Imma be honest this is a headline written by someone who just learned of the site… this is a weekly occurrence but good job intern who posted this
3128
Glittering_Fox_97692 days ago
+1251
Yeah i saw the article and was like "woah, what's this?" and then saw Motherless and it all clicked. That site's been notorious and controversial forever
1251
uller302 days ago
+379
It was a c*** site day one when I found it 10 years ago. Sadly those trash people will find a new c*** hole to hang out in. We just need to keep staking their “safe” spots out.
379
space_prostitute2 days ago
+250
What are they going to uncover next, stileproject?
250
spez_might_fuck_dogs2 days ago
+142
Whoa there’s a site I haven’t thought of in 20 years
142
timeandmemory2 days ago
+63
I still remember learning of him and being young enough to not be able to tell he was just an OG content creator. He had one particular 'live' webcam stunt where he put up a gif of a hanging body implying it was him, in hindsight it was always a hoax to drive traffic. That's burned into my brain from childhood. Good times honestly, I learned of Nine inch Nails from the perfect drug music video on his site too.
63
Yoshimi-Yasukawa2 days ago
+27
That stunt was pretty well done. There was some buildup to it, then the 'webcam' stayed that way for quite some time. Then the website turned into p**********
27
Kanduriel2 days ago
+23
Probably bonsai kitten
23
unhappycamps2 days ago
+37
You realize Stileproject won a f****** webby in 2000?
37
MilkiestMaestro2 days ago
+23
No. Which says a lot about the Webby award
23
unhappycamps2 days ago
+13
The webbys were a big deal for a lot of us.
That was the year The Onion won for comedy.
13
MilkiestMaestro2 days ago
+12
After their 1999 awards, they started charging which *to me\* makes it clear on the real reason for the award
Most websites don't apply, and the ones that do don't stack up to the ones who didn't
12
unhappycamps2 days ago
+11
We are talking about the year 2000 dude.
11
Azrichiel2 days ago
+34
Do not cite the Deep Magic to me, Witch. I was there when it was written.
34
MilkiestMaestro2 days ago
+8
I'm not sure what you're implying
8
euclid04722 days ago
+33
His obituary for Tony Danza was f****** hilarious back in the day.
33
d_psyfid2 days ago
+317
Right? I'll give it two days before it's back up. And that's generous.
317
sixtus_clegane1192 days ago
+44
I remember hearing about motherless at least 17 years ago lmao
44
kaizerlith2 days ago
+107
I had heard of the site back when I was a teen in the 2000's. Shocked when I saw the thumbnail as I assumed it had to have been taken down at some point.
107
Neokon2 days ago
+21
I swear to God they were taken down by the FBI or something back in the late 2010's
21
stayathmdad2 days ago
+698
Motherless? Jebus I haven't thought of that site in well over a decade
698
Fair_Blood31762 days ago
+244
I've never even heard of it until now. Is it a site for people with no mothers? I guess I don't want to know actually.
244
Due_Warthog7252 days ago
+226
its like efukt (a lot of content was crossed posted so you can get a glimpse of what motherless was like.
now that I'm remembering a bit more of ML, beheading and that type of gore was there too. (lots of dead people pics, some autopsy pics. then the rest was p*** "jailbait" creepshots type of shit.
what was crazy that i recall to was a who currently watching videos section on the homepage and random next video button so you never know what's next.
226
Fair_Blood31762 days ago
+122
Never heard of efukt either but thanks for the info. Definitely not my cup of tea.
122
APKID7162 days ago
+94
Be thankful you haven’t heard of efukt it sort of damaged my brain when I was 12
94
stayathmdad2 days ago
+19
Steak and cheese always another one.
19
YogurtClosetThinnest2 days ago
+115
It's just an unmoderated p*** site. Unless you go out of your way to look for grisly shit on there you probably won't see any.
115
Sarah-himmelfarb2 days ago
+142
To give you an idea, when I and others was groomed by pedophiles as underage kids some of our videos ended up there as blackmail and punishments.
142
OldMastodon53632 days ago
+73
Jesus, that’s horrible! I’m so sorry you had to go through that.
73
Advarrk2 days ago
+104
The recent Vietnamese Butcher case victim discovered his kink of getting decapitated on this site
104
YogurtClosetThinnest2 days ago
+140
"you must have made a typo because you said the victim instead of the perpetrator".
Googled it. Nope. You're correct and that is insane lmao.
