3 ms·
A lot of that era of dancing involved men it's true, but largely as props for holding the women in provocative poses. You might argue that is some extension of
by smackeyacky 4y ago
A lot of that era of dancing involved men it's true, but largely as props for holding the women in provocative poses. You might argue that is some extension of classical ballet (or of the natural strength advantages that men have) but it makes no difference to the titillation factor of TV dance segments of the era.
- harry8 4y agoI'd actually make much the same argument about classical ballet as it developed only with different technology, (stage, theatre) and a different, more segregated and selected audience, some of whom counted more than the rest combined. Tremendously fit women showing off their shape and astounding levels of flexibility has always been a large part of that appeal and I believe knowingly so. I say that without trying to denigrate an art-form I don't understand and appreciate (or even like) on a refined level. The man who hasn't seen a ballet dancer of either sex they found attractive doing remarkable things with their body and let their imagination go at least a little probably has some pretty profound health issues and my sympathies. Something similar may well be true for women in the audience, not sure if this is really the place to ask for people to speak up on the point. tl;dr sex sells and always has.