When I'm wrong I'll admit it!!!

[Vesuvio]

Playboy Casino by the way is only connected by the brand - there are no nudies there.

Actually they have their own slot [sic] machine with scantily clad/naked women - and for instance the info panel with your balance links to a video... or so I've been told *cough*

Playboy's clearly soft porn (your definition's for hard porn, Bryan). It's a matter of personal choice if you think that's a problem or not. I can completely understand your point of view, Trezz, though personally I think online casinos (and their promotion) are more of an issue than online pornography.

[Da_Gambla]

There are clearly two types of porn defined by my cable TV company.

Hard core is anything that shows penetration from -any- angle, and/or bodily fluids being exchanged.

Soft core is any depiction of any sexual situation, but without seeing any actual penetration. For the actors and actresses in soft core, there isn't any actual sex going on, it's all simulated.

Then you have the lowest common denominator: nudity

Nudity is neither hard core or soft core, it's just nudity. The instant nudity takes on a sexual tone, it becomes porn and can be classified as hard or soft core.

I've always held the strong belief that porn (soft or otherwise) should not be part of online casino's.

And there you go right there. If there's some nudity at Playboy casino, oh well... but I guarantee you there is no porn. I will also guarantee you that any nudity is extremely limited and quite tastefully done, or they would be threatened to lose quite a few potential female patrons (and yes, the gambling world has quite a few!).

Much ado about nothing there. You really gave up your private membership over this... You said there was a thread offsite from here.. did they not explain to you that nudity is not porn??

Just when you thought you heard it all, something like this gets posted...
Thank goodness you didn't chop off your "little friend" in protest!! A private membership I guess you can live without...

- Keith

[Vesuvio]

The instant nudity takes on a sexual tone, it becomes porn and can be classified as hard or soft core.
...
If there's some nudity at Playboy casino, oh well... but I guarantee you there is no porn.

You really think the nudity at Playboy has no sexual tone Sure, it's nothing much in this day and age and I certainly don't mind it, but that's a crazy statement. Someone would lose their job at Playboy if it was true

[Da_Gambla]

You really think the nudity at Playboy has no sexual tone Sure, it's nothing much in this day and age and I certainly don't mind it, but that's a crazy statement. Someone would lose their job at Playboy if it was true

You might need to re-read what I said. I never said the nudity in Playboy the magazine was non-sexual. I was surmising that the nudity (if any) at the casino would be non-sexual in nature; just plain ol' vanilla nudity.

But thanks for attempt number 14 at twisting my post and then labeling it 'crazy'. If you brushed up on your reading comprehension, I'm sure you would make qute a few less wild assumptions with people's posts.

If there is any simulated sex depicted at the casino, then I would stand misinformed. If not, my post stands as-is.

- Keith

[Simmo!]

Playboy Casino by the way is only connected by the brand - there are no nudies there.

What Vesuvio said

PS. Trezz: just saw this: admirable post in sticking to your principles.

[Vesuvio]

But thanks for attempt number 14 at twisting my post and then labeling it 'crazy'. If you brushed up on your reading comprehension, I'm sure you would make qute a few less wild assumptions with people's posts.

If there is any simulated sex depicted at the casino, then I would stand misinformed. If not, my post stands as-is.

Since when does there need to be simulated sex for it to be soft porn? My reading comprehension may be a bit shoddy, but unless I'm very much mistaken you define porn yourself as nudity which is "sexual in tone".

Showing a naked woman when you hit a combination of symbols on a slot machine, or encouraging you to click on a link to a video of a woman slowly undressing in front of a shiny car - how in the world can that not be intended as sexual? It's not called "Naturist World Casino".

I know you think I've got some sort of vendetta against you, but I'd respond in the same way if anyone else posted the same thing.

p.s. if you'd read my earlier post you'd have noticed I mentioned a slot machine - you don't get many of those in the magazine - so yes, strangely enough on a casino forum, I'm talking about the casino.

[Simmo!]

Just a definition as an FYI to add to the debate:

American Heritage Dictionary
por·nog·ra·phy (pôr-nŏg'rə-fē) Pronunciation Key (n).
1. Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.
2. The presentation or production of this material.
3. Lurid or sensational material: "Recent novels about the Holocaust have kept Hitler well offstage [so as] to avoid the ... pornography of the era" (Morris Dickstein).

[Casinomeister]

When I discovered that CM was promoting Playboygaming.com on site I was disappointed. I've always held the strong belief that porn (soft or otherwise) should not be part of online casino's..

