Professional Mermaid, Party Princess, Character Actor & Cosplay Model.
Reptile breeder/ Mad Scientist π
Let a creature experience transform your next event! π
@pubsubfan1@KT87985373 The hysterical laughter, the singing.... omgggggg im not sure there's a diagnosis for this. She's a true anomaly ππππβ οΈ
Stop weaponizing children, victims and these Missing cases for your creator wars - this is sick!
Please report this video to YouTube for review if you believe its treatment of child-related footage violates the Child Safety or Harassment policies. Report it honestly, include the timestamps and let YouTube evaluate it-no false reports and no contacting or harassing anybody.
This matter was dealt with back in 2023. Jay4Justice a true crime creator is dredging it up years later to push a false narrative that attempts to make QueenBee responsible for a video Brittney's kids originally uploaded. Queen did not create that footage or place it on the internet. Jay can replay it another hundred times, but repetition will not rewrite who originally uploaded it.
At 44:30, Jay acknowledges that three separate audio moments were combined to create a sexual implication. From 51:21β54:12 and 58:57β1:01:20, she drags the old footage involving Brittneyβs special-needs child back through YouTube, surrounding it with accusations about criminal conduct. At 1:18:25β1:20:56, she labels identifiable people βpredatorsβ without presenting verified evidence.
Jay is weaponizing these children-and a video these children uploaded years ago-to fuel her current hate campaign against QueenBee and other creators she dislikes. That is not protecting children. It is exploiting them all over again because Jay needs fresh ammunition for an old creator war.
Nobody willing to resurrect childrenβs private and traumatic material for revenge has any business going anywhere near victimsβ cases.
You cannot repeatedly replay this material, attach increasingly serious accusations to it, encourage your audience to circulate clips and then crown yourself a child advocate. That is exploitation wearing a crooked little halo.
These children are not weapons. Missing children are not content props. Victimsβ cases are not Jayβs revenge playlist.
This is sick. Report the actual content, provide the timestamps and let YouTube decide.
23:23β24:22 β Jay replays sexually suggestive material and answers it with allegations involving sexual harassment and child sexual-abuse material.
44:30β45:35 β Jay acknowledges that three separate audio moments were combined to create the sexualized clip.
51:21β54:12 β Extended discussion and replay involving footage of a special-needs child, including allegations about requesting, saving and redistributing it.
58:57β1:01:20 β The disputed child footage is discussed using terms including βillegal,β βchargesβ and device searches.
1:18:25β1:20:56 β The people involved are categorically labeled βpredatorsβ without independently verified evidence being presented.
2:14:19β2:16:06 β A retaliatory livestream and viewers following from another channel are highlighted.
2:22:46β2:24:34 β The stream again replays material connected to children while arguing about exploitation and monetization.
The closest policy categories are:
Child safety: If identifiable footage of a minor is actually displayed, replayed or sexualized, report under child safety. YouTube prohibits sexual exploitation of minors and applies stricter standards to content involving children. YouTube Child Safety Policy
Harassment or cyberbullying: The edited sexual implication, repeated personalized ridicule and unsupported βpredatorβ labeling may warrant reviewβparticularly if the targets are identifiable. YouTubeβs policy also covers unwanted sexualization and encouraging abusive audience behavior. YouTube Harassment Policy
Specific chat messages: Report individual messages separately, especially the unsupported child-predator speculation and the instruction to clip and send material at opponents. YouTube allows individual live-chat reports. YouTube Reporting Instructions
A factual description for the report box:
This livestream repeatedly republishes and discusses footage involving a minor in a sexualized and accusatory context.
At 44:30β45:35, the host acknowledges combining three separate audio moments to create a sexual implication.
At 51:21β54:12 and 58:57β1:01:20, the stream discusses and apparently replays disputed child-related material while labeling identifiable people as criminals or predators without verified evidence.
At 1:18:25β1:20:56, the host uses the categorical label βpredators,β and
Please review the complete surrounding context under the Child Safety and Harassment policies.
@YouTube@TeamYouTube
Video: https://t.co/x8OuwzxHgq