Maegan:
“But 108 showgirls, clad only in peacock headdresess and carrying fans of peacock feathers, slowly parading across the stage, that would be different. And Carroll needed something different, if he was going to top his first Vanities. That show had starred Peggy Hopkins Joyce, then the most notorious woman in America and the original for the character Lorelei Lee Anita Loos made the narrator of Gentlemen Prefer Blodes.”

It seems like these types of performances are starting a “nude battle” between directors where each one is trying to out do the other.  Directors even seem to be competing with themselves.  In this quote Carroll needed something different in order to top his first show.  It seems like censorship is on the decline at this time because the shows are getting more and more promiscuous.

“The shocking costumes which such contests encourage certainly call for protests from organizations interested in girl welfare. . . . It was noticed by competent observers that the outlook on life of girls who participated was completely changed. Before the competition they were splendid examples of innocent and pure womanhood. Afterward their heads were filled with vicious ideas.”
 
This quote seems to express the idea that with these scandalous costumes came ideas of promiscuous behavior and “vicious ideas”.  It seems unreal that girls would just change from innocent women to scandalous women with “vicious ideas” with just a costume.  But also, at this time, it probably did not take much for someone to judge a woman for having “vicious ideas”.  It’s also important to know what was thought of as a “vicious idea”.  

Stephanie:


Dexter: Some of the concerns of censorship were the image of women would be changed when they could be seen wearing a bathing suit that showed their legs.  The old fashioned image of women would soon be replaced with a more, say, “scantily clad” image.  This image of course is not scantily clad by any means in today’s society.  These images of the modern women react like a domino effect, where one image is seen as prude, and the newer image is seen as promiscuous, and then the newest image would be seen as promiscuous.  It’s really like a chain reaction.  

Women in show business were becoming more and more promiscuous as well.  Showgirls and actresses would parade around a stage in low-cut, shimmering dresses.  The contrast between the way women would act on stage and their image of what they previously were was completely and totally different.  The prim-and-proper image of women from the late nineteenth-century had been totally changed at the image of the showgirls and actresses of the early-mid twentieth century.

Kayla: "Nudity was a common element in shows like the Vanities, George White's Scandals, Ziegfeld's Follies, and the other "revues." Usually, it was momentary and partial, a bared breast or buttock briefly glimpsed. Writing in The Survey, a weekly magazine normally devoted to social problems and issues, Leon Whipple described both the "Artists and Models" revue at the Winter Garden and the public's "acclimation" to "public nakedness" in the theatre"
It was becoming a normal thing for nudity in the theatre.  It is even pointed out that it had been happening for some years now in New York City.  But this will build up to censorship.
 
"Two detectives from the Vice Squad attended the opening night performance. The next morning the District Attorned demanded that Carroll either drop the [Peacock] number entirely or else clothe the performers. Carroll refused."
This marked the beginning of the time when New York decided to put its foot down and not allow the nudity to be shown anymore.   The way in which this was done....with the officer and the blanket was probably not the best way to go about the problem.  They should not have surprised the woman on stage by covering her with a blanket (of course she is going to put up a fight).  They also should have made it a little more official, so the crowd actually knew what was going on....they assumed it was part of the show.  
 
"The next morning, another of New York City's finest observed a group of teenaged boys stopping in the lobby of the Earl Carroll Theatre to ogle a poster <http://www.assumption.edu/ahc/vanities/P1010108.JPG>  of the same Kathryn Ray."
After the censor came, the crowd overruled the decision and the show was to go on.  The problem with this is just what this quote is demonstrating.  People weren't happy that their teenage boys were seeing that type of thing, as parents nowadays would not be.  There was also the question of morals...were the pictures and the shows against the morals of most at the time? I think so, besides the "Modern" people of the time, most people would have found this to be immoral.  
 
