Hugh Hefner was the ultimate enemy of women no feminist anywhere will shed a tear at his death

[niyad]

Hugh Hefner was the ultimate enemy of women – no feminist anywhere will shed a tear at his death

To claim that Hefner was a sexual liberationist or free speech idol is like suggesting that Roman Polanski has contributed to child protection







The Playboy editor-in-chief, who has died aged 91, referred to women as ‘sex objects’ Getty

On hearing that the pimp and pornographer Hugh Hefner had died this morning, I wished I believed in hell. “The notion that Playboy turns women into sex objects is ridiculous,” said the sadistic pimp in 2010. “Women are sex objects… It’s the attraction between the sexes that makes the world go ‘round. That’s why women wear lipstick and short skirts.”

Hefner was responsible for turning porn into an industry. As Gail Dines writes in her searing expose of the porn industry, he took it from the back street to Wall Street and, thanks in large part to him, it is now a multibillion dollar a year industry. Hefner operated in a country I live in, a country where if you film any act of humiliation or torture – and if the victim is a woman – the film is both entertainment and it is protected speech. He caused immeasurable damage by turning porn – and therefore the buying and selling of women’s bodies – into a legitimate business. Hefner hated women and referred to them as “dogs”.

In 1963, Gloria Steinem (then a freelance journalist) decided to go undercover as a Bunny Girl, spending two weeks in the role at the Playboy Mansion. What Steinem found was that the women working there were treated like dirt. Bunnies had to wear heels at least three inches high and corsets at least two inches too small everywhere except the bust, which came only with D-cups. Steinem described it as a form of torture. A sneeze could break the zip, and when peeled off their torsos were bright red and swollen. Steinem found grotesque misogyny towards the women, and commented that they were “dehumanised” by the punters – who were, after all, following Hefner’s lead.
. . . . .


“These chicks [feminists] are our natural enemy. It is time to do battle with them,” wrote Hefner in a secret memo leaked to feminists by secretaries at Playboy. “It is time we do battle with them... What I want is a devastating piece that takes the militant feminists apart.” As a response, feminists began picketing his businesses.

. . . . .


http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/hugh-hefner-dead-death-playboy-mansion-bunny-women-misogynist-predatory-enemy-a7972046.html

[50 Shades Of Blue]

1. Thank you! K & R!!!!

[niyad]

2. you are most welcome--I have been sickened reading the articles about what great things he did.

[Eliot Rosewater]

4. It is even worse when you consider he was a liberal when it came to race, at least for the times.

So how can he be so liberal for one group's rights and not for another.

I mean what more proof do we need that misogyny is as deeply rooted as racism if not more?

[Dorian Gray]

204. People are complicated

they can hold various positions on things, some good/some bad.

I am not a fan of Heff, nor do I think he was a sexual liberator. (The opposite, in fact.) And that is enough to make me despise the man. But I can recognize that he held some positions that were progressive, especially for the time, and some of his words aided in the fight for civil rights for minorities.

[whathehell]

211. He was liberal when it didn't inconvenience HIM

Not complicated at all.
..

.
.
.

[Dorian Gray]

310. Or this

[whathehell]

209. "Misogyny is the last acceptable bigotry of the Left'

Katha Pollitt, feminist writer/ Nation contributer.

[DLevine]

213. You are not kidding.

The adulation of this "man" by some is disheartening.

[whathehell]

320. Agreed..

Although I think one sees a more muted, hesitant response from the mainstream media than one would have seen even 15 or 20 years ago -- We've made progress, slow but sure.

[niyad]

242. absolutely correct. we see it daily, even in places where one would not expect it.

[smirkymonkey]

262. I have read various articles on this topic on a number of liberal blogs and websites.

It's amazing how all the misogynists seem to come crawling out of the woodwork. I would expect it on right-wing blogs, but it's pretty disappointing to see how many supposedly "liberal" men hate women just as much.

[niyad]

263. should not be surprising. we certainly saw enough of it during the campaign.

[whathehell]

322. Yes...

Although I myself preferred Bernie and voted for him in the primary,
I saw a lot "mommy issues' among the ",bros".

[whathehell]

319. Yes

and it needs to be called out wherever it appears.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

6. So have I. Yeah, what a humanitarian he was. If you don't consider women part of the human race.

[Phentex]

141. Lots of mansplaining going on in those threads...

and some in this one. Not all that surprising from certain people.

[Major Nikon]

167. Meanwhile this one channels a non-apologetic TERF author

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Trans-exclusionary_radical_feminism

Which isn't all that surprising from certain people.

[Lordquinton]

193. Clearly a SWERF as well

[ehrnst]

243. OMG yes. (nt)

[Dorian Gray]

203. I'm with you

I will allow that most human beings are complicated and can do acts both good and evil. Though I think the overt objectification of females is his legacy, and it's a shitty one.

We all decry Bill Cosby and his liberal use of quaaludes. Isn't Heff known for the same thing? Passing them (and women) around at his parties. Have drug fueled orgies with his stable of girlfriends? He kept them like they were horses. No interest in their humanity.

He may have been someone whose civil rights record was good. But how he treated women is shameful!

[smirkymonkey]

3. I have to admit, I am kind of disgusted by so many on this board lauding him as a hero.

It really destroys my faith in so-called liberal men. It seems they only care about the humanity of an individual until it gets in the way of their sex life - then, fuck it - their sexual satisfaction matters more than other people's lives and dignity.

[niyad]

5. sadly, you are quite correct.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

234. Me three... fuck Hugh!!

[MicaelS]

25. Too bad.

Last edited Thu Sep 28, 2017, 03:06 PM - Edit history (1)

You have no right to tell any man what to do with his sex life unless you are in a committed relationship with him. You don't like it when men look at Playboy or other magazines, too bad.

The harsh truth of the matter is that many American women have always wanted to make ALL the rules when it comes to sex and relationships, and they resent it when men don't meet their demands expectations and demands.

The hypocrisy of some feminists is that women should have the freedom to do whatever they want, unless of course, other women disapprove of said freedom, especially when it involves sexually oriented businesses. If a women wants to pose nude, or engage in any other legal SOB, that is her decision, and hers alone.

America has always had a repressive attitude toward nudity and sex and still does to a certain extent. Hefner exposed that and wrote many articles about it. All over the world women go topless, or nude at the at the beach, and little is said, except in America where it still a crime. There is little nudity on broadcast TV, unlike other countries. Hefner made a fortune simply showing naked women. We wouldn't be the largest producer of pornography if we had a more relaxed attitude toward sex.

And yes, I think prostitution should be legal.

We still have plenty of prudes on the Right, and the Left, too.

[MrsCoffee]

29. You are right. They are free to objectify women if they want.

Doesn't mean there aren't consequences.

[PassingFair]

36. Nobody's trying to take your paper girlfriends away from you.

Your male gaze is not being blinded here.

There is no hypocrisy in women protesting against
their status as sex objects to buoy random men's erections.

[smirkymonkey]

38. Thank YOU!

Men always seem to conflate the issue of the exploitation of women and sexism with prudishness and a condemnation of sexuality. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING! I wish some people would get their heads out of their asses and see that they are two separate issues.

[raccoon]

46. Proposition should be legal? Nt

[Stallion]

50. Haven't You Heard of the Dangers of a Dangling Proposition?

[MicaelS]

55. DOH!!!!! corrected thanks. n/t

[Weekend Warrior]

48. Yes, women get to make all of the rules about what happens to their bodies. Sorry that bothers you.

"The harsh truth of the matter is that many American women have always wanted to make ALL the rules when it comes to sex and relationships"

"The hypocrisy of some feminists is that women should have the freedom to do whatever they want, unless of course, other women disapprove of said freedom, especially when it involves sexually oriented businesses. If a women wants to pose nude, or engage in any other legal SOB, that is her decision, and hers alone."