140
Due_Warthog7252 days ago
+45
it could be debated that his job as butcher helped him gravitate to decapitation >?
45
DaftPump2 days ago
+5
Neither have I. efukt back on the radar too now? Lol
5
RoarOfTheWorlds2 days ago
+1259
I’ll be honest, I’m surprised it’s taken this long.
1259
lemonylol2 days ago
+713
From the end of the article, it seems like they'll just rehost it in another country. It says it's only been hosted in the Netherlands for like 2 years.
713
Lirael_Gold2 days ago
+423
> it seems like they'll just rehost it in another country.
most likely Moldova, there's an interesting "underground data hosting" industry in that country.
Or somewhere in SEA if they decide to leave europe
idk how to feel about this, motherless was one of the last semi-unregulated p*** sites on the internet, which is both a good and a bad thing. killing it just drives the content onto decentralised sites (and afaik motherless did actually remove content, the other sites don't)
423
[deleted]2 days ago
+147
[deleted]
147
Lirael_Gold2 days ago
+127
Well yes, it will always exist, but motherless was the big dog in the scene, so it was easier to police
Now it'll be scattered across dozens of random popup sites
127
Lustfuldelights2 days ago
+16
There is some really great international coverage of the picture rings associated with the much famed French case where a hubby solicited men from a community of people who drug their wives, daughters, women and document it via pics and vids to have sex with his unconscious wife. I wish it was just the "upload" but the pictures on websites like that are currency in those dark worlds. HOWEVER, the disgusting thing is that men are MAKING the content and then bragging about it. Dead ass, the ONLY reason why we are really talking about is as some dude in the Netherlands, if memory serves, gloated so hard on a ML chatroom that investigative journalists contacted him, confirmed his disgusting behavior, went to said country to meet the guy, got ghosted by him BUT used the skills of investigation to find the man at a party where they met the wife in question.....the one that had hundred of hours of recorded non consensual sex and thousands of pictures now scattered to the wind on the net.
All of that is to say;yes, there are other tube sites, but there is only one ML.....
16
[deleted]2 days ago
+24
[deleted]
24
Torgud_2 days ago
+2
Shady businesses use shady hosts. Outright illegal operations will then use those hosts too, because again, the hosting business doesn't care.
2
Emptypiro2 days ago
+91
They've been shut down before. It will likely be back again
91
dregan2 days ago
+9
Yeah, I was shocked to learn that motherless was still around after all these years.
9
breadandbunny2 days ago
+11
I'm surprised it was removed at all, but glad.
11
GoggleDMara97562 days ago
+260
I’m not.
Remove the offended material that’s already against the law, and against that site’s own rules. Don’t remove all niche kink content just because it’s hosted in the same damn place.
260
zefy_zef2 days ago
+4
That's the exact grey-area that website operates in. Different countries have different laws and regulations regarding.... a *lot* of what is on that website. They use that ambiguity to their advantage by taking a very lax approach towards moderation.
4
SaltyShawarma2 days ago
+38
As much as I enjoyed the niche content and caption p***, in the past few month a lot more MAGA themed fake snuff, mutilation shit, and r*** was popping up, and that's just really bad and really can't be defended. An awarded comment bit further down are defending them against censorship; I also believe in this deeply, but also believe, as a user, that motherless let way too much go by that was extremely violent.
The fact that the vast majority of these horrific forums on motherless LITERALLY include the phrases "trump," "maga," and the "right wing," somehow, shockingly, seems left out of the article.
38
[deleted]2 days ago
+35
[removed]
35
TonAmiChris2 days ago
-11
Then the website needs to do a better job moderating its own content. If they cant do that, they get the hammer. Seems entirely fair.
Edit: for clarification, I have no issue with kink content. Jerk it to whatever you want. I have an issue with defending a website that intentionally doesn’t moderate its content, knowingly allowing illegal, non-consensual content to be posted there. Your right to a free internet goes only as far as they don’t infringe on other’s rights.
-11
GoggleDMara97562 days ago
+69
Is there evidence that violating content would stay up for heavily extended periods of time? I’ve seen dead bodies on Instagram and it’s still up
69
TonAmiChris2 days ago
-8
On this website in particular, yes. It was well known for questionable content even a decade ago. We’re talking about content that breaks laws, not TOS. A dead body being posted isn’t inherently illegal, just against the platform’s TOS.
