Playboy To Drop Nude Pictorials In Magazine Overhaul

[Imperium Sidhicum]

Well, I've always been of the opinion that scantily-clad women are more sexy than nude ones anyway. Leaves at least something to imagination, I suppose...

[Ifreann]

It's better not to arm fucking rapists and send them off to keep peace.

It's better to get them not be rapists, specifically. There isn't a magic screening process where we test if your a rapist when you sign up.

You're giving the impression that everyone you work with is a rapist, so clearly whatever screening process there is it's insufficient.

[Internationalist Bastard]

It's better to get them not be rapists, specifically. There isn't a magic screening process where we test if your a rapist when you sign up.

You're giving the impression that everyone you work with is a rapist, so clearly whatever screening process there is it's insufficient.

For fucks.. no, I'm saying that it's better to let everyone blow off steam hen risk it

[Ifreann]

You're giving the impression that everyone you work with is a rapist, so clearly whatever screening process there is it's insufficient.

For fucks.. no, I'm saying that it's better to let everyone blow off steam hen risk it

I doubt it makes a difference.

[Internationalist Bastard]

For fucks.. no, I'm saying that it's better to let everyone blow off steam hen risk it

I doubt it makes a difference.

There hasn't been an incidant under my command. That's the best I can do.

[Olthar]

Well, Chess said it, and you were supporting her. Either way, mocking your supporters is a great way to lose your supporters.

Trust me, I'm not supporting Chess in the slightest. I'm simply surprised that you wouldn't only not know about Steinem, but that you'd dismiss one of the most prominent and influential feminists in American history (Seriously, in terms of name recognition and shadow cast, she's up near Susan B. Anthony) as a "pet kook" of another person here.

Anthony was talked about in history class. Steinem was not. Influence is not the same as fame.

[USS Monitor]

Trust me, I'm not supporting Chess in the slightest. I'm simply surprised that you wouldn't only not know about Steinem, but that you'd dismiss one of the most prominent and influential feminists in American history (Seriously, in terms of name recognition and shadow cast, she's up near Susan B. Anthony) as a "pet kook" of another person here.

Anthony was talked about in history class. Steinem was not. Influence is not the same as fame.

Depending on what history classes you're taking, Steinem might be too recent to be covered. Sometimes there's a bit of a gap between what is covered properly in the history curriculum and what you learn as current events.

It's not really a big deal, just surprising that the name didn't ring a bell for you at all.

[United Marxist Nations]

This pleases my prudishness. Playboy must bend the knee to pornhub or be destroyed.

[Tinfect]

Annnd...
This is news?

I mean, really? A magazine known for adult content is now going to contain slightly less adult content? Victory... for someone, I guess?

[MC United]

So, Playboy now morphs into Maxim

This will not end well.

[The Qeiiam Star Cluster]

Those damn feminists are ruining everything!

[Uawc]

Meh. Never really cared about magazines in general, and that doesn't change now.

Made me think a little bit about how advances in technology make the world change in little ways. It's a very different world than it was twenty years ago, and it's going to be very different in another twenty, too. Different for the better? Well, human beings are at the helm, so I'm going to assume not, but we'll see.

That said, I don't see this as a victory for feminism. Playboy is still going to be Playboy, and it's still going to promote everything that comes with that.

[The Archregimancy]

I imagine because that type of pornography doesn't fit their brand image.

Hefner's first-ever editor's letter claimed that Playboy was aimed at men who 'enjoy mixing up cocktails and an hors d’oeuvre or two, putting a little mood music on the phonograph and inviting in a female acquaintance for a quiet discussion on Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex'.

Whether anyone contributing to this thread buys into that attempt to claim sophistication for a Playboy brand that was becoming increasingly frayed at the edges is another matter entirely, but - and I can't really speak from experience here - I don't imagine that your average video on Reality Kings or Brazzers involves a quiet discussion on Picasso, Nietzsche or jazz over a freshly mixed drink.

Dropping the nudes and keeping the articles is likely far more in keeping with what Hefner wants Playboy to be than hardcore pornography would be.

I trust you were only looking at those site's for research

Now Ethel, note that I said 'I can't really speak from experience'. So no, I haven't looked at those sites.

I'm not going to go all coy here and pretend that I've never seen any pornography; but let's just say it was long enough ago that women still had pubic hair.

[Naushantiya]

I can field this one, i've dealt with these types before.

Because capitalist patriarchy wasn't involved in their production, commodification, and distribution. You see, those other ones are women freely expressing their sexuality.
But western society is imperialist, colonialist, capitalist, and hierarchical. As such, when they do it, it's bad and fundamentally oppressive, because western society is fundamentally oppressive due to its structure being imperialist, colonialist, capitalist, etc.

You're very likely overthinking Naushantiya's approach here, which can probably be summed up as:

"Western culture is bad (and British culture is very bad)"

"Anything associated with Western culture is the root of all bad things in India, thanks to the very bad British."

"Playboy is therefore bad because it's associated with Western culture; the Khajuraho Monuments are irrelevant because they were brought up by a notoriously and openly British moderator who was clearly trying to distract us from the evils of Western culture."

Before I answer this, let me wholely and solely tell you that you brought the Khajurao Monuments. Now that is not the truth the Kama sutra like other religious documents prescribes the way to have sexual practices and outlaws certain sexual practices like fornicating in water, especially flowing water. The whole point of the Kama Sutra is to educate people in the arts of sex in order to strengthen bonds and as per certain sects of Hindu philosophy, Sex in essence is pure and can lead to Moksha.

