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

Yes. Censorship. Let's go there. You might as well invoke Hitler too- it seems that's the direction your hyperbole is heading.

In fact, the fate of this group masturbation video may validate or destroy Democracy in the western world as we know it. We must choose wisely!

Anywhooo ... I've offered to leave this in Sift Talk where you can visit it as much as you want - tell your friends, too! Post it to Facebook- we can't cover up this awesome masterpiece of video journalism. Power to the people and keep up the good fight against wicked censorship ... my liberty loving brothers and sisters.

>> ^kulpims:
@dag: i know you're concerned about sponsors and all that shit and i understand your point of view, i think. enough to know it's useless to debate this any further cause you're gonna discard it anyway.
just a few words though: what happened to majority rule? i thought we don't need administrators to tell us what content is acceptable and what is not. why not let votes decide the issue of porn or no porn? besides you and your girlfriend lucky i only see 2 guys here who think this video is too shocking for the general public - sheppard and choggs (a big fuck you to both of them). for me this is an issue of freedom of expression and i'm sorry to see choggie fight against it as I've always supported his bloody right to express himself on VS in his unique and often misunderstood way. my position on the matter is clear as always - censorship sucks and never works out

berticus-That trump card comes from a man who is married to one of the most liberated of females on the planet.... peggedbea, you'd have some enlightened discussions with her should you care to, and she'd probably be the first to want this content seen by women everywhere-not here, but everywhere-They are poking fun about it on EIT, more for the shock value of the gay women and spiritual elements combined, give ya that-but dudette....the faqs state the simple reasoning behind the exclusion of it here on the VS...Here I was proud to be upholding the rules of the place, by pointing out the obvious while tongue in cheekishly hobbling the abuser...never expected it to stick (thanks lucky)

please be ye not disillusioned with all males, some of us are not like the dweebs and freaks you may have encountered. Hang in there,
Like Billie(man's name) Holiday wrote:

"Some day he'll come alooooong, the man(men) you looooove;
and he'll (they'll) be big and stroooong, the man(men) you loooove..
and when they (he) comes yer waaaaay, you'll do yer best, to make them(him) staaaaaaay!"

sorry Sheppp, still not in agreement with ya. this clip is obviously edited to be 'humorous' - it is meant to be funny, not arousing. which is sad, i think, but that's an entirely different discussion. look how EIT describes itself "The premier video blog for funny, weird, terrible found footage."

in any case, dag's trump card wins.

>> ^berticus:
I don't know of one. But.. why? Is that what defines this as pornography to you, the fact that it shows stimulation of women-bits? This is an impasse, I suspect, one that I fall on the opposite side of a large wall from the majority of people here. This video is not pornography by any stretch of the imagination to me. Even the original clip, without the EIT editing, would not have been pornography. Porn to me is about intent as much as it is depiction. I don't see the intent of this clip being arousal for the viewer, it was made as an educational video for women. The fact that it's sexual education still doesn't make it porn, to me.
It's alright though, I'm used to being the odd one out here in how I perceive things.
>> ^Shepppard:
I issue you the same challenge. Find me a piece of material that is this graphic that has been sifted.


I don't see how you're taking anything away from this as "Educational". The minute we got tribal music and "O faces" we got to the point of full out sexual stimulation.

Let me put it this way. This video is about.. Women masturbating. If you were to go out and buy a hustler, most of that magazine is going to be of.. women masturbating.

Just because it may not be appealing to some doesn't mean it's not meant as a form of arousal for the viewer, the content is the same. The way I look at porn is basically as follows:

If it depicts some form of sexual act, solo, with a partner, or with multiple partners and or animals, that is porn.

If its something about describing anatomy, like a diagram, or something that is meant for educational purposes, that's not porn.

If it's about the female form, something showing the beauty of someone confident enough to pose without their clothes on, that's art.

This falls under one catagory on that list. This is not meant to be educational, and even if is, it's education about sexual arousal and stimulation. As dag said, it doesn't matter that it's a group of women. If it were a group of 6 guys around in a circle jerking one out, that'd also be porn, and inapropriate for videosift.

I don't know of one. But.. why? Is that what defines this as pornography to you, the fact that it shows stimulation of women-bits? This is an impasse, I suspect, one that I fall on the opposite side of a large wall from the majority of people here. This video is not pornography by any stretch of the imagination to me. Even the original clip, without the EIT editing, would not have been pornography. Porn to me is about intent as much as it is depiction. I don't see the intent of this clip being arousal for the viewer, it was made as an educational video for women. The fact that it's sexual education still doesn't make it porn, to me.

