An advertisement for Agent Provocateur has been branded ‘sexist and pornographic’ in the UK. By Twitter snowflakes, as usual.
God help us all. She’s in lingerie. As a woman, all I see is lingerie. As probably worn by women who have a specific intent on their male (and female) significant others.
God forbid she’d go naked and acknowledge her body!
OK, the post’s not naturist, but symptomatic of a new puritanism sweeping the world. Little wonder naturism, even in SL, is in retreat. God help us if women have a vulva or breasts. God help us if men have a penis and testicles. Where does this sort of nonsensical approach leave naturism if we daren’t display, or semi display come to that, some bits of us? Are we, as naturists, sexists and pornographic?
GG
the sl naturist 
We are the opposite of pornographic and sexist! — Maybe that’s why they don’t get us.
Pingback: Nudie News
I wanted to respond to this post but I had to think about it for a while first. What this advertisement is saying to women is that sending a small fortune on outfits like is necessary to be appealing and by the way only thin extremely thin ‘barbi’ types need apply. So its the opposite of any kind of body acceptance. Pornogrphy grows where body acceptance is denied. A big part of sexism is promoting insecurity by basing women’s value on standards of appearance that few achieve and those that do for only a relatively brief period of their lives . So in that regard I would agree with those who say this advertisment is sexist and while not overtely, pornographic promoting promoting that world view. Adverting is a form of propaganda and it works. That’s why it’s such a big industry. It forms people’s attitudes in insiduous.ways. All that said, I agree with GG that our culture is rediculously prudish about the body naked or to whatever extent, clothed..