Same reason there are more naked women in museums than naked men, and more male artists than female artists in those same museums.

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.

+1

Do we really need to see anyone naked? Can nothing remain personal and intimate?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one wants to see men’s junk.

Why do so many here find men's junk so gross?

Do men here agree that their junk is gross?

OP

May CRANK rocks and yall would love to see it, touch it etc.

I'm a guy and I'd love to see naked men and women.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No don’t think it’s because men control Hollywood. I think women are visually more interesting and often vulnerable characters are depicted sexually. It is what it is and mirrors real life whether you like it or not.

Of course it's because men control Hollywood. Do you HONESTLY think there would be just as many tits if you replaced every male Hollywood exec, director, producer and writer with women?

There are plenty of female directors objectifying other women. The writer/director of The Substance is a woman.

This movie was quite literally about aging and the insane pressure of women to look youthful. The nudity wasn’t gratuitous at all and the whole point was how problematic objectifying women’s bodies is. It sounds like you didn’t understand the film one bit.

I already thought of that, and seeing boobs isn't required to get that point across.

OP

Anonymous wrote:It's sad the number of women responding that nobody wants to see male genitalia. Absolutely not true! Plenty of women like to see it and plenty of men do also.

It's amazing how many people think everyone else thinks like them.

I'd be fine seeing it, too. The only reason we do not is because men have historically controlled Hollywood. Now, we are used to seeing what they want us to see and think it's strange or odd to see a guy's junk on screen.

Anonymous wrote:No one wants to see men’s junk.

Why do so many here find men's junk so gross?

Do men here agree that their junk is gross?

OP

Anonymous wrote:I want to see man sucking on some dcks, why not! Enough of this DEI crap in movies, hopefully there is EO order fixing this unbalance!

LOL!

OP

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.

I see your point and agree to a certain extent, yet this is a learned behavior or belief for both of us.

OP

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No don’t think it’s because men control Hollywood. I think women are visually more interesting and often vulnerable characters are depicted sexually. It is what it is and mirrors real life whether you like it or not.

Of course it's because men control Hollywood. Do you HONESTLY think there would be just as many tits if you replaced every male Hollywood exec, director, producer and writer with women?

There are plenty of female directors objectifying other women. The writer/director of The Substance is a woman.

This movie was quite literally about aging and the insane pressure of women to look youthful. The nudity wasn’t gratuitous at all and the whole point was how problematic objectifying women’s bodies is. It sounds like you didn’t understand the film one bit.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No don’t think it’s because men control Hollywood. I think women are visually more interesting and often vulnerable characters are depicted sexually. It is what it is and mirrors real life whether you like it or not.

Of course it's because men control Hollywood. Do you HONESTLY think there would be just as many tits if you replaced every male Hollywood exec, director, producer and writer with women?

There are plenty of female directors objectifying other women. The writer/director of The Substance is a woman.

And in over 100 years of movies, 99 perceny of directors have been men. Come on. And the director of the Substance didn't exactly objectify her. It was a treatise on objectification and very effective.

+1

It’s all about the male gaze.

Anonymous wrote:Dicks are gross

+1

Male nudity is scary and offensive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No don’t think it’s because men control Hollywood. I think women are visually more interesting and often vulnerable characters are depicted sexually. It is what it is and mirrors real life whether you like it or not.

Of course it's because men control Hollywood. Do you HONESTLY think there would be just as many tits if you replaced every male Hollywood exec, director, producer and writer with women?

There are plenty of female directors objectifying other women. The writer/director of The Substance is a woman.

And in over 100 years of movies, 99 perceny of directors have been men. Come on. And the director of the Substance didn't exactly objectify her. It was a treatise on objectification and very effective.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's simple. Naked women sell tickets, naked men do not. /End thread

There is so much porn on the internet, no one is paying to see a movie because of nudity.

Lol. Tell me you know nothing about men without telling me you know nothing about men.

Just because a man sees one pair of breasts naked, that doesn't mean he doesn't want to see more paid naked. If Sydney Sweeney is going to show her boobs in a movie, men will watch it