-8
Milyardo2 days ago
+6
> Then the website needs to do a better job moderating its own content. If they cant do that, they get the hammer. Seems entirely fair.
The offending content was never on motherless to begin with. It was on telegram. CNN linked this story to motherless for literally no reason.
6
HaCo1112 days ago
+9
How can you quickly tell the difference between kink roleplay content and actual assault content when you've got thousands of videos being posted daily and maybe one of those is depicting an actual assault? Even if you required something like a clip of everyone involved confirming consent in the beginning of the video that could be easily faked.
There's a ton of kinks out there that I fully don't understand but I am not about to tell people they are no longer allowed to make or enjoy content of it when nobody is being (non-consensually) hurt by it.
9
Worldly_Anybody_92192 days ago
+8
I don't know, but it's their job to figure it out. If they can't keep actual r*** off their website, then they don't deserve to be up and running.
8
sologrips2 days ago
+1
Fr, expected to see this back in like 2012 not 2026 lol.
Was left up a lot of years
1
AyTito2 days ago
+1754
The CNN investigation falsely said it was hosting an "Online R*** Academy" with "62 million attendees". 62 mil was the total visits sitewide, not unique users and not people clicking on the Telegram link one user shared where the offending material was being discussed.
It's like finding one video on PHub that should be taken down, and using that to say PHub has 4.26 Billion men "studying at SA university". And then writing that "step-sibling is a popular tag" in the following articles, like this article. There are also videos on there of people pretending (!!) to not hear their roommate bang the neighbor while they "sleep", that's not evidence they were actually asleep.
Remove offending material obv, but Far-right Christian groups (eg Laila Mickelwait at Exodus Cry) have been pushing to ban PHub, intro ID verification laws internet-wide, repeal Section 230 which would restrict free speech online. The ID verification and censorship pushes don't stop at adult content.
1754
katzohki2 days ago
+545
Right you are, Tito! The easiest way to erode online freedom of speech is by attacking things that a majority of people already disagree with. Sure, first its R*** content and everyone's on board, but then it's simulated sibling content and in 5 years I can't stroke it to anime tentacles violating Princess Peach anymore. In 10 years speaking out against the administration online gets you sent to the gulag. You already can't openly support violence online against people who clearly deserve it.
545
fevered_visions2 days ago
+81
> Right you are, Tito! The easiest way to erode online freedom of speech is by attacking things that a majority of people already disagree with.
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all." -H.L. Mencken
81
Much_Grand_85582 days ago
+256
They can pry my Waluigi rule 34 from my cold, dead hands. And I have a hell of a grip.
256
katzohki2 days ago
+74
Waluigi R34 in one death grip and your poor, abused dong in the other
74
bollin4whales2 days ago
+20
Yeah! That grip comes with training!
20
Elgato012 days ago
+120
You joke but after anime p*** we get to yuri and from that we get to LGBTQ stuff in general being deemed as pornographic
120
katzohki2 days ago
+91
I do joke, but also I don't joke. That's precisely the point of my comment. You illustrated the pipeline a little more realistically than me :)
91
RA-HADES2 days ago
+24
Ten years of edging further down that slippery slope could cause this whole society to pop.
24
katzohki2 days ago
+17
Did someone say edging?
17
reichrunner2 days ago
+11
Edging you say?
11
calmdownmyguy2 days ago
+97
Now that cnn is right-wing they going to roll out the same fear mongering disinformation as fox news.
97
Walldo_V32 days ago
+39
No, CNN's reporting did not say that, a random author went extremely viral sharing the story my misstating the number.
39
Sea-Broccoli-86012 days ago
+75
Yeah, this rubbish keeps getting regurgitated but if you look at archived versions of the CNN report, it has always been "62 million visits".
Snopes also did a [fact check](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/online-r***-academy-cnn/) about this false claim.
75
CitizenMurdoch2 days ago
+33
CNN never claimed that in their article, they explicitly said what you said, that the site received 62 million hits. You didnt read the article
33
washingtonu2 days ago
+11
You are falsely saying they said something they never said.
>The website, which had around 62 million visits in February alone and whose core audience is in the United States, describes itself as a “moral free file host where anything legal is hosted forever.”
>
>The legality of some material posted is in serious doubt.
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2026/03/world/expose-r***-assault-online-vis-intl/index.html
11
that_70_show_fan2 days ago
+346
Amazing how a shoddy investigation gathers so much traction.
