The photoshop aesthetics of Playboy in the 90's

It’s the photos that are being critiqued, not the models.

Meanwhile, criticizing Playboy is to feminism as Playboy is to porn.

Hey, there you go. A sample size of 1 can still be useful. This is pretty much the impression I have generally, which is that Playboy is barely taken into consideration as porn, it’s more like an occasionally embarrassing thing that you can’t quite justify but don’t want to get rid of.

I think you’re probably on to something, as it might be analogous to how people like me reject e-books despite constantly rotating books in and out of storag and having only limited space at home. There might even be a fixed, significant population that explicitly prefers traditionally formatted porn. What I would argue is (as you note with your reference to niche mags taking over) that this still makes Playboy’s strange “look” an endangered species.

The pictures are being criticized where they are accurate representations of “defects” of what is by many definitions an already flattering portrait of a physically exceptional woman. I think it’s fair to say they represent an aesthetic statement about women moreso than about photography per se.

I didn’t say that, as apart from being tangential to my point, it’s impossible to filter morons on that basis alone and it would be unfair to people who prefer other areas for good reasons.

Plenty of EE discussions stay on topic, and if this thread did turn out be be about how “hawt” the women were, Tom would shut it down anyway as he has made it very clear in the past that those kinds of threads are not welcome. And I say that from personal experience.

I don’t care. I don’t care if people want to have that conversation, and I’m not interested in how boundaries are set for it. I’m just not interested in having it, which is why I didn’t start it where I felt it would be most likely to occur. You can, of course, have it here or there or anywhere, but it’s not my beef.

I just don’t see what makes this a P&R topic. Certainly nothing in your original post suggests what P&R worthy issue you thought the link was supposed to spur people to discuss.

So don’t say shit, then. I’m confident something will crop up along the way regardless of what the OP puts into it so long as the topic itself has something to it. Then you can borrow an opinion from them, translate it into your milquetoast-speak and waffle to your heart’s content. Or not, and nothing is broken and no big deal. Rest assured I will not lose sleep over the success or failure of any of those outcomes.

This belongs here, because your body is a temple!

My temple could use some cleaning.