Another vote for reality here. I was watching a thread about how awful "cute" is, and struck by the irony that the folks who "hate" cute were likely to be the ones who devote energies to Goth cliches, comicbook violence, and sword-wielding thews. It's a bit like a McDonald's addict getting nutritionally righteous about Wendy's.

I found myself musing that what's "awful" about cute is awful about Goth and fantasy generally. And about pornography. They all trivialize. But trivializing is not bad, after all. We can't take everything seriously, and we can't take it seriously all the time. So I chuckle or groan over Koshini pictures, and I move on, uninterested, when I see chalk-white skin, blood-red lips, "clothing" made of leather straps, or another pseudo metallic jock- or bra-cup.

The all-time "I know what you're thinking" award for genitals must go to the Amy alternative to Posette which appeared then disappeared in a wave of copyright discussions. She had a complete vagina embedded in her crotch. That is to say, all the invisible parts. And this was for...? I mean, aside from the sweaty-neck thrill of modelling it?

Real genitals are no more nasty that real elbows. The idea that genitals are nasty is just as silly whether it's promoted by the pornographers or the puritans. And there are male-run cultures (if that's not redundant) that deal with the idea that females have external genitals by cutting them off. There, that fixed that.

DAZ can sell Victor 3 without so much as a pubic bulge; that's their perogative, but given the choice between a real body and a "Gibran"ed one, I'll take the real. The detail you want is a bit more than what I need, just like I don't really need hair follicles or cuticles and nailtips in my meshes, but a bit more than that flat space, a bit more than a split flat space, would be nice.

It seems to me that Arduino's Vickie genital prop provides a good deal of what you are looking for, by the way. Never bought it, but the freebie version had things like fullness, etc.