Is it eroticism? No. There is a sexual narrative behind the performance but the male body is simply being used to represent the Male and not for any overt sexual activity. His naked body including his penis is his costume and the handling of his penis appears to be integral to the story and showing how the females can manipulate the male actions. The male actor appears to be more focussed on the performance and not reacting to anything that happens to him in any inappropriate way, and there is no attempt to demonstrate any intimate act designed to have an effect on the male himself or the character of the male.
Is it Exhibitionism? No, it’s a performance. Clearly choreographed, at least set pieces within it even if some were repeated and may be more tango-like in its performance – the body of the Male offering opportunities for set piece actions by the females in response, and vice versa, as in the Tango where the male lead is forcing the female into positions where she can best be shown off.
Is it Art? Yes, a choreographed performance has to be Art presented for viewing by others.
Is it right to keep his socks on? Well, I’d prefer not as well. But he is a dancer protecting his feet. For me, I’d go bare foot. Indeed, nudity for me means fully nude with no add-ons (so if I need to see when modelling then I will wear contact lenses instead of glasses and remove my wedding ring – simply because they are not part of my body).
Treating his penis as though it was just a handle, as they would lead him by the hand if clothed, was, for me, the right thing to do. It shows their control and his subjection, would work if the females had been male but wouldn’t if the subject had been female.
likes this