"In general, Ziegfeld's girls have not only the Anglo-Saxon straightness—straight backs, straight brows, and straight noses—but also the peculiar frigidity and purity, the frank high-school-girlishness which Americans like. He does not aim to make them, from the moment they appear, as sexually attractive as possible, as the Follies Begères [in Paris], for example, does. He appeals to American idealism, and then, when the male is intent on his chaste and dewy-eyed vision, he gratifies him on this plane by discreetly disrobing his goddess. He tries, furthermore, to represent, in the maneuvers of his well-trained choruses, not the movement and abandon of emotion, but what the American male really regards as beautiful: the efficiency of mechanical movement."
This quote just really demonstrated what the Follies and shows like them of the time, was doing for the American Image of the young woman. They were moving to more independent people, and gaining rights little by little, but at the same time these shows attracted so many men because of the "disrobing of his goddess".

Natalie: As Earl Carroll said in an address to the court in a trial for his defense against charges of public obscenity on November 10, 1924, “today…women and our young people in their unafraid companionship preach and practice a freedom formerly unknown. This freedom, both of action and utterance, is finding abundant expression in the dramatic field. Then along comes the censor with frown and formula out of a forgotten age, and applies the cloture” (4). While this is certainly true it did not take into account the way in which advertisers were slowly changing behavioral norms in the minds of young girls. As in the way that they convinced us of the need to shower daily and wear our clothes only once before washing them again, they began to slowly change the way that women carried themselves. The best example of censorship and the female focus on beauty is that of the introduction of the one-piece bathing suit. While today this is considered conservative, at the time it was scandalous for women to be showing so much of their figure. Some athletic swimmers such as Crystal Eastman and Annette Kellerman found that one-piece bathing suits provided them more mobility, helping them to further succeed in their sport. However fewer women were attracted to one-piece suits for the mobility it provided than for the popularity it seemed to carry with it thanks to those famous actresses that donned them in movies. Even some men such as esteemed critic Edmund Wilson were overcome by the freedom and confidence that this new generation of women seemed to possess. In writing a critic of Follies Wilson wrote, “It has in it something of Riverside Drive, of the Plaza [hotel], of Scott Fitzgerald’s novels – though it radically differs from these latter in being almost devoid of wit” (6). It was almost as if societal advances of the previous years had been leading to this pivotal point in American culture, for as Wilson put it, there seemed to be something of the old culture still within it, just more pronounced than ever before.
 All of these examples shed some light unto an idea that is still true today: sex sells. While the “it” girls may have changed from Marie Prevost and Gloria Swanson to Miley Cyrus and Britney Spears, the message that advertisers are sending is all too familiar. There is no avoiding, “the censor with frown and formula out of a forgotten age” as Earl Carroll put it, for parents and other adults of past generations still criticize the new fashions and continued increase of promiscuity among girls. However, that being said, advertisers continue to have a large impact on how the new generation views the world and what “proper behaviors” they believe in. It was the recognition of this important link on behalf of advertisers around the nation that has helped to make them millions of dollars over the course of the years.

Josh: The idea of sex sells is very apparent in the public. For most people it was something that was relatively new, and made people become very interested. Especially, on such a highly glorified stage like Broadway. The public enjoyed the idea that they could see something very provocative and exciting. Titilation was very obvious, and the fact that you could see something for a relatively affordable price was something that was interesting for people. The image of Dorothy Knapp really shows what is being discussed. “Minimum” was the word that was used to describe the dress, and if there were any less fabric on that dress it would seem outrageous. Also the discussion in class about the cop chasing the nude female even drew a rise out of them. It was one thing when the audience paid for the spectacle, but when they got even more excited to the chasing it shows their excitement. The people tying to advocate these productions really stress the idea of the “bad effect” it has. When underage kids are caught staring at the posters not seen to be fit for their eyes, it sets a bad example. This should be something only for adults, and only adults. Then the typical female during this time period really want to feel beautiful and desired. It was very common for girls to enter contests and try to prove their beauty. “Shows a mania for perfection.” Everyone wanted to do this, and it is apparent that most every girl did this. So it is very hard for people to advocate censorship when so many people are involved in the competitions. It was a fantasy that was central to popular culture, and even men were intrigued by the show. It seems almost hypocritical to fight something that everyone is doing, when people had the freedom of choice. It was such a small population that went to the shows and competitions, all throughout America not everyone would see this, and for such a large effort to stop the shows seems like a waste of time.

