# Is Playboy porn? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 21, 2011, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791 "2011-07-21T01:25:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2011, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/41 "2011-07-21T18:32:05Z")
> [@Quint](#): > > :smack: Good point! Fuck, I’m old. You know what else? I LIKE pubic hair. Stupid shavey trend, get offa my lawn!!! What lawn? ---
**Author:** ![I\_Know\_Nothing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/f04885/32.png) [@I\_Know\_Nothing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Know_Nothing)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2011, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/42 "2011-07-21T18:49:16Z")
How about “Get that lawn offa you.” ---
**Author:** ![corkboard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9bcb4/32.png) [@corkboard](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/corkboard)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2011, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/43 "2011-07-21T19:50:22Z")
When I subscribed to it in the days when I lived alone and enjoyed the photo spreads the way they were meant to be enjoyed, it was porn. Then Al Gore invented the internet, and suddenly it was no longer porn. ---
**Author:** ![gaffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e68b1a/32.png) [@gaffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gaffa)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2011, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/44 "2011-07-21T20:07:56Z")
> [@control-z](#): > > Sure it’s porn. People don’t go around naked in everyday society do they? The naked chicks are in there to arouse, that’s porn. Depends where you live. If you’re talking about the nudist camp where my family spent summers? Then yes, people go around naked every day. > [@Living\_Well\_Is\_Best\_Revenge](#): > > I guess to me porn needs to include a sexual act. If the girls in Playboy are masturbating or something, I would call it porn. In November 1975, playboy had a cover image with a model slipping her fingers under her panties to masturbate. They got close to porn for a bit in that era, but backed away. ---
**Author:** ![ChicoEsperto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@ChicoEsperto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChicoEsperto)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/45 "2011-07-31T04:37:35Z")
Eroticism must be distinguished from porn. Nudity by itself is neither erotic or pornographic, but for those with a permanently “dirty” mind it can always be so. Erotic photography can be done with less, or with more nudity as is the case with Playboy. But eroticism is not pornography even if pornography may be erotic. Pornography is the depiction of sexual acts, and soft porn is the simulation of sexual acts. Magazines like Hustler stand between Playboy and pornography, because the photos are intentionally meant to arouse sexually. Playboy’s photos may be arousing and sexual but that’s not the goal, they just depict beautiful women in an artistic and tasteful way. With Hustler-type photography, this is impossible because there is always the focus on displaying a certain part of women’s anatomy. Actually, it’s with these photos, more than in real pornography, that there is an “objectification” of women. The real essence of the person’s sexuality is sacrificed in favour of the exploitation of their “hardware”. They don’t even deserve to be called erotic because erotic photography requires the subject to be photographed in their wholeness and not just as a piece of meat. Designating everything in which nakedness is displayed as porn is a personal moral judgement by itself, which prevents the real distinctions from taking place. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/46 "2011-07-31T04:54:21Z")
Soft porn that looks even softer in today’s world. Naked women to give an erection = porn ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/47 "2011-07-31T04:56:24Z")
I wouldn’t exactly consider Playboy “tasteful”. Just not quite “tasteless”. Look at it this way: a woman can pose for Playboy, but that doesn’t make her a porn star. ---
**Author:** ![overlyverbose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/9dc877/32.png) [@overlyverbose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/overlyverbose)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/48 "2011-07-31T05:02:03Z")
Sure it’s porn. It’s presenting naked women for the purposes of sexual excitement. ---
**Author:** ![gladtobeblazed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/85f322/32.png) [@gladtobeblazed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gladtobeblazed)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/49 "2011-07-31T05:19:59Z")
If it helps me jerk off then it’s porn. Whether the creators intended it to be used as pornography is irrelevant to me. The material becomes pornography the moment I choose to use it as such. ---
**Author:** ![Ostrya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/35a633/32.png) [@Ostrya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ostrya)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/50 "2011-07-31T05:29:36Z")
Haven’t seen it in years, but it sure seemed like porn when I was a teenager and during that time that mag was highly sought after. Then some kid stole from his dad some issues of Oui, Club, and Penthouse. Playboy took a back seat to those. ---
**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:** [July 31, 2011, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/51 "2011-07-31T05:56:18Z")
> [@ChicoEsperto](#): > > Playboy’s photos may be arousing and sexual but that’s not the goal, they just depict beautiful women in an artistic and tasteful way. Disagree. No, it is not speculum country, but neither is it art photography IMHO. The whole climate of “bunnies”, “playmates”, the club and mansion scene and all the other trappings point it more towards arousal than art. ---
