Is Playboy going to be sold to 14 year olds now that nudity is no more?

Yes, most likely

And is there a problem with a younger clientele buying the magazine now that the nudity has been removed??
With the nudity removed I would care less if ten year olds look at and read it.

It might, but why? they can get the hard core stuff via their cell phone for free, so what appeal would they have to spend $5+ for a mag where that can’t even see actual boobs, bush, and blowjobs? They can see all that off the Net and then some.

Playboy never depicted actual sex acts, @Hypocrisy_Central. Just fairly tasteful nudity. I’ve seen stuff as risque or more in Vanity Fair as I have in Playboy.

^ Playboy never depicted actual sex acts, @Hypocrisy_Central. Just fairly tasteful nudity.
That is why Playboy to many young men is about as interesting as Field & Stream, they can cruise their Smartphone and pull up ever sex act (in good quality, not the fuzzy stuff you can hardly make anything out) imaginable, why settle for some woman who is not showing as much as many Instagram selfies.

Honestly, when I was a horny 13 year old kid I eagerly awaited the next Victoria’s secret catalog over any playboy magazine I managed to get my hands on. Was it any mistake I always brought the mail in?

Oh, Vicky’s was nice. They certainly didn’t advertise the cup-less teddies on the TV commercials, did they?

Playboy was never pornography. It was naked women, and in later years, a few men enjoying naked women. Let’s get that straight right from the beginning.

Of course, this begs the question of – what is porn? Is it naked women? Priapic male? Coitus? One could make an argument that even when Playboy introduced men into pictures, it was still artful.

So if you can tell me what pornography really is, maybe I can give you an answer….

^ There’s the famous “I know it when I see it” legal stance.

Why would 14 yo’s be excluded?

Some features may still be considered too racy for minors, like Letters or comics

Once they take out the nude pictures, they won’t have to hide it behind the counter at 7–11 or the grocery store.

@zenvelo while that is true, it will take decades for the ‘behind the counter’ stigma to wear off. And think about libraries. Many/most libraries won’t buy Playboy because of the nudity, but they continued to get titles like Esquire, and some of the women’s mags that articles that were far racier than anything that ever showed up in Playboy.

^ […but they continued to get titles like Esquire, and some of the women’s mags that articles that were far racier than anything that ever showed up in Playboy.
Just a glaring example of how in the US, at least, when it comes to sex and which is acceptable or not etc. the US is like a man who once he turns from the mirror forgets what he looks like. Standing at the checkout and reading the leading articles highlighted in most of the women’s magazines there, you’d think minors have access to this, and some of what is being put out we go through hoops and hurdles to not to advocate. We in the US seem to not even know what we want to accept or reject sexually, we are find with this at prime when tons of kids have access to watching the award show OK, etc. but freak out or think it is something to point out if a woman is seen in the big box, or mall au natural and not in a bra. While trying to vilify those without a bra but a full top as hoochie or vulgar, society lionizes Cyrus for showing nearly everything she was born with. Talk of mixed messages; ”wear a bra or you are a hoochie slut but if you are rich and famous, show it all, just so as long as no bush or nipple is seen”. Hiding Playboy behind the shield at the liquor is like showing up to a car wreck and handing the guy with a gear shift poking out of his chest a large Band-aide and telling him it is not that bad.