Comments on: Vintage Erotica

Vintage Erotica

headspace — Fri, 30 May 2003 13:13:11 -0800

boasts a huge collection of vintage erotica; beautiful, artful poses of women you won't see in Maxim anytime soon. The appeal of Vintage Sex is ephemeral, but we've been making erotica long before cameras; since the beginning of civilization, really. (Should really go without saying that none of these links are safe for work.)

By: fishfucker

fishfucker — Fri, 30 May 2003 13:24:07 -0800

awesome post. pornokrates was an instant bookmark for me. thx. [this is good]

By: four panels

four panels — Fri, 30 May 2003 13:24:10 -0800

Is this advertising for the 'In the Rain' cd-rom?

By: four panels

four panels — Fri, 30 May 2003 13:26:15 -0800

Well, it worked.

By: oog

oog — Fri, 30 May 2003 13:27:00 -0800

but, you know, its a real shame that "erotica" really means "nude females." some things never change. that said, i have nothing against nude females. or vintage erotica, for that matter.

By: headspace

headspace — Fri, 30 May 2003 13:29:23 -0800

Four Panels: It's not- I dunno who runs the site, I just happen to like it. (Let me know if the CD is good, will ya?)Oog: Hit the links for Pornokrates, Vintage Sex, and Solomon's Refuge- there's a lot more than just naked women there. ;)

By: tomplus2

tomplus2 — Fri, 30 May 2003 13:54:59 -0800

Be carefull what you buy. Poor Pee Wee (paul reubens) was charged with a misdemeanor for having some under age nudes in his newly purchased vintage collection. "The city attorney charged Reubens with a misdemeanor after a police search of his Los Angeles home allegedly turned up images of children among a vast erotica collection. Reubens said he had purchased the collection from a dealer and was unaware that it contained anything improper."

By: soyjoy

soyjoy — Fri, 30 May 2003 14:06:40 -0800

that said, i have nothing against nude females. Neither do I. But I hope to.

By: Hildago

Hildago — Fri, 30 May 2003 15:02:04 -0800

Is this advertising for the 'In the Rain' cd-rom? Damnit, this is starting to piss me off.

By: Wood

Wood — Fri, 30 May 2003 16:06:21 -0800

What?

By: jamespake

jamespake — Fri, 30 May 2003 16:07:57 -0800

that said, i have nothing against nude females. Neither do I. But I hope to. Soyjoy, you are hereby charged under cliche misuse article 37 specifically the 'If I told you you had a beautiful body would you hold it against me' clause.

By: WolfDaddy

WolfDaddy — Fri, 30 May 2003 16:19:03 -0800

Actually, I believe soyjoy is exempt from indictment. As soyjoy's gender is indeterminate, they could use the "well, it might be two women with beautiful bodies and ... and ... they might KISS" clause provided in article 69. Oh, and [this is cool]. Thanks.

By: jamespake

jamespake — Fri, 30 May 2003 16:36:02 -0800

WolfDaddy, if you read my comment you'll notice that I made no assumptions about gender, sexuality or eating habits (for that matter). The charge stands.

By: moonbiter

moonbiter — Fri, 30 May 2003 17:31:22 -0800

but, you know, its a real shame that "erotica" really means "nude females." some things never change I just wonder why it should be considered erotica. Are all nudes to be considered erotica? Can images of the human form not be seperated from sexual desire?

By: Hildago

Hildago — Fri, 30 May 2003 18:08:28 -0800

Can images of the human form not be seperated from sexual desire? Not really. I doubt it anyway. People will say that "nudes" are art, whereas "naked pictures" are pornographic. The difference is merely technical skill and aesthetic genius. Titian painted pictures of rich people's mistresses and wives, to be hung in their bedrooms. Gosh, I wonder what they were used for? Now we hang them in galleries, try to pretend that the Venus of Urbino is touching her crotch for purely academic purposes.

By: letitrain

letitrain — Fri, 30 May 2003 19:26:58 -0800

Thanks Hidalgo. I'll never look at Venus the same...

By: kozad

kozad — Fri, 30 May 2003 19:35:13 -0800

To us, this is quaint. Twee, even. To our great-grandfathers, this was megaporn.

By: stbalbach

stbalbach — Fri, 30 May 2003 21:17:40 -0800

Which follows porn today will someday be quaint .. frightning.

By: plep

plep — Fri, 30 May 2003 23:36:44 -0800

Thanks, this is good. I particularly Aubrey Beardsley's illustrations to Lysistrata.

By: hairyeyeball

hairyeyeball — Sat, 31 May 2003 00:23:51 -0800

Should really go without saying that none of these links are safe for work. Unless you're the editor of Scarlet Letters.

By: Big Fat Tycoon

Big Fat Tycoon — Sat, 31 May 2003 14:36:10 -0800

stbalbach: how does that follow? i foresee a return to Victorianism in oh, about a hundred years.

By: cohappy

cohappy — Sun, 01 Jun 2003 00:29:57 -0800

jamespake, you are hereby charged under article 42, which clearly prohibits "any action taken that, directly or indirectly, results in an obstruction in the execution of, or attempted execution of, lesbian acts of any sort"

By: kliuless

kliuless — Sun, 01 Jun 2003 08:33:37 -0800

here're some vintage male nudes! dunno if it's "erotica" :D