That truly makes no sense and holds no basis in reality.

"We wouldn't be the largest producer of pornography if we had a more relaxed attitude toward sex. "



"And yes, I think proposition should be legal."

Then stop propositioning women.

Very eye opening post. Thanks for making it.

[brooklynite]

259. Women do indeed have the right to make all the rules about their bodies...

...and that includes the right to express their sexuality (in Playboy, in movies, at a strip club, in a brothel...) if they choose to.

I have no objection to people who don't like what Hefner did with Playboy. I find the assertion that no "real" feminist would disagree with the OP to be self-righteous preaching.

[Fullduplexxx]

82. Her body her choice only applies in cases of pregnancy it seems

[niyad]

253. really????? that is why there are so many laws making her "choice" next to impossible??????

400 some pieces of legislation just in the past few years restricting her choice????????

or am I misunderstanding your post?

[Fullduplexxx]

274. My point is her body her choice just as with abortion . If she wants to pose nude

It's really nobody's business. .

[niyad]

324. you really do not get it. address, if you please, the concept of "choice" when the pukes

are putting up hundreds of pieces of legislation to prevent her choice.

[Fullduplexxx]

325. I get what youre saying... but not all states ban it and the u.s. isnt the only country

That does them

[niyad]

326. wow, you keep demonstrating that you truly do not get it. we are not discussing other

countries, so quit trying to switch the focus.

again, address the hundreds of pieces of legislation restricting her choice, without an outright ban.

[Fullduplexxx]

332. Wow I already have addressed it, there are other places to go to get it.

And no state has abolished it . Im sorry you dont get it. The fact that the congress is constricting access is a result of the dems failure to vote in dems but that doesnt detract from my original statement which was about women deciding to pose nude not abortion except to say that it' her body so it's her choice . YOU are trying to switch focus .

[niyad]

334. keep trying. you are almost amusing in your deflections, and assumptions that we do not

understand what you are doing.

[Fullduplexxx]

335. Well you keep trying to understand if you want i think it's pretty clear

Her body her choice applies to her posing nude just as it applies to abortion . It applies even if she chooses to do something with her body about which you dont approve.you are trying to drag this into a discussion about abortion and im not interested in going there. I guess you'll have to get your amusement elsewhere.

[mythology]

258. The problem is you can't really separate the economics of our society

Women can make a lot of money selling sexuality, whether it's posing naked for pictures, stripping or prostituting. But women are also not always granted the same economic and educational advantages men are. So how many of them are voluntarily choosing those over other equal options? To me, that's not an easy question to answer and so I don't purchase from those services.

[beaglelover]

149. Right on man!!! Agree 100%

[uppityperson]

155. You agree it's ok for men to rape without anyone criticizing unless they're in a committed ...

"You have no right to tell any man what to do with his sex life unless you are in a committed relationship with him"?

[uppityperson]

152. If you agree anyone's sexual satisfaction matters more than other people's lives and dignity,

I feel sorry for you.

"You have no right to tell any man what to do with his sex life unless you are in a committed relationship with him"?

Rapists and child molesters are fine "unless you are in a committed relationship with him"????

[whathehell]

208. Yeah..kind of the ultimate Male Privilege..

[obamanut2012]

157. Wrong -- we are totally free to call you and anyone else

On objectifying women and degrading women.

And on enabling sexual predators like Hefner.

Cosby palled around with him for a reason.

[Squinch]

158. We still have plenty of ignorant misogynistic troglodites on the Right,and the Left, too.

[SharonClark]

191. Wow! So people who deplore the objectification of women are prudes?

I am almost speechless.

[radius777]

195. Agree. White feminists have little to say about white women,

the majority of whom voted for Trump, yet like to spend much of their time pontificating about men and our desires.

Hefner was a pioneer who used his platform to promote social justice and the idea that a woman could be valued for her beauty as well as her brains.

Only a repressed society sees consensual sex and sex work/entertainment as something that tarnishes a woman (or man) - which really is the core issue.

[whathehell]

212. 'Majority'....By one percent? Give me a break!

By that standards White MEN -- who voted in far greater numbers for Trump -- should have nothing at ALL to say on liberal topics.

[radius777]

216. Feminists claim all men oppress all women,

in the same way that PoC are oppressed by whites.

Yet while we see most PoC vote for the party of civil rights, we don't see most white women vote for the party of women's rights - even when the candidate is an unabashed misogynist like Trump, who would jail women for abortions.

Men of color overwhelmingly voted for Hillary, and younger white men historically have leaned liberal.

IOW, many white women vote to maintain an oppressive system, while many men vote against it.

[whathehell]

219. Some feminists may say that -- Most say they live in a Patriarchy

much like most PoC would not say "All white people oppress all people of color". Rather than hold each and every white person responsible, I think they&d say there is something called ''systemic racism' -- Feminists see something very similar in male - female relations, so iinstead of seeing all men as 'misogynists,
they instead point to s "systemic male dominance," or patriarchy...

[TheFrenchRazor]

279. talk about cherry-picking; those same MOC voted 10 to 1 against Hillary in the primaries when the

opponent was a black male. there was no such similar phenomenon among white females. and please don't tell me that obama was just that much better of a candidate than hillary. the reality is that world-wide, non-white men are no friends of women, whereas white women are at least slightly above average when it comes to supporting the rights of non-whites. i'm really not saying this to start any sort of "contest," but just to suggest that you open your eyes a little wider.

[TheFrenchRazor]

280. that's like saying that ted bundy represents all (or most) men; yes, ted bundy was a man, but he was

hardly representative of the entire sex. it seems that some men really want to create a false representation of feminism to discredit it; this is nothing new; it has been going on since the very first woman attempted to differentiate herself from a door-mat (paraphrasing mae west, or whoever it was that popularized that saying.)

[Squinch]

288. IOW MOST women voted against an oppressive system while MOST white men

voted for it.

But great cherry picking there in your post. Way to show that your point can't be made without it.

[Dorian Gray]

206. WTF?

I don't give a shit what YOU do sexually, whether you look at Playboy or read porn.

But Heff was not a hero. He didn't help liberate women, but enslaved them to their objectification. He provided "thigh openers" (quaaludes) to girls at parties so they'd be open to having sex with him or his buddies. He used their desire for fame to ensure that he had a group of girls at the ready. The age and power discrepancy is a big deal.

We complain about Bill Cosby (well, i don't know if YOU do), but celebrate Heff? GBAFB.

[DLevine]

220. If you think you've been putting up with bullshit

all your 71 years, imagine what more you would have had to put up with if you were a woman.

By the way, it's not about "womens hurt feelings when people want to have fun", it's about women being treated as, you know, actual people. But thanks so much for telling women how we should think and feel about misogyny.

[ProfessorGAC]

224. Did You Forget The Sarcasm Thingie?

This 61 year old man would like to know that you were not being serious. Prostitution is a paid occupation, but i doubt anyone could buy into the idea that they're not exploited.

[ehrnst]

244. I am so grateful that someone has been kind enough to explain this to all of us.

Women are just too prudish to get it.

[niyad]

249. did you accidentally wander into the wrong forum?

[niyad]

250. goddess forfend that women, and the men who support them, should talk about what

they find offensive, without the conversation being hijacked. nice deflection, but we all know how this game is played.

[niyad]

254. this isn't reddit.

[LittleBlue]

201. Then it's a good thing that few if any liberal men care

whether you have faith in them. These posts always strike me as self-important anyway, like men are somehow affected by your disappointment in them.

[whathehell]

215. Sure..'"Midogny is the last acceptable bigotry of the Left"

Kstja Pollitt.

