Why Chicks Pose Nude, 1963 Version

In 1963, the nudist vs. men or skin magazines debate was a matter of censorship and obscenity, and when it came to publication, distribution and delivery, a matter of profit and survival. Nudist publications pushed themselves (and obscenity laws to the side) with principals of natural innocence and an anti-erotic stance. While this gave them acceptability, other issues arose.

Interestingly, the issue was not always 'art v. porn' but those of 'lifestyle', 'aesthetics' and 'self-esteem'. The August 1963 issue of Nude Living (a nudist publication by Elysium, Inc.) discussed such matters with a several page-long rebuttal to Thomas Ives' "Why Great Ladies Pose Without Clothes" which appeared in the May 1963 issue of SAGA, "the magazine for men".

Here's a snippet from Would You Pose Without Clothes?, by Alan Duncan (for Nude Living):

Admittedly the subject of sexual freedom is touchy and open to interpretations. Other authorities, for instance, might find Dr. Hoffman a bit stuffy and pedantic in some of his conclusions, especially that displaying a lovely body is necessarily a "cheap vanity." Appearing in the nude does not always mean that character is cheapened. Along with maturity should come an enlightened attitude about sex. It is sophistry to say that the woman who enjoys for many reasons (among them being admired) appearing in the nude under controlled conditions is perforce cheap, vulgar, or immoral.

The image of Diane Webber (from International Nudist) is included as Diane is mentioned and interviewed in the article -- and because you like to see nude chicks.