[jeyurkon]

Originally Posted by Tubejunke

Yes nudity is not even really relevant here historically if you think about it. Even though today television is among today's preferred mediums for private indulgence in pornography, this was not always the case. In the early days of television which we tend to focus on, "blue movies" or "skin flicks" were projected onto a screen in a back room somewhere more often than not. The sixties saw the ruin of our grand old theaters and drive-ins, which often converted to XXX in order to stay in business (for a while).

I think things were better when "adult" material or any hint of it was by and large hidden. It was there if you wanted it, but like feminine itch and male enhancement products, I see no need to advertise on television. Word of mouth (no pun), or unfortunately the Internet, sells these products just fine. It's sort of cool to have old sets and know that none of this modern day sex garbage was not relayed through them.

I agree that VK isn't for nudity. But I don't find it offensive either. As I recall the post that initiated this discussion was about the identity of a TV, possibly a DuMont. There was no posting of a nude, only a warning that the link would take you to a photograph of a TV, that contained nudity.

Although I used to think TV in the late forties to early fifties was rather puritanical; after watching "Topper" episodes I was surprised to see how riské
they are.

John