Tried posting this in r/ feminism and two Xx’s and basically got no response. Disappointed I didn’t get more support regarding this inequity. I then posted to r/ OneY to get a male perspective and someone directed me here (I’m new to the sub). Much if this is copy/pasted but I’ve added some additional sources and made edits.

TLDR

Discussions with my girlfriend about imbalance of male/female nudity in film lead us to discover that while women have been shown more frequently partially nude, female genitalia is almost entirely banned from TV/film while male genitalia is freely shown.

Background

Since this is a strange topic I want to make it known that I’m not some kind of pervert who just wants to see vaginas in film/TV. If that were my motivation I’d just go watch porn. My interest in this topic is sociological: what does this say about gender relations in the US?

I had never really thought about this topic before a few months ago when Wonder Woman came out. My girlfriend and I both saw the film and mostly really enjoyed it.

I told her that I would like be able to take my daughter to see it (age 9, from a previous relationship), but that I was concerned she was too young for some of the sexual content. In particular, the Chris Pine nude scene but also the discussions about whether men are necessary for pleasure.

She took this is as a criticism of the inclusion of the Chris Pine nude scene and ended up sending me an article talking about how the inclusion of that scene was a win for feminism since action movies typically have “the male gaze” and include unnecessary sex appeal targeted to men. Having Wonder Women fully clothed while a man is helplessly naked in front of her was supposed to be “a reversal.” I responded that if true feminism is about equality and includes advocacy for men’s issues, we shouldn’t consider “pay back” to be a good motive. I hadn’t originally been intending to criticize the scene (just saying I didn’t want my daughter to see it) but it was gratuitous and unnecessary.

This lead to a broader discussion about the imbalance of male/female nudity. It went something like this:

Her: Women are shown “nude” more frequently.

Me: Breasts are shown more frequently than full male nudity, but men are shown shirtless as often or more often and this is often for sexual appeal.

Her: But men being shirtless isn’t considered nudity. Only a penis counts as nudity.

Me: Movies do show penises on occasion, but never vaginas (I’ll clarify what I mean by this later.) More importantly, I thought desexualizing breasts was a goal of feminism? (Aka free the nipple) And again, shirtless males are definitely more sexualized than fully clothed males, even if this is less sexual than breasts.

When Thor: Ragnarok came out I rekindled the discussion by sending her this article (or one like it) where Chris Hemsworth says he thought his shirtless scene was “unnecessary” and “gratuitous” and that it wasn’t originally in the script. He was forced to do the scene by his director for sex appeal. She agreed with me that if a female actor was forced to do unscripted nudity for “sex appeal” to men, that it would be considered sexual harassment and probably lead to a media blow up.

The only point of disagreement we still have really is on the disparate treatment of genitalia in film/TV.

Research

The MPAA has strict rules regarding showing genitalia in film. Breaking these rules takes you from “R” to “NC17” and shrinks your potential audience. Penises can be shown, but not fully erect. If they flop, they can only flop side to side and not up or down (looks too much like an erection.) Vaginas on the other hand, usually can’t be shown at all (meaning no labia minor, labia major, or even vulva “cleft.”) If a woman does “full frontal nudity” she usually has to have either a naturally thick bush or wear a “merkin” which covers her actual parts.

The MPAA will allow a penis up close, for an extended period, in good lighting, and now semi-erect, (Hall Pass / Bruno) whereas the vulva, labia, clitoris, or vagina have been shown a grand total of ZERO times (unless you want to count the "did I see what I thought I just saw" moment of Sharon Stone in Basic Instinct or Rosario Dawson in Trance). If a female's pubic region is clean shaven she will be required to wear a merkin (pu**y wig) so as not to show any vulva cleft and get the dreaded NC-17.

Source

There are a few very minor exceptions to this. “Trance” drew some criticism for showing a fully nude Rosario Dawson with a shaved pubic region. This had a very specific purpose in the story, so maybe that’s why it escaped the NC17 rating. There were still no labia shown, but it was a bald pubic area showing the cleft, which is extremely rare. The lighting was poor and it wasn’t equivalent to a penis because she wasn’t spread legged or bending over from behind.

However, despite the calls for “more penis” in shows like Game of Thrones or movies and TV in general—and despite praise for shows like American Gods for showing a lot of dong (can’t link to site because it’s banned here)—male genitalia are not black listed in the same way. Game of Thrones actually shows a lot of penises but has never shown a vagina.

The amount of penises in TV has dramatically increased since 2015, but still no vaginas.

I’ve also noticed a lot of movies with gratuitous and unnecessary shirtless males, with no eye candy for men. Thor, Captain America, The Last Jedi, just to name a few.

Conclusions

Hollywood and TV are showing more shirtless men and penises as an attempt to “pay back” a perceived historical imbalance. Vaginas are never shown.

The equitable fix is to either completely ban penises from a Film/TV or to start showing vaginas in all their glory. Personally, I don’t need genitalia of either gender in my entertainment and I’d prefer the nudity was limited to boobs and butts (of both genders).