It's alright though, I'm used to being the odd one out here in how I perceive things.
>> ^Shepppard:
I issue you the same challenge. Find me a piece of material that is this graphic that has been sifted.

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

I feel you're making this into an issue of feminine empowerment- and I think that is over reach. We don't allow graphic sexual content on the Sift- that's all. If this was a bunch of guys sitting around stroking it - my response would be the same.

>> ^peggedbea:
@Shepppard
i never said this wasn't the most graphic display,it most likely is, just that this video is meant as parody, not as porn, also i fail to see where the great leap is between this and the dozens of videos that get sifted only because the content was sexualized and so we should let the voting mechanism determine what should be here.
i think the problem we are having relating to each other on this issue is that as girl, i do not regularly sexualize the female body. and i'm making the reasonable assumption that you are a straight male, and the assumption that as a straight male you do regularly sexualize the female body. we most likely view all content sexual in nature very differently. old ladies masturbating together as some hippie ritual, shedding the bondage of their repressive upbringing doesn't set my porn flag flying, it sets my feminist flag flying, so my perspective is totally different.
DISCLAIMER: in absolutely no way am i saying that i think you only sexualize females, i do not think that is true at all. but it is inherent with straight male brain to think about females and sex in combination, and probably fairly regularly.

>> ^berticus:
i'm incredibly disappointed, and torn.
on the one hand i think it's so unbelievably cool to see a video of "older" women learning to enjoy sexual experience so uninhibitedly.
on the other, the fact that it's an EIT video just shows that most people think this is something shocking or revolting and therefore relegated to humour.
i was cheering for those old girls right up until the spirity wafty nonsense at the end.
but worst of all is reading the comments here, save for pb's.
there is already a fuckton of 'porn' on this site. most of the guys here (and some ladies) vote up videos that serve no purpose other than sexual stimulation. so what is the line that separates those kept from those discarded? because it doesn't seem to be anything well defined. it just seems like the boys club gets together and grunts appreciation or not.
well fuck that.


I issue you the same challenge. Find me a piece of material that is this graphic that has been sifted.

Nothing educational, or nothing that you can see on a basic cable channel. Again, i did my own search. The worst I could find was from Gwiz, something to the tune of "Explaining the vagina" with a live subject. Everything else was either clothed, or educational (I.e. you could see the same pictures in a medical textbook.)

The content isn't there. Friday nights on cable t.v. you can see soft core porn movies, played out more artfully then porn, and the most you'll see is maybe a boob, and a couple thrusting motions.

So, go on. Find me a video of this quality. Something showing explicit sexual stimulation, leaving absolutely nothing up to the imagination.

i'm incredibly disappointed, and torn.

on the one hand i think it's so unbelievably cool to see a video of "older" women learning to enjoy sexual experience so uninhibitedly.

on the other, the fact that it's an EIT video just shows that most people think this is something shocking or revolting and therefore relegated to humour.

i was cheering for those old girls right up until the spirity wafty nonsense at the end.

but worst of all is reading the comments here, save for pb's.

there is already a fuckton of 'porn' on this site. most of the guys here (and some ladies) vote up videos that serve no purpose other than sexual stimulation. so what is the line that separates those kept from those discarded? because it doesn't seem to be anything well defined. it just seems like the boys club gets together and grunts appreciation or not.

well fuck that.

>> ^peggedbea:
help, im a man on the sift and unattractive woman are sexualizing themselves in ways im not comfortable with.
if they were hot young girls jumping up and down or doing something worthless and unfunny, that never the less made me think of sex without ACTUALLY thinking about sex, where the sex thought only existed in my imagination. id send it straight to number one.

or if this was a fucking family guy video, id tell people they were pretentious and should let the votes decide what stays and goes.
sometimes i feel like mink. FUCK.
who defines quality?


I challenge you to find me another sifted video that is this graphic, and not in some way educational.

(I.e. Nothing you'd find in a medical textbook. So, things that are just diagrams, or explinations of how things work)

Nothing you will find will be this graphic (Seeing full on genitals, people in the act of pleasuring themselves in full view. etc.) The worst I've been able to find is a video collection of "O Faces" and one from Gwiz about the "Anatomy of the Vagina" which just seemed to be him posting it for the hell of it, because the video he posted that was from a porn site got discarded.