Lou:
1.   The advocating censorship consisted of the appearance of nudity in movies and theatrical productions and the amount of skin shown in beauty contests and beach wear. Some of the concers dealt with going against the historical view of women and men. Women were looked down upon if they were to show much skin in public. By people going against the censorship, it was a new way of people showing their excitement for the new popular culture. This type of excitement the people were recieveing was an unusual excitement that many weren't accustomed to and kept private. The historians believed a sense of danger was being generated and couldn't understand what was occuring. This confusion sparked the concerns of the censorship.

2.   Earl Carrroll is described to understand that America was ripe for titilation. Women were going against the old beliefs of how women should dress and started to become more free. This type of excitement shifted the notions of proper behavior by having women and men go against the censorships. This allowed for people to not be limited and try to reach that glamorous perfect look that was becoming popular. The censors gave Earl Carroll and those "brave" youth defying beach censors popularity to grow the new culture that was taking over. This censorship allowed for the historians to grasp what was occuring and notice how others were reacting to the new popular culture.


Alex:             Some of the concerns of those advocating censorship found in “Revues and other Vanities: The Commodification of Fantasy” are that nudity had a “bad effect on teenagers”, and “that the stage is the only place where a stain upon a woman's personal character seems to enhance her popularity and success”.  During the time of the Keystone Kops play, police testified claiming that the posters advertising were a bad influence on teenage boys because in several instances the racy posters would be surrounded by several teenage boys.  John Roach Straton wrote an article in Theatre Magazine explaining that women who would allow their naked bodies to be used for entertainment were not only wrong but it proved that women who lack character allow themselves to be objects to gain popularity and make money.  He also explains how these women would not be suitable for an average household because of their shameless flaunting on stage.  Advocates for censorship, especially in beauty pageants and on beaches ,because the vulgar and lack of wholesomeness of the women in these pageants are a bad example for young contestant and puts the wrong idea in the minds of young girls. 
            Many people were for censorship on beaches and in pageants because they felt it was not classy and not very womanlike to show off their bodies.  Many heard this censorship and chose to ignore it mainly because of the fact that they wanted to feel modern and were trying to define their new freedom; for example many women wore one-piece bathing suits for this reason.  Many men were embarrassed to have their daughters run around the beach in a scandalous bathing suit.  Many women argued that these bathing suits gave them freedom of movement and to tan in the sun considering many women were unable to swim or chose not to swim anyways. 

Patrick:
1. Concerns of those advocating censorship:
            The main concern of those advocating censorship was that acts that needed to be censored were “bad influences” for others, especially little kids. One of the major points of evidence of those advocating censorship was that provocative pictures caused children to become corrupted and have immoral thoughts. With Carroll’s show, the depiction of the nude women in peacock feathers proved to be a very contentious issue for those seeking censorship. They believed it was too inappropriate to show that many women naked and sought to censor the show. When Carroll would not change his script, they tried to prevent the show from occurring and even eventually threw him in jail for violating censorship laws.

2. Links between notions of proper behavior and glamorization of showgirls/actresses:
            Women were always taught that they should behave “properly” in society. While some girls wanted to follow this view, others dreamed of being free from the societal ideas of a “good girl.” Actresses and showgirls were those who rebelled against that idea and made it through life on their own accord. Women of all backgrounds dreamed that they could make the same choices and fantasized about becoming an actress or a showgirl. At the time, independence for women was increasing in popularity as a goal for women to strive for. Therefore, the women would have looked up to the actresses and showgirls as a sort of “modern” idea of a woman. The lines between proper behavior and the glamorization of showgirl and actress would become murkier than in previous times.

Kerry: Some of the concerns of those advocating censorship were “low moral ideals of the theatre as it exists today”.  People who were for censorship in the theater also felt that shows were promoting salacious and impure elements.  “Bathing Beauties” contests along with beachwear was also seen as vulgar and degrading to women since they were not judged on achievements or talents, but were judged solely on their appearance.   Some people also believed that beauty contests would take pure and naive girls and fill their heads with “vicious ideas”. 

