I wish you would have warned me that this is *nsfw!

Video is already flagged NSFW - ignoring nsfw request by therealblankman.

Let me know if y'all think this is too much like Porn. I found it too funny to be confused with that oft banned style.

I had to upvote for "Wonder Screw" that somehow sent them spiraling through the dirt.

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.

<-- Watched it at work.

"Oral Attack!"

And I'm thinking that the Invincible Wheel would cause chafing.

An Ant downvote? I never saw that coming!

Oh, it's too bad this scene was cut from "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon," but I'm glad it made the extras.

*discuss

I don't want to rain on everybody's parade here, but this is definitely porn, guys. Hilarious, yes; terrible, yes; but still porn.

This video is being sent to Sift Talk for discussion - discuss requested by JAPR.

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

hmm, yeah- kind of porn - but too ridiculous to cause real arousal. I'm on the fence with this one. I abstain with a "present" vote and bow to the will of the majority.

Definitely NOT porn. C' Mon! "Oral attack" and "Invincible wheel"?
Just because you got this file when you typed "asian sex" into Limewire doesn't make it porn.

Upvote this comment if you want it to stay. Down vote it if you want it to go.

See? Comment voting comes in useful.

I agree with dag on this one. When it's this ridiculous, does it even count as porn? Plus, watch the video again -- you don't really see much. Certainly, no genitalia. I think this should be * returned, but that's just me (it's clearly labeled nsfw).

Actually, rembar linked me to this the other day. I myself found it totally hilarious, especially the sound effects, but I'm pretty sure that this is still considered porn (despite passing the dag wood test), and I feel that we should maintain our standard of "no porn videos on the sift." It's funny, and linking your friends to it for a quick laugh is fine, but I just don't feel like it's something that belongs on the sift, as defined by the site's rules.

If the consensus is that it's not porn and can stay, I'll upvote it and hope it goes to the top 15, but I just felt that this was definitely pushing if not crossing the line.

No wood here. But my laugh bone swole up and is pulsating

hehe "dag wood test"!

... video doesn't work for me? i wants to see the funny porn!

Yeah no wood here either. And that is the final test and heres why: I left my newly pregnant wife (which means her boobies were growing ) and almost nightly sex routine and came to Korea and haven't gotten any since. And that was 16 October, so that means its been a little over 3 months. So if it doesn't give ME a raging sifty, its not porn. Now *return this thing, cus' this debate is over

Invocations (return) cannot be called by arsenault185 because arsenault185 is not privileged - sorry.

Lol @ "raging sifty"

And it's funny how a simple comedic comment has become the standard rule of passing judgment on border-line videos.

I just feel that the line needs to be clearly defined, and as hilarious as this is, it's pretty clearly part of a pornographic film. If we say that this one can stay, where do we draw the line on what's porn and what's not?

Is it really? What film? Was it meant to be a porno or a spoof? Even if it was made to arouse (I doubt it was) there have been two instances that I can recall where nudity has been an issue. This and that awesomemagic trick. And that other one clearly was not porn, but still - How many times can you think of where something like this will be posted? The numbers are so infinitesimal that I think we can easily deal with it on a case by case basis. The only two people to downvote this haven't said it's porn, and there's 17 people that obviously think it's not.

I don't think there needs to be a line drawn. If you (generalization) really can't tell what porn is and isn't, maybe you should head on over to Youporn and compare this to anything over there.

Like I said, I'll gladly upvote it when I'm sure what the decision on this is, but I just kind of thought we had a little bit more class than that...

In olden days a glimpse of stocking was looked on as something shocking, but now, God knows, Anything goes.

*not porn

well, i guess it's pretty clear what everybody thinks.

*return

Returning this video from Sift Talk - return requested by JAPR.

I don't think it's right that this was returned before a woman gave her opinion. There IS genitalia. I agree with JAPR that it's obviously porn. The angles are porn-shots. A woman being pumped, from the pumper's point of view is a good example. I say chuck it.

>> ^persephone:
I don't think it's right that this was returned before a woman gave her opinion. There IS genitalia. I agree with JAPR that it's obviously porn. The angles are porn-shots. A woman being pumped, from the pumper's point of view is a good example. I say chuck it.


