Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
At work, I get to watch CNN Newsroom, more of what news should be on the US circuits and usually, with all the bad news, turmoil in the world, I just shrug and go on. But that story.........
Boy, that just took the wind out of my sails. I feel like someone punched me in the gut.
What the story was about was that because of the ability of being able to see what one wanted to see on the Net, of being able to see all of what one wants to see on the Net, the magazine has decided to go from full nudity to provocative photos.....though we will have to wait to next March to see just what exactly that means.
Now, as to that question that inquiring minds want to know,why should that make a difference to me. Playboy is the source of my independent streak. As I child, I would see those pictures and it inspired me, wrong or right, to be independent, to be out there, out of the house, making my own decisions.
So what does it mean to me if it becomes more like GQ? The stripping of personalty of the model and without that communication, it gets rather plain. One must realize that part of the message we wish to see in these magazines is to remember, to feel, what it was once like, to be entering this new world (of being an adult), of feeling that innocence.
Last edited by TamaraSavannah; 10-13-2015 at 01:54 AM..
Location: Free State of Florida, Support our police
5,859 posts, read 3,295,032 times
Reputation: 9145
Playboy has lost a ton of circulation. I wonder how much longer they stay viable as a print magazine. They still have the tv and internet. Playboy was the class of the nudie magazines. However you look at Penthouse or some of the other magazines they are hardcore. Personally I am glad they are shutting the nudity down. Women deserve to be respected and not looked at as just a sex object.
The funny thing was there a time when they DID get bought for the articles. Yes, in the early days Playboy was as known for the articles for the playboy lifestyle that Hugh Hefner lived as it as the pictorials. Perhaps this is looking to go back to basics in a way...
The funny thing was there a time when they DID get bought for the articles. Yes, in the early days Playboy was as known for the articles for the playboy lifestyle that Hugh Hefner lived as it as the pictorials. Perhaps this is looking to go back to basics in a way...
Difficult to say. I remember reading some of the articles over the decades such as "Time is Money" by Lee Falk, one about how to drive very, very fast, and I don't think I read it but recall seeing the publication of "The Man with the Golden Gun" in one issue (I actually read the book). As time has gone on, though, I have read less and less of it, mostly because to me it is extremely liberal and doesn't mesh much with my world.
Two other things as well. First of all, consider, if, a Fleming Bond written in the magazine, such as "Casino Royale" where it is written "women were for entertainment".....and then consider a magazine that takes a different path. Right or wrong, men should have their batcave. They maybe shouldn't have it everywhere, but at least in one place.
Secondly, what basics are they trying to get back to? The Hugh of now probably isn't that pleasant and the Hugh of then is gone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bjh
Provocative photos. Some find that more titillating.
I'm sure there are photographers who can do it but one must keep in mind what the goal is. Is one trying to illustrate the article or trying to communicate a fantasy? This is an "analysis" I wrote last year on the latter. http://www.city-data.com/forum/psych...-some-why.html
Further, I think there is a big point that all of us, myself included, are missing here.
The cost of a clothed model tends to be lot less than the cost of a nude one. It is just simple economics for a wise model (or actress) that if you are going to be giving up your clothes, you better charge them enough to make it worth your while, to pay for the (future employment) risk you are taking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by retiredcop111
Playboy has lost a ton of circulation. I wonder how much longer they stay viable as a print magazine. They still have the tv and internet. Playboy was the class of the nudie magazines. However you look at Penthouse or some of the other magazines they are hardcore. Personally I am glad they are shutting the nudity down. Women deserve to be respected and not looked at as just a sex object.
Interesting view point and in all likelihood, Playboy was not written for those like me (but you never know just what does go in such minds behind the scenes).
If we say, here, that sex is one thing and personal energy is another, then that is what I saw when I looked at the occasional Playboy. I've been looking at my old diaries tonight (trying to find an entry about the IRS), and here and there there are other entries associated with Playboy pictures, such as of one who was into ballet and high board diving which taught me to have "lithe" as part of my personalty. (as I thumb through the pages, seems I have a lot of ballet entries in it). In another diary, there's January '76 Daina House because she is stuck in memory as being January; Barbara Edwards because leg warmers were once a major part of my life (and still are to an extent); the Women of Braniff because they could land on their feet regardless of what happened, and of forth.
Quite frankly, I don't think one can say sex is one thing and personal energy is another. Life is energy and often it comes from how one feels about themselves and that often means feeling turned on, feeling good, and of course, feeling sexy.
A, B, and C.
A: It may all be an illusion anyhow (haven't looked that often since most became overinflated, cookie cutter blondes), but nevertheless, it is less of an illusion when one isn't hiding behind anything.
B: WATCH OUT for the woman who runs on her sexual energy. There will be no keeping up with her.
C: Rebooted Bond, rebooted Playboy, it seems two great icons of the past century are changed.....and not for the better from where I watch.
Last edited by TamaraSavannah; 10-13-2015 at 07:09 AM..
Maxim already changed to be like GQ giving up the three provocative pictorials per issue. Is there still a market for sexual poses in lingerie and bikinis anymore. Will upcoming actresses still do them to offer a kick to the customers that the unknown models do not? With porn coming free and ex porn actresses now being accepted in non pornographic entertainment work the pictures of models may be limited to body builder publications.
Maxim already changed to be like GQ giving up the three provocative pictorials per issue. Is there still a market for sexual poses in lingerie and bikinis anymore. Will upcoming actresses still do them to offer a kick to the customers that the unknown models do not? With porn coming free and ex porn actresses now being accepted in non pornographic entertainment work the pictures of models may be limited to body builder publications.
I think there is even though we do have the internet. It just depends on how it is set up.
I'm actually surprised that Playboy has made it this long. I view it in the same situation as the phone book.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