Other links that he claims to have found were fantasy and consumer goods.  People wanted to live out their glamorous dreams and desires, and therefore began to purchase things that would help them to do so.  Another link was the “incompatibility of New Era of Capitalism and traditional Judeo-Christian moral teachings”.  This link claims that more extravagant things that people wanted went against religious teachings they had learned and could lead to greed.  Even the idea of “pure enjoyment” of things such as smoking could eventually lead to an impure lifestyle which could later influence how the next generation of Americans were to be raised.

Kevin: Some of the concerns of those who tried to advocate censorship were that the morals of the modern day theatre were extremely low as a result of the lack of censorship.  They didn’t like how people that watched these shows applauded girls that personified provocative and promiscuous lifestyles.  They described how nudity that wasn’t even acceptable in a home as well as the way the woman talked and acted was flaunted on the stage, and people applauded it.  Also, since the purity of womanhood was an important aspect of American culture and Christian morals, the bare nudity in these shows went completely against this concept, which in turn made the woman unfit for the home, another Christian value.  They complained that it seemed as if the people that hired the girls for the show only hired them based on how “near naked they were willing to appear on stage,”(Straton).

One of the links between woman being interested in beauty pageants and wearing skimpy clothing to proper behavior was one of the early pageant winners, Mary Katherine Campbell.  After she had won one of the early beauty pageants, she saw how the pageants became all about glitz and glamour, and decided that she didn’t want to be apart of that.  She ended up going back to college at the Ohio State University and went on to live a normal life.  It also said that not many young women actually participated or even thought of participating in beauty pageants.  To many, it was a “complementary daydream,” to be a contestant in it, but never an actual consideration, which shows beauty for the most part were a fantasy for most women than an actuality.  This shows that most women did stick to their normal ways of life.  

Brian:             According to McClymer, many of the concerns derive from the idea that the image and reputation of women are significantly tarnished if they were to take nude or scantily-clad photos. Essentially using women as an object to gain revenue. It was thought, that in times where women had just gained equality as men in the idea that they can now vote, that they were bringing down that same image, reputation, and credibility that took so long to build. Also, much of the swimwear that women were, then recently, wearing went against religious ideals, as well as local communities, and the parents of the young women wearing the bathing suits.
            The usage of beauty contests also created many concerns for the advocates of censorship. Beauty contests then were cheap forms used in place of illustrated newspapers and movies; both of which produce significant revenue as well as stimulate the economy.
            The Outlook was an instrumental and outspoken voice against these beauty contests. They stated that while many of these girls/women that before they entered the contests were wholesome, and innocent girls that portrayed “pure womanhood” changed and that their heads “were filled with vicious ideas.” Moreover, on the religious front, The National Council of Catholic Women said that these contests were for the crowds that were inspired by unhealthy desires and that they “do incurable harm to participants and to beholders.” The Catholic church was very much in favor of censorship because it coincided with much of what the Bible preached.

Christina: One of the main concerns of the revues was the issue over nudity on the basis of morality. Earl Carroll was brought on trial for posting images of his revue “Vanities.” A cop saw young boys staring at the pictures of nude women and demanded Carroll take them down, when he refused, they arrested him. Carroll’s charges were dropped when the court deemed the images “insufficient to hold the defendant.” He was released although still considered an “honest crook” telling the truth about his actions but avoiding trouble with the law.
            Earl Carroll explained that the one piece bathing suit was a reflection of the ideas of the young people “preaching and practicing” their freedom. The article further explains that the bathing suit was not just for comfort for athletic swimming but also to show off women’s “bare brown legs.” Women in the real world were taking on appearances that the censor boards felt the need to cover up in the theatres. Women started to enter beauty contests that added bathing suit competitions. These contests caused many controversies over what the ideal woman should look like and how she should be judged in the contests.
            The article also explains that Rabbi Stephen S. Wise stated that women in the theatre were nude and promiscuous but “no more than the boxes of the theatre itself, or the lobbies of the average hotel.” This statement further proves that Carroll’s performances were reflecting the changing society. Although women were not walking the beaches completely nude like they were dancing on his stage, they were changing from conservative appearances to more modern, revealing styles. Women on the beach wore less clothing which caused controversy and even led to some arrests. These situations on stage and off were a reflection of a society that was becoming more modern and therefore less conservative.