You may feign indifference, but these uncaring "liberal men" will care a lot when some hot woman they want rejects them precisely FOR that entitled selfishness..


P..S. One is hardly "liberal" if hr dismisses half of humanity as unworthy of his concern.

[smirkymonkey]

264. +1000

[whathehell]

321. Thanks, Smirk

And back at you..

[LittleBlue]

267. If only I'd known that I offended Kstja Pollitt

whoever the hell that is, I'd be really ashamed right now. You quote these people to me like I should know them and really care about their moral philosophies.

[Squinch]

290. So if someone quotes, say, Nietzsche, you think it's all about you and how Nietzsche

thinks about you?

Jesus. That's bizarre.

[whathehell]

318. Lol..

"You quote these people to me like I should know them and really care about their moral philosophies".

You post as if I should know and care about yours.

[MrsCoffee]

226. I don't think you have a clue what liberal men think.

Some of these posts are more in line with Men's Rights Advocates than any liberal ideology I've ever encountered.

But Imma let you finish....

[LittleBlue]

268. I'm sure you know men much better than me

You know, I just am one. You've lived precisely zero days as one. So obviously you know better. How stereotypical.

[Pacifist Patriot]

272. Stereotypical?

[Squinch]

291. Right? There's a sign hanging out and it doesn't say "liberal."

[Squinch]

289. So you are not affected by the disappointment of women. It's SO important

that we should all understand that, and conduct ourselves accordingly.

[whathehell]

205. "Their sexual satisfaction matters more than other..

peoples' lives and dignity".

We'll put. Thank you.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

235. Well said.

[Nay]

236. Me as well. This guy didn't do anyone any favors by existing. nt

[snooper2]

7. He did open the door for Playgirl which was part of women's sexual revolution

[grantcart]

11. mirroring objectification is not liberation.

[snooper2]

18. I guess I should check all the users who were/are GA GA over Justin Trudeau

Oh wait..

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029163488

LOL- Even the OP of this thread chimed in

[LanternWaste]

27. I especially liked how so many people talked about his boobs and butt

I especially liked how so many people talked about his boobs and butt, and completely ignored his policy and positions.

Cherry picking anecdotal and tenuous evidence seems shrills, hysterical and over-emotional, I certainly hope that doesn't apply to you.


Oh, wait... part II.

[snooper2]

34. oh, there is a picture of his boobs and biceps in that thread...but objectification isn't done

by true feminists. That would be hypocritical right?

but I'm just cherry picking so move on LOL

[melman]

49. LOL indeed

"mmmmm yummmm"

[progressoid]

73. Oops.

[RandomAccess]

245. You're having a little trouble with the concept of objecification

let me help you out.

ob·jec·ti·fi·ca·tion
əbˌjektəfəˈkāSH(ə n/Submit
noun
1.the action of degrading someone to the status of a mere object.




Sexual attraction is not the same as sexual objectification: objectification only occurs when the individuality of the desired person is not acknowledged. Pornography, prostitution, sexual harassment and the representation of women in mass media and art are all examples of common sexual objectification.

The concept of objectification owes much to the work of Simone de Beauvoir regarding the basic dualism of human consciousness between the Self and the Other: the general mental process where humans classify the world into ‘us’ and ‘them’. Women are universally viewed as the Other across all cultures, a role which is both externally imposed and internalised, and which means that women are generally not truly regarded as fully human. An important point of de Beauvoir’s was that this Othering effect is the same whether women are viewed as wholly inferior or if femininity is viewed as mysterious and morally superior: Otherness and full equality cannot coexist.
https://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/faq-what-is-sexual-objectification/


Then of course there's this.

[HopeAgain]

57. Best comment on this thread.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

301. You got that right!

[elehhhhna]

47. Play girl actually had more gay males and subscribers than it ever had women

[Nay]

238. Thank you. My college girlfriends and I had a couple of those mags for the

newness and grins, but never kept up with it. Women can appreciate good-looking men, but frankly, most of us don't need or want to look at pictures of them regularly. That's one way women differ from men.

And it's why, IIRC, at least 40% of the 'readership' was homosexual men.

[obamanut2012]

159. Playgirl was created for gay men

And that is who mainly bought and subscribed to it.

That doesn't make objectifying men any better, but Playgirl was not a publication targeted to straight women. Not really.

[Squinch]

164. Not a very big part. At all.

Women's sexual revolution had very little to do with tit for tat (pardon the pun) objectifying of men.

[radius777]

200. Romance novels/soaps/romcoms do objectify men

for relationships, money, status, popularity, dominance, height, sexual prowess, etc - for alpha male traits.

Such forms of entertainment are effectively the female version of porn, which is mostly written by women for a mainly female audience.

The fact is evolution hardwired the genders differently when it comes to sexual desire, owing to the differing reproductive needs.

[MrsCoffee]

227. When did these MRA talking points start on a Democratic website?

This place confuses the hell out of me sometimes.

[Squinch]

292. They think we don't notice. It's funny after a while.

[Coventina]

232. Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!

"But, but, but ROMANCE NOVELS!"


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!




Oh, please, you're killing me here...hahahahaha....

My sides......

[Squinch]

287. Right? And don't look now but by that logic, western novels objectify men too!

[Coventina]

304. And, don't even get me started on comic books!

My goodness, every boy must be in tears when Batman thwarts the Joker!!

"Boo-hoo! I'll never be a billionaire vigilante!"

[Squinch]

307. Ooooh!!! Batman's so alpha!!!! I want him to pay all my bills! Because I'm a woman and

can't pay my own and need a man to do it for me! And I'll pay him with sex! Because I'm the MRA view of what women are!

[Coventina]

313. Hehehe!

[RandomAccess]

246. Now how did I guess you were an MRA type w/your first post?

Guess my MRAdar is working well.

[treestar]

256. "Hard wired" usually means stereotypes

No, evolution did no such thing. Every person is different. And why would evolution "hard wire" the two sexes to want such different things? It usually tries to favor reproduction.

[Squinch]

286. LOL! This whole "alpha male" bullshit is a hangup of men who believe in

the absurd MRA definition of alpha male, and who are desperate to be that definition.

Hint: the MRA definition of alpha male has nothing to do with what a real self-actualized man looks or acts like.

[PassingFair]

8. No tears here...

He is responsible for casting women's bodies into
hazy, retouched fantasies that had little to do with
real life women.

[niyad]

12. mine was, "good"

[PassingFair]

13. A big shrug from me...

I spent a large part of my young adulthood feeling imperfect,
Playboy didn't help...

I am SO gratified by some of today's advertisers who are eschewing retouching!

[obamanut2012]

160. me too

[maddiemom]

255. I've always thought that Hefner turned his personal preoccupation with large breasts

into a national male preoccupation. I was maybe influenced by a conversation I heard between my mom and some women friends(Hefner's generation) about the Fifties' men's fascination with big busted actresses and Playboy. (Although I didn't inherit, Mom was quite busty and grew up self-conscious about it). Then, again, she grew up when men were obsessed by Betty Grable's legs...another objectification.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

14. K&R.

[treestar]

15. I agree; talk about exploitation

It was like payback for women not staying in their place - now we'll objectify you even more.

[RandomAccess]

247. Excellent insight

[Orrex]

16. Honestly I'm kind of shocked

I honestly thought that he died about 10 years ago.

[lunatica]

26. Well, you were right

They just put his silk jammies on him and propped him up in a big bed in the mansion and occasionally took pictures with him.