346
OnlyAdvertisersKnoMe2 days ago
+184
Responsible journalism has taken a backseat to sensationalism and fear mongering
184
that_70_show_fan2 days ago
+20
Unfortunately, it also reflects poorly on those who consume media. Very few people have the capacity to ponder on things. Amplifying a story is much easier than truly processing it.
20
ABHOR_pod2 days ago
+10
"Responsible" journalism was the aberration and a temporary insanity. Sensationalism and fear mongering is a return to form.
10
CrustyToeLover2 days ago
+56
Huh. Thought motherless died long ago
56
Fresh2Deaf2 days ago
+19
Nah the mom did.
19
Hurm2 days ago
+9
Now there's a stepmom though
9
toooldforshame2 days ago
+105
First they came for Omegle
And I did not speak out
105
Jack_Krauser2 days ago
+23
I did. I used that site even before there was video chat. I made some international friends on there back in the day.
23
dorkimoe2 days ago
+230
Now investigate the president?
230
denverdave232 days ago
+15
I thought that's why they were looking at motherless
15
GoggleDMara97562 days ago
+294
Why not take down specific videos that actually violate the law instead of taking down an entire platform? Once again freedom of speech seems to not apply to stuff a person doesn’t personally find acceptable.
Do I like extreme poop videos or whatever the hell this site has? No. But they should have the right to post everything that isn’t illegal.
There’s illegal videos on YouTube and Facebook and every other site too. This is f****** puritanical bullshit and the fact y’all are celebrating this disgusts me more than the content on that site
294
SheZowRaisedByWolves2 days ago
+19
I was under the impression that motherless was a honeypot from the get go
19
Update_Later2 days ago
+17
Oh shit motherless. I saw a guy insert a worm into his urethra on there one time. Hell is what that place is.
17
degjo2 days ago
+31
Motherless is still around‽
31
HereButAbsent2 days ago
+61
Yet YNC website still stands with even more disturbing stuff on it and extremely hateful comments. Makes me wonder who initially found motherless and was like, I’m reporting on this.
61
prometheus_winced2 days ago
+11
What is ync?
11
HereButAbsent2 days ago
+11
A pretty messed up website
11
No-Connection77652 days ago
+10
Feds must be pissed or they wrapped up that operation. That site has been a VERY useful honeytrap for them for over a decade now.
10
Synth-Pro2 days ago
+229
Who ever would have thought a site dedicated to sharing/hosting content that is often largely considered "disturbing" might end up being a hotspot for troubling video recordings of abuse 😐
229
[deleted]2 days ago
+120
[removed]
120
FuzzyEmployment53972 days ago
+147
Twitter.com:
147
FluxKraken2 days ago
+11
You mean like P******?
11
Due_Warthog7252 days ago
+11
all news sites?
11
d4nowar2 days ago
+43
Surprised it took that long. But also I imagine it will simply be re-hosted somewhere else.
43
periphery722712 days ago
+118
F in the chat for the pervs y'all.
118
BakedChocolateOctopi2 days ago
+88
Goonsquad in shambles
88
Im_not_an_admin2 days ago
+5
Next they'll be taking down Stile Project
5
MadHuevos2 days ago
+49
Well shit no wonder I couldn’t get that site to work last nigh…….uhhhhh did I say that out loud?
49
Ok_Database_84262 days ago
+13
my heart goes out to the fine folks over at Motherless
13
MomsAreola2 days ago
+11
Motherless videos were the worst quality and never matched the description. Its tame compared to 4chan.
11
JFeth2 days ago
+6
I didn't know that site was still around. I remember it from years ago and it had some sketchy looking videos on it back then.
6
Nullhitter2 days ago
+8
Saw the CNN "investigative" article and majority of the content had nothing to do with motherless itself.
8
Ok_Surprise_40902 days ago
+21
If you'd like a primer on this story, including a dissection of CNN's absurdly sloppy reporting, [Taylor Lorenz posted a really good video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvzQ0WPzRSo) about it the other day.
21
washingtonu2 days ago
+19
She is doing some pretty sloppy reporting herself since she claims CNN wrote things they never wrote.
19
lobollyollie2 days ago
+97
Would never trust any thing coming from Taylor Lorenz lol.
