1971 anatomy book uses pornographic photos


43 Responses to “1971 anatomy book uses pornographic photos”

  1. febryle says:

    Wow, I have a copy of this that a friend gave me in medical school. The “best” (worst?) picture is one of a topless woman emerging from a swimming pool, with an arrow pointing to her neck with anatomy labeled. 

    I had no idea it was worth so much!

  2. ChicagoD says:

    I saw some posed nudes, but not any pornography. I guess I don’t know it when I see it.

    Now we’ll see who the lawyers on here are.

  3. theSamLowry says:

    Naked does not equal porn.

  4. Quiche de Resistance says:


  5. Gyrofrog says:

    This is similar to what ‘National Lampoon’ called “mnudemonics.”

  6. sisyphus321 says:

    _Please_ tell me they didn’t write a book for pediatric care.

  7. angusm says:

    “What am I doing? What does it look like I’m doing? I’m studying for my anatomy class, obviously.”

  8. timquinn says:

    I once tried to explain to my girlfriend how Playboy had served to help the liberation of women. I never tried that again.

  9. davnel says:

    And to think I once passed up studying medicine. Rats!

  10. robdobbs says:

    What they atta do is change the title to “Anatomy for Artists” and republish it.

  11. Preston Sturges says:

    There was a whole genre of “photography” books that were mild porn.

  12. toadboy65 says:

    someone should do a story explaining the strange economy of books and other items which sell at seemingly crazy inflated prices on Amazon and Ebay. here is a link to one of the thousands of examples:


  13. kmoser says:

    Ewww, their epidermis is showing.

  14. rationalthought says:

    Ah the 70′s when women had normal body fat distribution and pubic hair, oh how times have changed. Why did they not have art nudes in my chemistry books? I guess it was hard enough to get women in the hard sciences. 

  15. Ooh, Marli Renfro!  She’s the woman sitting sideways on that chair.

Leave a Reply