[Orrex]

40. Weekend at Heffie's

[lunatica]

43. They used the same makeup artist who did Evita Peron and Lenin

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

52. Me, too. My reaction was, "What, he wasn't dead already?"

While I'm not about to dance on his grave (I'm saving my happy two-steps for Dick Cheney and the Current Occupant), I'm also not going to hang crêpe and mourn his passing. He turned the objectification of women into a mainstream, commercial enterprise, so fuck him and the silk pajamas he slithered in on.

[Hawaii Hiker]

17. Disagree 500%

Before Mr Hefner, America was a puritanical land not much different than it was in 1612...He was truly a transformative cultural figure...

The truth in part is some people are just too God damn uptight when it comes to sex....

[niyad]

19. oooookaaaaay. . . .

[lunatica]

24. Women being seen as an object of sex was Hefner's legacy to women

You obviously have no clue.

[livetohike]

37. Really? Because looking at women as objects is so progressive?

Perhaps you can find a board of right wingers to join who want to make America great again by making sure women know their place.

[Baconator]

89. As long as they weren't coerced into it...

... that's their choice.

[Demsrule86]

330. Economics coerce women into it... women still don't get paid what they are worth...

Going to block every single person who posts this sort of thing.

[lunatica]

39. Obviously you resent women for objecting to your ideas of what we should think and do

Heffner was a male chauvinist pig and maybe you like to pretend that women in bunnie tails and ears with skimpy attire are some kind of role model we should emulate, but most women have better things to do and think about than to be clingy, brainless eye candy to people like you.

[Autumn]

282. There were a lot of women competing eagerly to pose nude and wear bunniy tails

and ears with skimpy attire. I don't remember hearing that we women had to emulate those... as you call them

clingy, brainless eye candy

A lot of those women that you despise were bright, intelligent, college educated women.

[Kaleva]

35. Without that, the human race would have gone extinct thousands of years ago.

[lunatica]

41. nope

Testosterone has made sure of that. It has nothing to do with Playboy bunnies stroking male egos. The human race was pretty much established by the time Heffner came along.

[Kaleva]

45. Without testosterone, there'd never would have been Playboy

Males have been depicting women as sexual objects since the beginning of recorded time for sure and most likely before that.

[lunatica]

85. So why would they need Heff then?

[Kaleva]

88. Why did they need pin up posters, racy playing cards, erotic photos and drawings?

Hefner used a medium (magazine) to take advantage of a demand that is ages old. Now the print magazine is becoming obsolete being replaced by the internet.

[JCanete]

93. Was that not the case previously? I think Playboy's legacy is probably a mixed bag,

and very well might have helped to move us away from that puritanical bullshit, but even if that is the case, it is certainly front-and-center of commodifying the objectification of women and forcing a body image, and even if there were positive byproducts, that certainly doesn't have to make Hefner a saint, or even a decent person.

I think it was instrumental in pushing boundaries that needed to be pushed in order for women to be accepted as having the right to dress how they like, having their own sexual desires, etc. Of course a lot of the shit propping up that kind of narrative was faux women's lib talk, since the result was no less objectifying but I'd have a hard time determining whether the net result was more positive or more negative. Not that somebody who is more informed on this issue couldn't make it easier for me with the right evidence...

[lunatica]

94. If Heffner helped it was as a shining example of what most women didn't want

By making women into playthings it made many of us mad enough to go burn our bras and let the girls hang loose! He really helped the impetus to fight against what he stood for.

For quite a few years he fell out of style. His daughter took over the magazine and brought him back from the dead. So he owes his golden years of endless bunnies to his daughter, a woman.

[JCanete]

102. Interesting history, thank you. nt

[Major Nikon]

194. At the end of the day he was in the business of selling magazines

If someone doesn't like the content, there's a good chance they will never be able to see past that, but the idea he didn't push lots of people in a progressive direction just doesn't hold water.

Meanwhile back in the 70's we were assured the proliferation of porn would turn men into sex craved maniacs and the incidence rate for rape would go through the roof. Back in the real world porn proliferated in ways we never would have imagined back then and rapes unquestionably decreased.

Not even all feminists buy into objectification theory and the connections between cause and the assumed effect have even less evidence than the connections between Rock-n-Roll and devil worship

[RandomAccess]

248. Someone more informed than you

would have a completely different -- should I say opposite? -- POV.

And both more progressive and contemporary. Yours is c. 1950.

[JCanete]

252. well you certainly have convinced me with all of that knowledge that you are one

of the more well informed...

thanks. If you have a specific detail you'd like to disagree with me on, that might go further than just calling me a neandratal. You do know that the cure for ignorance is information right? Do you have any?

[RandomAccess]

260. I am always willing to share information

with those who are sincerely interested.

When you convince me that describes you, I'm on.

[JCanete]

261. and what would that look like to you pray tell?

[RandomAccess]

266. Well, that's part of the test

[JCanete]

269. and how, with a lack of any and all guidance, does somebody evolve to the point where that person

passes this double secret test designed to jealously guard knowledge but for the few who can scale those obstacles? Are you part of a guild?

[RandomAccess]

273. Hey, man, if you don't know how to be sincere --

sincere enough to convince someone you are -- I'm sure I can't help you.

Sorry, you're on your own.

[JCanete]

276. so sincerity doesn't look like trying to consider the whole impact of Playboy and to even suggest

that I'm not qualified to say whether or not one affect was greater than the other, or that I'd be interested in other people's take on this subject, or my response to a poster who actually gave me some information I didn't have before, who I then thanked without engaging in any kind of agenda...

all of that sounds like insincerity for the purpose of...what exactly? What do you think my agenda is? I thought it was that I was genuinely interested in understanding this better and in order to do so had to frame for people my own perspective, but apparently you have the real scoop and i've been living a lie.

[RandomAccess]

278. You know what?

I think I completely misconstrued the original post of yours that I replied to.

I apologize. Profusely.

[JCanete]

283. thanks, no hard feelings! nt

[Weekend Warrior]

51. Amazing what I learn on DU.

"Before Mr Hefner, America was a puritanical land not much different than it was in 1612"

[lunamagica]

87. LOL! That was such an enlightening post!

[johnp3907]

132. Quite the history lesson there.

Kinda sad that people like Mae West and Jean Harlow never existed.

[Pacifist Patriot]

59. So it's okay to objectify women as sex objects...

and promote unreasonable expectations of physical appearance to drag America out of it's puritanical views of sex. Got it.

[TheFrenchRazor]

96. some people conflate sexual freedom w/ objectification of women; it is important to make

the distinction. we can support rationality when it comes to sexual freedom, but not support the porn-style objectification of women as brain-dead, easily available and disposable "bunnies." it is not either/or, but some people seem to deliberately try to muddy the waters and force a false choice on others.

[prayin4rain]

183. +1 ... Playboy had nothing to do with sex. nt

[radius777]

210. "brain dead.. disposable bunnies" - misogynist anti-sex moralism

that actually demonizes women as much as it does men.

The problem isn't porn or sexual fantasy - but rather a repressed society which fails to see sexual desire as merely one aspect of a total and complex individual.

[RandomAccess]

251. LOL -- you're in no position to make that assessment

You've already revealed your MRA biases.

Denouncing that post as misogynist anti-sex moralism is ludicrous -- but, I have to hand it to you, downright hilarious.

[TheFrenchRazor]

281. you pretty much just illustrated EXACTLY what i wrote. nt

[Squinch]

293. It was kind of perfect, wasn't it?

[TheFrenchRazor]

316. heh heh. nt

[Callmecrazy]

97. Totally agree with you, HH...

Nobody forced any of the models to pose for the pictures. They all did it of their own free will and it made so many of them famous. He opened the minds of Uptight Americans.
If what he did was so terrible, how did he get so rich? Nobody was forced to buy his magazine.

He started the Sexual Evolution of America and treated women with respect. Anyone who says he didn't is full of shit.
Rest in peace, Hef.