I figure the number of upvotes speaks for the overall opinion, and dag's refusal to take a stance made it unfortunately clear that simply because it was funny rather than arousing, this would be allowed to slip by without much of a fight. Good to see I'm not alone in thinking that it goes against VS's rules.

*discuss

This video is being sent to Sift Talk for discussion - discuss requested by persephone.

I've gotta go to bed now, but I'm keen to hear from any other sifters who agree that this goes too far, even if it's only a spoof. I'll be up in 8 hours.

If something falls into a category of "things we don't have on the sift" but also has other qualities like "utterly ridiculous", should the fact that it is ridiculous (and therefore not very good/good quality of the type not allowed) and has some comedic quality as a result, counter its being not allowed?

I don't think so. I tried to make the above in generic terms for a reason.

I know the sift has had quite a few discussions on snuff, and while im not going to get in to that here, if/as we are banning snuff, consider the following:

A clip from a snuff film, showing a clearly snuff part to it.
Its not very good snuff.
Its shot in a manner that makes it seem ridiculous and comedic.

Its still snuff.

I don't think anyone would think it had a place here, simply because it was poor snuff and comedic.

I think the same reasoning applies. It is bad porn, and it is ridiculous, but its still porn.

The internet is huge. most of it has porn. Having a few parts of it which don't have porn is no bad thing. This is a part that seeks not to have porn.

Keeping it here goes against that.

Comedic snuff? We have a new low for bad analogies.

MG, that's a rather weak response to a valid point. Yes, this video is hilarious, but does it really belong on the sift?

Absolutely. From Princeton: "creative activity (writing or pictures or films etc.) of no literary or artistic value other than to stimulate sexual desire"

I fail to see how this falls under that definition. It's not porn. It's a a comedy with a breast in it. How is that different than a Chevy Chase flick from the 80s?
Unless I missed it, I saw no genitalia. Just massive bush.

Allowing this wouldn't even create a slippery slope.

[edit] And Persephone - it's kinda cheesy they way you said it was returned before a woman gave her opinion - that makes it seem like a woman's opinion should have more weight than a man's.

Yeah, I have to side with Persephone/ Thylan/ JAPR on this one. This seems to be in the porn-esque category, albeit funny and weird porn, IMO. I don't think it should be here. I think we should get other female opinions on the matter also.

MG, this is CLEARLY a clip from such a work. Just because it doesn't achieve its intended purpose of being arousing does not make it any less porn.

Ok, well, we've voiced our opinions, so lets see what everyone else has to say.

And Issy - you're doing it too - should a woman's opinion matter more than a mans? It's just how it comes across.

>> ^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?

1) That comment was satire.
2) The rule is to prevent this place from becoming just another porn dump.
3) Ok, maybe this clip is from a real porn, but when sbchapm posted it here, he didn't do it thinking "Oh sweet, maybe someone will rub one out to this." No, it was more like "Holy shit this is hilarious." By posting it with the latter mentality, I think it negates any reasons it was made, and creates a new set of reasons, i.e. comedic value.

But seriously, how many other porn clips are out there that are REMOTELY like this? I think it's safe to say 1:1,000,000,000. I just don't think we have to worry about this place becoming Youporn just because this clip stays. There's enough warnings to keep people from clicking on it when they shouldn't.

I did not say that MG. All I'm saying is that I am curious as to what the other females on the Sift have to say, considering there are only 2 that commented here. I'm open to keeping this here in all fairness, but honestly, if a lot of the females out there object to this being here, I think that is enough to decide that it shouldn't be here. It would be the same the other way around. Geez. Stop turning it into the battle of the sexes.

I know that's not what you meant, Issy. I said it's just how it comes across.

>> ^MarineGunrock:
Ok, well, we've voiced our opinions, so lets see what everyone else has to say.
And Issy - you're doing it too - should a woman's opinion matter more than a mans? It's just how it comes across.


If you get 5 opinions on an issue, does it become true? how about 10? how about 1000?

Does a balance of opinions make a discussion more balanced? Is a balanced discussion more desirable than jumping up and down in glee that 10 or 20 or 30 people have all agreed on an issue?

"Comedic snuff? We have a new low for bad analogies."

Saying i was comparing comedic porn to comedic snuff as a direct analogy misses the point. We don't allow porn. we don't allow snuff. I laid out a generic reasoning, that i feel is appropriate and should be applicable to anything we decide not to allow. i showed how it would apply to snuff. I showed how and why i think it should apply to porn.