Valerie: A concern throughout the 1920s and into the 1930s was nudity.  This theme of nudity was even brought into different shows.  A famous show was the “Peacock Dance.”  There were even cops brought into the shows ordered to stop any nudity.  When the cop saw nudity he then acted on his order and went to stop the woman, which caused a lot of confusion for the audience watching the show.  

Many women aspired to become just like the women they see in pageants and shows.  The behavior aspect caused some of the women to act like the women that they looked up to.  An example of this is from the ad where the woman is on the beach wearing a one piece bathing suit which caused the women of that time to want to be able to wear the same thing.  This made the women feel as if it defined their new freedom.  

Lauren:
1) Although New York had loosened up its censorship laws leading up to Carroll’s “Peacock Dance,” advocators for censorship feared that if the show was allowed to go on, censorship laws would be rendered useless.  They feared that since what one generation considered shocking was “orthodox,” the next, that if the laws kept getting less and less strict, than more and more inappropriate attire and shows would become legal. They saw the fantasies that the shows and pageants produced as a decline of morality as it promoted the male fantasy that he could have any woman he wanted while promoting the female fantasy as being popular solely as an object of a man’s lust.
            Those in favour of censorship were less lenient also because of the “morals of the present day being deplorably low” as it was and they felt that the new styles and entertainment violated the three great foundations of the civilization which were “ the home, purity of womanhood, and the sanctity of the Sabbath.”  They go, as far as to say that these foundations “are what the theatre most directly and constantly attacks and tries to undermine.”  They bashed the idea of beauty pageants saying that they “lack the wholesomeness of athletic contests, for victory is given for something which has no relation to achievement or skill.” They recognized that these women were not promoting hard work or conditioning but were exploiting what natural gifts they had in ways that were damaging to society. They complained about the artificial nature of the judging and were concerned about the number of young girls flocking to New York or Hollywood to be seen in movies, plays, or pageants that had such negative displays of their bodies. Atlantic Cityeven went as far as to cancel pageants for a time due to the violation of the Family atmosphere that the park wanted to give off, although the pageants resumed a few years later to help counteract the disastrous effects of the depression.
            Soon, laws began to pop up around the country that set regulations as to how much skin could be shown at beaches, in an attempt to purify the culture that was beginning to reign over modesty.

2) He states that the phenomenon that is the showgirl/pageant girl is so widespread that woman are enjoying the fantasies of having men fawn all over them as much as men are enjoying the fantasies (and the intention of shows) of being able to choose whichever girl he wants. He said that not every woman by any stretch went out to be a showgirl, but many pushed the envelope as far as appropriate dress was concerned. He stated that people justified their actions by saying that “what is prohibited in one age is apt to be orthodox in the next,” and this realization allowed both scantily clad beachgoers and showgirls to justify that once the shock factor wore off, their behavior would not register a second glance.  Also, just as the “peacock number” was banned, restrictions were put on what one could wear while at the beach. McClymer notes that both the showgirls and the beachgoers dress the way they do for one reason; to be looked at. They show off their legs and bodies to gather attention from men. Being seen at the beach is a realistic way of fulfilling the showgirl fantasy of being desired by many different showgoers each night. 

Stephen:
Nudity was a common element in shows like the Vanities, George White's Scandals, Ziegfeld's Follies, and the other "revues." Usually, it was momentary and partial, a bared breast or buttock briefly glimpsed. Writing in The Survey, a weekly magazine normally devoted to social problems and issues, Leon Whipple described both the "Artists and Models" revue at the Winter Garden and the public's "acclimation" to "public nakedness" in the theatre:

