Erotic depictions of women in drawing, painting, sculpture and photography from the dawn of man to the present.

Friday, January 6, 2017

Centrefold Venus of the Month 91: Cynthia Suckhold, December 1977



Well, this last week's hirsute Centrefold of the Week, Cynthia Suckhold,  (above) has attracted some comment, unusually, both positive and negative.   One thing is for certain is that her uncompromising centrefold has attracted a lot of views in that time; more views in seven days than the previous centrefold had in seventeen and more views than three of the ladies we posted in October and November.  One of the things we intended to do was post the most popular Centrefold of the Week pictorial of 2017 (if we have it) averaged by views related to days on the site in its entirety. Cynthia would have easily led this ranking, although she is disqualified because many of the views have been in January (she probably still would have won, though).  




Anyway, one reader requested the rest of her pictorial (no doubt just to see what her face was like) so here it is. She appeared in the December 1977 of Cheri.  The brainchild of Peter Wolff, who used to run Gallery and then High Society before setting up Cheri in 1976.  Subtitled the All True National Sex Magazine, it took him even more downmarket than High Society and both magazines were shameless ripoffs of Hustler, anyway. The first issue of Cheri, in August 1976, featured women penetrating themselves with their fingers, almost uniquely at the time, outside of under the counter publications and one pictorial at the time had women photographed with fake semen all over their faces.  Classy it was not.




Wolff was fascinated with real people's sex lives and felt that both Playboy and Penthouse were stuffed full of lifestyle articles which were just pretentious excuses to show naked women.  What he wanted to show, and what he thought most men really wanted, was what Cynthia is showing here; which is as much pink pussy as possible,  Perhaps Cynthia's centrefold is more honest than those which decorated the women with lingerie, lighting and expensive sets.  It is a modern l'origine du monde, perhaps. All are presenting women as objects but this one pares that objectification down to its essence for pictures designed to enhance masturbation. .




Cheri didn't have the budget of the other magazines wither and this was obvious from the poor print quality and colour reproduction (we had to do a lot of colour correction on these images).  In fact it still looked like Hustler had in 1974.  It's circulation eventually passed one million and it managed to survive in a print edition longer than Penthouse, though, eventually stopping print publication late last year, after more than four decades.




They make an attempt at a glamorous Penthouse 1973-style set here, complete with antique sofa but its hard to look sophisticated and glamorous when you are trying to spread your legs as much as possible.  Cynthia is actually a nice looking young lady but even her stockings look cheap; partly to disguise very skinny legs.




At least Cynthia had both legs.  In February 1977's issue Cheri presented a lady named Long Jeanne Silver as their centrefold. She had had her foot and much of her lower leg removed as a child leaving her with a flesh covered bone which she employed in the porn industry in the way that you might imagine. No barrel bottom went unscraped at Cheri.




Speaking of bottoms it is mainly that feature that interested Cynthia''s  unnamed photographer.  More than half of the pictorial''s shots feature her rear aspect and, indeed, she is lucky if she gets her face in most of them.  The photographer is obviously a bottom man not a breast man, as as there is just the one glimpse of one breast on show.




Not a lot of subtlety here, either, as a random prop is inserted into the picture to create insertion fantasies.



Younger readers will, no doubt, be appalled by the forest on display in these pictures but that was what women were like in the seventies (and before, of course).  This may be the source of the differing opinions as to the appeal of Cynthia and Meghan Leopard in our last post.   For Triple P, however, this is what makes them real women, rather than a depilated, fantasy objects.

We are grateful to the reader who gave us one of her other names, Barbara Howe, under which name she appeared in  Mayfair.  She appeared in a number of other British magazines as well, so may have been British.

18 comments:

  1. She's more widely known as Barbara Howe.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for that. I thought I had seen her somewhere else.

      Delete
  2. I actually remember Long Jeanne Silver, suggesting I came across Cheri some time in my youth. (I remember finding a cache of skin magazines in the Mojave Desert, walking home from school.)

    The photography isn't elegant, but Cynthia was a lovely model. Thanks to the conventions of modern porn, I'm afraid there are men in their 20s who think women just don't grow any hair below the neck.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The advantages of a desert climate. Such a cache wouldn't last long in rainy Britain! We looked under train cushions on our way too and from school!

      Delete
  3. Indeed, as you say "this is what makes them real women, rather than a depilated, fantasy objects". Younger readers don't know what they miss on the side of mistery and eroticism. Thank you for showing us Cynthia's face and at least one of her breasts too, as requested previously.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is a lovely tactile element with furry girls too. Always happy to deal with requests if I can.

      Delete
  4. wonderful, that's what they're supposed to look like. much nicer au naturel :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Have to say I am genuinely amazed that the Centrefold shot offended anyone's sensibilities. While it isn't the most beautifully-rendered slice of eroticism (and personally, I much prefer the front view...face included), it is what it is....a young lady's spread labia from behind.

    And, showing my own age no doubt, I always prefer an enticing bush to fancily-sculptured, barely-there efforts, or worse...nothing at all (though they can still be beautiful).

    ReplyDelete
  6. haha I am the offended one. I guess I just don't understand men!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you were the one who commented on the Centrefold of the Month post I can see where you are coming from! Men have always been able to separate an appreciation of all aspects of a real woman (physical and emotional) from an arousing fantasy image, whether one like this, a photograph of an actress or an old style pin up. Many women think that men's attitudes to one must carry over to the other and it doesn't...

      Delete
  7. Yes, I am the one who commented on the Centrefold shot. As a woman I don't find that picture arousing. Of course, many women don't find up close pictures of male genitalia arousing either. I guess we are just wired differently.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. well that's the point: men and women don't have the same kind of look to the body. But feeling is even more important. Anyway it's good to have you on board commenting...

      Delete
  8. Also, thank you for doing this and your other blogs. I love them!

    ReplyDelete
  9. From my years of working in & burrowing through magazine & paperback stores, I recall that during the mid-to-late seventies, there was a flurry of monopede mania mostly in a few truly low-rent mags, many of which didn't even manage color pics for the covers. I believe the psych term is acrotomorphilia

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I certainly remember a series of "letters" in Men Only about the joys of one-legged women at the time!

      Delete