I don’t think I have ever talked about anything pornographic here on this site, even though some of the films that I reviewed on Speculative Fiction Friday contain some sex scenes and possible nudity. Personally, I believe that there might be a place for pornography, but it should not be with those who are lonely for real love and embracing the fake.
All right, I’m stepping off the soapbox. I’m sure that you have heard the news that Playboy is no longer going to be putting naked women in their magazine anymore. Sure, that was incredibly racy back in the 50’s, like that cover that you see here with Marilyn, but there are good reasons not to do this.
Two of my Sources blamed the Internet porn that helped bring about this decision on Playboy Enterprises part, and there is a quote that proves that. Scott Flanders, Playboy Enterprises chief executive, has said that “you’re now one click away from every sex act imaginable for free. And so nudity is just passe at this juncture”.
I hate to say it, but Playboy is right. If they ever want my services as a writer, I would write for them. However, if they had contacted me a few years ago, I would have accepted to. Those people that say they read Playboy for the articles have a point that the articles are usually well-written.
For this reason, Playboy has a reputation of being a magazine full of “artistic” nudity rather than just sexual acts that other pornographic magazines are prone to show. It seems that Playboy’s move to not have nudity is a wise one, and it is also a business decision to veer their brand away from pornography and more towards men’s magazines like Maxim.
So, does this mean that it will be possible to purchase a Playboy from a magazine rack that doesn’t have something blocking the cover? I’ve heard that the Centerfold will still be there, but it will be tastefully PG-13.
You know, ten years ago, if you would have told me that they will let anyone purchase Playboy, I would think it was a bad sign. However, since it is PG-13, who cares?
Leave a Reply