. . . For a not excessive price, men, women, and adolescents can go into a lovely New York theatre on Broadway and see naked bodies, generally of women, under full lights with nothing on save what antique writers call a "zone" [belt or girdle]. The rest of the body is completely and absolutely nude, with scarce alleviation of a coat powder. The bodies are exposed as statues, figurines, and symbolic persons, with recurrent veiling’s and for brief flashes. The showmanship is deft and even discreet though the shadowy lighting of yesteryear has given way to the full flood. The exposure of the body lasts probably not five minutes out of the three hours, though there is a constant and cloying stream of lesser bareness — legs, backs, torsos, and anatomical odds and ends. To these latter we have already been acclimated for the unveiling has been going on in New York for several years, almost by fractions of inches as the producers tried out the public taste. Indeed, the student might find a thesis in social science in the scrutiny of this process of breaking down a convention by annual innovation. — "Not Art and Not Model," Survey, March 1, 1926


        This quote from the passage revues and other Vanities: The commodification of fantasy in the 1920s appeared to be a very biased review.  The author of this quote mentioned that women in the theaters have been showing more skin inch by inch over the years.  The author uses words such as completely and absolutely nude, to dramatize the situation.  He also describes the play as “not art and not model”, which appears to me as trashing the play as a whole.  It seems that the writer is aware of the changes that was occurring at that time but does not want to take part, as he describes a “student might find a thesis in social science in the scrutiny of this process”, Which seemed he was just handing the burden down to a younger fellow to interpret and judge.

Some of the links Earl Carroll finds between the women who want to become beauty stars and actresses compared to the men and other women who thought it was  not right and immoral were, women were being censored so much that they wanted to show what they had.  What I mean by this is women of this time could do very little, so give a woman a job as a sultry actress and she would want to show off her God given talents.  It is like the example of keeping a dog locked up for a long period of time, once the dog sees a way out it would run away and try to find freedom.  It appears to me that these women were trying to do the same thing.

Mike M.: Some of the major concerns of those who were advocating censorship were that these movies, theatrical productions, beauty contests and beachwear were a social problem.  Those in favor of censorship believed that this was a bad influence on society.  Woman were being made into objects only for the pure enjoyment of men.  For a very cheap price anybody could walk in off the streets and take in one of these classless shows.  Other concerns were that this was negatively effecting the youth of the community.  Officials saw young boys hanging out in the theatre lobbies googgling over nude advertisements of dancers, which they felt had a negative effect on these young boys. 

During this time many people were in favor of censorship because they felt it was wrong of women to show so much of themselves.  On the other hand, many other women wanted to feel more modern and try to show off their bodies and be more free. These brave youths defied beach censors by wearing more revealing bathing suits which were becoming all the more popular.  It was the influence of Annette Kellerman whose popular bathing suits were well marketed to younger women and they flew off the shelves.  Women were beginning to like the ability to show off their “bare brown legs.”  It seemed that swimming was beginning to gain popularity.  This was not the case.  Women began wearing these suits to look attractive but it seemed that more and more girls were going to the beach to bathe in the sun and not even attempt to go in to the water. 

Kelsey: Those advocating censorship were worried about the loss of integrity of womanhood.  For the most part it was only women exposed, which helped to create a 'sex sells' motto in advertising and entertainment.  Those who were for censorship were afraid that the morals of the modern day people were very low.  The "three greatest foundation stones" of the American woman were in jeopardy and constantly being attacked.  These were the home, purity of womanhood, and the Sabbath which were all called into question by the vulgar, tasteless entertainment and ads.  There were protests of the artificial woman that was created from this media.  

There is an aim to find links between the women who were in the shows and those entering beauty or beach pageants.  The women in both areas aspired to be 'sexy' and beautiful.  They try to portray and maintain a perfect woman body image.  While they are first competing for womanly perfection, there is a negative connotation that is associated with such young women by an older crowd.  But as the trend continues, both begin to gain a slight amount of understanding.  These women were envied by others and it became more socially acceptable over time to become like one of them or to aspire to be like them.  
Jeffrey:                The concerns of censorship critics had to deal with the amount of skin being displayed in shows and the fantasy that was created by watching the revues.  It was called a breaking down of convention of being clothed and completely removed clothes from the shows.  When girls in the “peacock” shows danced in New York, it was said that any man, woman, or adolescent could purchase “for a not excessive price” a ticket to one of these vanity shows.  The fear was that the removal of clothing would be adapted to the common public women and that it would create a world similar to the shocking one inside the vanity shows.  
               Another fear was that the men leaving the show would become obsessed with the fantasy of the nude women, and that it would create unhealthy relationships with real-world partners.  The article states “the fantasy became problematic only when one loved an actual woman.”  The next fear was that the women in the shows created an unobtainable level of sensuality and beauty.  The article states that the women were compared to “figurines, statues, and symbolic persons,” meaning that when men left the theatre they had become obsessed with those particular women and would hope that real world women would become like that.

