>> ^dag:
There is definitely a difference between this and porn - it's hard to pin down but I know it when I see it.
It has to do with exploitation, production for sexual gratification, the will of the person performing and artistic merit.
The Wii girl was closer to porn than this.


Exactly - Pornography is done purely for sexual pleasure, often very graphic and sexually explicit. Erotica on the otherhand, often protrays sexuality and human anatomy often to high art aspirations (such as this performance)
Human anatomy is not porn, and it shouldn't be "indescent"

I refer back to my sifttalk http://wtf.videosift.com/talk/Survey-Sex-and-Gay-Kissing-are-Worse-Than-Severed-Heads
about twisted sense of morals

What? You all don't think this is porn?

It may not be hardcore, but it's a woman stripping. I call that porn.


In reply to this comment by dag:
Stimulating, artistic but not quite arousing in that way, at least for me. I vote not porn - but it's nearing that invisible gray line.

My nerdy side wants to point out that this a courtship display. The magpies out my window do the same thing.

Did you just dicuss and return this to justify watching LOL
LOL This is PORN! oh, wait...no its not...



In reply to this comment by arsenault185:
There is no need for this to have a SiftTalk. *Return. This is not porn. SHE did it for the gratification of other people, but the video was not made for that sole purpose. It was to capture a bizzare moment, that most of us only wish would happen.

There. Doesn't that feel better now that we've gotten that out of the way?

There is no need for this to have a SiftTalk. *Return. This is not porn. SHE did it for the gratification of other people, but the video was not made for that sole purpose. It was to capture a bizzare moment, that most of us only wish would happen.

There. Doesn't that feel better now that we've gotten that out of the way?

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

Stimulating, artistic but not quite arousing in that way, at least for me. I vote not porn - but it's nearing that invisible gray line.

My nerdy side wants to point out that this a courtship display. The magpies out my window do the same thing.

How was this in any way NSFW? And where where those graphic images it warned you about?
It's life, not porn.

Great Video! So good, infact, it already got 145 votes Sorry seltar, its *dupe http://www.videosift.com/video/Not-porn

i think its a crappy clip. I was interested in seeing the movie and may still someday get around to it but this clip? no. The MOVIE may be art but THIS VIDEO is not;the aim is clearly to titillate the viewer into wanting to see the movie (as all teasers aim) and it does so through sex and nudity.

I resent the accusation that "no nudity" is called for - no one has said that. I resent that enforcing the rules is likened to prudery. You all knew the rules when you joined, just as I did, you had the chance to peruse the site before you joined and NOW you wanna cry "hypocrasy" becauase the clips YOU want stars for are under scrutiny? And if someone disagrees then its attack their self-esteem? wow.just wow.
and i agree with ox - i think persephone was being nice because thats what generally happens when you badger anyone enough. if its a female and you jump their sense of fair play? oh yeah, guaren-damn-teed she'll back off.
I downvoted because I think this is a crappy clip; as I always downvote when I think a clip is crappy. Nothing to do with nudity or sex even though I think this teaser IS overly-sexual - it's not porn so I wouldn';t have said it needs the boot. So take your accusations of prudery (you and everyone from kung fu porn HEY NOTICE THAT POST HAD THE WORD PORN IN THE TITLE?? ANYONE? ANYONE? BUELLER? BUELLER?) and stuff them up your juvenille arse.

i'd say that ^JAPR was absolutely right to discuss it.
i guess i'd call it 'porn' in that i wouldn't want kids watching, etc., but that it's so campy and such, that it's clearly meant to cause laughter and not arousal, and by that definition, not porn, per se.

we're all adults. i'm a libertarian. to the degree that i get a vote? i vote it stays, and that those who would be potentially offended? shouldn't have clicked on that title.

I think the key thing that we are missing here is what porn is. Sex is not porn. Rule 7 about porn does not bar sexuality. (sure we dont want to see the act of sex, but thats besides the point.) The clip from the other day was not porn. Hell it barley belonged in the sexuality channel. Who acres what the clip came from, the clip t self was not porn. A pornographic film is designed to make me happy in the pants. Its for sexual gratification. Im alost positive, that clip itself does not do that. (well considering that 2g1c gets soem people off, theres always the exception)What I'm saying is, If people dont want to see something thats "edgy" then they dont have to click. There was sufficiant warning. Yesterdays clip shoud have stayed.

This has not to do with the discussion, but I just thought of something. I wonder if Tom Cruise is wearing platforms in the scene because here they look about the same height, and he is about a foot shorter than Nicole.

Thanks for not discarding this. It's NOT porn!

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

Well jeez, I don't think I can discard this now - since it's been given the sexuality manager's "not porn" stamp of approval. I guess I'm the prude with a chubby.

A big argument surround the last thread was that even though it didnt show sex, it was still porn because the rest of the movie was porn. Well this didnt come from porn. The definition of a porno is the filming of sex and watching it for the sexual gratification. This clip did not come from such a movie, nor did this scene mean to give anyone any sexual pleasure. Its not porn. nor was the last video, but its to late for that. So long as a video is tagged and titled appropriatly so that people who dont want to see it dont, then theres no issues. let it stay.

I'm a little surprised with MG. He's one of my favorite sifters, but I don't see how he can possibly argue that it's not porn. Well, we'll see what happens.

In reply to this comment by Thylan:
I saw it while it was still unsifted. withheld my downvote because it had few votes (3 i think if that) and assumed it wouldnt get sifted. i probably shouldn't have assumed that and should have downvoted. it was funny, and the unsifted que is not what most users see. when it did get sifted i was surprised. i dont think it should be here.

>> ^MarineGunrock:
If only every porno had this much production value.
And I never would have dared to post this, but the first time I saw this, I laughed my ass off. I still do.


I would think that with you having posted this earlier, you wouldn't be so adamant in trying to argue that it's somehow all of a sudden not porn, MG. I don't think this is a matter of "what other people have to say" on the issue. It's not about opinions: this is clearly a clip from a (badly-done) porn. VideoSift's rules say no porn. How is that something that should need discussion?