Playboy Is Bringing Back Nudity After Failed Attempt To Court SJWs
(Last Updated On: February 15, 2017)

Playboy tried courting the people who hate male sexuality and hate the feminine aspects of female sexuality. They at one point jumped on the regressive bandwagon of being “Progressive” by misreporting on things like the Alison Rapp firing at Nintendo (which eventually saw then games editor Mike Rougeau part ways with the company several months later, due to a downsize of their online staff) and even opted to remove nudity from their magazine.

Playboy’s attempt at being “Progressive” was an absolute failure, especially after having Rougeau (a former member of the GameJournoPros) take control of the games section and attempt to bring his regressive, censure-style politics to a magazine mostly known for nude women. Social Justice Warrior propaganda is not why people play video games and it’s certainly not why they read about video games in a nudie magazine like Playboy.

Former CEO Scott Flanders thought by not offering nude pictorials they could be progressive in an age where porn is freely available on the internet. According to The Globe and Mail, that experiment failed horribly. It only took a change in CEOs to get the company back on track.

Flanders departed the company back in spring of 2016 to join eHealth, and the young Cooper Hefner —  the son of Playboy founder Hugh Hefner — was given charge of the company. Cooper decided to abandon the SJW politics and the war against young male sexuality; he put aside the disdain of worshiping feminine beauty, and simply decided to bring back the nudity.

Cooper stated…

“Nudity was never the problem because nudity isn’t a problem,” […] “Today we’re taking our identity back and reclaiming who we are.”

So what were they hoping to achieve by getting rid of the nudity and focusing only on the editorials? Well, at the time a lot of loud voices in the media – almost all entirely from the hardline regressive left political system – were saying that adopting “progressive” views on gender, sexuality and the feminine form would be the way forward. A lot of third-wave feminists had pushed for limiting the celebration of certain ideal body types, especially in games and ads because it gave women a negative ideal type of body to achieve.

Articles on sites like The Daily Dot perpetuated the media’s agenda of furthering the stigma of including fit feminine females in media, ads, movies and video games. The article quotes the staff from Bulimia.com, who wrote…

“The difference between the original video game heroines and their more realistic interpretations is hardly subtle,” […] “In these images, unfeasible waistlines expand and arms and legs grow wider. Perhaps the changes are especially noticeable since most of these characters are so scarcely dressed.”

There was even a group of SJWs who attacked the Protein World company for their “Beach Body Ready” ads featuring a fit, thin woman in a bikini, as reported by Forbes.

Playboy was attempting to fall in line lock, step and key with the regressive agenda and it failed.

The Globe and Mail quoted magazine expert and journalism professor Samir Husni who explained that Playboy’s attempt to be non-nude was an oxymoron…

“Playboy and the idea of non-nudity is sort of an oxymoron,” “They are always going to have the stereotype as a nude magazine.”

Well, they’ve gone back to embracing the stereotype after that non-nude failure. Whether or not they can carve out a place in today’s porn-ridden industry is another story. However, one thing is clear from this little experiment, and it’s that employing an agenda to attract an audience of “progressives” proved that the SJW social media bark is only there to make noise, and they certainly aren’t large enough in number as a marketable demographic.

(Main image courtesy of Donna M. Evans)


Ads (learn more about our advertising policies here)





About

Billy has been rustling Jimmies for years covering video games, technology and digital trends within the electronics entertainment space. The GJP cried and their tears became his milkshake. Need to get in touch? Try the Contact Page.

  • Clarence

    People imagine that companies are free to ‘drop’ the SJW agenda.
    No, at least in the US they aren’t.
    Why? Two things: Human Resources and sexual harassment laws.
    The SH laws that basically REQUIRE Human Resources (not sure if its a legal requirement for companies of a certain size to have an organization like HR, but they do have to have procedures and policies about Sexual Harassment ) are based on a radical second wave feminist (of the sex-negative, not sex-positive variety) viewpoint on male /female sexual relations in the workplace and in society in general. The Supreme Court of the United States (made up, at the time, of one feminist Justice, and mostly TradCons for the rest) in the late 80’s or early 90’s (I forget exact cases) basically said that the “standard” for sexual harrasment was ‘reasonable woman’, not ‘reasonable person’. In effect, over the years this has basically set the LEGAL standard as what constitutes harassment the most easily offended (or willing to abuse process)woman in a given company decides it is. If it wasn’t for the fact that the existence of HR (and its policies) gives the company presumptive legal cover(good intentions, providing they can show they follow the policies), and that harassment must be more than one or even two isolated incidents but instead a “pattern of behavior” then most companies would presumably be bankrupted by now.

