Jump to content

Talk:Playboy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 82.141.119.195 (talk) at 19:50, 23 May 2011 (→‎Pornography or not?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

circulation

widely reported that circulation has fallen in the last year or so by 40% and that Playboy Inc only guarantees advertises magazine will sell 1.5 million copies when former guarantee was 2.6 million. Now as a result no longer best selling men's magazine surpassed by Maxim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.77.13.113 (talk) 08:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firsts

Shouldn't marge simpson be featured here as the first cartoon character to make the cover? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.139.127 (talk) 17:16, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Celebrities

Can we just remove that section altogether? There seems to be no point, as a whole list of everybody who has posed is already available. Irk(talk) 15:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I had replied to this when it was originally posted... odd... Anyway, I think it's a notable enough series in the magazine that it warrants inclusion. The small lists aren't taking up that much space. It's just sort of a pain when people avoid the 5 or 6 comments within the section asking for people to not just add yet another name. We have a good spread of years represented and the sports category is no longer 75% wrestling women. Dismas|(talk) 23:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Also, enough celebrities have been in the magazine in some form or another (posing, 20 questions, interviews, etc.) to warrant having a small section in there, like what is currently in place. The short list present seems perfectly fine to me as examples of celebrities who have appeared in Playboy in some form or another. UncleThursday 02:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Models vs. Girls in article

I believe we should change the term girls to the term models when discussing the web site for Playboy. Although Playboy calls them Cyber Girls, an encyclopedic article should call them models, since that is what they are; and the term girls may be misconstrued as meaning girls under the age of 18. Thoughts? UncleThursday 02:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

removed comanies owned by PEI

The part of the article I removed was saying Playboy Magazine owned these companies. Playboy Enterprises owns these companies the same as it owns Playboy Magazine. Since this article is about Playboy Magazine it should not be on this page saying that the magazine owns them, as this is false information.Rogue Gremlin 06:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems reasonable. Dismas|(talk) 06:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection now implemented

Due to this page being repeatedly targeted by IP address and new-user vandals, I've gone ahead and implemented semi-protection. This means that this article will not be editable by anonymous users or by users with an account that is, at most, four days old. Anyone with an account older than 4 days can edit the article. The semi-protection is infinite, though can be scaled down to a more defined period at a later date.

Of course, anyone who can't edit the article is more than welcome to discuss changes that should be made here on the talk page! -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud 21:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Playboy not a porno today

I just finish with one and can say it is not porn. Today it's mostly articles, ads, cartoons, and JUST a few pics that a times do not even reveal the poon or tits. The recent issue is a great example.YVNP (talk) 18:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The very first issue was a great example, too. So has been every issue I've read myself thereafter.
Playboy has never been pornographic. The keys to the meaning of the word are "primary purpose," and "artistic merit."
Every woman I've ever known who's read an issue of Playboy has regarded its depiction of women as tasteful, elegant, even wholesome, if light-heartedly lascivious. Each of the few women I've known quite personally who've posed for the magazine, or have worked for its photo department, has commended the professional respect that organization consistently has shown women in every encounter.
Wortschätzer (talk) 23:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photoshopping - Retouching - Airbrushing incidents

A Polish gossip site http://deser.gazeta.pl (not a reliable source) claims that one of the recently published US Playboy magazines had published a picture of a model with an edited out navel."What is wrong with this Playboy bunny?" Can anyone confirm or deny this claim? The website does not give any deteils besides the fact that the model was Brazilian. Mieciu K (talk) 23:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

some of these magazines make men want sex even more —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.158.129.167 (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC) The image was a fake. 75.110.137.47 (talk) 20:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want to store the sourced quote below here in case it is needed in the future to support a discussion in the article of photo hoaxing by the magazine beyond the usual digital erasing of skin bemishes and wrinkles. The quote below is from a People magazine article in which Heidi Montag discusses her latest plastic surgeries, including a second larger breast augmentation (she indicates she wants even larger ones). The comments in parentheses are what appeared in the original. 5Q5 (talk) 16:19, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Q: How do you feel about your breasts? A: I'm already planning my next surgery — I'm determined to get bigger ones! I know it sounds crazy (she is now a DDD), but I just love boobs. They make me feel more womanly. Dr. [Frank] Ryan is very safety conscious, and this was the most he could put in this time. But I can't wait to do it again. When I posed for Playboy (in Sept 2009), I didn't fill out one of the bras and they had to photoshop my boobs bigger, and it was so disheartening. I almost cried. I want to pose for them again but this time have it be sexier. Although I still don't think I'd be nude.

