Restructuring of MSSBoard

sowbb

Active Member
I agree with SomeGuy. If the scene is realistic enough that we can't tell if it's real or not, than it's as good as unsimulated. Focus on what you see, not on what did or did not happen during the shoot.

Personally, I wouldn't even bother with a BD \ Prosthetic tag. Those will only start needless "did they or didn't they" wars. The behind-the-scenes effects should be left to the textual discussion inside the thread.
I would add a "Pornstar" tag because this is relevant indisputable information, but only when the pornstar is used as a real character in the film and not as a body double for one. Think "Picture of Beauty" but not "Starlet".
 

JohnsonJ

Active Member
Where do you guys think we should place scenes where body doubles and/or pornstars are used and maybe prosthetics? Or even where cgi is involved.

Should we include them in the unsimulated section and maybe add prefixes such as BD or prosthetic, CGI of some sort, or would it be better in the graphic section?

Examples that I can think of right now are let's say VIctoria Carmen Sonne that has 2-3 films that she realistically blows fake dicks and perhaps the movie Starlet where a pornstar was used.
Pornstars and body double shouldn't have an effect on where to place post in my opinion. Explicit nudity and sexual acts are still explicit regardless of who is performing. Prosthetic and cgi 'explicitness' simply shouldn't be considered explicit or put in the explicit sections(except in cases where there is prosthetic and cig 'explicit' scenes along side actual explicit scenes). Scenes/Movies with convincing prostethics and cig like the Victoria Carmen Sonne scenes I'd say be put under Graphic, with signifiers. Ex: "[Graphic prefix] Neon Heart (2018) - prosthetic". Unconvincing scenes/movies should be under non-explicit with appropriate prefix. If it's unknown whether cig or prosthetics were used then just leave under Unsimulated or explicit nudity, and maybe add signifiers such as possible prosthetic/cgi to thread post.
 

SomeGuy

Well-Known Member
I would add a "Pornstar" tag because this is relevant indisputable information, but only when the pornstar is used as a real character in the film and not as a body double for one. Think "Picture of Beauty" but not "Starlet".
I wouldn't bother with the "pornstar" tag as not everyone follows what goes on in the pornstar world. If it's in the movie, leave it up to the viewer. If you didn't know who Taylor Sands was that explicit scene in Picture of Beauty is as good as any other.
 

sowbb

Active Member
Pornstars and body double shouldn't have an effect on where to place post in my opinion. Explicit nudity and sexual acts are still explicit regardless of who is performing. Prosthetic and cgi 'explicitness' simply shouldn't be considered explicit or put in the explicit sections(except in cases where there is prosthetic and cig 'explicit' scenes along side actual explicit scenes). Scenes/Movies with convincing prostethics and cig like the Victoria Carmen Sonne scenes I'd say be put under Graphic, with signifiers. Ex: "[Graphic prefix] Neon Heart (2018) - prosthetic". Unconvincing scenes/movies should be under non-explicit with appropriate prefix. If it's unknown whether cig or prosthetics were used then just leave under Unsimulated or explicit nudity, and maybe add signifiers such as possible prosthetic/cgi to thread post.
The problem with the approach JohnsonJ suggested, IMHO, is that what looks like prosthetics or CGI to one person might not look that way to another, and usually we can't really tell what went on. Especially since convincing special effects are getting better and cheaper. Some obviously fake scenes, like horror scenes where the prosthetic is bitten off (there are surprisingly many of those), should be put in Graphic Scenes because they are no different than any other "strong" simulated scenes. However, that's not true for most scenes.
Think about "Blue is the warmest color". Prosthetics? The actresses said so (and probably lied) and it all comes down to whether you believe them or not (I don't). We assume that Victoria Carmen Sonne only did prosthetics but it's really not that obvious from the films. The list goes on...
 

SomeGuy

Well-Known Member
The Roy Stuart Glimpse series thread that is currently in For Request could probably be moved and pinned to Unsimulated.

There are probably a few other fulfilled requests in there that could also be moved.
 

mammos

Administrator
The Roy Stuart Glimpse series thread that is currently in For Request could probably be moved and pinned to Unsimulated.

There are probably a few other fulfilled requests in there that could also be moved.

Yeah, there are a lot of threads in the Request section that have been resolved and need to be moved or merged in the appropriate sections.

As for Glimpse, I would prefer to put it in the Arthouse Porn section because I wouldn't consider it mainstream.
 

mammos

Administrator
Where do you think we should add movies such as Dancing on the dark side of the moon, which are mostly gay but contain explicit hetero scenes as well? I don't know how mainstream they are considered, maybe not at all. I believe in the Vimeo and other movies/shorts.
 

tng

Active Member
They would probably fit in the Vimeo section since most of those projects are released there, but is there a way that we could give these kind of low budget movies the spotlight instead of burying them in sub-sections? Especially when they do have some great unsimulated sex scenes. I think it would be in our favour to try and support independent filmmakers as much as we can, which is ironic since we post copyrighted material all day long, but since we're doing it anyway, it could be a good idea to shine the light on some of those films, also throw in a link to their Vimeo page so people could support if they want. The threads in the main 'Unsimulated & Explicit Scenes' section get way more views than anywhere else and I bet the 2000+ views could help a small independent team, even if only a small percentage click on their page... just a thought.
 
Top