Yes more of Hollywoods weird double standard regarding nudity. Male genitals and associated jokes abound and never a vulva in sight. In the very very few recent films with female nudity always safely behind a patch and merkin.
Looks like this film will be like all the others in this genre , a complete bomb and flop!
ITS TIME FOR THE MERKINS TO COME OFF, ITS TIME TO FREETHEVULVA!!
Please read my Bio.
I agree what utter rubbish. How is a mans genitalia not NC-17 and a woman's is?
Hypocritical and a disturbing if not perverse double standard
It's really strange that Hollywierd has such a fear regarding vaginas. A body part that is so ridiculously common on the internet has yet to become commonplace in anything resembling a mainstream film. As far as I'm concerned, if a woman is wearing a merkin, that should trigger a PG-13 rating at worst. A merkin is no different than a thong bikini.
shareI love getting to see the genital and anal areas of beautiful female humans and I do not think there should be any legal age limit for knowing what a female (or male for that matter) human body looks like. Nudity itself should be rated G. I like to look at certain types of soft core porn and I think children should be allowed to see that too. Only disgusting VIOLENCE like SAW or HOSTEL should get restrictive ratings.
shareTrance isn't NC-17 and you get a close up long shot of Rosario Dawson's freshly shaved vulva. (they make a point of it being freshly shaved as part of the plot)
I'm not afraid of penis, I'm very confused by men who are immediately repulsed at seeing a penis... you see and handle one every day several times.
Penis jokes have been a thing for a very long time this is nothing new.
Flaccid (soft) Penises are non-sexual so its Rated R. If the Penis was erect, it would be NC-17.
And vagina jokes are a thing now too - even comedians like Sarah Silverman and Amy Schumer have become rich and famous because of vagina jokes. So how come they never show that body part in movies as the punch line the way they show penis? That's what people are asking. No one is afraid or "repulsed" at seeing a penis. They are questioning why all penis and NO vagina at all. Frankly, the question you should be asking is why are people so repulsed at seeing a vagina that showing one in Hollywood films is a big no-no? That's a better question.
Also Trance wouldn't even count because while you see Rosario's beautiful vulva in all its glory, the film itself is a foreign (British) film, not an American Hollywood production. That's what I believe the OP is asking - why is Hollywood so afraid of vaginas even though they don't fear penises, and I'd say that's a very good question. I'm actually glad you brought up Trance because Hollywood filmmakers to this very day continue to lie and claim if they show vagina, the film would earn an NC-17 automatically. They still repeat this lie even though foreign films like Trance were rated R, not NC-17. In fact, Trance was screened by Hollywood distributors to see who would distribute it as a wide release film, and they all passed up on the film due to the vagina exposure, thus it became a limited release film shown in very few theaters and falling out of radar almost completely. Even Hollywood distributors, not just filmmakers, suffer from vaginaphobia.
Also, erect penises don't seem to count as NC-17 because there have been films will erect penises in them that were rated R - Bruno, Hall Pass, The Night Before, Spy, Under the Skin... I don't know where you got the notion that an erect penis is NC-17. Have you worked at the MPAA before? How would you know?
If you can show erect penises and still manage an R rating, there is no reason or excuse that Hollywood can use to claim they cannot show vaginas too.