|
|||
|
|||||||
| Register | All Albums | Member Blogs | FAQ | Members List | Mark Forums Read | |||
| Main Site | CM Casinos | CM Poker | I-Gaming Forum Reps | Rogue Pit | Webcast | Bitchin' Newsletter | News |
| Notices |
| Casino Industry Discussion Casino Industry Discussion - This discussion group concerns industry topics: press releases, stock market issues, Nevada and offshore organizations, and other business related items |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
||||
|
Interesting - I believe Playboy casino is marketed like the Playboy Club. We should pay attention to the ad copy to see how much is geared towards sex, and how much is geared towards being classy.
__________________
Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy ~Ben Franklin Useful links: ~ Accredited Casinos ~ I-Gaming Representatives ~ Evil Section ~ My Wish List ~ The Meister on YouTube ~ Donate Now! |
|
||||
|
Quote:
http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...aphy-poll.html Last edited by Simmo!; 31st May 2007 at 01:51 PM. Reason: Updated poll link |
|
|||
|
Quote:
Well, we then differ, but all I can say is that society overall treats them as two very different things. An R rated movie with simple nudity: someone underage may go in with an adult (parent). A NC-17 with more explicit nudity which usually also involves intense sexual situations: NO ONE under 17 allowed, perod. MA or X: No one under 18, period. So there are clear levels to each one, and as such, there is nudity almost everywhere you go. Anything that goes into the realm of porn is pretty much pushed underground here, stateside. Just to clarify, please answer this... you have a movie where the actress quickly removes her top and bra, and then changes into a different blouse. You saw brief breast, definitely nipples, for about 2 seconds. You consider this pornographic? This film should be rated MA? Just curious to know where other's standards are... - Keith
__________________
Just for fun, I'm trying out this new sig. Let me know what you think. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
That is where we clearly differ... I do feel that all nudity is just nudity... until someone puts a hand or other object in the wrong place, then it is instant porn. I very clearly have in my mind what criteria must exist for nudity to cross the line into porn. I wonder if you might explain yours? What exactly is gratuitous nudity? In the movie scene mentioned, the producer could have -easily- edited out the breast shot entirely, so why isn't this nudity considered gratuitous? I just feel that if you gave a committee 500 nude photos of every variety (no sexual depictions), and had them try to label each one either porn or not-porn, they would go nuts inside of 10 mins! I don't know how you would go about creating a standard for this... - Keith
__________________
Just for fun, I'm trying out this new sig. Let me know what you think. |
|
||||
|
Try a cold shower!If lasts more than 4 hours seek medical treatment!
|
| The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to NASHVEGAS For This Useful Post: | ||
bonustreak (31st May 2007), cynthial (1st June 2007), Da_Gambla (31st May 2007), Pinababy69 (31st May 2007), Simmo! (31st May 2007) | ||
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]() ![]() ![]() - Keith
__________________
Just for fun, I'm trying out this new sig. Let me know what you think. |
| The Following User Says Thank You to Da_Gambla For This Useful Post: | ||
NASHVEGAS (31st May 2007) | ||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Reminds me of the scene with the "mammaries" in The Aviator. There's no clear distinction, but I don't think Playboy Casino falls into a grey area.
|
| The Following User Says Thank You to Vesuvio For This Useful Post: | ||
Da_Gambla (31st May 2007) | ||
|
|||
|
Quote:
As to the issue, one thing I have learned from this thread is, this seems to be as ambiguous as a discussion of religion. I feel, and have always felt, that the line between nudity and porn is as simple as saying whether a car is white or red in color. I understand that some religious folks move the bar much closer to porn, but they also seem to have a clear understanding in their mind. However, you are saying there is a "grey" area. My understanding of a grey area is that each case would have to be examined and a determination made. This works well for the individual, but some body of thought and legislation would have to clarify all of these cases. Clearly politicians have tried to even ban some forms of art, as well as specific pieces of art as pornographic (although these politicians are usually pushed quite heavily by religious fundamentalists). They say they are saving us from ourselves... ![]() If you say that it is best left up to each individual to define his or her grey area, then unfortunately that will at some point get abused, and often does. There is never a shortage of those who will always test the line in the sand for their 15 seconds of fame, so we do need definitions. Your thoughts on this would be of interest... how do you legislate or control that grey area if it is so subjective and sensitive from one individual to another? While you ponder that, and hopefully find time to respond, I'll just say that from my own personal upbringing, Playboy has always been much much closer to art, than say, Hustler or Penthouse... Therefore the nudity contained in Playboy (the magazine) has never been considered porn of any sorts to me or anyone I have spoken to about it. One can argue that Playboy postured for business and acceptance, but their own stance and PR has generally tilted towards artform rather than any sort of pornography. Their entire brand relies heavily on avoiding a relationship with porn. However, they do promote soft-porn out of general public consumption with videos and pay-per-view or subscription television channels. Larry Flynt, on the other hand, openly markets his product as pornographic and is quite proud of that. Again, differences arise which makes one wonder...Will real pornography ever be defined? Probably not, if thousands of years of it have come and gone, and here we are in the 21st century still discussing it. - Keith
__________________
Just for fun, I'm trying out this new sig. Let me know what you think. |
| The Following User Says Thank You to Da_Gambla For This Useful Post: | ||
Vesuvio (31st May 2007) | ||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| INETBET proved me wrong | kakata | Online Casinos | 21 | 23rd May 2007 03:06 AM |
| Montana can work when Casino are wrong | Hnora | Casino Complaints - Non-Bonus Issues | 8 | 18th June 2006 05:05 AM |
| Credit Cards Mastercard & Visa Maybe I posted to wrong area before | duke7123 | Online Casinos | 14 | 24th May 2006 08:59 AM |
| This is so wrong... | rma20 | Online Casinos | 29 | 23rd May 2006 04:22 AM |
Casinomeister is proud to present the following quality portals
Online Casinos | GoneGambling | Online Casino Reviews
| Wizard of Odds | Games and Casino | Online Poker Rooms | BetOnCharity | Winneronline | Online Casinos| Online Slots |
Online Casino Reviews
Legal Statements and Privacy Policy
Casinomeister.com does not intend for any of the information contained on this website to be used for illegal purposes. You must ensure you meet all age and other regulatory requirements before entering a casino or placing a wager. Online gambling is illegal in many jurisdictions and users should consult legal counsel regarding the legal status of online gambling and gaming in their jurisdictions. The information in this site is for news and entertainment purposes only. Casinomeister.com is an independent directory and information service not affiliated with any casino. Links to third party websites on Casinomeister.com are provided solely for informative/educational purposes. If you use these links, you leave this Website.