[wryter2000]

111. No one ever got rich by doing something terrible?

Have a talk with Joel Osteen. (And I am a Christian.)

[Callmecrazy]

127. Not the same thing...

When you gave hef your money, you got something in return.
Not so much with Osteen.

[wryter2000]

140. Like what?

A magazine with ridiculous images of what the female body should look like, in his point of view? Something unattainable by almost 100% of women without surgery?

No thanks.

Osteen's followers would tell you they get a lot from him.

[Dorian Gray]

207. Giving women drugs

so they'll have sex with your guests at the playboy mansion.... Progressive.

[wryter2000]

107. As long as men are exploiting women

He definitely did not elevate women's sexuality, only how they could satisfy men.

[obamanut2012]

163. Yeah, wrong -- the birth control pill did that

Not Hefner.

Does your back hurt btw?

[Squinch]

166. Right. All those prudy prudes complaining about objectification! Amiright?

Objectification is what makes America great! Amiright?

[Caliman73]

172. Disagree with that statement 500%

America has always been of 2 minds, on basically everything. While one the outside there was a puritanical streak, that exists to this day. On the other hand, prostitution was extremely popular from the Revolutionary War to the Civil War and in the Westward Expansion, women gained quite a bit of political and economic power from selling their services. Some of the first photographs were of naked women. As soon as the first films were being made, the first pornos were being made.

We love our sex here in America, we just don't want anyone to know how much. Hefner capitalized on that more than innovated anything.

Also, there is a big difference in exploring and celebrating sex and making it a commodity and selling it.

[RandomAccess]

257. Thank you

Also, there is a big difference in exploring and celebrating sex and making it a commodity and selling it.

Why do so many men have so much difficulty understanding this?

Hmmm, could it be because they don't want to?

[Caliman73]

294. Part of it is because of physiology, but a lot of it is because of socialization.

Even those of us who see the difference and want to be respectful and egalitarian sometimes have impulses and learning that we have to overcome.

[jodymarie aimee]

176. I'm with you Hiker, he was a progressive man

Joy Behar had a nice piece about him on the VIEW...she knew him, we didn't. And yes, it is 2017...grow up folks....

[whathehell]

217. .and after Hefner, women are STILL being called 'sluts"

and *whores" for doing the same things men do!....How "liberating".!

btw, it's easy NOT being "uptight" when you:re not the target of such slurs, not to mention some other vulnerabilities like pregnancy, rape, etc. .. Just sayin'.

[lunatica]

20. Boy! You said it!

He was always a pig. But, like Trump he did us a favor because our fight against male chauvinism was helped by his male priviliedge philosophy.

He became a pariah and had to have his daughter bring him back to popularity.

I wonder what Gloria Steinem has to say. She worked incognito as a Playboy Bunnie and then wrote about it.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/26/gloria-steinem-bunny-tale-still-relevant-today

[niyad]

22. I have been looking to see if she has made any comment about his passing. nothing so far.

[Orsino]

21. And more than the borderline sexual assaults/sex slavery and the pictures of nekkid ladies...

...the very term "playboy" seems to have foreshadowed or molded the entitlement of modern PUA/MRAs. The image of "what kind of man reads Playboy" was a man ofwealth and power who could pick and choose women to use. Oh, it hid behind the alleged "empowerment" of women sometimes, but it was all about the menz.

[niyad]

23. so true

[MicaelS]

28. Too bad we still don't have Unrec. n/t

[niyad]

30. really? why?

[MrsCoffee]

67. Can't get that feeling of control just posting in the thread.

It pisses some off to think that women should be allowed to make ALL the rules about their sexuality and bodies.

[Major Nikon]

120. Because the entire pretext is nonsensical

Hef most certainly did have feminist allies who most certainly will mourn his passing, along with lots of other people who value his efforts toward legalizing abortion, making birth control more legal and more widely accepted, comprehensive sex education, and countless other topics that had a direct positive impact on the lives of women and men. So whether some feminists like him or not, the reality is the sexual revolution happened and moved this country to a much more progressive stance on gender attitudes of which Hef played a significant part.

[leftstreet]

190. Hefner did nothing 'progressive' for men

There was no sexual 'liberation' or 'revolution' to be found in his objectifying women as sexual commodities that in any way freed men from their own rigid self-concepts. In fact, he made it worse.

Decades of social change and progress later, yet 'full frontal nudity' movie and tv classifications almost always mean 'nekkid ladies!' with rarely a penis to be found. Men are more fully clothed than ever before, both literally and psychologically. Which makes sense. Hefner showed them what happens when you disguise sexual exploitation as 'liberation.'

[Major Nikon]

192. Sure, there's nothing progressive about putting black and white musicians on the same stage

I get that some are convinced Hefner is the anti-Christ, but the claim he did nothing progressive pretty much pegs the hyperbole meter.

[leftyladyfrommo]

31. Bill Cosby used to hang there.

I don't think he was the only one drugging up women so that they would be more compliant.

That whole scene was just awful.

[niyad]

33. a most excellent point.

[demmiblue]

42. "I called Hugh Hefner a pimp, he threatened to sue. But thats what he was"

...

The accounts of the “privileged few” who made it into the inner sanctum of the 29-room Playboy mansion as wives/girlfriends/bunny rabbits are quite something. In Hefner’s petting zoo/harem/brothel, these interchangeable blondes were put on a curfew. They were not allowed to have friends to visit. And certainly not boyfriends. They were given an “allowance”. The big metal gates on the mansion that everyone claimed were to keep people out of this “nirvana” were described by one-time Hefner “girlfriend no 1” Holly Madison in her autobiography thus: “I grew to feel it was meant to lock me in.”

The fantasy that Hefner sold was not a fantasy of freedom for women, but for men. Women had to be strangely chaste but constantly available for the right price. Dressing grown women as rabbits – once seen as the height of sophistication – is now seen as camp and ironic. There are those today who want to celebrate Hefner’s contribution to magazine journalism, and I don’t dispute that Playboy did use some fantastic writers.

...

If any of them left the mansion and were not available for club nights where they were paraded, they didn’t get their allowance. The sheets in the mansion were stained. There was to be no bickering between girlfriends. No condoms could be used. A nurse sometimes had to be called to Hefner’s “grotto” if he’d had a fall. Nonetheless, these young women would have to perform.

Hefner – repeatedly described as an icon for sexual liberation – would lie there with, I guess, an iconic erection, Viagra-ed to the eyeballs. The main girlfriend would then be called to give him oral sex. There was no protection and no testing. He didn’t care, wrote Jill Ann Spaulding. Then the other women would take turns to get on top of him for two minutes while the girls in the background enacted lesbian scenarios to keep “Daddy” excited. Is there no end to this glamour?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/28/hugh-hefner-pimp-sue-playboy-mansion

[niyad]

44. thank you for this. I think it deserves its own OP, for visibility.

[Dave Starsky]

115. Yeah, I agree. Fuck that.

Count me among those who, though a bit skeeved by him, sort of looked up to him for striking out for sexual liberation and providing access to some great writers and thinkers.

But that is just plain messed up. I cannot deny.

[JHan]

109. I read that this morning, some bitter truths for those who glamorize him.

[RandySF]

53. What about Playgirl?

[PunkinPi]

108. See grantcart's post (#11)...

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9646869

[Laffy Kat]

54. Hooray!

Thank you, thank you! I didn't have the energy or the eloquence to post and then defend my feelings re : HH. Bless you.

[niyad]

56. you are most welcome--the lionizing of this misogynistic creep is disgusting.

[DLevine]

68. Sexual attraction and sexual objectification are two different things. nt

[Cuthbert Allgood]

74. so if a guy says "yuuuuummmmmmmmmmmm"

about how a woman looks, are you going to say that isn't objectification?

