Ok, that sounded a little redundant. Bear with me. We’ve been joking in yet another nekkid Harry Potter thread about the, uh, presentation of Mr. Radcliff’s family jewels during his nude scene(s) in Eqqus. And it occurred to me that I don’t really care to see his actual penis and testicles. Not that I’d be grossed out by them, but I’m much more interested/aroused/glorying in the body as a whole and the abdomen, hips, inguinal ligament and pelvic bone than I am in the actual genitals. I don’t actually find penises very aesthetically pleasing, to be honest.
In fact, if you Google **Eqqus **with the safe mode off, you’ll immediately get two image hits of Daniel Radcliff in publicity stills, one bare from the pelvic bone up and one with schlong a-danglin’. I find the first a much sexier image.
So, for those of you who are fans of the male form, is it the actual dirty bits that get your motor revving, or other generally hidden parts of the male body?
And, if you wouldn’t mind, your gender and orientation would be nice to know - I’m wondering if there’s a homo/hetero divide here or not.
I prefer the chest-pelvis region as well (I call it the “Greek Statue” look). And, as my husband and I were saying the other night - why look at a soft penis? It’s goofy looking.
An erect penis is a different thing, and is added to my mental database for future use
Given the option, sure, I’ll look at the penis. Why not? What I find annoying are the coy fellows out there, posing completely nude but with a hand parked in front of their goods. I don’t find that sexy at all, I find it awkwardly posed and artificial.
I prefer the full monty. I’d rather have the completely naked picture with the cocks-a-flappin. The rest is nice but it’s … not exactly my favorite part.
Aside from the fact that the one you refer to is faked (which is, in and of itself, a turn off), I don’t really like “posed” nude shots anyway. Porn promos, what have you – I’d rather have the subject just be natural acting.
A bit of both. A full body nude of Danny boy would rev me up. The promotional pics of the waist up don’t. Likewise, a shot of just his twig and berries wouldn’t do much.
A man’s junk all by itself is not hot. The aforementioned bits in addition to the hips, abs, chest, etc creates a much more appealing image. Especially when that image is attached to a man with a british accent.
Penis? Meh. They all look the same to me… the attraction definitely lies in what they’re attached to.
Personally, it’s all about the abs and the butt. I love love love a toned mid- and back-section (see: partial shot of Daniel Radcliffe, D’Angelo’s video for How Does It Feel, various David Beckham photo shoots, etc etc etc). Any of the above get me more hot and bothered than any full frontal I’ve ever seen, despite the fact that the guy could be hung like a mouse for all I know.
I definitely like seeing naked men, but it’s more about seeing the body as a whole than anything. There is also a tittilation factor of seeing parts that aren’t usually on display, but that’s not specific to the genitals.
The genitals themselves? Eh.
I have a lot of experience with this very thing given that I’m a member of a particular dating website where it is very common for men to have a cock-shot as their main photo or send one with the first email. As in a picture of just their penis. Apparently, a lot of men think that their disembodied penis is really alluring.
(Straight female.)
I’m a straight male but I’ve always taken it for granted that females were never really that into male full frontal nudity.
This from the fact that Playgirl magazine never really gained the popularity like Playboy did.
And that anytime you hear “girl-talk” about wanting to see some hot celebrity guy nude it’s usually from the back side only. I’ve never heard gals saying how they would really love to see Brad Pitts penis.
I thought all you straight guys read Playboy for the articles? I have been sorely deceived!
Something like 50% of Playgirl’s readership is gay men. There’s an amusing mockumentary called Man of the Year, about filmmaker Dirk Shaffer’s year as Playgirl’s MOTY and his own coming to terms with being gay and a heterosex symbol that touches a bit on Playgirl’s gay readership.
Although I like the pictures (like the promo for Equus) that show whoever almost to the good stuff, it’s only the Snoopy Happy Dance I break out for actual confirmation. I mean, it ain’t hard (heh) to tell if he’s chiseled or got tattoos or whatever. I need to know the correct square footage.
So, to answer the question specifically… show me the dickage!
Female, straight and grateful for that head’s up (heh again) search idea on Google. Mmm.
Oh, misspelling Equus, of course! And maybe for not sending them the links to pictures of Daniel Radcliffe’s penis. (Fake, huh? I suspected so, but wondered if a second, more explicit, version of that pic was released in Europe.)
I like to see it if you’re going to do a nude scene. Hey, it’s there, it’s natural. It’s distracting when you contort yourself to not show it.
But, as much as I love all parts of the male form, their kit is probably the least interesting to me, unless you’re a porn star showing off something impressive. Face, torso, legs - nice.
Some guys are show-ers, some are growers, but most guys in a completely flaccid state are simply displaying anatomy. Women’s boobs are there, all the time. Guy’s dicks have to be, huh… fluffed to look their best.
While it’s not a guarantee, if there’s a black and white photo purporting to be a celebrity from the days after color photography became commonplace, there’s a good chance it’s a fake. Especially if it’s a b/w photo that bears a striking similarity to a known color photo.
As I mentioned in the naked DR Dopefest thread, there’s a subscription site that purports to be the only one out there with bona fide footage of DR naked on stage. The front page of the site has one NSFW image so to spell it out, billymasters(dot)com. There’s a $5 48-hour pass option if anyone’s interested and a $10 monthly option (I have no affiliation with the site).