Becca:             There were many concerns of those advocating censorship during this time. For example, when a police officer observed teenage boys viewing a poster of one of the actresses, the police officer said they had a bad effect on the young boys and demanded all other posters like it should be taken down. Religion was still a big part of the lives of 20th centure Americans, so many people felt it was against their religion and would look bad in the eyes of God to show too much skin. People viewed these new bathing suits as “shocking” and would look down upon women who wore them.

            By participating in these beauty pageants women were able to enjoy being glamorous and their bodies, and these pageants were created because of the increasing acceptance of the showgirls. Despite some people feeling that censorship laws should be stricter due to the increase in pageants and shows, these new shows were becoming a step toward modernity, and this couldn’t have happened without Earl Carroll sticking by his shows and fighting the suits against him. In Earl Carroll’s defense he was able to use bathing suits as a way for people to see legs besides just at his show.

Alyse:             Those who were advocating censorship had many concerns. John Roach Straton, for example, was concerned with the moral implications of nudity in the theater. In his article “The Trouble with the Modern Theater” he states, “that the stage is the only place where a stain upon a woman's personal character seems to enhance her popularity and success” (http://www.assumption.edu/ahc/vanities/default.html). Straton was not the only one to feel this way. Rabbi Stephen S. Wise was quoted saying “It was nothing less than the work of moral scavengers and filth-producers. It was the product of moral leprosy” (http://www.assumption.edu/ahc/vanities/default.html) when talking about theater in general. Straton also felt that these acts of the theater were a threat to the “Anglo-Saxon civilization.” They threatened the home, the purity of womanhood and the sanctity of the Sabbath.

Jennifer: Some of the concerns of those who advocated censorship included the fear that the quality and content of a woman’s character was being based solely on her appearance as evidenced through her popularity and success.  There was a general concern that when these women dressed in such a scantily clad manner they were in effect degrading themselves and were rapidly losing any form of virtue which they had previously possessed.  According to Rev. John Roach Stratton, by women parading around in such a scantily clad manner the entire Anglo-Saxon civilization was being undermined.  In particular, “the home, the purity of womanhood, and the sanctity of the Sabbath” were all under constant attack.  Many who advocated for censorship also felt that beauty pageants as well as the one piece bathing suit were creating an essentially shallow and superficial society that was being demoralizing at a rapid rate.  Young women sought admiration purely based on their looks, not on their intelligence or personalities and many advocates of censorship worried over how this would affect these young women. 
            There are definite links between the widespread aspiration young women demonstrated to become beauty pageant contestants as well as the glamorization of actresses/ showgirls and the shifting notions of proper behavior.  It was from the movies which the term “bathing beauties” was coined and as a consequence, “Given that everything associated with the movies was rapidly gaining popularity, it is not surprising that local entrepreneurs began to drum up business by staging "bathing beauty" contests at local resorts.”  The transformation of the bathing suit as something to be used to advertise the female form was seen as completely indecent to many of those who advocated censorship.   Many women began to enter these beauty contests at high numbers due to the fact that many of these girls longed to be admired for even just a couple of hours and to escape the boring normalcy of their everyday lives.  Each sought to be a star for a day, “Whatever the chances for movie stardom of the Atlantic City contestants, women participating in lesser events, could hardly expect to get a movie offer. They could expect admiring stares. They could feel, as they paraded, like show girls for a moment before returning to the routine of their regular lives. They could enjoy, in Mary Katherine Campbell's word, a sense of glamour.” 

Mike Dee: