# Heff says: No more thread-bare hare **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 13, 2015, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518 "2015-10-13T03:58:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/81 "2015-10-16T21:49:52Z")
Solid business move. The Playboy brand is popular in China. Which is sort of weird as they have an official ban on porn. The flagship magazine does little to support the brand. Eliminate the nudes, and they have something like Maxim or the SI swimsuit issue. Both can be sold fairly openly. Licensing provided half of Playboy’s revenue in 2013. > **[China—not online porn—is why Playboy is dumping nude photographs](https://qz.com/522672/china-not-online-porn-is-why-playboy-is-dumping-nude-photographs)** > > Playboy now gets about half of its revenues by licensing out its bunny logo. ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/82 "2015-10-16T22:46:07Z")
> [@The Great Sun Jester](#): > > Yeah, but you have to pay to see it. Uhhhh … no. No, you don’t! :o ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2015, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/83 "2015-10-16T22:48:36Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > There goes my brother-in-law’s wanking material. Yeah, but think of all the 18–22 year old females whose career options are now seriously limited. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![ekedolphin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ekedolphin/32/10003_2.png) [@ekedolphin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ekedolphin)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2015, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/84 "2015-10-17T02:17:09Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > “Go to sleep, Lewis or I’m telling Mom about your Playboys!” Haha, yes! ---
**Author:** ![Count\_Blucher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Count\_Blucher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Count_Blucher)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2015, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/85 "2015-10-17T02:28:55Z")
The writing and current events/edgy stuff was very good; concentrate on that and they’ll eat Maxim’s lunch. Plus, think of how many starlets would Now consider being a centerfold with a snarky blown kiss and a “ha-ha”. > [@Siam\_Sam](#): > > Clearly we have reached the End Days. …but there will be no kinky Gabriel Byrne three-way… ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2015, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/86 "2015-10-17T05:53:21Z")
To me it seems like the onward march of prudery, perhaps inevitable after years of increasingly skimpy attire becoming standard for women heightened their objectification. The opposite message has been going out to men and, to a definite extent, older women as well: you’re ugly! Cover up! I’ve always held that this is a very unhealthy trend. As for _Playboy_, it’s certainly true that teenage boys can find pr0n online. But what the publishers seem to have overlooked is that those who really do value Esquire or GQ type journalism can find that online as well, and usually for far less money if not actually free. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2015, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/87 "2015-10-18T01:09:40Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > You’re lucky over there where you live. Nobody has yet figured a mobile app that substitutes for a blowjob bar. A-men to that, brother! But it may not be all doom and gloom. [This writer](http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/why-you-should-be-worried-about-playboy-dropping-naked-women-from-its-pages-a6692756.html) sees it as a sign that porn is on the rise. That may be, but one thing about _Playboy_ is that it really did, and probably still does – haven’t seen one in donkeys’ years despite there being a Thai version – have good articles. And did we little kids buy, or more often steal, it for the articles? No, we obtained it for the pictures, and only then, once we reached a certain age, did we discover the stories. What child is going to get his hands on one now, just for the stories? And keeping a secret stash of Playboys is yet another rite of passage that will disappear. Sigh, more proof I’m getting old. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2015, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/88 "2015-10-18T03:31:25Z")
> [@JKilez](#): > > If they turned it into a _GQ_ or _Men’s Health_ for heterosexuals, or a _Maxim_ or _FHM_ for adults, they could have something. By today’s standards, _Playboy_ is already pretty tame and the photo layouts are a small part of the magazine. They could still make it as a lifestyle guide. Playboy’s problem is there are a couple of holes in this theory. First, it’s not like those other magazines are doing all that well either. Maxim’s circulation is way down. The US edition of FHM ceased publication years ago and the British edition is hurting. Second, it’s doubtful Playboy will be able to steal any readers away from Maxim or GQ. I doubt there are all that many men reading Maxim who have stayed away from Playboy because of the nude women and will now make the jump over if they’re gone. I suspect there will be a lot more readers crossing over the other way; Playboy readers will switch over to Maxim now that Playboy has given up its main distinguishing characteristic. For the last few years, Playboy has essentially been Maxim magazine for guys who also want naked women. Without the naked women, Playboy is just an imitation Maxim. And the guys who want to read a magazine like Maxim will read Maxim. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2015, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/89 "2015-10-18T04:00:31Z")
