Re: Why did some vintage photographers try not to capture boys' genitals in photos? -- new childhood nudity forum.

[ 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: Re: Why did some vintage photographers try not to capture boys' genitals in photos?

Author:
spelvin
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 04:52:54 01/14/26 Wed
Author Host/IP: 72.78.201.247
In reply to: TaroCow 's message, "Why did some vintage photographers try not to capture boys' genitals in photos?" on 14:27:01 01/12/26 Mon

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.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

[ Login ] Create Account Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (Registered users only):

Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
>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.
Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.