— Heidi Montag, People magazine, Jan 25 2010 cover story "Obsessed with Being Perfect," pp 80-88

The interview

The Playboy Interview is a very noted and notable feature of the magazine, often generating headlines (ref. Martin Luther King and Jimmy Carter). I've started a section on this, but it should be expanded - perhaps spun-off into its own article. 23skidoo (talk) 22:24, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is written as if it were an ad

As the header says. Chasnor15 (talk) 18:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No yellow on the map

The caption on the map refers to yellow on the map, yet there's no yellow there. 67.38.24.177 (talk) 16:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Circulation

Something should be written about the two recent double issues (July/August 2009 and January/February 1010). Has this ever occured before in Playboy's publishing history? What is the reason behind this? Is it because the company is facing financial difficulties and skipped an issue to cut back on costs? Or was it for a different reason? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AshidMapantz (talk • contribs) 06:44, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In "Circulation" it says 1/4 of all college men were buying Playboy each month, but it doesn't mention (as the source does) that this was by the end of the 60s, rather than 1972 as the text states. I'd edit this but I don't have an account. 71.123.119.67 (talk) 21:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I would like to know what Playboy international edition is available to readers in countries where there isn't a national edition. Is American playboy the standard in UK and Canada? What edition do they sell in latin american countries that don't publish Playboy, the Mexican? The Spanish? Or maybe they don't even know the magazine? (189.63.69.195 (talk) 02:58, 7 September 2008 (UTC))'[reply]

In Finland we have the American edition for sale. 82.141.126.196 (talk) 03:18, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also

I think there should be links for Playboy Cyber Club, Playboy Online and Playboy Special Edition in this section. Meister Schmidt5 (talk) 16:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Playboy IS porn!!!

Any magazine that has pictures of women called "ass fucking sluts" and "big vixens" is considered porn.

Also, most Americans think nudity is art, not porn. It's things like Playboy that make us think it's porn... :( --Blah911 (talk) 18:41, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. Where has Playboy ever referred to women as "ass fucking sluts"?
  2. Are you just soapboxing or do you have some sort of suggestion for the article? Dismas|(talk) 19:00, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I know, it doesn't say that. I was kind of exagerating, but still. I suggest saying that the magazine is a "pornographic men's magazine," rather than just a "men's magazine." --Blah911 (talk) 20:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First off, Playboy is not porn. It's a well known men's magazine that portrays beautiful women in a positive light. Pornography would be more like Hustler magazine. Secondly, it sounds like you're soapboxing and that has no place here. And thirdly, if you don't like the Playboy article...then perhaps you can focus on another article instead. Caden S (talk) 21:08, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, what planet do you live on? Playboy may not be what you call "porn," but it is at least softcore porn. --71.225.111.4 (talk) 00:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the women in Playboy are not beautiful at all. They are blonde wannabes who have fake boobs and suck at life. --71.225.111.4 (talk) 00:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If it isn't pornography, than why is it in Wikiproject:Pornography? --71.225.111.4 (talk) 00:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, it's softcore pornography. Now do you have a point or are you still just soapboxing? Dismas|(talk) 00:50, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dude, haven't you been listening? I said that since people without an account aren't allowed to edit this page, I'm asking someone else to. I want it to say the it is a pornographic magazine in the opening sentence. --71.225.111.4 (talk) 22:19, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why not make an account for yourself, then you can add the information? Tabercil (talk) 22:30, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If it's porn, they why are minors in some states allowed to buy it? Emperor001 (talk) 20:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Type of Men's Magazine

It should say in the introduction that Playboy is a "Pornographic men's magazine" and that it "features semi-nude or fully nude women." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blah911 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Dismas|(talk) 19:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The article is locked for me to edit for some reasson, and I even have an account. --Blah911 (talk) 20:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The main article is more than likely protected due to vandalism (from IP's). Even though you may have an account, the page may also be protected from new users editing as well. You could try editing later. Caden S (talk) 00:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Error on Playboy Page

{{editsemiprotected}}Fahrenheit 451 was written by Ray Bradbury, not Roy Bradbury Douglasmusgrove (talk) 16:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 16:36, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help me please! International Playboy