The point, is that i feel the same reasoning method, for deciding if something is valid or not, should be applicable to both, and anything else we decided to disallow, and the "comedic as mitigating" was generic and could be replaced with any other aspect of a vid which we normally feel gives it good reason to be here. it is not a comparison of content, between the "ridiculous snuff" and "ridiculous porn". Its an application of reasoning to decide if it should be discarded.

If my "abstract" reasoning were agreed, there would still be the question of "is it porn, be it bad porn or otherwise". My view is that it is, and some agree, but clearly some do not.

I don't think anybody can honestly claim that this ISN'T porn, but rather that the comedic value cancels that out.

Stupid internets. "Comedic snuff? We have a new low for bad analogies." <--- also satirical. Sorry for miscommunication.

How does it come across that way? Persephone's comment was referring to the fact that NO females had commented, and she thought it was important to get more female opinions on it other than her own. I think she just wanted to get a more balanced cross section of opinion. That is NOT saying a woman's opinion is more important than a man's... except in this case of course. My opinion is most important of all! I'm KIDDING of course...

Yeah, I think we all realized it was a joke comment, but we're trying to discuss an issue here and you were brushing off the actual discussion with jokes. (You did contribute your actual, honest opinion here, finally, at least.

Haha - No, all I was saying is that I don't think it matters if you're a guy, a girl or anywhere in between. Our opinions are the same as our votes here, one each. (as in we only get one vote on a video, no one's is more important.)

[edit] Brushing it off? No, just trying not to get so serious and edgy about a comedy clip.
P.S. - Out of curiosity, I'm looking for back-story.

>> ^MarineGunrock:
Allowing this wouldn't even create a slippery slope.


Thats irrelevant. You can argue that "this vid wont encourage more like it" but so what. if we don't allow porn, we don't allow porn singular, not "only disallow the 2nd or 10th porn vid, because tis only a problem on mass"

Its also irrelevant if you feel allowing this vid was a special case, and so didn't set a precedent for allowing more porn, as the rule should still hold. It shouldn't "only has to be applied if more porn would be justified if we didn't". The porn isn't being disallowed because of fear of porn on mass.


>> ^MarineGunrock:
2) The rule is to prevent this place from becoming just another porn dump.



Oh, i'm sorry, i didn't realize you were there at the original meeting when the rules of the FAQ were originally drawn up. I hadn't understood that it was only important that we didn't become a porn ranking system for the universe having to deal with tons of porn a day. </sarcasm>

That may be your interpretation of it, but i'm sure others of us see "no porn" to mean "no porn" rather than "not lots of porn please, we're British and couldn't cope"


3) Ok, maybe this clip is from a real porn, but when sbchapm posted it here, he didn't do it thinking "Oh sweet, maybe someone will rub one out to this." No, it was more like "Holy shit this is hilarious." By posting it with the latter mentality, I think it negates any reasons it was made, and creates a new set of reasons, i.e. comedic value.



My earlier argument was to illustrate exactly why i don't agree. If it is porn, its porn. If it is also * nochannel * porn * comedy * parody * wildwestshow * grindhouse it's still ALSO in porn, and IS porn, and shouldn't be here.



But seriously, how many other porn clips are out there that are REMOTELY like this? I think it's safe to say 1:1,000,000,000. I just don't think we have to worry about this place becoming Youporn just because this clip stays. There's enough warnings to keep people from clicking on it when they shouldn't.


Ah, i misunderstood the "Porn is only allowed in the * NSFW channel and then its ok, oh, but invoke the channel 20 times and run around your house backwards too"

The people in this clip may have Sex-Fu, But I have Google-Fu! It's from a move called "A Chinese Torture Chamber Story"
Ass; I kick it.

You can read a summary of it here. (I haven't yet)

[edit] There's no need to be condescending, Thylan. You can easily make your point otherwise.

Thylan makes a good argument for dumping the video. It's nothing personal, it just doesn't belong on the Sift.

What say you, OTHER FEMALES? Kidding MG... but seriously, I even saw quite a few concede to the fact that this IS porn. If that is the case, it is pretty cut and dry.

::Changes avatar - Runs away, ducks for cover::

>> ^MarineGunrock:
::Changes avatar - Runs away, ducks for cover::


In reply to this comment by James Roe:
yeah, i will nuke this dudes avatar. I certainly agree that avatar spam is a no no and is worthy of the ban hammer.




