Comments on: Pre-Photoshopped Playboy Photos (Definitely NSFW!)

By: Nina

Nina — Sun, 14 Jul 2013 17:20:00 +0000

Ey yo Steph. Your granny was a straight up les.

By: disgusted

disgusted — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 04:00:00 +0000

First of all…isn’t it disrespectful for a husband to stare at other naked women besides his wife? i’m sorry..that’s kinda awkward..wow….what a society we live in….

By: Rjjspesh

Rjjspesh — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 05:02:00 +0000

This strengthens my opinion that people actually HATE women’s bodies. This constant alteration and unrealism means that what we see before us are not females but cartoons & jokes

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 04:22:55 +0000

You don’t “allow” someone to be a sexual orientation. They are what they are whether one likes it or not. He may have disapproved of it, if she had been bi, but he *could not* have disallowed it.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 04:21:17 +0000

Too bad. Adults like to discuss adult topics sometimes. There are plenty of places for you to go that do not feature “mature” content or conversation. You may also skip over these posts entirely. It’s featured in a way that is relevant to the topics this site covers. I don’t lurk around on the Disney website complaining that their content is geared toward kids; don’t lurk around here complaining that the content expects an adult audience mature enough to handle NSFW issues.

By: Sunday Speed | LoveLiveGrow

Sunday Speed | LoveLiveGrow — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 12:25:47 +0000

[…] “The message is clear: even after a genetic bounty, all-but-certain plastic surgery and dieting, good lighting, a pro-photographer, and dozens of shots, even the fantasy woman is not fantastic enough.” (h/t) […]

By: Kait

Kait — Mon, 29 Nov 2010 21:16:41 +0000

I was so disappointed to discover that upon growing up, my naked body didn’t start appearing in soft focus. I blame my brother’s Playboys for giving me unrealistic expectations!

By: anon

anon — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 17:59:39 +0000

and neither is Sociological Images….

By: anon

anon — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 17:57:32 +0000

Jezebel isn’t a “porn-specific” site though, that’s the whole point.

By: Mere

Mere — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 06:36:47 +0000

I’m rather puzzled as to why a woman who is not interested in porn would be on a porn-specific site. I’d agree that porn aimed at heterosexual men is fairly inescapable, but if porn aimed at a female audience is actually that ubiquitous I guess I’ve been missing out!

By: anon

anon — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 03:03:34 +0000

It’s not hate for Fleshbot so much as for the insidious incapability of porn. “Porn for women” is irrelevant at best to women that are not interested in porn.

By: Butter

Butter — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 23:36:58 +0000

Exactly!

By: Richard

Richard — Fri, 26 Nov 2010 13:11:52 +0000

Of course Playboy was doing its thing long before Photoshop came on the scene. And lets not forget that women’s fashion magazines do this same kind of thing to a no less exacting standard. The difference is only that they’re not showing quite so much of women’s bodies.

By: Anon

Anon — Thu, 25 Nov 2010 18:56:18 +0000

I thought this was fascinating. I saw the whole post elsewhere and it just amazes (and disgusts) me. It’s no huge revelation or anything, but it’s still always sad to me.

By: Stephanie

Stephanie — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 22:41:58 +0000

Yeah. Her husband would never have allowed that. :P