**Author:** ![PunditLisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4af34b/32.png) [@PunditLisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PunditLisa)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 11:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/52 "2011-07-31T11:27:22Z")
Yes. If it was merely an artful display of women’s bodies, they would present all body types. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/53 "2011-07-31T13:33:27Z")
> [@PunditLisa](#): > > Yes. If it was merely an artful display of women’s bodies, they would present all body types. Not all body types are beautiful, and ugly ones won’t sell magazines. ---
**Author:** ![PunditLisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4af34b/32.png) [@PunditLisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PunditLisa)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/54 "2011-07-31T13:56:05Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > Not all body types are beautiful, and ugly ones won’t sell magazines. Yes, but there are plenty of beautiful bodies that aren’t the Playboy sterotype. ---
**Author:** ![rhubarbarin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/eb9ed0/32.png) [@rhubarbarin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rhubarbarin)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/55 "2011-07-31T14:30:49Z")
> [@PunditLisa](#): > > Yes, but there are plenty of beautiful bodies that aren’t the Playboy sterotype. I’d even go so far as to say that the majority of attractive female bodies in the world wouldn’t be found acceptable for publication in today’s Playboy. ---
**Author:** ![Sleel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/73ab20/32.png) [@Sleel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sleel)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/56 "2011-07-31T14:33:16Z")
Back when I actually saw Playboy, I remember about 90% of it being non-porn, with some soft-porn pictorials making up the other 10%. They were pretty damn thick magazines, with lots of articles, stories, ads, gadget reviews, clothing and grooming advice, etc. But naked chicks semi-tastefully photographed were the primary draw—let’s face it—and by most reasonable standards would be considered pornography, no matter how tame it is in comparison to today’s stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/57 "2011-07-31T14:46:09Z")
> [@ChicoEsperto](#): > > Playboy’s photos may be arousing and sexual but that’s not the goal, they just depict beautiful women in an artistic and tasteful way. Maybe I’m being whooshed here, but _Playboy_’s photos of women are quite openly intended to be “arousing and sexual”. I doubt anyone involved with the production of _Playboy_ would deny that their photos of women are supposed to be sexy. I don’t know that the magazine has an actual mission statement, but if you Google “playboy” (probably not a good idea to do this at work!) the official _Playboy_ website should be the first hit and the description listed underneath the link says “See \*\*hot \*\*girls, nude girls, naked women in \*\*sexy \*\*pics and videos. Find hundreds of \*\*hot \*\*girls posing nude for Playboy, including naked celebs and Playmates.” (Emphasis mine.) ETA: Not really related to the above, but the poll results so far indicate that a majority of both men and women consider _Playboy_ to be porn, but men are about twice as likely as women to consider it not to be porn. At the moment it’s about 13% of women voting “no” and 36% of men. ---
**Author:** ![salinqmind](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3ec8ea/32.png) [@salinqmind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/salinqmind)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/58 "2011-07-31T14:47:39Z")
Of course it’s porn, even if it isn’t in-your-face-vomitous-perversion stuff that the bored reader of such seems to need more and more of today. Would you bring a Playboy magazine to a family Christmas gathering, to read while you’re waiting to be called to the table? Would you be reading it at work, during a break? Say what you want about the intellectual articles, the turd in the punchbowl is the naked bimbos, no matter how sweet and beautifully photographed. ---
**Author:** ![PunditLisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4af34b/32.png) [@PunditLisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PunditLisa)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/59 "2011-07-31T16:18:39Z")
> [@rhubarbarin](#): > > I’d even go so far as to say that the majority of attractive female bodies in the world wouldn’t be found acceptable for publication in today’s Playboy. Agreed. Playboy tends to depict women with exaggerated sexual features, such as enormous boobs, tiny waists, and big hips. Barbie if you will. It’s not just prettily shot photographs of beautiful women, but prettily shot photographs of beautiful, sexually exaggerated women. ---
**Author:** ![DMark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@DMark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMark)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2011, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791/60 "2011-07-31T18:25:51Z")
Maybe I lived in Europe too long, but the sight of a naked woman (or man) posing alone is not what I, nor most Europeans, would consider pornography. If that arouses you, so be it - you could probably also be aroused by the models in the Sears Catalog underwear section. I think kids of any age could look at photos in Playboy and see a nekkid person, but I hardly think they would need years of therapy to undo those horrid images. If nude models are just standing there and not masturbating or sitting on a banana, what is the big deal? Sometimes I wonder where this American prude attitude comes from. My guess is that the same people who consider Playboy pornographic go see movies with a nude woman or man getting up from bed and walking to the bathroom. Is that a porno film? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-playboy-porn/589791.md?page=4)