Ummm... you're not in any way commercially affiliated with that movie MG? j/k

Haha. Maybe I am. For all you know, that could have been me doing the "Invincible wheel".
Nice connection there, though.

well I am a female and I think a females opinion on this matter IS important (maybe not MORE important but important nonetheless) because porn has traditionally been geared towards men, for the benefit of men and often at the cost of female degradation. Would you still think it isn't important to get female opinions if the video in question were of a woman being sexually humiliated? C'mon dude, to pull the "poor oppressed male" card is disingenuous. Maybe other females will back off when you do that but I sure as hell won't. If this video were of a black person being beaten, you might think getting a black persons opinion to be important (maybe not MORE important but...) because it's a good way to make sure your own viewpoint isn't subhect to bias because of your privelledged perspective.

I say it's porn. And yes, MGR I've seen at least ten parody-porns all the way through and I've seen trailers for more than that so no, this isn't unique. It's uncommon, but not at all unique. NOt that that should matter in the slightest; if its porn and we say "no porn" then NO PORN.

Take this pile of crap off the sift. I really don't see what the debate is I say we * kill it.

This is straight up porn. You see movement, positions along with sounds.

It's not that hardcore but it'll open up a flood of softcore videos that aren't allowed. My vote is kill it.

I don't know, I think this video is funny, it's unique, it's clearly not meant to titillate... And if we're going to talk about videos that are demeaning to women (which I don't think this video is) and are crass and lower the class-level at the sift, why don't we get rid of that cleavage/shirt-folding video? That's way more crass than this video, and really adds nothing to the sift other than "hey, look at those awesome jugs!" If you want to talk about demeaning that's demeaning.

This video is labeled nsfw, and it just isn't porn in the traditional sense (and if you want to argue that it is you've clearly not seen enough porn Keep it.

Sarzy, it was made as a pornographic film. Did you look at the link MarineGunrock posted? It's impossible to honestly claim that this wasn't made for the purpose of being porn, bro.

JAPR, ya frikkin' moron-What constitutes porn for you? Does there have to be close-up shots of the in and out, juices running from mouths, what the hell, man-yer obviously kickin' this dead horse cause you wanna fuck it! You'd probably fuck anything with a hole, so start working on that yoga, and maybe one day you can get it on with one of the several holes you have in yer head-

When you see a hairy bush inches from someone's face, it passes for porn. This shit is silly fun, but fuck all if it belongs on the sift....

What is the distinction between porn and erotica?

Alright, that's it this is porn, don't try and dress it up as anything else. *kill siftbot, kill.

I dunno, I still don't think that this particular clip constitutes porn; I think it's different and adds something interesting and funny to the sift (isn't that what this site is about?) but clearly the puritanical police have spoken. Remove it then, whatever.

Several months ago, someone posted a trailer for a porn spoof movie (not surprisingly, I can't find it now). It was freaking hilarious, but it had to go. This seems to fall under the same umbrella.

This old vid is unfortunately dead, so I don't know if it's relevant or not, but perhaps some elders can comment on its content and why it was acceptable.

I'm not really taking a position on this. I think it's one of those areas where you have to decide to be dogmatic or flexible. I generally think flexibility is good, but I can see why this is one rule for which you might not want flexibility.

well, I feel that I'd be pretty safe in *discarding this then, since I'm obviously farm from the only one who thinks that this is definitely over the edge.

And choggie, lay off the crack for one day and type out a cohesive, well-thought out post and we'll talk. Cheers.

Discarding this post - discard requested by member JAPR.

oh and *return

Returning this video from Sift Talk - return requested by JAPR.

Thanks ladies. This video was shown to me several days ago, and I was mildly disgusted, but it didn't even occur to me to comment.


>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
What is the distinction between porn and erotica?


Porn is almost always degrading to women, or focuses solely on the man's pleasure. Erotica is something most women enjoy, too. It also [usually] leaves more up to the imagination. That's probably why most people who attempt to make erotic films fail miserably. The only decent ones i've found are based off the Kama Sutra.

So murder is okay on the sift, but any hint of sexuality is bad. You're a bunch of Fox viewers.

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

I'm happy with the way this was discussed and handled by the community.

It's the tyranny of the very vocal sexually repressed minority.

