Hi friends! Sometimes I struggle with describing my videos because I'm no longer sure what "x-rated" actually means. UMD gives examples like: masturbation, penetration, oral sex.

Personally, I've always felt that anything NSFW is automatically x-rated--basically, anything that my neighbor or coworker wouldn't normally see from me (tits, ass, pussy). But when I label my videos as x-rated based on that feeling, I sometimes wonder if I don't have the same standards and might disappoint my viewers. I don't mean the UMD criteria specifically; I just mean that I'm showing a lot of myself and I'm wondering whether I should keep marking my content this way or if we've all become a bit desensitized and it's only the "hardcore" scenes (masturbation, penetration, oral sex. ) that deserve that label.. Does just showing" not count?

What do you think? What do you expect from an x-rated video?

On a site like this nudity is expected, so I'd not use the X-rated tag on that image, though of course posting nudity does require a verified account.

But to me the X-rated option is for instances where there is "sexual touching", whether naked, or through clothing. So if people are touching each other or themselves between the legs, or going further than that, then it needs the X-rated tag. But not for just exposed breasts.

MM may clarify this.

As far as I always understood it, it was related to the film censorship board's age rating system. So exposed nipples would be cleared in a 15 cert film, some more explicit sexual acts (within reason) might constitute an 18 cert. And graphic depictions of hardcore penetration, insertion and other generally more vulgar sex acts would fall outside of the mainstream ratings system and be regarded as X rated - therefor couldn't be broadcast on TV at any time, even after the watershed.
So my rule of thumb would be, if it could plausibly be broadcast on regular TV, or shown in the cinema with an 18 or under certification, it's probably not X rated.
A tasteful topless image like the one here (even without the stickers) would probably scrape by in a PG context, and definitely isn't what I'd regard as even close to x-rated.

I've watched the ratings change over the decades, too.

Women topless was once acceptable in PG, then, briefly, in PG-13, before becoming somewhat rare even in R films.

There are things in G rated films from the 70s and early 80s that would get films a dreaded NC-17 rating now.

JAWS, for instance was PG, as was one of my favorites from the 80s, Streets of Fire. The latter film had a scene with a dancer wearing heels and a g-string... and lots of excessive violence... and is said to be the reason they created the PG-13 rating.

I'm definitely desensitized to nudity but it didn't happen the way people here would think.

I used to belong to an art club. Every week we ponied up $10, put the money in a pot and paid a model to take it all off and hang out for an hour striking poses.

My personal opinion is that there is no way your picture is porn, with or without the leaves. We could have used you at the art club. UMD's guidelines sound accurate to me. You need masturbation, penetration, or oral sex to be considered porn.

When posting to a fetish forum, it is best to tell the exact, objective truth and don't exaggerate. But do confess it all. Spoilers can destroy an audience for a Hollywood movie. But at a fetish forum, people hate surprises.

As for "NSFW" -- it stands for "Not Safe For Work". A lot of stuff that isn't porn isn't safe for work at all. The picture you posted is NSFW.

Nessie

Nudity may be nsfw but not x rated. X generally implies sexual content. In the US there can be reasonable amounts of full frontal nudity but an R rating. I'm pretty sure there cannot however be an erection if there is a penis displayed.


https://www.cinemablend.com/new/Incredibly-Strange-Rules-MPAA-Has-About-Penises-According-Nicholas-Stoller-131237.html

@DungeonMasterOne

Thanks for your insights, DungeonMaster! Your explanation about X-rated content focusing on "sexual touching" really makes sense, especially when considering the context of nudity versus explicit actions. What I find particularly intriguing is how your perspective ties into the other responses. It adds a layer of depth to our discussion, especially when looking at how different contributors, like @slipperyskin and @messyhot, discuss film ratings and societal standards.

@slipperyskin

Thanks for your reply, slipperyskin! It's really interesting to compare your perspective with what @DungeonMaster said. Both of you agree that X-rated content is more about "action" than just nudity, but there's a key difference in how you each define it. DungeonMaster considers any kind of sexual touching--even through clothing--as X-rated, focusing on what part of the body is being touched, regardless of explicit nudity. You, on the other hand, seem to introduce a tiered system based on explicitness and censorship ratings. You define X-rated content as involving more graphic, hardcore depictions, only crossing into that category when it goes beyond what could be shown in an 18-rated film or on mainstream TV. This creates a higher threshold for what you'd label as X-rated compared to @DungeonMaster, who places milder sexual actions in that category.