[Major Nikon]

134. True

One comes naturally, and the other is an idea that originates with a guy who thought the true value of women was being barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant

[smirkymonkey]

161. That is exactly it! When I am attracted to a man, even if it's just physical at first, I don't

attempt to deny his humanity and reduce him to a mindless object without agency. He is still a human being even though I might find him very sexy and attractive. Men like Hef and his sort need to reduce women to something less than human, probably because they need to believe they have complete power over them.

[Major Nikon]

165. So sexuality makes us less human?

I prefer to think of it as one of the defining features.

[smirkymonkey]

169. No, you misunderstand me. It makes us very human. It is the insistence that a woman

NEEDS to be de-humanized or taken down a few notches in order to be sexually attractive to certain men. Healthy men are able to find a woman sexually attractive as she is, without having to demean her or turn her into an object whose sole purpose is to please HIM.

[Major Nikon]

171. I'm understanding you even less now

I don't see nudity as dehumanizing or demeaning.

[smirkymonkey]

173. Forget it. It's not about nudity. It's not about sex.

It's about their views of women. You said it yourself - maybe I misunderstood YOU. "One comes naturally, and the other is an idea that originates with a guy who thought the true value of women was being barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen." I took that to mean that sexual attraction comes naturally and sexual objectification means that women are only allowed certain roles in life and if they step out of those roles (i.e. submissive, un-threatening) then they are no longer desirable.

I don't think you are reading my posts to understand. I think you are imposing your own interpretation on my words because you don't want to get it.

[Major Nikon]

181. Kant's idea of objectification had little to do with desireablity

It was more about if women get nothing in return for sex, their value is diminished. I don't happen to agree with that premise which seems much more at home in the 18th century than it does today. The reason for that has a lot to do with the sexual revolution and changing ideas of sex and sexuality, which like it or not, Hef played a significant part in bringing about that change.

It is about nudity and it is about sex. Without those two elements we wouldn't even be having this conversation. What I don't get and probably never will is I don't see the issue as men vs women. There are no shortage of women out there that most certainly do want to be desirable based on how they look. If they choose to take off their clothes and display nudity, I just don't see that as dehumanizing or demeaning, and objectification theory doesn't do much to explain why they shouldn't have the agency to chose THAT role.

So what I'm not understanding is how you get from displaying nude women, even in sexual situations, to dehumanizing them. Maybe this is clear to you, but it's not to me.

[prayin4rain]

185. Your logic squares up if applied to a society based on equality.

If men and women had equal chances in life and violence against women was not still such a huge problem in our society, then sure, what you say makes sense.

In a society based on equality, there would still be women who FREELY choose that lifestyle and, of course, that's fine. It would probably be a slightly lower percentage of men who choose that lifestyle now.

But, in this society, many women have made the "choice" to be bunnies, literally and figuratively, because it's the best (perhaps, the only) way they have to stay safe and out of poverty. And the Playboy mentality did a lot to create and maintain an environment where being a bunny was the safest bet for women. And a place where it was acceptable for men to consume women instead of relate to them.

Playboy was not about sex, but about selling an idea of women as a commodity for the enjoyment of men. Polite, coy, women who think of nothing but looking good just for you. The magazines that are more sex focused, portraying women with sexual desires who are also acting upon them, are probably less misogynistic and contribute less to women being seen as objects instead of people.

[Major Nikon]

186. I'm questioning the cause vs effect

Your logic gets no closer to the answer.

Whether you believe it or not, there are indeed women who FREELY choose that lifestyle, which just isn't that much different than any other career choice that most other people, male or female, make based on their own needs. Hell given the internet there's no shortage of both men and women that are producing far more explicit content completely for free. So I just don't see the idea that these women were somehow slaves to the situation meshing all that well with reality.

I also don't agree with the "logic" of the porn and violence against women connection. That one has been debunked so many times it really isn't worth the effort anymore.

[prayin4rain]

187. Yes, I acknowledged that even in a

society based on equality some women would freely choose that lifestyle. Probably in slightly lower percentages than men do now.

I also stated that pornography that portrayed women as active participants instead of passive objects would also contribute less to women being objectified. (i.e., porn itself is not inherently harmful. Some porn is harmful, some isn't.)

So, I'm not sure if you even meant to reply to my post or someone else's?

[Major Nikon]

189. I just don't see the evidence for your claims

What is the evidence that women aren't freely choosing that lifestyle? Certainly there are situations where people are being trafficked and slavery most certainly does exist, but that's not the same as what's being discussed. I'd like to have a job that pays in the high six figures to drive fast cars around town all day. That doesn't mean I'm a slave because I have to take a lower paying less desirable job in order to pay the bills, and that's making the assumption the job in question is undesirable. As I pointed out, you have no shortage of people today literally doing this for free. The idea that some might want to get paid for it just shouldn't be all that surprising.

The idea that porn harms women just isn't that solid. If anything the evidence suggests the exact opposite, not to mention whatever "porn" was displayed by Playboy was very much on the side of soft where actual sex wasn't even depicted.

[radius777]

214. Exactly. Society is based upon men "paying" for sex

via relationships, and alot of the anti-sex/anti-porn moralism that comes from the right and left has to do with this.. essentially the objectification of men as relationship objects, who are evil if we don't grow up, pay up and take care of women.

[smirkymonkey]

271. Don't you have an MRA rally to attend somewhere?

[Squinch]

295. WTF world do you live in? Seriously, stop watching those 50s sit coms and talk to

actual humans. You'll be pleased to note that your worldview is bizarrely obsolete.

Things have changed since Lassie let us know that Timmy was caught in the well. Them wimmins are actually humans now.

[smirkymonkey]

156. Thank YOU!

It's amazing how many people can't seem to wrap their minds around that!

[Bettie]

58. As with all human beings

I feel sad for the people who loved him.

[Scruffy1]

60. As a man I was appalled that his death was front page news.

i was even more appalled to see it was the most talked about piece on the DU news. He was a vile man who made his living by objectifying women and selling name brand hedonism. His whole schtick was to wrap his misogyny in glossy coverings with a little serious mareial to make it acceptable. Ever time I meet a woman who is obsessed about her appearance I think he shares a lot of the blame. He belongs on the scrapheap of history.

[Pacifist Patriot]

62. Thank you.

[niyad]

64. yes!! thank you!

[3catwoman3]

77. Another thank you...

...from me. Hedonism is a good adjective for him.

In a related thread, I said he was a dick who never got past his obsession with his dick.

[wryter2000]

112. Thank you

For a while when I was in my teens and twenties, I'd try to read Playboy because it was cool. And it certainly was true that the fiction was AWESOME.

But eventually, I realized I was being creeped out because I didn't look like the women in the magazine. I also hated the letters to the editor that read something like, "I have a fabulous car and a great stereo. Why can't I get a woman?" Because a woman isn't a THING, asshole.

[Oneironaut]

63. He was always creepy to me. The whole Playboy thing is.

The idea of 18-year-old women being collected like Pokémon by some old guy in a robe is, frankly, extremely weird and disgusting. I always found Playboy to be bizarre at best and horribly misogynistic at worst.

[niyad]

65. so true

[BadgerMom]

69. Me, too.

He always skeeved me out and I always disliked the fact he was held in esteem by some. The reaction to his death has been jarring. I'm happy to read this and to discover I'm not alone.

[ailsagirl]

314. Right there with you, Oneironaut

[Bernardo de La Paz]

70. Pro sports is the buying and selling of bodies by the same logic. . . . nt

turning porn – and therefore the buying and selling of women’s bodies – into a legitimate business

[Adrahil]

75. Not QUITE the same thing.

I mean, pro sports has lots of its own faults, but it is not the same as porn, which encourages defining bodies as sexual commodity.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

95. Something wrong with sex while athletic commodity is ok?

[Adrahil]

100. Nothing wrong with sex...

The issue us objectification.

