Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2 ]

Subject: Why did some vintage photographers try not to capture boys' genitals in photos? Author: TaroCow [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 14:27:01 01/12/26 Mon Author Host/IP: 77.111.246.44 When looking at vintage photos of boys nude swimming, I noticed that some (but not all) photographers tried to hide penises from the photos. They often took photos of boys from the rear or side in ways to hide penises. I am confused why they wanted to do this when spectators could see the boys' genitals. Was it because of some religious belief or censorship policy? [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Subject: Re: Why did some vintage photographers try not to capture boys' genitals in photos? Author: spelvin [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 04:30:21 01/14/26 Wed Author Host/IP: 72.78.201.247 I have wondered the same thing about the French painter William-Adolphe Bougerau (1825-1905). He lived at about the same time as the Impressionists, but he was contemptuous of the Impressionists. Matisse was one of his students, but he wasn't very proud of Matisse. He preferred to paint realistically, and he did a darn good job. He did exquisite painting of nude men, women, and children. I find it interesting that some of his portrayals of Cupid are censored and some are not. In "Admiration," Venus and her lady friends are gathered around, affectionately looking at a somewhat embarrassed Cupid. A flowing cloth just happens to dangle right in front of Cupid's vulgar and unmentionable body part. If Bougerau did the same in all of his paintings, I would assume that such expurgation was required by law. But apparently it was not. In "Cupid and Psyche," "L'Amour Vanquer," and "Cupid Captive," we get to sneak a peek, but in "Cupid et son arc" and "L'Amour au Papillon," we don't. Danged if I would ever throw away a chance to show everything. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: Why did some vintage photographers try not to capture boys' genitals in photos? Author: spelvin [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 04:52:54 01/14/26 Wed Author Host/IP: 72.78.201.247 I saw Blue Lagoon when it first came out. I was interested in a question similar to yours. First, I saw the girl cousin and boy cousin as little kids. There were occasional fleeting unfocused shots revealing the boy cousin's weewee. After the cousins grow into teenagers, I didn't notice anything naughty then, but apparently I didn't watch closely enough. The stargalaxy site was set up since then. Before that site got censored, it showed a still of the girl and her dashingly pubic-haired cousin sliding down the waterfall. The cousins have a baby boy, and I get a leisurely and unabashed view of the boy after he learns to stand up. It looks like the regulations depended on the age of the subject. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]