This is your brain — on gambling.
Just check out the starship in this vintage photograph of the old Vegas casino’s slot machines.
Trivia may not be your gambling game of choice, but I’m betting some of the facts on this infographic from GluecksSpielSchule.de may help you win a few bets — even if it’s only by chatting-up and distracting those around you. *wink*
Pussycat a’Go Go, 3255 Las Vegas Blvd S. These are the only pictures I can find of the place that was open 1964-1971. Jim Morrison of The Doors was arrested here Jan. 29, 1968. Location
Additional images, so click!
See on vintagelasvegas.tumblr.com
See on dpoptart.tumblr.com
This infographic provides the odds of the cards you’re dealt in poker and then compares them to real life things. For example, the odds are 1 in 509 that you’ll be dealt a flush (5 non-sequential cards of the same suit) — which is comparable to a super volcano erupting this century.
Do these odds make you feel better about poker? Worse about life? (You parents might want to read the one about finding out your child is a genius before you answer!)
Speaking of those scantily clad casino waitresses…
In the 2003 study, the finding were that “pretty ladies make men want wealth with which to impress”, taking less money right in the moment rather than waiting for more money later.
After eyeballing pictures of pretty women, men were more likely to want immediate monetary gratification than to wait for a bigger bonus. Women’s calculations, on the other hand, were unaffected by male eye candy, as were men’s after ogling plainer women or fancy cars.
What surprised me most about this study, wasn’t the “smarter” reaction of women — but rather that women were included in this study at all, and that when they were, the women were shown sexy men (as opposed to the usual showing women photos of sexy women). Sadly, however, this isn’t going to get us the beefcake marketing that at least some of us want.
In the second study, from 2006, men — especially those with higher levels of testosterone — who fondled lingerie and/or were shown pictures of women bikinis were also said to have impacted men’s thinking in terms of money and bargaining. However, as this other article makes very clear, such arousal may actually have made men more rational and better deal makers.
The bottom line here: while men are most certainly motivated by women and sex, sexy women do not necessarily make men foolish with their money. Perhaps a little greedier in the moment, a little more prone to instantaneous cash; but not idiots.
However you look at this though, the house certainly wins.
Those men winning at gambling are far likelier to leave the tables in pursuit of, well, you know. *wink* Whether that makes them follow their women around while she shops, or search for companionship with strangers, these men are willing to head up to their hotel rooms. Whatever and whomever these men pursue, those winning are far likelier to leave the casino, taking their winnings — and their winning streaks — with them.
Men losing, however, may stay at the tables far longer than they should, just praying for Lady Luck to show up. They continue to stay, desperate to win at least a little bit, so that they can have something in their pockets to impress the ladies.
Even if a man knows he can’t take the sexy casino waitress up to his room, a guy can — and will — dream. And that just helps the house.
A very sexy Miss NEVADA is dressed in her risque long red dress and throwing a lucky seven on this one-of-a-kind souvenir water decal, among the best there is when it comes to sexy pin up art!
Produced in the early 1940’s, this risque water decal is part of a set of Miss America decals that were popular at that time, but are very rare today.
Have you ever wondered why casinos often employ scantily clad waitresses? I’m not making this up as some sort of feminist attack or even a complaint. Many casinos, like the Rio in Vegas, do more than appear to vie for the title of Most Scantily Clad Waitresses in Town; they have appearance clauses in their employment contracts (which actually protect them from discrimination law suits). Now that any doubters are convinced…
Have you ever wondered why casinos focus on providing scantily clad staff?
Yes, sex sells. That’s the saying, anyway — and, if advertising itself counts, there’s certainly some evidence to back that up. Or at least sex sells to men; women aren’t always so happy with it. In fact, just this past December, the results of a study about women’s reactions to sex in advertising made the news. According to the study abstract:
Two experiments tested when and why women’s typically negative, spontaneous reactions to sexual imagery would soften. Sexual economics theory predicts that women want sex to be seen as rare and special. We reasoned that this outlook would translate to women tolerating sexual images more when those images are linked to high worth as opposed to low worth. We manipulated whether an ad promoted an expensive or a cheap product using a sexually charged or a neutral scene. As predicted, women found sexual imagery distasteful when it was used to promote a cheap product, but this reaction to sexual imagery was mitigated if the product promoted was expensive. This pattern was not observed among men. Furthermore, we predicted and found that sexual ads promoting cheap products heightened feelings of being upset and angry among women. These findings suggest that women’s reactions to sexual images can reveal deep-seated preferences about how sex should be used and understood.
When the news of this sexual economics theory, the theory that that “women want sex to be something rare and valuable”, hit the news, only a few smart folks took the time to point out that women had more negative feelings toward all sex-driven ads, than they did towards the others ads (which featured “mountain scenes”). Anyway, the news of this study and its findings really upset some women — but for all the wrong reasons, I say.
Some women were upset, claiming that the study’s findings were that “women use sex as a bargaining tool” and that such a notion is “wildly outdated” — which is really just taking an issue with sexual economics theory itself. Yes, that theory is debatable. But why not take issue with the fact that this study, like so many damn other studies, had the odd idea to see if sex can sell to women by showing them sexy photos of women and not sexy photos of men?
While there’s no mention of the sexual orientation of the study participants, and demographics for orientation are largely unknown, it is relatively safe to assume that, unless screened otherwise, the majority of the participants would be heterosexual. So why not show them sexy photos of men? Or at least show them some photos of sexy men? Why do we continue to study the female response to sexuality on male terms?
That’s as sexist as it gets. And, frankly, I think it objectifies the women in the study themselves.
Then again, just how are the women responding to the sexy women in ads? Do women see the sexy babes in advertising as commodities, rivals, the idea of sex, or glamorous versions of themselves? Would that depend on the product? Would luxury products themselves just make the women imagine they were in that scene, enjoying a luxury lifestyle?
All this said, it sure makes sense for casinos to reconsider their scantily clad female waitresses in terms of female gamblers. Are the casinos selling dreams and glamour, or driving female gamblers away?