Now let us look at the Western view of Sexuality, Playboy is an instrument of the west that endorses fake boobs and sexual debauchery of the highest kind

[Washington Resistance Army]

You're very likely overthinking Naushantiya's approach here, which can probably be summed up as:

"Western culture is bad (and British culture is very bad)"

"Anything associated with Western culture is the root of all bad things in India, thanks to the very bad British."

"Playboy is therefore bad because it's associated with Western culture; the Khajuraho Monuments are irrelevant because they were brought up by a notoriously and openly British moderator who was clearly trying to distract us from the evils of Western culture."

Before I answer this, let me wholely and solely tell you that you brought the Khajurao Monuments. Now that is not the truth the Kama sutra like other religious documents prescribes the way to have sexual practices and outlaws certain sexual practices like fornicating in water, especially flowing water. The whole point of the Kama Sutra is to educate people in the arts of sex in order to strengthen bonds and as per certain sects of Hindu philosophy, Sex in essence is pure and can lead to Moksha.

Now let us look at the Western view of Sexuality, Playboy is an instrument of the west that endorses fake boobs and sexual debauchery of the highest kind

Fake boobs are pretty great, just saying.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

I remain skeptical about this. I guess I'll have to see how it looks once the changes are made. Playboy has always been a magazine about nudes for me, with one article here and there. I don't exactly know if they can successfully change format after all these years. We'll see, of course.

[Naushantiya]

As for the Khajurao monuments, I am not sure and therefore I am not going to comment on it

[The Archregimancy]

It's a very famous quote from Gloria Steinem, perhaps the most important living American Feminist.

and just a question is Gloria Steinem more important in Feminism than Germaine Greer?

I think that likely depends on where you live.

In the United States, Gloria Steinem has been more important. In the UK, Australia, and NZ, Germaine Greer has been more important. But they're more or less analogous to each other in terms of their importance and strong media profiles in the regions where they're most influential, and have been active for about the same amount of time (Steinem is five years older than Greer). They're not precise analogues; Steinem has been more directly involved in political action, while Greer focuses more on writing (and they only time they've ever met was apparently at the Democratic Convention prior to the 1972 US presidential election), but within their respective regions their influence has arguably been similar.

[Cetacea]

Now Ethel, note that I said 'I can't really speak from experience'. So no, I haven't looked at those sites.

I'm not going to go all coy here and pretend that I've never seen any pornography; but let's just say it was long enough ago that women still had pubic hair.

ah yes the classic hair bikini, sometimes so thick that you wouldn't know if they weren't wearing shorts

I wonder if some university in the future will offer a course in the History of Pornagraphic Imagery and incude the demise of Playboy

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Trust me, I'm not supporting Chess in the slightest. I'm simply surprised that you wouldn't only not know about Steinem, but that you'd dismiss one of the most prominent and influential feminists in American history (Seriously, in terms of name recognition and shadow cast, she's up near Susan B. Anthony) as a "pet kook" of another person here.

Anthony was talked about in history class. Steinem was not. Influence is not the same as fame.

Again, I find it hard to believe that your history class contained the sum total of your knowledge of history.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I trust you were only looking at those site's for research

Now Ethel, note that I said 'I can't really speak from experience'. So no, I haven't looked at those sites.

I'm not going to go all coy here and pretend that I've never seen any pornography; but let's just say it was long enough ago that women still had pubic hair.

Pubic ha...I'm sorry, you're talking nonsense.

[The Qeiiam Star Cluster]

You're very likely overthinking Naushantiya's approach here, which can probably be summed up as:

"Western culture is bad (and British culture is very bad)"

"Anything associated with Western culture is the root of all bad things in India, thanks to the very bad British."

"Playboy is therefore bad because it's associated with Western culture; the Khajuraho Monuments are irrelevant because they were brought up by a notoriously and openly British moderator who was clearly trying to distract us from the evils of Western culture."

Before I answer this, let me wholely and solely tell you that you brought the Khajurao Monuments. Now that is not the truth the Kama sutra like other religious documents prescribes the way to have sexual practices and outlaws certain sexual practices like fornicating in water, especially flowing water. The whole point of the Kama Sutra is to educate people in the arts of sex in order to strengthen bonds and as per certain sects of Hindu philosophy, Sex in essence is pure and can lead to Moksha.

Now let us look at the Western view of Sexuality, Playboy is an instrument of the west that endorses fake boobs and sexual debauchery of the highest kind

What's wrong with some sexual debauchery?

[The Archregimancy]

Now Ethel, note that I said 'I can't really speak from experience'. So no, I haven't looked at those sites.

I'm not going to go all coy here and pretend that I've never seen any pornography; but let's just say it was long enough ago that women still had pubic hair.

Pubic ha...I'm sorry, you're talking nonsense.

I'm still not clear on when and why the entire Western world decided to turn into John Ruskin.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Pubic ha...I'm sorry, you're talking nonsense.

I'm still not clear on when and why the entire Western world decided to turn into John Ruskin.

It's more that they turned into Humbert Humbert.

[The Archregimancy]

I'm still not clear on when and why the entire Western world decided to turn into John Ruskin.

It's more that they turned into Humbert Humbert.

Given some of the allegations about Ruskin's attitudes to women, I'm not sure that there's a functional difference between the two examples.