What is the Playboy edition available to readers in countries where there's not a national edition? Is American playboy the standard in UK and Canada? What edition do they sell in latin american countries that don't publish Playboy, would it be the Mexican? The Spanish? Or maybe they don't even know the magazine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.63.70.7 (talk) 17:43, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Finland we have the American edition for sale.
And, other thing about regions: Indonesia is darker red in the map meaning it's active today, while the list on it's side says (2006-2007). I think the latter is probably right. 82.141.126.196 (talk) 03:29, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Playboy in Indoensia has been discontinued. The government has passed a 'Anti pornography law' in Indoenesia. --Shorty23sin (talk) 02:10, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My point was: Indonesia is darker red in the map, and the text below picture says The dark pink indicates the countries where regional editions of the magazine are produced today, so Indonesia should be coloured lighter. 85.217.23.95 (talk) 00:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Though I just clicked the picture and the description says 2007. It was then 'today', but it's not 'today' now... 85.217.23.95 (talk) 00:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Then just change the picture! --Shorty23sin (talk) 03:01, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have such picture or skill to make one. 85.217.15.114 (talk) 17:05, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm suggesting removing the picture, since no-one is willing to update it. At least 5 countries are in wrong color already. And I don't know how to do it myself, and since I don't have an account I couldn't even upload it... 85.217.14.88 (talk) 10:57, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should be mentioned in the body of the paragraph that since this magazine reveals the naked bodies of women in certain erotic poses it is considered to be pornographic. The stub is often not noticeable. This should be in the first paragraph... this is not merely "men's magazine"... to imply that is very false. Thank you. PLEASE EDIT FOR THE LOVE OF ACCURACY. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.115.174 (talk) 20:49, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More Photoshoppery

Beachnut4's photo in the "History" section is a pretty obvious photoshop job (I say this not because it depicts nudity in public, but because it's just pretty damn obvious when you go to full resolution, i.e. the shadowing around the model's feet, the difference in resolution/grain on her versus everyone else, etc.). Any reason objections to removing it? --rsgdodge (talk) 19:25, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No issues here. Dismas|(talk) 21:49, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/Beachnut4 Remove photo by Beachnut4; user could not identify the model; the so-called amateur (exhibitionist) is not typical of Playboy models and therefore doesn't contribute to the article at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 40four (talk • contribs) 03:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remove naked picture

Delete photo by User:Beachnut4. After removing it once with the request that its contributer furnish the name of the model, Beachnut reposted the picture with the claim that she is an amateur from the Women of South Beach photoshoot. Playboy is not known for its amateur models, it is known for its Playmates, celebrities, and signature special edition models; the photo, therefore, does not contribute at all to the article's attempt to provide the unfamiliar reader with a general idea of Playboy's particular brand of pornography. Furthermore, without any name or searchable documentation, it is questionable whether it is even a Playboy photoshoot at all, and not simply an exhibitionist. A glance at Special:Contributions/Beachnut4 is enough to convince even the most 'benefit of the doubt' giving editor that Beachnut is merely trying to shock readers with his depictions of nudity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 40four (talk • contribs) 03:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]


List of Famous Contributors and Notable Article

A popular sitcom joke is that people read Playboy for the articles. Playboy, however, is renowned for the quality of its writing and the fame of its contributors. I think a list of notable articles and contributors would be very cool!

04:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benbenbenben (talk • contribs)

Best Selling Issue?

The article says that an issue in 1972, which sold 7.1 million copies, was the best selling issue. However, it is touted that La Toya Jackson's 1989 appearance made for the best-selling issue, over 8 million magazines. Can anyone confirm if the latter sold that many at the time of release, or notched-up that many subsequently? Actually, does that even matter, as it would still seem to qualify it for the title of 'best-selling issue ever'? User: Jaydash 9 January 2009

how can you send in some thing that you wrote so you can get it put in playboy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.43.200 (talk) 20:26, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo editing - Pamela Anderson's disappearing labia

The article says there is a rear-view shot of Pamela in the February 1990 issue of Playboy that has caused controversy due to photo editing. I just looked at the February 1990 issue and there is no rear view shot of Pamela in the entire issue. Perhaps the original writer was mistaken about the issue? I know she has appeared in Playboy many times.

remove photo editing section

The whole section is unsourced. It should be removed if there are no independent sources put in. The claim Hustler photos are never airbrushed and completely natural is dubious. The section gives the misleading impression that it's somehow abnormal for a magazine to alter images of models, when the exact opposite is the case. Even if we get good sources, a section on photo editing should be kept only if we can explain how Playboy is unique in this regard. --Rob (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Porn