> [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](#): > > To me it seems like the onward march of prudery, perhaps inevitable after years of increasingly skimpy attire becoming standard for women heightened their objectification. If anything it was the opposite. Before their demise magazines like Penthouse increasingly went towards hardcore pornography to try and satisfy the tastes of those that were no longer content with simple posed nudity as wanking material. Though there probably remains a healthy market for softcore, air-brushed cheesecake shots, I suspect it is no longer the major demographic it once was. Not when hardcore pornography is readily available to the masses in the privacy of their own homes, essentially for free. ---
**Author:** ![Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slow_moving_vehicle/32/291_2.png) [@Slow\_Moving\_Vehicle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slow_Moving_Vehicle)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2015, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/90 "2015-10-18T04:52:10Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > There goes my brother-in-law’s wanking material. He has every issue going back to the original, which probably has some sort of collector’s value. Not if you can’t open the pages. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2015, 10:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/91 "2015-10-18T10:07:27Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > There goes my brother-in-law’s wanking material. He has every issue going back to the original, which probably has some sort of collector’s value. At my undergrad uni in Texas, I worked a student job in the campus library. They kept all the Playboys, even the new ones, in the Rare Book Room. To check anything out of there, you had to sign in and leave an ID, so it was an anti-theft measure. They too had all the Playboys back to day one, each year bound in hardcover. But I don’t think they’d be worth much, because in the early days some old-lady prude librarian had taken some scissors and cut out all the naughty bits. ---
**Author:** ![Greekfreak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c68b51/32.png) [@Greekfreak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greekfreak)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2015, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/92 "2015-10-19T20:40:38Z")
> [@scabpicker](#): > > Yeah, I acquired a nearly complete collection of Playboy through the early 90’s (sans the Monroe issues) in trade. They take up a lot of space, but I’m loathe to get rid of them, and it’s not really because of the photo spreads. The writing and art is pretty great up through the 70’s. After that, it’s kind of hit or miss. And how. Sometime in the mid-late 90s, they made the decision to cut the average interview from 10,000 words to 3,000. The edits became insanely bad. ---
**Author:** ![Master\_Wang-Ka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/master_wang-ka/32/3325_2.png) [@Master\_Wang-Ka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Master_Wang-Ka)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2015, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/93 "2015-10-19T22:06:50Z")
I dunno. Playboy is synonymous in American culture with naked women. Perhaps they will be able to make it work by cutting back to artfully posed models with hands, feet, and furniture between their nipples and the camera. But I’m also thinking of a fair number of people who really don’t give a rat about anything ELSE, and will feel betrayed if this iconic publication all of a sudden goes all tame. I’m not sure what they think they have to gain, here. Can you think of a single library or church lady who will say, “Oh, well, they got rid of the naked girls, we can leave them all around the lobby and reading room NOW…” ---
**Author:** ![opinionator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/58956e/32.png) [@opinionator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/opinionator)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2015, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/94 "2015-10-19T23:46:55Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Why else would anyone buy it? > > I mean, who the hell pays money to look at pictures of naked women these days? > > If Playboy wants to turn itself into GQ or Esquire, then good for it. There’s certainly more money there than in printed porn. Porn? Nudity is automatically porn. Besides, not all porn is bad anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2015, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/95 "2015-10-21T19:01:40Z")
Nekkiddidditty will NEVER be obsolete! Now get of my lawn. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2015, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/96 "2015-10-21T19:20:27Z")
Not all nudity is porn, but nudity intended to cause sexual arousal (which, let’s face it, is most of it) is porn. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2015, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/97 "2015-10-22T01:40:14Z")
> [@opinionator](#): > > Porn? Nudity is automatically porn. Huh? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![terentii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/terentii/32/212_2.png) [@terentii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/terentii)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2015, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/98 "2015-10-22T01:49:01Z")
I don’t care for porn, but I’ll happily look at naked women 24/7! :o ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/99 "2016-02-15T17:08:29Z")
Dezombiefying this thread to link to an imgur post on Reddit that has images of every Playboy Playmate in Playboy’s history. Archival, indeed! NSFW of course [Playmate archive.](http://imgur.com/a/Uxug4) ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518/100 "2016-02-15T17:27:01Z")
The woman from the cover of the first no-nudie pics mag was on Stephen Colbert. Sarah something - has eyes that are different colors. She was in a dress she was constantly adjusting - Colbert was adroit in making it funny without coming across as skeevy. ::quick search:: Ah - here it is: [- YouTube](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_r-JM9xNJds) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/heff-says-no-more-thread-bare-hare/734518.md?page=6)