the public to peruse that which is in the public domain. Additionally to the false-flagged status is an example of market dominance being abused to restrict access to public domain material in furtherance of sex discrimination. Part of the purpose of the First Amendment is to protect unpopular expression and insure that it can be seen and heard. It would be nice to think that large corporate media owners might reconsider their opposition to having a free press.

Tags: #false flagging, #full briefs, #man in panties, #sex discrimination, #weird news, #funny, #viral video, #share this #violations of net neutrality

Please see the COMMENT POLICY before commenting.

Blog_Home (MAIN PAGE)

11 Responses to “Two YouTube Videos of Man In Panties False-Flagged as “potentially inappropriate content””

  1. Marge Says:

    Your videos should not be restricted but I don’t know why you are so determined to be a “world famous panty model”. Your “customer reviews” are good but you must be aware that most women are laughing when they watch them. I think it will be funny if you get famous for “male-modeling” panties. Why don’t you see if you can find a job actually modeling in public for some lingerie store instead of complaining?

  2. SadieT Says:

    Is mister sissy “Panty Buns” pouting? Are you frustrated because you’re having trouble showing off your pretty pink panties to every woman on the planet? Don’t be such a chicken. Run around in your panties out in public someplace to get yourself on the news and then go on the talk shows and Jerry Springer. Pay for some photo ads and get your “panty photos” put up on billboards. How about posting some more new pics and videos of you showing off your panties out in public? Your tardy. Maybe you should go get yourself spanked. I like that second video of you in your pink panties and babydoll. I hope you get it unflagged so everybody can see and share it. It’s pretty funny.

  3. Vanessa Says:

    When are you going to post some new pics and videos? Did you join the “No Pants Subway Ride” or participate in “No Pants Day” this year? No? Why not? Why no post about those events? I agree with Marge and Sadie. Stop being such a wimp. I agree your pink panty videos are tame but there’s nothing stopping you from making new ones. Get off your butt and show your panties. Take and post new photos. MAKE yourself famous instead of whining. Let’s see some new panty pics. Go find the TMZ crew and panty-moon them if you want fame so much.

  4. N. Lynn Says:

    You are sooooo SICK! Exhibitionistic sissy FAGGOT! Yes, you have the right to show your panties to the whole world and if they don’t like it they are bigots? You are an ASSHOLE! Enjoy your “free expression” and “model” those panties. LMAO. Gorgeous. Hahahahaha! Disgusting pervert. Gee, I wonder why no lingerie firms have hired you? Maybe they agree with me that a man wanting to “model” panties is bizarre.

  5. Sandra F. Says:

    @Marge: What’s with you giving the URL for “tips” at the National Enquire?
    @Sadie: That would be funny.
    @Vanessa: I think he’s too much of a chicken.
    @ N. Lynn: First of all, you are a bigot. Knock it off with the insults. Secondly, if you think it’s so disgusting, why do you keep looking?
    @ Panty Buns: Okay, so your PG videos got false flagged. Just upload some new ones. I think you look kind of cute in your pink panties. Maybe some people find it creepy because of your age. Men in panties are pretty common. You wanting to be famous in your panties is a little more unusual. I like your panty videos. They’re amusing. Take and post some new and different ones. You’re long overdue.

  6. Panty Buns Says:

    @ Sandra, Thank you. The reasons I hadn’t taken and posted much new is because I’ve been depressed, moping over a long lost love. I made a permanent proposal of marriage to her 41 years ago, haven’t seen her in 40 years, and got back in touch after the movie “Love Actually” jump-started all my memories. Now she hasn’t spoken to me for over 10 months. I don’t think she is too thrilled by my urge to get famous for male-modeling ladies full brief panties on the internet.

  7. Panty Buns Says:

    YouTube Help - FAIL!

    It seems that YouTube Help is a total sham. The few Google employees who do post responses to legitimate requests for help use the forums to deny any problems exist in the first place and to engage engage in Public Relations pablum. Account holders who have had videos FALSE-FLAGGED get directed to terms of use policies that have already been shown to be not germane to the videos, images and dialogue in question.

    Perhaps if enough people complained to YouTube utilizing the phone, fax and snail mail listed at “YouTube - Contact Us” it might make a dent, but I doubt it.

    The contact address and phone numbers are:

    YouTube, LLC
    901 Cherry Ave.,
    San Bruno, CA, 94066
    USA

    Phone: 1-650-253-0000
    Fax: 1-650-253-0001

    I suspect contacting them directly will only yield the same kind of lame responses found for most subjects that fall under the query title “False-Flagging” in YouTube Help, in other words, no help at all.

    There is no doubt in my mind that Google has, for the sake of political expedience, decided to jettison its previously claimed policies of non-discrimination and free expression. Apparently sex discrimination and censorship are more aligned with its goals for business expansion.

    If only they would prove me mistaken.

  8. Mister Panty Says:

    I suggest people read the University of Pennsylvania Law Review ARTICLES: CENSORSHIP BY PROXY: THE FIRST AMENDMENT, INTERNET INTERMEDIARIES, AND THE PROBLEM OF THE WEAKEST LINK by Seth F. Kreimer.

    “The Dangers of Proxy Censorship” described starting at page 27 of these articles point to the flaws that result in things like Google’s exclusion of the images of male-modeled ladies full brief panties from it’s “Moderate Filter” image searches. They are a good example of the kind of erroneous collateral exclusion of protected free expression from it’s results based on this sort of policy implementation combined with “false-flagging” by zealots. More of the PG images wrongfully excluded from image search using the default “Moderate Filter” can be seen on the blog titled “Full Brief Panties“.

  9. Panty Buns Says:

    How sad that a great search engine like Google has let it’s “Moderate Filter” become a tool which is abused by bigots to effect the exclusion of the benign images on this site from Google’s image search results. The exclusion from Google’s “Moderate Filter” image search results of virtually all images on this site is unconscionable. Google’s once lofty goals of inclusion, diversity, and non-discrimination have apparently been flushed down the memory hole and replaced by one of the most aggressive censorship programs on earth.

    Rest assured that if Google ceases and desists from enabling aggressive over-censorship of images under the disingenuous heading “moderate Filter” they will receive credit and kudos for correcting the current injustices they are currently allowing to be perpetrated and a Post of thanks for image reinstatements.

    Please, Google, end the sexually discriminatory false-flagging based abuse of your “Moderate Filter” system that has resulted in some of the worlds most censored image search results.

    Please replace those employees on your staff who so aggressively promote bigotry and censorship using said method.

  10. Lucy Says:

    I’ve noticed this on youtube and you’re right. They seem to be very biased when it comes to deciding what’s appropriate or not and then they hide behind the good intentions of trying to protect children or something like that.

    I think that excuse is used too often anyway. You can’t protect people from humanity itself anyway, nor should you in my opinion. And since these photos contain no nudity, there’s no case to be made for that anyway.

    It’s quite concerning what’s going on with the dominant internet players these days. I write about crossdressers and lately in particular about sissification on my site and I often worry if there will be problems. I think topics like sissification are harmless and fun and as long as there’s no nudity, I’m sure it’s also harmless to young readers.

    But the way political correctness is going these days, it’s hard to feel safe unless you just write about home baked cookies or something like that.

  11. Sadie Says:

    Don’t blame Google for the prigs flagging your videos. I agree with your point about not forcing people to have an account to see you showing off the backside of your panties. You have the right and deserve to give everybody the opportunity to laugh at you. Why don’t you just make some new panty videos? Did you know your blog posts are all backwards? Why are they backwards? Why didn’t you get yourself on the news yet instead of complaining? Because you are a sassy mouthed wimp and a chicken.