97
Astrotrain-Blitzwing2 days ago
+6
Why? Genuinely curious
6
NomadicJellyfish2 days ago
+8
I watched her for a bit but her content tended more towards interviewing a single "expert" who agrees with her existing biases with no fact checking, prior research or second opinions. When the topic was something I actually know about, such as education, certain tech, or certain science topics, it became more obvious how poorly researched her videos were, and how prone she is to stating things as fact with little to no evidence.
Certainly not as bad as a Joe Rogan type, but it started leaving a similar taste in my mouth.
8
[deleted]2 days ago
+46
[deleted]
46
Astrotrain-Blitzwing2 days ago
+7
Are there sources?
I'm curious about the contexts and their responses.
(The burden of proof, etc. etc.)
7
Alwaysontilt2 days ago
-10
I don't know if we can trust the veracity of reporting from someone like Taylor Lorenz, she takes dark money after all.
-10
snomeister2 days ago
+71
I mean, I used to go on Motherless a bunch like ten years ago. Does it host content that's a bit questionable? Yes. But calling it a r*** academy with 62 million members is absolutely comical, by the same methods you may as well call Youtube a r*** academy with 2.7 billion members. Terrible reporting by CNN and frankly it should stop being seen as a credible news source.
71
washingtonu2 days ago
+6
>But calling it a r*** academy with 62 million members is absolutely comical,
CNN didn't call it that.
6
Ralphie52312 days ago
+8
YouTube will litterally play p*** ads on kids videos. Then play the kids some weird Spiderman Elsa gone sexual video straight up on YouTube kids.
8
Ghidoran2 days ago
+3
> But calling it a r*** academy with 62 million members is absolutely comical
Did CNN actually do that? I've seen other people claim that but don't remember it in the original article, it just says the site got 62 million visits.
3
[deleted]2 days ago
+26
[deleted]
26
rupturedprolapse2 days ago
+3
Considering David pakman had videos about being involved in chorus months before her article came out, it actually doesn't need much rebuttal. It was a shitty hit piece by someone larping as a journalist who's in/was in the same exact type of incubator program she's attacking.
Edit: [thuper secret guys](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0kAOyZOqWI).
3
[deleted]2 days ago
+2
[deleted]
2
LossPreventionArt2 days ago
+11
Hiding your history doesn't hide you're a destiny fan when you all use the exact same point about his enemies. At least try a little.
11
w33dw1zard4202 days ago
+13
So easy to spot them from the “fellow kids” language and showing up right on cue to change the subject whenever one of their Pavlovian cues are triggered
13
IllustriousPhone982 days ago
+6
Good, now start going after DeviantArt. "Artists" upload hundreds of AI generated sexual child images a day, some of them actively selling child p*** through profile links.
6
[deleted]2 days ago
-14
[deleted]
-14
reichrunner2 days ago
+150
You quoted the part right there that makes your comment meaningless...
>moral free file host where anything *legal* is hosted forever.
150
youtocin2 days ago
+132
They specifically say the content has to be legal...
132
GoggleDMara97562 days ago
+56
Did you just miss the whole “anything legal” part of that???
Actual sexual abuse material should be taken down because that qualifies as not legal. It’s not that f****** complicated
Taking down the entire site \*is\* a violation of freedom of speech. Non consent roleplay is legal. Extreme content between consenting parties is legal. B*** is legal. Kinks that you or I personally do not like, believe it or not, are f****** legal.
56
Throwredditaway20192 days ago
+1
Thats a pretty sweeping statement. Whether something is legal depends on the jurisdiction. Consent does not necessarily mean that something is legal. In many jurisdictions, what you can consent to is limited. There are many examples of people engaging in consensual activities that go wrong and end up with someone in legal trouble.
1
GoggleDMara97562 days ago
+3
Sure and all words mean nothing but be a f****** normal human, what do you think they mean when they say ‘anything legal’ and what do you think I’m referring to when I defend that?
Hint, im not talking about extreme niche edge cases where two consenting adults have sex and then there’s some weird legal shit
3
FluxKraken2 days ago
+49
>Yeah "moral free" meaning "no consent."
No consent = illegal = against "anything legal."
>crimes committed and shown under the disguise of "free speech."
Absolutly no rational legal argument can be made that the prohibition of r*** p*** is a violation of free spech.
49
Didact672 days ago
+3
People should stick to respectable adult sites like P******.
3
Epistatious2 days ago
-11
here is a debunk of CNN. just kidding i always trust corporate controlled media. /s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvzQ0WPzRSo
131 Comments