This has nothing to do with the fact that they're all older, it's the fact that what they're doing is sexually explicit, and doesn't belong on the sift.

>> ^peggedbea:
THIS IS NOT PORN. THIS IS A PARODY VIDEO OF OLD LADIES FROM A REPRESSIVE GENERATION LIBERATING THEMSELVES IN THE MOST RIDICULOUS FASHION. AND FUCKING GOOD FOR THEM.
BRAINS APPOLOGY POST SAID IT BEST
titty babies are traumatized by vaginas that are not attached to porn stars.
the polling system is built into the site. and don't even get me started on the number of videos that got mass amounts of votes for being sexy. even if the content itself wasnt intended to strictly titillate, the reason these videos made it to the top was the male sift brain sexualizing it. there is even a video clip from an actual soft core porn vid, allowed to stay without the fuss.
and the talk of bannings, RIDICULOUS.


Sorry peggedbea, parody or not, it fits the definition-While not always universally accepted, definitions are not like assholes. Everybody does not have one....unless, perhaps, they have free-associative programs running in the background which convince the semantic mechanics otherwise. No brain, there is no polling system built into the site permitting posts containing nude women masturbating and offering up macro shots of their cooters!!
Sexy is fine, always has been, and given the amount of shut-in, socially dysfunctional WoW generation males on the site, who spell boobs with a "W" and have only ever touched their own cocks much less had any intimacy with a female of the species, I am surprised there are not more posts from these developmentally disabled.

We have issue with the "male sift brain" sexualizing anything....more like the kind of antics of a monkey who, finding his habitat trampled upon by nosy tourists, throws shit at the nearest, then dances around whooping....

no one talked of banning..... I simply hobbled the abuser, as the powers afforded the status according to the stated guidelines offered.

I would like to take this opportunity to offer the most sincere apology imaginable in this current incarnation, if I offended ANYBODY'S divine sensibilities with my actions of yesterday.

I have sat in sackcloth and ashes for most of the day now, and have begun a rigorous regimen of self-induced flagellation to attempt some transubstantial effect worthy of the forgiveness I fear may never come. In order to amend my gross and wholly negligent abuse, I have devised the most grueling of tortures to follow in order to somehow sublimate my egregious ill-will and hatred for all of humanity and gOd herself, especially the vaginas, oh so wet and smelly, pulsating this way and that....

I only hope this will be enough for me to someday be welcome into her massive benevolent vagina rebirth facility, in Detroit's seedy underbelly.

>> ^BreaksTheEarth:
So where do we go from here? An eternal discussion?
Oh and choggie simply because you label the video porn does not make it so.


Then what does. What describes "Porn" in your opinion?

Dictionary.com has it listed as:

por·nog·ra·phy (pôr-nŏg'rə-fē)
n.

1.Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.
2. The presentation or production of this material.
3. Lurid or sensational material: "Recent novels about the Holocaust have kept Hitler well offstage [so as] to avoid the ... pornography of the era" (Morris Dickstein).

Like it or not, The video is all about producing sexual arousal. Maybe not for the viewers, but the entire video is about those women in some form of class, or group or something, getting aroused, and then stimulating themselves.

>> ^blankfist:
Who cares? If you don't want to see a big gray vagina in your face, then don't press play. For me, I'll press play again and again. Oh, don't get it twisted, I don't have a thing for grannies, I'm starting a whole bulimia thing to lose some of the baby fat.


Now there's an idea: change the title "Graphic Vaginal Opening Begins Circle Jerk of Women Degrading Themselves On Tape." The real pornography in this clip isn't the nudity. I think Dag is right. This doesn't belong on the Sift.

the underage viewer viewing it is a valid point, and im curious what dags liability would be in that situation.

however, withstanding that. now that the video has been released from purgatory, i was free too and did infact downvote it, because i didn't like watching it. my whole point is that 1. the gage of offensiveness can't be measured by one person or 4 persons or their penis's. and 2. the voting system is a sufficient guideline to determine if something is siftable, which is a matter of personal preference. personally i find family guy clips viscerally offensive and wish they didn't find their way to the sift, but they do and so i downvote them. if a video hits -3, its gone.

