In movies, why so many naked women yet so few naked men?

[Anonymous]

Post-Harvey Weinstein, I thought this would change.

However, I just saw the Demi Moore movie. She and Margaret Qualley are naked of scantily dressed for long time periods. I wouldn't mind the number of naked women if the men were also naked.

Then, I watch Anora--yes I know she is supposed to be a sex worker--but they didn't have to show twelve to twenty naked women with all clothed men. Even her lover is clothed.

So, what's up with this? In the Demi Moore - Margaret Qualley movie, the nudity is not necessary at all. They are not playing sex workers.

I don't mind naked bodies but think men should be equally as naked as the women.

[Anonymous]

Men really aren’t that nice to look at. I’m not sexually attracted to women, but they’re simply more visually pleasing.

[Anonymous]

Men are rich in those movids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Men really aren’t that nice to look at. I’m not sexually attracted to women, but they’re simply more visually pleasing.

This isn’t why. I mean, that’s just silly and your opinion. It’s because men control the means of production in Hollywood. Even when there’s a female director (The Substance), it has to be greenlit, usually by a man.

[Anonymous]

Because men control the industry?

[Anonymous]

Good question! But please don’t start putting naked men in movies. Their junk is so ugly, no one wants to see it.

[Anonymous]

Harvey Weinstein wouldn't greenlight a movie unless the female star agreed to get naked.

[Anonymous]

Because women will watch films with naked women or naked men. Men will only watch films with naked women because they’re scared of being called gay.

[Anonymous]

I see plenty of nude, well developed, male butts, hamstrings, chests and backs and they are always rippling, smooth and free of hair.

No one wants to see dangly or not so dangly bits… We basically see the same level nudity in women mammary glands, thighs, backs etc., on tv… anything else is a porno and I don’t watch porn.

[Anonymous]

Watch British movies / TV shows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see plenty of nude, well developed, male butts, hamstrings, chests and backs and they are always rippling, smooth and free of hair.

No one wants to see dangly or not so dangly bits… We basically see the same level nudity in women mammary glands, thighs, backs etc., on tv… anything else is a porno and I don’t watch porn.

This! We’re seeing the same nude body parts in male and female. Seems like just one area is off limited in both. (in some shows do show that one spot in men, but very, very very rarely in women)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because women will watch films with naked women or naked men. Men will only watch films with naked women because they’re scared of being called gay.

Np. What choice do we have? Reminds m of my hairdresser saying no man would pay $50 for a haircut. I didn't know I had a choice!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Men really aren’t that nice to look at. I’m not sexually attracted to women, but they’re simply more visually pleasing.

This isn’t why. I mean, that’s just silly and your opinion. It’s because men control the means of production in Hollywood. Even when there’s a female director (The Substance), it has to be greenlit, usually by a man.

It’s not silly and it’s a widely held opinion. People don’t want to see men naked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because men control the industry?

Yup. It’s also why you often see gratuitous lesbian sex scenes but would never see a gratuitous sex scene of two men.

[Anonymous]

Dicks are gross