Funny how you never bothered to email me to let me know how you felt before getting bent out of shape about this in public. A heads up would have been appreciated.

However I will state here that I started a thread about my disapproval of CM promoting the Playboy Brand...

Ditto.

The stand I took against CM for promoting the Playboy Brand, is still something I wont back down on. IMHO casino's and porn shouldn't be connected...

Agreed but it's not porn - and it's really silly to take a stand against me or Casinomeister on this. The casino is branded with Playboy, you don't click the banner and get pummeled with spread eagled nudity or giant erections - it's a casino - pretend it's at the Playboy Club or whatever. It's not pornographic.

I don't appreciate the way you are trying to posture yourself here - it's absolutely unnecessary. Further, I feel you're being way too judgemental on this - and you know what they say about throwing stones...

...think about that one for a few minutes.

[Da_Gambla]

Since when does there need to be simulated sex for it to be soft porn? My reading comprehension may be a bit shoddy, but unless I'm very much mistaken you define porn yourself as nudity which is "sexual in tone".

Your reading comprehension gets worse by the post. No, that is not MY definition, I said it was the definition of our cable TV locally. They have to submit standards to city councils, and so therefore they have to try and "define" what content is what. Movies come with ratings. Anything showing nudity will get an R. Anything with repeated FULL-FRONTAL nudity will get a NC-17. Anything that simulates actual sexual intercourse will get a MA (designates soft core). Anything that shows penetration will start receiving X's.

These are not MY definitions, they are standards where I live. And from what I gather compared to European countries, our standards are pretty damn strict. The bottom-line is, nudity is nudity, and not considered sexual. Put a girl against a car, in a forest, on a beach, doesn't matter. It's nudity. As soon as she touches herself in a sexual way, or a second person is in the picture and performng anything sexual or simulated, you've now gone into porn. There have also been definitions tested with regards to men in nude pictures. If he's flaccid and just posing, it's considered nothing more than nudity. If he's erect at all, it then turns into soft-core porn. There has been argument that maybe if a woman's nipples are erect, the same should apply? Nope, the people who dictate morals AROUND HERE say no, it's not the same, since a woman's nipples can become erect from the cold, or a breeze, and not necessarily from excitement.

Showing a naked woman when you hit a combination of symbols on a slot machine, or encouraging you to click on a link to a video of a woman slowly undressing in front of a shiny car - how in the world can that not be intended as sexual? It's not called "Naturist World Casino".

I don't know.. ask someone else. You bore me silly with your useless rants about really nothing at all. Why we're even having this discussion is beyond me at this point. Calling nudity "sexual" under any terms is not reasonable. The term "sexual" doesn't mean it causes excitement necessarily. There are certain guys who might get hard looking at a bikini picture. Are those now sexually explicit too? No... and like Bryan said, topless and nude beaches are quite accepted in european countries. Should we start boycotting Spain and France? Rediculous notion that all nudity is sexual! It becomes sexual when someone does something sexual!

I know you think I've got some sort of vendetta against you, but I'd respond in the same way if anyone else posted the same thing.

Right. It must be coincidence. A shame really.. you appeared to be one of the more intelligent people at one time... someone I thought I would probably get along with. But then you went off into this Bonus Hunter crap, and since you wear it on your sleeve everywhere you friggin' go, it's impossible to be a friend to you. That's fine... you know, I'm actually more used to being stalked by the female variety, which is why I'm uncomfortable with this situation. If I clarify that I'm in no way shape or form homosexual, will you finally bugger off?

p.s. if you'd read my earlier post you'd have noticed I mentioned a slot machine - you don't get many of those in the magazine - so yes, strangely enough on a casino forum, I'm talking about the casino.

Well, here's the post I answered:

You really think the nudity at Playboy has no sexual tone Sure, it's nothing much in this day and age and I certainly don't mind it, but that's a crazy statement. Someone would lose their job at Playboy if it was true

Nope, nothing that says slots there! I can take your word that that's what you meant, but if you don't say what you mean, don't get upset if the other person makes a mistake in responding to it.

- Keith

[henryVIII]

. You bore me silly with your useless rants about really nothing at all.

Hilarious.

Saying this in the middle of a half page rant.

Of course teenage girls in lingerie flashing their breasts and bending over in front of sports cars is a type of soft porn. Were you brought up in a bordello or something?

You are hilarious though.