And athletes are exploited as commodities, but in a different way. It's not okay, but it is different.

There is tons of academic writing on this subject.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

114. Objectification is only a problem when it crosses over to behavior.

The problems with porn are fundamentally due to the lack of proper opportunities and pay for women in other sectors of the economy and society. Closely related is societal shaming including the double standard that condemns promiscuous women and celebrates promiscuous men.

Other problems, flowing from that, are bad working conditions, criminally fraudulent promises, sexual harassment, lack of equity participation opportunities, etc.

I have never seen anyone write complaining about the objectification of men in porn featuring men — examples being porn appealing to women, to homosexual men, and to submissive males — which is just as prevalent in those varieties as any other.

To the extent that porn featuring women is a problem it is basically a symptom of a sick society, not a cause. Further, some women have had great careers in porn on either side or both sides of the camera.

[Major Nikon]

146. There's also tons of academic writing on the myths of global warming

The difference being global warming is an observable phenomenon which can be objectively measured. Objectification theory is a theory only in the loosest sense. There are no models in which one can effectively evaluate the "theory". It's more accurately described as a philosophical concept with a very wide spectrum of diverse thought.

[Major Nikon]

136. Boobies!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

137. Is that picture NSFW?

( ... working to boost the number of looks your post gets )

[Major Nikon]

138. Probably should have included the warning

[edbermac]

139. Pervert!!!

Showing birds without clothes on!!!

[Dopers_Greed]

71. I'm no fan of Hefner...

...but I don't think he can claim "the ultimate enemy of women" when we have Dump in the White House.

[Skittles]

72. I thought he was a creep

[Sneederbunk]

76. A significant cog in the giant entertainment and advertising sex-ploitation wheel.

[jalan48]

78. The least sexually repressed kids I knew growing up were farm kids. Sex was a natural act, not

something hidden in a magazine under the bed, to be looked at when a disapproving mother/father weren't around.

[Kaleva]

79. I think the title of "ultimate enemy" ought to go to Trump, evangelical leaders and some others.

People like Roy Moore. Trying to argue that Hefner was the ultimate enemy trivializes the very real danger politicians like Trump, Pence, Moore and evangelical leaders like Falwell, Robertson, and Bakker pose to women.

[MineralMan]

80. Yup. As a new teenager, I looked at Playboy, because

it answered natural questions I had about female anatomy. Sort of. However, had I not had access to an anatomy book, Playboy's strategic airbrushing would have left me with a completely wrong idea about many things.

However, the cardboard women that Hefner championed were nothing like the real-life girls and women I encountered, who were actually full-blown complete human beings. As I learned that from the women and women-to-be I interacted with as an adolescent, it became obvious to me that the "Playboy Philosophy" was hopelessly flawed and incomplete.

I learned about women from women and the girls my own age who were approaching adulthood. They taught me how to treat them, not as objects, but as individual people as complex and interesting and important as any other people. Hefner taught me nothing, really, except that most women were not at all like the objects he showcased.

Thanks to all of those people who taught me better. No thanks to Hugh Hefner.

[Fix The Stupid]

81. I didn't know he forced these women to pose at gunpoint? Got a link? n/t

[MineralMan]

99. Did someone say that he did? I didn't see that.

He paid quite a large fee to women who posed for the nude photos in that magazine. Money gets people to do all sorts of things they might not otherwise do.

[Fix The Stupid]

104. Ahh...so we're back to infantilizing women...

Can't make their own choices now, can they?

Need us men to tell them what to with their bodies right?

Why is it anyone's business if a woman wants to pose for cash???

[MineralMan]

113. Of course they can make choices as individuals.

I did not imply otherwise. I imagine if I placed an ad on Craigs List, offering $1000 per session for nude models, my phone would be ringing off the hook. People need money to survive and will do many things to get it. I would not do such a thing, of course, but I'm certain that I'd have plenty of willing models.

Yes, people make their own decisions. However people make many decisions that are negative in their effect, based on need. If I were to pay people to do something and then exploited their willingness to do so in a way that demeaned women in general, I'd would be a sexist pig, to be quite frank. I am not that, so I do not do that.

Hugh Hefner paid far more that that for his nude models. He build a publishing empire that was copied and modified by others. There is a multi-billion dollar Internet porn industry that pays far less for people to perform sex acts, often demeaning acts, for videos. It's easy to get women who are in need of money for survival to do almost anything to survive. That does not make it a good thing to do. Exploiting people for money is not an ethical thing to do, even if they are willing.

That's my opinion. I believe that exploiting people for demeaning and often harmful motivations is simply wrong, and would never engage in such activities. Plenty of others, though, are more than happy to do so. It sucks to be them, but it sucks far worse for the people who are used by them, I think.

You might think differently. And there it is.

[Major Nikon]

121. You could say the same thing about pretty much any unskilled or low skilled labor

I find it a bit hard to reconcile that women should have their own agency, except when they use that agency to make choices others don't like.

[treestar]

129. Their agency is affected by the society around them

and by misogyny. What sells is their exploitation. They can "choose" to make money that way if they have the looks, while they have them. But it is not this great opportunity.

[Major Nikon]

131. As is everyone's

The idea that women can't do what they choose because of different sets of societal expectations is also deeply rooted in misogyny and the absence of opportunity.

[GReedDiamond]

198. "Exploiting people for money is not an ethical thing to do, even if they are willing"

Is that not what is going on with almost everyone with whatever kind of job they have?

When I agree to accept payment to do whatever I agree to do with whoever it is*, I assume that the entity asking me to do whatever they want me to do is going to exploit my services - whatever they may be, whatever talents and skills that may entail - for profit, or some other tangible benefit, even if it's ultimately only a tax write off.

Is that not just the nature of what we call "capitalism"?

So, apparently it's legal, and by extension, "ethical," like it or not.

*I am not including any illegal activities of any sort here.

[RandomAccess]

265. No, it's not ethical in all situations

Is that not what is going on with almost everyone with whatever kind of job they have?

When I agree to accept payment to do whatever I agree to do with whoever it is*, I assume that the entity asking me to do whatever they want me to do is going to exploit my services - whatever they may be, whatever talents and skills that may entail - for profit, or some other tangible benefit, even if it's ultimately only a tax write off.

Is that not just the nature of what we call "capitalism"?

So, apparently it's legal, and by extension, "ethical," like it or not.

The key factor is humiliation, degradation, physical harm, or some other negative effect to the worker.

IMO, and I'm not alone, football players -- no matter how highly paid and no matter how "willing" -- are exploited by nature of the damage they are doing to their brains.

And sex workers including Playboy models, are exploited by virtue of the humiliatiion and degradation they are subjected to.

And let me pre-empt your certain objection: When children aspire to grow up to become porn stars or prostitutes and other sex workers, and their parents agree and are proud of that, and when it's not frowned on by ALL society (except horny men protecting their supply and the people making money off them), THEN and only then can you regard it as NOT EXPLOITATIVE.

[GReedDiamond]

270. "The key factor is humiliation, degradation, physical harm, or some other negative effect...

...to the worker."

OK, so where do you stand on, for example, the plight of migrant farm workers who toil for extremely low wages under harsh conditions that may result in "physical harm" or "some other negative effects," so that the rest of us can go down to the market for some strawberries?

What do you do for those people? And any other group of workers doing less than desirable jobs with possible negative consequences because they need to do anything they can to survive?

