Now that we've read the script for Avatar's Na'vi sex scene James Cameron's claim that they cut it to avoid an 'R' rating prompts an interesting question: Do sex scenes count if they aren't human and don't involve genitals?

Recall that, for Na'vi, "the ultimate intimacy" involves intertwining hair tentacles, which means Na'vi obscenity may be somewhat different than the human kind. Nonetheless, if Cameron is to be believed, then MPAA is uncomfortable with tentacle sex, too. This is either a boon to Avatar's hyperrealism (Na'vi are so relatable and realistic, their sex scenes have the same effect on us as our own) or a blow (Na'vi aren't anything new, they're just people in digital face paint, which means they aren't allowed to orgasm on screen, either).

Here's what MPAA says about PG-13 sexual content:

[D]epictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture. ... nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented.

James Cameron appears to have missed a vital loophole: If you put Na'vi genitals on their heads, then they don't need to take their clothes off to have sex. On the other hand, their sexual organs would be perpetually exposed, which could result in an NC-17. On the other-other hand, MPAA has always had a weird understanding of "sexually oriented." Case in point: Moulin Rouge was PG-13 despite a scene in which a rich man ripped Nicole Kidman's clothes off in an attempt to rape her, which is quite a bit more aggressive than undulating willow branches and rippling sunbeams. On the final hand-like tentacle, Neytiri's line about "better than kissing" is unambiguously sexual, even if it refers merely to consensual follicular stimulation.

Sidenote: Will Avatards develop hair fetishes around this?