    As it is, this encourages companies to crack down on even the smallest of chances that any given sexual speech, joke, display, or proposition will run afoul of someone’s sensibilities. Long and short – rather than banning mere bad behavior like a boss saying to subordinate “Sleep with me or no promo” or “Sleep with me, or you are fired”, we’ve instead been basing the legal regime imposed on companies large enough to have HR departments on FEELS for over 30 years now.

    Why should these companies (and how would they) who’ve basically been policiing “microaggressions” before that was even a word or concept and who have tremendous unaccountable power over employees work life condu ct go against the SJW’s? The SJW’s are just taking out into larger society the Orwellian expectations that laws that try to keep no women (“disadvantaged class!”) from ever feeling offense at work already have as legal requirements for jobs.

    While at the time this law was being formulated feminists such as Christina Hoff Sommers pushed back against it, they lost the fight, and I haven’t seen a major critique of the status of SH laws (which I do think need to be reformed drastically, both to remove ‘feels’ as much as possible and also to make less sexist) in nearly twenty years.

    As with Radical feminists in the ‘shelter movement’ – amd hence why todays DV laws are so expansive in scope and so one sided in application – radical feminism ruins everything. And it’s really radical feminism (occasionally mixed with TradCon support) that is responsible for most of the current SJW shit.

  • Γεώργιος Αρχαιοκαπηλίδης

    With
    Donald Trump winning the elections, Marvel decided to give up at SJW
    comics and now Playboy decided to bring back nudies. See? He makes
    America great again! XD

  • anopolis

    finally…something anything returning to normal. Just the idea that playboy magazine wouldn’t feature nudity is stupid and silly. Nudity is what it does best.

  • Seriously who was the genius who came with the idea that Playboy without nudity would sell?.

    Don’t the employees at Playboy have families?, I would think that running a successful business so they can provide for their family would be a priority, is not that hard to understand, is not like this is rocket surgery or brain engineering.

  • Disqusted

    An unnamed source confirms Russia is to blame. It was Russia. Did you know it was Russia? It has to be Russia. Everything is Russia’s fault.

    Russia Russia Russia.

  • Keystone

    “A lot of third-wave feminists had pushed for limiting the celebration of
    certain ideal body types, especially in games and ads because it gave
    women a negative ideal type of body to achieve.”

    Translation: It reminds men that fat, ugly land whales like us who put no effort into improving our bodies or out attitudes are not the norm, and that guys can indeed do far better.

    I’ve always loved, and will continue to love, how this “brave” and “deep” feminist movement narrative these rabid feminists try to push is all bullshit, and that it’s down to absolute simplicity; they’re jealous of women who look better than them and can take home a real man, not some emasculated beta male who they can order around like a pet. Nothing more, nothing less – it really *is* that simple.

    The fact that fake, pixelated women can evoke this response from these people is just hilarious and sad.

  • Playboy coming to their senses?

    It’s clear that all of this “body positivity” and “realistic body standards” stuff is not really for the cause of empowering women. Instead, it’s always been about attacking and eroding any entertainment media that is catered towards heterosexual men, and enabling bitter, ugly fat women to bully and censor things they don’t like.

    “body positivity” and “realistic body standards” is just used to dress the SJWs/feminists up as victims so that normies will sympathize with them.

    Anyway you might want to ignore my following rant: as someone who works out and weight-lifts regularly, I find it absolutely laughable that the SJWs and feminists make the “realistic body standard” garbage an issue only for women.

    Because the truth is, it’s actually MUCH harder for a man to achieve the “ideal male body”. You know, the handsome, muscled, chiselled pecs, chiselled-abs male warriors we see in video games, comics and movies?

    For women to achieve the “ideal female body”, the main requirements is to eat less and lose weight. Once women start dropping the fat, their natural curves will come into play.

