So this is allowed on YouTube, but even tasteful nudity is not?

This raises an interesting question about what, really, constitutes porn. Surely actual filming of intercourse would be closer to pornography than, say, somebody jiggling topless. Yet if the film is confined to a face-only view (or some other non-traditionally-sexy bodypart...such as an elbow, a foot, a kneecap...), what then? Is that less sexual than a bare nipple? A flacid penis? When, then, does sexuality kick back in? Obviously it can't only be about nudity, as intercourse can be achieved with both bodies remaining "modest" to an outside viewer...

It's a little strange to think about. What's so scary about nudity, anyway?

> I'm pretty tempted to sign up, though...

Don't deny you got the lifetime membership!

I will debate porn with you another day, Phil. Let me get over this one first.