This is not porn.

-It has no nudity
-It doesn't turn me on
-It seems to be more educational/research oriented

By the way, there are a few males on the site as well, and their videos are just about as facinating as the females.

Exactly how this is research or educational I don't understand...

BTW she faked it obviously.

Ajaraki, I fail to see how this is not porn, as in meant to induce sexual arousal.

-Porn doesn't have to have nudity, just look at foot fetish porn, or "crushing" fetish porn, or food fetish porn...most fetish porn, for that matter.
-Just because it doesn't turn you on in particular doesn't mean it wasn't meant to do so for other people.
- And as Farhad said, I fail to see how this is research or educational.

Even though I don't think this will make it out of the queue on its own, I want to see it get *blogged.

Sending this video to Sift Talk for discussion (sent by gold star member rembar)

It is a video of an orgasm, but to me, that seems to be the entire purpose of the video: to document an orgasm. I just can't see this being too arousing for anyone, or really even meant for arousal. It's more facinating. Recording a part of our existence and displaying it. I feel the same about this video as I would about a video of a natural setting that has been allowed to grow without human interference, our a video of cells under a microscope. It's meant to show how amazing our world is.

I understand your position, Ajaraki, but given the video itself as well as the site, I don't believe that's the purpose of the video. From beautifulagony.com: "...we just know it's real and it's sexy as hell."

If the video were about celebrating our existence and sexuality as a product of nature (and we have a few of those kind of sifts on here), I would be all for it. Nothing personal, I just don't think Beautiful Agony videos belong on VS.

To me, there is nothing more erotic than watching a woman have an orgasm, especially if we're "not allowed" to see what she's doing -- my imagination is simply too powerful to not fill in the blanks. The sound alone is extremely arousing.

I've seen ba.com before and have often wondered if it's sacred (i.e., art) or profane (i.e., porn) as it seems to be a delightful mix betwen the two.

Like the Supeme Court has a scalable acid test definition for obscenity ("You know it when you see it."), my own acid test for whether something is pornographic is "would you show this to your children AND be completely okay with it?" I can't say that I have the answer to that with complete conviction...

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Fails the wood test for me, so I don't think this belongs here.

We can talk about it a bit more - but this should probably go.

That's fine, I guess. I've stated my opinion, and if people disagree with it, there's not much I can do. By my definition of porn, it doesn't come close, but for others, it might be over the line. Both opinions are valid, I think.

well, I've watched it seven times now, and I've . . . just . . . about . . . come to the realization that it's porn. But thanks for putting it up ajaraki and for taking a well argued position.

Looks like soft porn to me so it shouldn't be accepted. Also I imagine most of these vids are going to be fairly similar and won't get upvoted on a regular basis. So for anyone who's into this then ba.com is the place to go and indulge.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

The Sift has spoken, sorry. *discard

Discarding this post (discard called by gold star member dag)