I don't think so - at least, not for most of these. When I was a teenager (in the 60s, UK) I used to see lots of 'glamour' photos which definitely
had been airbrushed. All you could see was a neat V of skin between the legs, a bit like a classical statue. None of them had visible bits and bobs like these have. Possibly it was different in the US, but I think there was a definite distinction in those days between 'glamour' shots (they would have been called porn then, but not now), and the harder stuff that showed actual genitalia. Certainly, in my youth I would never have seen stuff like this in a magazine you could buy freely. I doubt if anyone, US or UK, would go to the trouble of airbrushing out pubic hair but leaving in the labia. In fact, in my experience, a shaven pussy was possibly even more indecent than a hairy thatch, which at least hid the
really naughty bits
On another note, weren't they all sturdy girls in those days? You wouldn't pick a fight with any of them.