@tsarmina

tsarmina, your contribution adds an interesting historical perspective, noting how societal views on nudity and violence in films have shifted over the decades. You highlight that women being topless was once acceptable in PG films, then PG-13, and is now rare even in R films. This observation shows that the way we assess what is considered X-rated or appropriate for certain ratings seems to reflect broader societal changes over time. It's intriguing to see how these varying viewpoints illustrate the evolving nature of ratings and what is deemed acceptable in media!

@Loch_Ness

Thanks for your insights, Nessie! It's interesting to hear about your experience in the art club and how it shaped your views. You seem to take a strong stance by asserting that real pornography requires more than just nudity. I also find your point about NSFW relevant, especially in the context of how we classify images and content. Your emphasis on the importance of honesty in fetish forums is important, reminding us that the audience's expectations can significantly shape how content is perceived.

@messyhot

Finally, messyhot, your succinct point about nudity being NSFW but not necessarily X-rated is a great addition. It's interesting that you brought up the restrictions in U.S. ratings, like how showing an erection with a penis displayed would cross a line. This ties in nicely with the concerns raised by @slipperyskon and @DungeonMasterOne regarding what can be shown based on ratings.

Overall, it's fascinating to see how all your viewpoints come together in this conversation. The varying definitions and perceptions of nudity, NSFW content, and X-rated material reflect personal experiences, societal changes, and evolving norms in media representation.


Thank you all for your contributions!!!!

PS: Until next time, I'll find out if and how I can respond to all of you directly

Technically your picture would be considered XX because it is softcore not hardcore LOL.

Loch_Ness makes an excellent point there. There was a well-known and respected model here in the UK (now long-retired), who almost always stuck to "tasteful nudity", ie topless. But, very surprisingly, she also made two videos along the way of her masturbating while messy. Well, I say two but in effect it was only one because the description to the first completely over-sold it. I can't remember the details at a decade's distance, but do recall that the finished clip simply didn't match the blurb. Masturbation really was an exaggeration. And it drew some criticism. However, the second clip did match the hype, although had the oddity of a soundtrack which presumably blotted out her moans of pleasure.

That suggested the issue was one of boundaries and what she felt comfortable with. It is quite unusual to have someone stick so much to a specific level, as she did for years, and then chuck in a couple of surprises that upped the ante. Most models/producers are either in or out on explicit stuff, or perhaps start as out but work up to in, and when they are in get comfortable with making more x-rated stuff. But an outliers approach, which this model did, is just that.

Of course, no one's saying any model or producer should do what they're not comfortable with. Everyone's got their own limits with how adult they get, and stick to them. Absolutely fine. But what is important, and this is why I'm pleased you've asked the question, is that everyone - models, producers and customers - all have the same interpretations of these words in their minds. That way, everyone knows where they stand and what they're getting, or not getting, when they buy a scene.

This is something I keep wondering about especially with the freedom to express oneself and the ability to let people know part of it is being in the moment with someone getting off.
I think this place umd has cultivated that curiosity

@Curiouspaints

Wow, that's incredibly deep and thought-provoking! I'm grateful for such a sensitive perspective. I had never considered how self-expression and intimacy could appear to be at odds--after all, self-expression often involves showing a side of ourselves to the world, while intimacy is usually something private and personal. But through your explanation, it's clear that these two ideas don't have to conflict. In fact, as you pointed out, they can actually complement each other when shared in a moment of vulnerability or connection. It's fascinating to think that expressing oneself, even in intimate moments, can deepen both the experience and the connection between people.

Your point has opened up a new way of looking at this balance for me, thank you!

@moreslime

Thanks for sharing that example, it shows how important it is for everyone--models, producers, and audiences--to have a clear understanding of what certain terms mean. It's interesting how this model chose to step out of her usual boundaries for a moment, which shows that personal comfort and limits can evolve, but it's crucial for everyone to be on the same page. In the end, it's all about respecting those boundaries and making sure the expectations match the reality.

In light of this discussion, I adjusted the descriptions of my videos, but I still wasn't 100% sure about some of them. Overall, I leaned towards the "stricter" interpretation from DungeonMaster.