Based on the definition at the article pornography, why is there even an argument about whether or not it's porn? The definition reads "Pornography or porn is the depiction of explicit sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexually exciting the viewer. Pornography makes no claim to artistic merit, unlike erotica which does." I would also like to mention the Greek word from which pornography is derived: pornographos, which means writing of the prostitutes. Basically, porn is a depiction of prostitution and since there are no sex acts in Playboy (except for the cartoons), it is not porn. In some states, you don't even have to be 18 to buy it. Emperor001 (talk) 04:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see a source for your comment about not needing to be 18 in order to buy a copy. Dismas|(talk) 04:15, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Source an employee at a book store. She said you only need to be 18 to sell it, not buy it. Emperor001 (talk) 15:53, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whether Playboy can be considered pornography is dependent on how strict standards are, personally, municipally or even nationally. "Playboy" is banned in most Muslim countries (Indonesia excepted), and was banned for a few decades in the Irish Republic. Many people consider nudity obscene, therefore pornographic.~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Opusv5 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New owner?

Any truth to Hef selling the magazine/franchise to RIchard Branson? --Cooly123 (talk) 15:32, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marguerite Empey

She was in two playmate pictorials. The first playmate pictorial to show pubic hair wasn't her February 1956 pictorial, but her May 1955 pictorial. Would someone please fix the article? 168.100.1.1 (talk) 14:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Firsts" list

I'm a little concerned with this section/list. At best, it's thematic trivia; you might say it's borderline fancruft—first issue without a staple in the centerfold? And where could this all be sourced from? I think the article could do w/o such a list, likely to be forever largely or entirely unsourced and arguably unencyclopedic. I tagged it with my concerns, and if no one objects to the section's removal, I'll do it in a few days.  Mbinebri  talk ← 01:41, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Unencyclopedic?

"Playboy is one of the world's best known brands.[citation needed]" The top brands change depending on who pays for the survey. For example, Apple is a top three worldwide brand when Apple pays for the survey with Microsoft nowhere. 19:39, 24 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.215.245 (talk)

Older women in Playboy

I would like to start a new section on women who were 40 or older at the time they posed nude for Playboy. I think it would be useful for those who are fans of older women. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by VickieP (talk • contribs) 14:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Firsts

I've removed the list of "Firsts". At first (haha, sorry), I started removing the overly crufty pieces of trivia such as "first issue with an Ian Fleming story". I didn't see why we were choosing Fleming over any other author, after all several notable authors have had stories published in Playboy. But then as I went on, they were all looking rather crufty and pedantic. The first time for femlins or Vargas comics or whatever are rather trivial milestones in the magazine's history and not noteworthy for any other reason. And things like "first African American Playmate" might be notable, it's out of any sort of context as to why this was groundbreaking or important to point out. No mention is made as to whether this was commonplace by that time or if they were the first in the industry to take more of a social/equal rights type stance. Dismas|(talk) 09:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So that the list doesn't get lost in the pages of history, here it is:

Firsts

  • First issue with two-page centerfold: February 1954 (Margaret Scott)
  • First issue with LeRoy Neiman's Femlin: August 1955
  • First issue with a Playmate showing pubic hair: February 1956 (Marguerite Empey)
  • First issue with a three-page centerfold: March 1956 (Marian Stafford)
  • First issue with a Vargas girl: March 1957
  • First issue with two Playmates for Playmate of the Month: October 1958 (Pat Sheehan and Mara Corday)
  • First issue with Ian Fleming story: March 1960
  • First issue with a Playmate featured officially as Playmate of the Year: June 1960 (Ellen Stratton)
  • First issue with Playboy Advisor column: September 1960
  • First issue with Playboy Interview: September 1962 (with Miles Davis)
  • First issue with an African-American centerfold: March 1965 (Jennifer Jackson)
  • First issue with Playboy 20Q: Cheryl Tiegs in October 1978[1]
  • First issue with a man on the cover: April 1964 (Peter Sellers)
  • First issue to show a celebrity or non-Playmate's pubic hair: August 1969 (dancer Paula Kelly)[2]
  • First issue with centerfold showing pubic hair: December 1969 (Gloria Root)
  • First issue with identical twins in centerfold: October 1970 - (Mary and Madeleine Collinson)
  • First full frontal nude centerfold: January 1971 (Liv Lindeland).
  • First issue with an African-American on the cover: October 1971 (Darine Stern) [3]
  • First issue with a double sided centerfold (the reverse side was a rear view). January 1974 (Nancy Cameron)
  • First issue with signed centerfold: October 1975 (Jill De Vries)
  • First issue with Playmate data sheet: July 1977 (Sondra Theodore)
  • First issue without staple in the centerfold: October 1985
  • First issue with identical triplets in the centerfold, The Dahm Triplets: December 1998
  • First issue with www.playboy.com explicit on cover: February 1999
  • First issue with female video game characters (most notably Bloodrayne): October 2004[4]
  • First issue ever of Playboy Philippines debuted on April 2, 2008 as a "mature lifestyle magazine" without any nudity.
  • First issue with a animated character (Marge Simpson) as the cover girl: November 2009 [5]

