Why australian law demands all vaginas be digitally altered

Everyone must read this article and watch the attached video. Explains how by law porno magazines clean up all visible vaginas to be a simple slit, when vaginas that the inner libia protudes are concedered R rated, when the ironic thing is, that more women have the R rated vagina

http://www.mamamia.com.au/news/why-australian-law-demands-all-vaginas-be-digitally-altered-nsfw/

and the video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK9GtT-khb0

Bizarre! However encouraging to find the desire to use the correct name for the visible female genitalia in the following discussion.

I think the more important point is does this then have a link in the increase in

Libiaplasties.

They Used the word vagina as a description of the outer genitalia because most ppl don't know the medically correct term is vulva.

I think it could well influence some females to undergo surgery, the media should be held to account for causing issues for those with low self esteem.

The nurse practioner at our woman's clinic related that many of her high school age girl clients are concerned about their labia. she thinks it is crazy. this is in south florida.she is concerned that it even has become a topic when the rate of out of wedlock pregnancies has skyrocketed, and stds are more common among teens.

Thanks for posting this clip. I found it very interesting and sad at the same time; I would never do this to my beautiful natural labia.

Lady Teddy, all natural in the Pacific Northwest, USA

Mm agreed 😃 i just find it sad by law they have to edit the vulva because apparently. apparently outies are r rated. So i have a r rated vagina lol as do a lot of women. This effects women because then they look at there edited vagina in porn gazines and think they are not normal, when in fact a lot of the porn models have visible inner labias. I think girls and men should know this so they don't judge there vagina on this edited material.

I don't want a "simple slit" i want those sweet pussy lips to play with, i love unfolding them with my tongue, caressing them ever so gently to start with and making her tell me harder -- harder -- harder.

don't ever "dive" in roughly and start to suck, give her plenty of time to become aroused, she'll enjoy it much more.

Agreed they are a lot of fun, and great for oral sex for my personal preference 😃

What a Nanny State...Fuck! Can't have pictures of real pussy, but they'd be first in line to allow vulgar filth involving crosses in urine, or any other anti-Christian garbage that they call "art". That's what years of unchecked liberalism will do for you.

Ouch i come from Australia and its not only Australia that does it. Art is a freedom of expression, what you may not like another may like. We actually under labour government. Anyway i didn't put up this post to judge Australia, i wanted to put it. Out there what the media porn magazines in many countries do edit vagina s and does this increase the number of females getting labiaplasties.

It just occurred to me that with the wide variety of size, texture, and appearance of vaginas, could the latest generation of facial recognition identify someone, just with a photo of their genitals? Maybe those pictures without faces aren't so anonymous as we'd all like to think! =-)

Food for thought!

Doctor Tom

What I find odd about this is that Australia banned small breasted women in porn a few years ago. Apparently to combat child pornography. Wouldn't making every woman have a undeveloped Vulva undermine that?

The Governments of the world need to stay out of my porn stash...and for the Sexual Predators when we catch them throw their ass in General Population and you have a system that would rid itself of them. Instead at least in the US we have to segregate them from the rest of the inmates, yes we put criminals with other like minded criminals and there you have it when and if they get out of prison you end up with better criminals. The system (Government) is fucked up!

First: I would like to thank cherrypie for bringing this to public attention. Since I don't read porn magazines, I would never have known about the issue although I'm sure I would have recognized, in short order, that the altered photos were not representative of the wide diversity that exists in the real world. The suggestion that young women would consider genital surgeries to conform with these images is absolutely appalling and very disturbing to me.

Second: I would like to thank Dioptra for bringing this other issue to light as well. Banning the portrayal of small breasted women (for whatever reason) as not being a 'suitable' image of women to be shown in public is at least, if not more, offensive to me. And again, the implication that young women would be driven to consider that surgery could be a solution to their non-existent problem is very disturbing as well.

I married a beautiful small breasted woman who bore our two children and had a 'real' vulva.

Once again, the thoughtful and perceptive views and opinions of the many serious members who participate here serves to remind me as to why I am so proud to be a member of this particular community.

Keep up the good work!

At least this is a marginally better situation than when I grew up in Belgium in the 60´s and early 70´s. Back then magazines like Playboy and Penthouse were not allowed to be sold without blacking out the pubic areas with magic markers ... and this was from a time when many shots were airbrushed to begin with. Imagine the persons who were hired to do that work - so repetitive and boring. Probably a good way to make you loose interest in sex.

But on the Australian law ... how silly can things get? It´s better than an outright ban on erotica, which is probably impossible to enforce anyway. But still, shouldn´t governments invest their time and effort into providing more jobs and better social security for their citizens rather than try and regulate the type of genitalia seen in magazines? Sounds like a modern day version of a liberalized Puritanism ...

Seems to me there is some correlation with this procedure to the real reason behind circumcisionm, which is totally APPEARANCE. Everyone thinks women prefer a 'cut cock'. My ex-wife, shortly after we were married wanted me to get cut. I said, flatly, "NO F**KING WAY!!!! NO DISCUSSION ON THAT SUBJECT!!" Maybe that is one reason sex tapered off. It sort of all boils down to what people think is 'good looking'. I actually prefer the neat and tidy VULVA, but would never expect any woman to have that done.

This idea is just ridiculous. In fact any attempt to regulate porn (with legal actors of course!) is ridiculous to me. Why regulate such things? Weird.

This idea is way too conservative! I thought that Australia was more progressive.

That is very very odd. I mean a vagina is a vagina right.

What Slim said.

Really interesting!

Well that was an interesting read. just goes to show what some governments will accept what they wont accept

This idea is way too conservative! I thought that Australia was more progressive.

Compared to which countries?

In any case, there are always examples of odd statutes and laws. In Japan for instance, it is still required that sex organs be pixelated in videos and I am presuming in photos as well. This is for home consumption, export materials of the same though are usually uncensored. And you can't really say that Japan is a sexually repressed society, many aspects are so blatantly apparent ... in this case however, I believe that the censoring (later becoming pixelation) requirement, originated during the American occupation and can therefore be attributed to good old fashioned puritanism. The question is though, why is it still on the books?

All magazines edit a lot more than just that, they make the girls look perfect even though they are not in real life

Wow, so much for every girl being different, right?

All magazines edit a lot more than just that, they make the girls look perfect even though they are not in real life

Well, photography can be a manipulative technology in essence. Set wrong exposure times, get the contrast/brightness and any other parameter wrong and images come out looking awful.

Thinking that photography can capture life as it is, is a misconception. Compared to painting and drawing it does a much better job of capturing reality and far faster at that. But just like painting and drawing, it too often strives for a certain esthetic and that usually means a well-meant, but unavoidable distortion of how we otherwise perceive things.