>The first issue of Playboy's non-nude era is here.
>Playboy's March issue is the first to embrace a new look and a new mantra. There is now a commitment to "art, literature and long-form journalism," along with "an entirely contemporary take on photographing the beautiful women who have made the publication one of the most enduring and successful of all time," according to a press release.
what does /pol/ think about playboy becoming SFW?
Playboy is largely irrelevant now but has historic cultural significance and for that I find it sad.
playboy from 2009-2012 was GOAT. They had the hottest girls and no porn could compare to it.
Nowadays it's just meh and they get lots of used up porn stars.
the nude/non-nude debate is a secondary concern for me, the choice to stick that obnoxious, vapid "heyyyyy ;;)))))" millennial shit right on the fucking cover is the problem here
how the fuck are we going to fix humanity?
internet porn has made made such still images irrelevant to the need of a young male.
they should have synergized early with the internet and release gif/webm of their models instead of sticking with then archaic format
actually makes sense since everyone on earth just goes on the internet to look at naked girls now adays
but making their magazine easier to sell widely and more acceptable to read in public will boost their sales
Non-nude is an infinitely better way to go about doing this. Its great that playboy is finally bringing back the art of the tease.
If you want blatant, upfront nudity where imagination is totally out of the picture you should just watch porn.
Playboy was what kept me going in a boys only catholic boarding school in the 90s.
>don't be afraid of womens bodies!
>us walking around naked isn't an excuse for rape
>the female form is nothing to be ashamed of!
>...unless the women is attractive and men are looking!
Tthey don't really have another option now. In an age where everyone has a smartphone and everything at their fingertips a monthly print publication is archaic as hell. plus the times and people's limits for what is lewd have gotten way more extreme. a nipple popping out in 1950 might have made a million teens and 20 something dudes cream themselves but a huge chunk of the target demographic probably doesnt get a boner now for anything less than a chick gargling piss out of her ass and making herself puke on a dozen cocks
HOLY FUCK THOSE COMMENTS
>Those girls look like they are extremely young, far under 18.
>I agree they look way too young, it is almost scary thinking they could have been nude. Seeing a young female that loks far younger than 18 preform sexy poses dressed or nude makes me gag.
>Are they catering to pedophiles now?? The girl on the cover looks about 12! Super, super, cringeworthy.
>his point is not there exact age but how old they really look
Girl looks like an underfed 14 year old
I understand them. If you want nude girls these days it is only a couple of clicks away on the internet. By offering something more contemporary and tasteful, perhaps they can turn it around.
Like it or not, Playboy at least had some glamor. Modern porn is just filth. And most pornstars are fugly. I prefer beautiful women. For me the 80s/90s Playboy aesthetics are just perfect.
You seem to have them confused with Hustler.
Playboy has more class than that.
>Select all images with a milkshake.
With all kinds of horrible filth being easily available Playboy should've been running on the fact it has the rare tag of being "classy" porn with suprisingly good writers and journalists working for them.
I'm curious if their new approach will sell, I can understand that they wanna town down the graphic content so that people might buy one to read their articles which tend to be really good. But I don't think it will.
I liked to torrent all the foreign playboy mags every now and then for a good fap. Guess I wont be doing that anymore. Or is this just for the US edition. A lot of countries have their own version of playboy.
Who the fuck will buy porn let alone non nude porn? Do these retards think they can somehow change their image of playboy from being a porn mag into some journalism shit at this stage, after becoming the fucking icon of porn?
Circulation has collapsed at all general interest mens mag's because their SJW approved content sucks.Elites / liberals don't like masculinity and objectification of women. Online porn will eventually be targeted too.
>sjw did this!!
This thread is pathetic. Playboy doesn't give a shit about SJW. The problem is that Playboy has been going to shit for decades and they need to change things up. Men used to buy playboy for the articles and nudes but now you can find all the nudes you want online cutting out half of the audience while still turning off possible consumers who'd want to read their articles but don't want to buy a "porno mag". This is just them attempting to keep afloat.
So men's magazines have male oriented content, but juxtapose w nu-male indoctrination. Read thru Esquire, every layout says something like "she can kick your ass" or "you know, she's a genius!". Comes across as cringingly self-hating, thus readership collapses
and they're healthier than your average feminist shithead
Are those saggy too big, badly shapen breasrs with ugly mishsapen nipples an example for whats good or bad? I mean i can agree with your statement, but u chose a terrible picture to go along with it
she's literally perfect
Let's dispel this fiction once and for all that Playboy doesn't know what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing; he's undergoing a systematic effort to change this country and make America more like the rest of the world. If I'm elected we'll embrace what makes America the greatest country in the world.