magazine's content

While this entry explains much of the "for the articles" content of Playboy, it seems goofy that it barely mentions that the magazine also features model photo shoots of naked women. I see that there's been disagreement in the past about whether or not it's pornographic, but I wouldn't think the article could get much past the lead in without at least referring to the nudity and its importance to the Playboy magazine and the wider brand. 173.26.205.136 (talk) 04:33, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, there should definitely be a reference to nude/semi-nude women and/or the centrefold in the introduction. Vonbontee (talk) 15:14, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree

There needs to be an article just about the term "playboy" and what a "playboy" is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.184.82.118 (talk) 22:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Revisionist history?

Anyone else disturbed by the fact that after reading this article if I didn't already know that Playboys had nude pictures in them I still wouldn't know? For instance, in 100 years if you had no idea what a Playboy was, and you went to Wikipedia to find out, are you going to understand why it was such a big deal for a 9 year old boy to have a tree house full of them? Don't undermine the value of all my hard work in getting my hands on those things at that age! People won't have the faintest clue how hard it was before the Internet. :-) 71.59.192.76 (talk) 21:56, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Burtinsh, 8 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Latvia have PlayBoy too. From this year. http://www.mango.lv/zinas/apraksti/personibas/pirma-playboy-meitene--anna-rozite.m?id=34525173&serialized_data=a:8:{s:2:%22fa%22;a:1:{i:0;s:5:%2263576%22;}s:1:%22s%22;s:6:%22style7%22;s:1:%22r%22;b:0;s:1:%22l%22;i:8;s:2:%22si%22;b:1;s:4:%22hash%22;i:0;s:9:%22activeimg%22;i:7;s:4:%22burl%22;s:27:%22http://foto.delfi.lv/js/ec/%22;}

Burtinsh (talk) 15:05, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Added with a somewhat more reliable source being used for it. Tabercil (talk) 17:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And delisted. Salvio Let's talk about it! 17:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pornography or not?

I don't really have any opinion on the answer to the above question, but instead came here trying to find an idea of the answer. Whatever answer Wikipedia gives, I feel it should be consistent. So, is playboy pornography? This article would suggest not. However, wikipedia's categorisations would suggest that it is. Category:Playboy is subcategorised in Category:Pornographic magazines. I suggest that someone with a better grasp than me of the arguments that have doubtless raged on this talk page can choose whether or not to delete that categorisation. GDallimore (Talk) 00:12, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Someone might also want to take a look at Pornographic magazine. GDallimore (Talk) 00:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does it matter, is perhaps the answer? —Zujine|talk 00:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It depends how you look at it. Pornography is by the definition in wikipedia: the portrayal of explicit sexual subject matter for the purposes of sexual excitement and erotic satisfaction.
I think Playboy has always been somewhat explicit. But I think pornography is considered to be some kind depiction of sex. You can ask almost anyone, and that is probably what they say. Playboy could be considered as soft-porn, though to me soft-porn is depiction of sex without penetration. Playboy has no depictions of sex in their pictures, only sexual poses. Maybe it would be best to have a source that says PB is or is not porn. 82.141.119.195 (talk) 19:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "playboy.com / world of playboy / events".
  2. ^ "The Playmate FAQ".
  3. ^ "The Most Controversial Magazine Covers of All Time". Webdesigner depot.
  4. ^ "Playboy undressed video game women - Aug. 25, 2004".
  5. ^ "Marge Simpson on front cover of Playboy". 9 October 2009.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Playboy&oldid=430561627"