Mike & Lynda
June 28, 2006
With more than forty years experience in fashion photography, we were
surprised to read in your columns, of women who considered that their
labia were too large. Your photo gallery does not show any of these
women, so is size a matter of - how long is a piece of string?
Had your web site been available in say 1956, women would have
been writing in, saying their labia was too small or underdeveloped.
In the 1950's the law said that you could not even show pubic
hair, so every studio had to employ an artist to airbrush out all
evidence of genitalia. Yet girls who had underdeveloped genitals were
difficult to find, because they were self-conscious about applying
for any job that included nude posing.
On the sexual side,
teenage foreplay was an important part of courting, if not the only
part, so it was essential that the girl had something the boy could
play with.
Come the mid-sixties and the fashion changed and big
girls had to look like little girls. Petting gave way to free love.
The pill meant that girls could now go all the way, so genital
foreplay was less significant.
Today every woman wants to have
the body of a young adolescent girl. Low esteem means you must look
normal, even if normal is incredibly artificial.
However, we must
not overlook the fact that the labia is not just a decoration, it has
a function to control the flow of urine. Without the labia,
women have difficulty in stopping the urine flowing down the buttocks
and thighs due to water's capillary action.
You will never stop
easily lead girls from seeking surgery to correct what they think is
nature's mistakes, but do they realise that what they will get, looks
very similar to that of a female chimpanzee.
previous