but the talk of bannings and hobblings because a seasoned member posts a provocative video is ridiculous.
and i think i accidentally hit the wrong button and am posting this to sheppard's profile now. but oh well im not going back and redoing it. sorry sheppard.
and now ive lost my train of thought and its time go do real life things. tralalalllala
In reply to this comment by Shepppard:
>> ^peggedbea:
THIS IS NOT PORN. THIS IS A PARODY VIDEO OF OLD LADIES FROM A REPRESSIVE GENERATION LIBERATING THEMSELVES IN THE MOST RIDICULOUS FASHION. AND FUCKING GOOD FOR THEM.
BRAINS APPOLOGY POST SAID IT BEST
titty babies are traumatized by vaginas that are not attached to porn stars.
the polling system is built into the site. and don't even get me started on the number of videos that got mass amounts of votes for being sexy. even if the content itself wasnt intended to strictly titillate, the reason these videos made it to the top was the male sift brain sexualizing it. there is even a video clip from an actual soft core porn vid, allowed to stay without the fuss.
and the talk of bannings, RIDICULOUS.


Soft core is just that - soft core. It shows basically nothing but the odd breast and nothing truly graphic.

This, is not soft core. Videosift doesn't have a "You must be 18 to enter this site" page, this video embed doesn't have a "You must be 18 to view this content" link, however, if you follow the embed you have to click a "I agree that I'm 18 years old" button.

Soft core is displayed on basic cable now. This is not. This is fully graphic material, and other then a small tag of "NSFW" along the side, has nothing to even show what the content is. Right now, I believe the sift is liable if some mother gets pissed off that her kid found something of this quality on here. If there was the "I agree to be 18" button, or the video required you to input age, that would be a horse of a different colour, because that means that the child willingly knew what he was going to be seeing, and the sift has no blame.

It only takes one angry mother to lead a vendetta against something because her child is more special then the others and therefore has to be protected.

That being said, if theres an "I agree that I'm over 18" button on the front page before you can enter the site, who knows how much traffic that'll stop. I came here when I was 17, and granted, would've clicked the button anyway, but there's a lot of goody-two-shoes out there.

Maybe even if there's a system in place that makes it so you have to hit one of the "I'm over 18" buttons to view anything flagged as NSFW, or have to be logged in and have an input age when you sign up. But as it stands right now, this is not educational, this is not art. This is a bunch of women sitting around for one common goal. You want to see something of this sort? Go to a free porn site then. The sift is not one. And again, softcore clips are not as bad, they're on basic cable now. But they're still up to dags discretion.

>> ^peggedbea:
THIS IS NOT PORN. THIS IS A PARODY VIDEO OF OLD LADIES FROM A REPRESSIVE GENERATION LIBERATING THEMSELVES IN THE MOST RIDICULOUS FASHION. AND FUCKING GOOD FOR THEM.
BRAINS APPOLOGY POST SAID IT BEST
titty babies are traumatized by vaginas that are not attached to porn stars.
the polling system is built into the site. and don't even get me started on the number of videos that got mass amounts of votes for being sexy. even if the content itself wasnt intended to strictly titillate, the reason these videos made it to the top was the male sift brain sexualizing it. there is even a video clip from an actual soft core porn vid, allowed to stay without the fuss.
and the talk of bannings, RIDICULOUS.


Soft core is just that - soft core. It shows basically nothing but the odd breast and nothing truly graphic.

This, is not soft core. Videosift doesn't have a "You must be 18 to enter this site" page, this video embed doesn't have a "You must be 18 to view this content" link, however, if you follow the embed you have to click a "I agree that I'm 18 years old" button.

Soft core is displayed on basic cable now. This is not. This is fully graphic material, and other then a small tag of "NSFW" along the side, has nothing to even show what the content is. Right now, I believe the sift is liable if some mother gets pissed off that her kid found something of this quality on here. If there was the "I agree to be 18" button, or the video required you to input age, that would be a horse of a different colour, because that means that the child willingly knew what he was going to be seeing, and the sift has no blame.

It only takes one angry mother to lead a vendetta against something because her child is more special then the others and therefore has to be protected.

That being said, if theres an "I agree that I'm over 18" button on the front page before you can enter the site, who knows how much traffic that'll stop. I came here when I was 17, and granted, would've clicked the button anyway, but there's a lot of goody-two-shoes out there.

Maybe even if there's a system in place that makes it so you have to hit one of the "I'm over 18" buttons to view anything flagged as NSFW, or have to be logged in and have an input age when you sign up. But as it stands right now, this is not educational, this is not art. This is a bunch of women sitting around for one common goal. You want to see something of this sort? Go to a free porn site then. The sift is not one. And again, softcore clips are not as bad, they're on basic cable now. But they're still up to dags discretion.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.