I still can't believe they allow the Beautiful Agony clips just because they don't feature the little nipplet or the ladylips. Some of them, I would say, are arguably more overtly sexual than porn which they would not allow. The way the world works is incredible. This is why I can't wait to see the doco 'This Film Is Not Yet Rated' (which investigates the MPAA) to see if it discusses how decisions like this are made.

>This is why I can't wait to see the doco 'This Film Is Not Yet Rated' (which investigates the MPAA) to see if it discusses how decisions like this are made.

I really do wonder about this...how much "discussion" goes into each film. To be honest, I doubt it's much at all--but I am an outsider to the industry and anyone is welcome to correct me if I'm wrong.

I get the feeling it's more that the parameters for each classification are pre-set...and anything that falls into a grey area between the two will probably be decided on pretty hastily just for the sake of giving it a classification.

Remember, "This film is not yet rated" doesn't actually mean the rating is up for debate. It means the filmmaker (or studio) hasn't paid the board to review it yet, or they did and were dissatisfied with the rating, and are currently re-editing the film for a different one.

That said, I don't know why the Beautiful Agony clips are allowed, either. I mentioned in a previous post when John posted the links that it was clearly more pornographic than a lot of the stuff that isn't allowed...I mean, it's actual footage of women having orgasms. Right? That's sexual. I can't think of any way in which an orgasm is not sexual. And it seems a bit cheap if the reasoning is that it doesn't contain nudity. Could someone upload footage of their neighbors going to Hanky Panky Ville if they blurred the offending material?

Sex is sex, masturbation is masturbation. No matter where you position the camera.

Oh wait, were you referring to a real documentary coming out? I'm sorry. I thought you invented the title to make a point.

If that's real than it certainly would be an interesting watch.

>That said, I don't know why the Beautiful Agony clips are allowed, either. I mentioned in a previous post when John posted the links that it was clearly more pornographic than a lot of the stuff that isn't allowed

It's a lot more erotic than your average porn as well, as it actually managed to embarass me. I felt that I shouldn't really be intruding.

Oooh, pardon.

> I mean, it's actual footage of women having orgasms. Right? That's sexual. I can't think of any way in which an orgasm is not sexual

Well, because the camera is on the woman's face there's no way of knowing if they're really, er, frigging themselves senseless or not, and some of them certainly are fake. Not that I know what a girl faking an orgasm in front of me looks like...not that I'm in any way insecure about my...ability, or anything...but I would say it's a fact that every girl has faked it at some point. See the Seinfeld episode 'The Mango' (season 5 episode 1) for reference.

>Well, because the camera is on the woman's face there's no way of knowing if they're really, er, frigging themselves senseless or not,

I haven't watched any of the videos, to be honest. I've SEEN them, but I don't sit and watch them. It just didn't do anything for me except make me feel uncomfortable. It didn't help that the first girl I saw was someone I really wouldn't want to have anything to do with sexually...that doesn't help the case for any porn.

Maybe someone with a keener eye would have something to say on whether they're real or fake?

>but I would say it's a fact that every girl has faked it at some point.

I'd be fascinated to see your research on this assertion, pm. :)

It looks like now TubeHos is posting videos of girls from other sites too, not just YouTube. hrm I still like the amateur girls in their rooms the most ;)

tubehos is good but http://tubeteases.com is better in my opinion