Contemporary soft porn standards grudgingly allow the depiction of female genitalia - to a degree. They're down with Labia majora, but there are standards that dictate "not too much detail" and in all practical terms this means zero or minimal Labia minora.

That is, the soft porn industry Photo-shops what are perceived as "untidy" or "bulky" Labia minora to an idealized model. If they do not not photo-shop out excessive detail of the Labia minora then the image almost certainly won't pass the censorship board.

It has been asserted the soft porn industry only shows idealized genitals that emulate very young girls, not the genitalia of mature women. This is not by intent or design - it would be a lot easier if they could not have to spend time photo-shopping the images to removes detail.

That is, if you pick a dozen women off the street and show their genitalia to board censor not all would pass and be allowed to appear in a soft-porn magazine.

This skews the idea of "normal" and since this idealized form is all that appears in the literature - world wide - it creates an artificial idea of "normal" and any women with more genital detail this this may encounter image problems and resort to surgery - in short, genital mutilation because of prudish forms of censorship.

This isn't hard to show. The soft porn industry says flat out if they don't photo-shop genitalia a certain way, the images are not allowed. The censorship board when shown images of a dozen random pussies would not allow all to be published, there are "issues" with "too much detail" according to an Australian news investigative report [1]

What's the inevitable result of Hot or Not and over a billion people on Facebook sharing photos? You guessed it, rate my vagina [2], a website where women can upload photos of their genitals for the express purpose of having mostly men comments on it.

A staggering number of women mention, in the 2 or 3 sentences that accompany each photo, how they dislike their genitals - and the greater the deviation from the soft-porn "norm" the greater the dislike to the point in the most extreme cases these women talk about the potential for surgery to "correct this".

What's curious though, and the reason is not clear, but these cases aslo garner the greatest number of responses from men, all positive.

It's not impossible women are altering their bodies to conform to an artificial standard that became the standard completely by accident and does not represent the ideal in the minds of anyone other than the censorship board.

[1] Ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dizLqJ_LnHQ - an Australian news investigation that shows the relationship between the soft porn and medical industry because of censorship.

[2]http://ratemyv.com/ - Rate my vagina.