Hopefully one day we will rid ourselves of puritan guilt and shame. The human body and sex is at the core of our nature and is not a big deal. Titillation is a good thing; healthy even.

Cultural conditioning aside, what is offensive about this? It's cute. This clip wouldn't even raise an eyebrow in most of Europe.

Note: It's always the puritans who get caught doing the really messed up kinky stuff.

I guess I'll nix that 'Edward Penishands' clip I was about to submit.

Awesome post. Impressive discussion. Agree that it probably shouldn't be here.

That being said...

Invincible wheel HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

No need for this, here.

There's nothing sexually repressed about me. I just figure if we've got a rule that says "no porn" then this fits the basic definition and shoujld be nixed. It has nothing to do with whether I find it titillating, exciting, funny, interesting or what-the-fuck-ever. I found it mildly amusing in theory but stupid and almost boring in execution. I don't think its particularly offensive other than they are trying to make fun of something that is difficult to make fun of without being juvenille. Its juvenille as hell. THat'st not why I think it should be nixed. It should be nixed because we have a rule and we need to abide by the rule.

suggestion: turn off the sound and watch it. Not until you get to "invincible screw" does it look like anything but porn.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
This clip wouldn't even raise an eyebrow in most of Europe.
Note: It's always the puritans who get caught doing the really messed up kinky stuff.


I love people who are more natural about it, and hate messed up prudes who somehow find it ok to show killing on a grand scale but won't tolerate anything more intimate than kissing in things rated under M (Not to mention same sex which is instant AO because it hurts gods feelings).

But I do think this would raise them eyebrows in most of Europe since this isn't exactly natural or non-porny.

I spent a short time in Europe and saw some R rated stuff on basic TV, including a sex show (in London) where a grandmotherly woman showed how to give a handjob on a banana and plenty of full nudity in France. It's true that I didn't see anything as zany as the above video.

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.

*sarcastic tone* OOOO! look at me I have the longest name on videosift and I have SOOOOO many comments in the top 5! I'm SOOOOO special.

hahaha, kudos to you man.

This video is like Sesame Street compared to this, so I'm bringin' it back! (assuming you can promote a discarded video. Let's see). *promote!

Hmm... one more try? *promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Wednesday, January 23rd, 2008 10:41am PST - promote requested by Sarzy.

Wow, where was I 2 years ago? There was a fuss over this? That was awesome!! It even had a pre-dated Escalopter in it. It's got my vote.

My opinion: Not porn because I perceive the intent as comedic rather than sexual. Still though:

*sexuality

Invocations (sexuality) cannot be called by Truckchase because Truckchase is not privileged - sorry.

*sexuality

Adding video to channels (Sexuality) - requested by geo321.

I think my wife explained it best, when I asked her opinion: "It's just explicit content. There's not enough detail for it to be porn - porn is something designed to get you off. It clearly isn't designed for that. But it is explicit content."

>> ^JAPR:
I just feel that the line needs to be clearly defined, and as hilarious as this is, it's pretty clearly part of a pornographic film. If we say that this one can stay, where do we draw the line on what's porn and what's not?


I think that you're right about it obviously being part of a porn video but what I think you're wrong about is the perspective you're viewing the video from. First of all we've had parts of pornos on the sift -- you guys remember the snake video? Allow me to refresh your memory: http://www.videosift.com/video/Best-porn-intro-ever While there is actually no nudity in the video it is part of a porn. I'm sure there's more porns on the sift just because of comedic value, but the point is that the intention of the video changes once it's submitted to the sift. This is much like the concept of found art -- just because a certain object had a certain purpose at one point in its life doesn't mean that it cant be changed.

The second more obvious point is this: -people keep bringing up the fact that this might set up a new standard for whats allowed on the sift.- Really? this isn't the supreme court and we're not passing new legislation. This is video sift and we're a fairly small tight nit community- if in the future a video comes along that follows relatively the same guides as this one but it deemed more offensive we'll fucking ban it, that simple. Just because we find this one acceptable doesn't mean we lose our ability in determining if future similar videos are.

For the record, I didn't vote for the video because I didn't find it funny, not because I found it offensive.

80+ comments. Sex does bring teh dramaah.

damn, it's *dead Q_Q

Only published or personal queue videos may be flagged dead - ignoring dead request by hpqp.