Tidbits; Gynaecology 101, The Art of the Tasteful Presentation

Playboy 1953

When Playboy first hit the stands in 1953 with Marilyn Monroe as it’s cover star, it was deemed as racy, sexist, in poor taste, and an instant hit! Inside were not only ads, opinions, and articles, but photo spreads. Beautiful, art directed productions in vivid colour, exquisitely set decked, perfect hair and make-up, and tastefully presented. Such was the style of the day in all “men’s” magazines, art, photography, and pretty much all depictions of female nudity and sensuality.

Pin-ups were all over the place, and long before Playboy, in the form of artist renderings and photos created mostly for the troops abroad fighting for our rights and freedoms. Renderings that gave most of these men a glimmer of hope for their triumphant return to their home country and for what life would hold for pin-up1them afterwards. Presentations

that left sometimes very little, a little, and lot to the imagination with the amount of clothing being worn within the poses.

As time wore on so did the clothes and poses, getting less and less posed, and covered. Visible nether regions were generally a sneak and peak presentation with the artfully groomed and trimmed, and sometimes not so trimmed pubic hair. Legs were closed, entwined, knees slightly bent, a foot covering the opening that lay at the bottom of the coif, or legs gently spread. Legs, arms, and bodies, were posed and positioned to draw the viewer’s eyes over a beautiful landscape of sexy flesh that left it up to the admirer’s imagination as to what a journey that body could be. An imagination ripe with fantasy, thought provoking fantasy, using the mind to conjure up illicit thoughts, to think and fantasize just the way our brains were designed to function.

When did that all change? Was it sudden or a gradual change? When did a good portion of erotic presentation and sensual nudes become blatant and in “your face” crotch shots? Yes I work in the adult industry and most likely always will, and I have seen many forms of advertising evolve into what they are today, but I question if it needs to be presented that way it is today.

We know there is serious and visible difference between what is considered art and pornography, what was sensual nudity on the covers of magazines and movies, now presented as in your face vulva, spread, pried, pulled apart to reveal pink. Not really leaving much up to the imagination.

watermelonTimes change, and so does supply and demand, or in this case demand and supply and to keep up with demand so did the presentation of the supply. It’s here that borders began to be blurred and raised as to what constitutes art, and pornography. Art for art’s sake is created to stimulate thought and use your imagination, looking long and hard for periods of time. Pornography on the other hand, and no pun intended, ok well just a little, also stimulates, but for a very different reason. Visual pornography lays it out for the viewer, created to stimulate for a shorter period of time, with less thought, to be over and done with till the next urge arises.

Lets compare it to this, and some may or may not agree, but burlesque dancing, versus exotic dancing. Both require a serious amount of talent, for the moves, dances, costumery, and physical exertion, but provide very different forms of titillation. With burlesque you will not find the overt presentation and viewer direction to the kitty cat, let alone find a burlesque performer without panties and pasties on. Exotic dancing on the other hand, depending on the location is completely the opposite. There many other elements to compare here of which I will not go into but what I can say is, I LOVE both, and understand the differences!!

For some they may not get the meaning here, others will completely, sensuality and sexuality are presented in different forms when it comes to art and pornography. If your looking for art you may not be wanting those visions of genitals splayed out for in all their glory for you, yet on the other hand in pornography maybe you do. Keep in mind the same applies to male presentations of sexuality, presentations designed for the women or the gay male crowd, it’s no different.

Producers know this, producers that for pretty much most of history have been male, a demographic that has been slowly changing with a steady stream and influx of women artists, photographers, pornographers, writers. Women that are producing, that want to provide, and for their discerning clients, receive a very different presentation.original-ALBERTO-VARGAS-pinup-nude-art

Personally if you ask me I would like to see a healthy mix of both when it warrants. An element of class and taste, and not the in your face presentations we see so much of today and apply it to all presentations of sexuality.

I love art, but I cannot and nor can anyone else define what art is for you, it’s a very personal thing, but know that what you find as art is not always so for someone else.

Food for thought……….