    However for men to achieve the “ideal male body”, the requirements are eating well, controlled protein supplements, strenuous and continuous weight-lifting, working out all the muscle groups and cardio work to cut the areas of fat that might be covering up muscle definition. It takes far more effort and time. With dedication, if you’re lucky you might see slight muscle tone in 1-2 years. You want those pecs and abs? 2-3 years minimum with no slouching off to see slight noticeable results.

    But of course, we all know the double-standards of SJWs/feminists.

    • Also, the full version of that parody Playboy Zelda cover is quite nice. It’s a shame that she doesn’t draw more female covers.

      Isn’t it ironic that the cover says “CHU JELLY” on it, considering that anti-GG person Arthur Chu is going through or has just had a divorce with his wife/ex-wife.

      • Arthur Chu is going through or has just had a divorce with his wife/ex-wife.

        Real women hate weakling beta cucks. Virtue signaling won’t do squat to please a woman.

  • SevTheBear

    Sexy sells and always has and always will. People wants them to be in good shape, pretty and… FUCKABLE. No amount censorship and PC policing can stop people from jerking or fantasies about banging the living soul out of sexy people. So of course it back fired for PlayBoy.

    We look at normal boring people everyday. I am forced to look in the mirror each morning and regret it each time. I don’t want that in my games xD

  • Alistair

    Hurrah a double wammy take that SJWs fucktards.

    Just like video games, comics, films, there this thing called “business” The term is simple and two things to make that work.

    1. To entertain.

    2. The main goal to make a “Profit”

    As billy did a article the other day, about video games sales drop is when you carter to other demographic so sales drop and Profits take a hit.

    SJWs Doesn’t give a shit about Profit and if i was a boss like copper i would fire anyboby that has Social justice agenda if my Profits take a hit.

    Of course there other factors in a business social justice Isn’t one of them.

    Now there more hope for a U-turn of page 3 girls make a comeback in UK Papers but then we got another problem billy, do you know the sales figures for Papers because i Don’t.

    As no one said anything it like brushing it under the carpet. And give out wrong signal that it alright nobody taking about it so it fine you dont need it.

    that is rather worrying Don’t you think.

    • Sadly print is out the door.

      I think for Playboy they’ll need to focus on bringing back celebs. People pay big bucks for the clear nudes of celebs (even if Photoshopped, as evident with Kim Kardashian).

      They need to also tackle topics currently trending. Instead of pushing regressive agendas they need to focus on what their demographic is discussing elsewhere.

      My old motto used to be “If someone is talking about something online somewhere else, find a way to make them talk about it on your platform.”

      I don’t think print mags will ever recover, but there’s definitely a market for them to carve out in the online space.

      • Alistair

        Im sure i see the dairy star and the sun on the shelfs.

        I take a closer look next time i vist a shop. The sunday sport is still doing the rounds thank god.

        Andyes online is were it at now.

      • Doesn’t Kim take naked photos of herself, though?

        I only remember that snarky and hilarious reply from Bette Middler who said that if she wants people to see part of her they’ve never seen before, she’d have to swallow the camera.

    • The Page 3, Zoo, Nuts, Maxim, FHM, etc. stuff in the UK is gone now

      We all saw it coming years ago when the pathetic SJWs/feminists and “Labour-liberal” women started protesting, campaigning and lynch-mobbing newsagent stores to stop selling them, which resulted in these magazines having to be sealed up AND placed at the back of the shelves away from view

      Those publications have all but ceased now unfortunately, and that’s due to a combination of SJW pressure and the Internet. I mean who’s gonna pay £3 – £5 for stuff you can get free online?

      • Alistair

        Oh yes i remember zoo and all the others.

        But it only fair and right we banned those femmist mags as well. Like woman own and others tie to them.

        But we dont, dont we. well keep it up SJWs we be after your utter gabbage too.

        • But it only fair and right we banned those femmist mags as well. Like woman own and others tie to them.

          But we dont, dont we. well keep it up SJWs we be after your utter gabbage too.

          That’ll never happen because:

          1) Men don’t care about those kind of things (unfortunately)

          2) Gynocentrism

  • Gorgon

    I expect more and more companies to start dropping SJW agenda like a sack of shit that it is. It’s just not profitable.

    • SevTheBear

      We can only hope