Playboy from the 60sPlayboy from the 60sIt’s always interesting to see how everything in our lives is changing with time. Even Playboy is very different from what it was 50 years ago, although the standard of censorship remained more or less the same. Don’t believe me? Have a look at the post and point to the differences you found in the [...]
It’s always interesting to see how everything in our lives is changing with time. Even Playboy is very different from what it was 50 years ago, although the standard of censorship remained more or less the same. Don’t believe me? Have a look at the post and point to the differences you found in the comments!
Related posts:
Loading ...
26,106 views
Print 
Comments (16)
16 Comments
so this is what hot women looked like before Photoshop
i see, my understanding of beauty needs reconsideration
Real non-anorectic, non-photoshoped girls. Beauty.
oh and no silicon, lipo or any other nip tuck crap girls!
just plain
To me, the most obvious difference between the Playboy of our fathers, and Playboy today is back then you NEVER saw anything below a woman’s belt line. In other words, no vaginas, and very few pubes. (Although women back then tended to have more pubes, if you catch my drift.)
“Although women back then tended to have more pubes, if you catch my drift”
I think we all catch your drift, seeing as how you spelled it out n all.
The girls are hotter now, but they were sexier then.
well the question is, why are they hotter now, if they really are?
is it because of our new understanding of beauty or because they grow better nowadays or because of plastic surgery/photoshop?
its very unlikely that girls just became prettier. if, e.g. you take a look at the young jane fonda, she was GORGEOUS! even compared to todays standards she would be one or maybe even the most attractive women in the film biz.
sure, now and back then beauty was in the eye of the beholder, so its hard to say what is actually hotter…
@ Jeff
and about the pubes: yes, back then that part was left to our imagination. close ups of certain areas of the female gender might be hot to wank to, but never were “sexy”… just pure sex
watch this, if you want to see some makeup plus photoshop magic!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFlxSlOKNI&feature=related
2nd picture resembles late Jackie Kennedy.
The women of the past were more sexy and natural. I love women with pubic hair and alot of it, so that’s my era.
FYI: These women are old enough to be your moms or grandmas by now. Oh yeah, by the way… Damn
I hate to bust your bubble guys. Photoshop or digital manipulation of photographs may have been unknown in the 1960s but airbrushing out certain details (e.g. skin blemishes or pubic hair) was commonly practiced by Playboy and other magazines.
Cosmetic surgery wasn’t unkown either, breast augmentation came in around the mid-60s.
Time has changed everything how woman look and men as well. Is just the sign of times is all and changing of style. The women where sexy back then and they are sexy now. We have changed as a culture nothing more.
las chicas me exitaron mucho pero creo que deberian enseñar mas la vagina para exitarse mas a por sierto tienen unas tetas enormes
All such truthful! not usually.Especially not sunburnt places
)
back when playboy was filled with natural beauty. nowadays its just twigs with round, bolt-on tits that look too obviously fake. honestly i dont even pick up playboy mags anymore, the girls all look the same, nothing special, there are only a few exceptions. its obvious that hughs getting older cuz he clearly cant see good anymore.