As far as my "certain objection" goes, such a thing never entered my thoughts, I assure you. Plus, I explicitly excluded illegal activities such as prostitution/human trafficking from my remarks.

[RandomAccess]

275. What do you mean

where do I stand on migrant workers?

ABSOLUTE exploitation. No question. And for me the main issue for any other workers doing HARMFUL or degrading jobs. "Less than desirable," isn't the issue.

And there will always be jobs that carry risk of potential harm -- police, for example. Military as well. They must be fully informed (and usually are in those two cases), and adequately paid for the risk (not so much the case for these). AND every possible effort to minimize harm should be adopted by the employer (in this case government).

I also think of coal miners who are at risk in dangerous mines. They're exploited because the risk is grave and too often the mines are unsafe because mine owners do not take appropriate measures to ensure safety. AND, no way are miners adequately compensated for the risk of black lung.

What do I do for them? What would you have me do?

If I find a company that builds shoddy products you happen to like and I complain about it, are you going to then expect me to go form a company that builds the same thing only not shoddy?

I vote for the right people and I try to raise awareness -- like talking to you about it. If that ain't enough for YOUR standards for me, tough. Doesn't take away my right to have my opinions and to complain.

[GReedDiamond]

285. You seem a bit hostile...

...and I never said or implied that you had no right to your opinions.

My point is, if it's legal, it's gonna happen, whether you, me or anyone else likes it or not.

Have a good evening.

[Blue_Adept]

83. Gotta love all the acceptable gravedancing going on around these parts

[kwassa]

84. Hefner's sexism was nothing compared to extreme sexism in other countries.

I don't see him as ultimate anything.

He certainly might be a chief figure for sexism in the US, in terms of his phony idealization of it. Hefner was a throwback and faux sexual liberator. He was liberal in everything but his treatment of women.

Large parts of the world still have extraordinary mistreatment of women that we never see. Female genital mutilation? Killing female babies? Sexual assault as social control? Hefner doesn't hold a candle to this.

[Iggo]

91. LOL...Welcom to DU.

[melman]

90. The ultimate enemy?

Ultimate? None worse anywhere? What garbage.


btw, Julie Bindel is a transphobic bigot. Just saying.

[m-lekktor]

106. AHA, anti-sex AND a TERF!nt

[Major Nikon]

147. More interesting reading from the same author...

I look back on them with affection and, yes, nostalgia. At least those women were women, and hadn't gone to gender reassignment clinics to have their breasts sliced off and a penis made out of their beer bellies. Their attitude was, we're comfortable in our own skin, let's be women but subvert what that means. Could we really have imagined back then that unpicking constructions of gender would result in Kwik-Fit sex changes on offer to all and sundry?

If you are tired of being stared at for snogging your same-sex partner in the street, have a sex change. Where are those who go berserk about the ethics of genetic engineering yet seem not to worry about major, irreversible surgery on healthy bodies? Also, those who "transition" seem to become stereotypical in their appearance - fuck-me shoes and birds'-nest hair for the boys; beards, muscles and tattoos for the girls. Think about a world inhabited just by transsexuals. It would look like the set of Grease.

To go back to my five men and a toilet, I don't have a problem with men disposing of their genitals, but it does not make them women, in the same way that shoving a bit of vacuum hose down your 501s does not make you a man.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jan/31/gender.weekend7

[melman]

151. Here's another nice one

We became "lesbian and gay", but soon bisexuals shouted, "Us too". Transsexuals, having received short shrift from heterosexual society, asked to be included in our rainbow alliance, followed by Queer (anyone who is into "kinky" sex), then Questioning (those having a think about who and how they might shag in the future), and finally (for now) Intersex (those born with biological features that are simultaneously perceived as male and female). The mantra now at "gay" meetings is a tongue-twisting LGBTQQI.

It is all a bit of an unholy alliance. We have been put in a room together and told to play nicely. But I for one do not wish to be lumped in with an ever-increasing list of folk defined by "odd" sexual habits or characteristics. Shall we just start with A and work our way through the alphabet? A, androgynous, b, bisexual, c, cat-fancying d, devil worshipping. Where will it ever end?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/nov/08/lesbianism

[Major Nikon]

153. Interesting the parallels between the TERFs and far right social conservatives

[get the red out]

98. He and the Religious fanatics

have always been on the same page.

[mr_liberal]

180. Religious fanatics and radical feminists both want to censor porn.

I think you have it backwards.

[Squinch]

296. Porn consumption is highest in the most religious states. So no.

https://consumerist.com/2009/03/05/which-state-consumes-the-most-online-porn/

[RhodeIslandOne]

297. And yet, the GOP has a plank in the platform for banning it.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/11/politics/gop-platform-republican-convention-internet-pornography/index.html

[Squinch]

300. Uh huh. And they say that Trump is going to build a wall and the tax bill is good for

poor people.

I see why you trust their sincerity.

[RhodeIslandOne]

302. Republicans and religious nuts are repressed hypocrites

That was the correct initial answer.

Publicly all about banning shit they claim they don't like for everyone else, privately often engaging in stuff worse than watching porn that's actually illegal.

Me being sincere is saying there is nothing wrong with watching porn.

[Squinch]

306. "That was the correct initial answer" to what? What was the question?

And why are you telling me that you sincerely feel the need to defend watching porn?

[RhodeIslandOne]

308. That no one should be surprised GOP hypocrites consume what they want to ban for others.

If they were just honest, they could drop the pretense and move on.

I'm still trying to figure out this statement by you:

"I see why you trust their sincerity."

Huh? Look, I don't trust anything about Republicans. But both Ashcroft and Gonzales did go after porn during their tenure. I mean, you know that, right??? True believers do sometimes rise to power.

[Squinch]

309. You seem to be veering a bit.

[RhodeIslandOne]

311. Have a good night n/m

[get the red out]

317. I have no experience with

"Radical feminists" Sorry if believing woman are people equal to men is radical.

[RhodeIslandOne]

298. A pro-choice, pro-gay marriage publisher?

Unless this is some clever subtle satire about the hypocrisy of religious pricks looking at "dirty pictures", uh......ok.

[Demsrule86]

331. From Salon...

"But what did Playboy ever do to encourage female sexuality? How does a magazine published explicitly for the male gaze offer sexual liberation?
Defenders of Hefner and his Playboy lifestyle will say that the Playboy bunnies freely chose their destinies, were treated well and that Hefner provided Playboy’s Playmates with career-boosting exposure. But not all the models who appeared in Playboy went on to fame and fortune. A disproportionate number of Playmates have died young from drug overdose, suicide, homicide, or some other unnatural cause. When Gloria Steinem went undercover as a Playboy bunny in 1963, she found the models were forced into painful, body-contorting costumes, poorly compensated and generally treated as though they were disposable. Maybe the bunny costumes are a little looser in the 21st century, but they still promote a retrograde notion that women’s bodies look better when they’re forced into corsets.
Hefner, who is praised for promoting racial equality, hated feminists and pushed a heteronormative, 1950s view of gender division. In an internal memo in 1970, he wrote, “These chicks are our natural enemy. What I want is a devastating piece that takes the militant feminists apart. They are unalterably opposed to the romantic boy-girl society that Playboy promotes.”

[Lunabell]

103. Amen!

He was a misogynist pig.

[wryter2000]

105. Amen

He, more than anyone else, made the commodification of women mainstream. I won't miss him one little bit.

[Old Crow]

110. The article gets a fact wrong regarding Steinem.

When Steinem went undercover and wrote an exposé on what it was like to be a Playboy Bunny, she worked at the Playboy Club in New York City, not at the Playboy Mansion, as the article incorrectly states. If you haven't read Steinem's piece, you should. It's as good today as when it was first published in 1963. It offers a lot of insight into the seamy reality of the Playboy brand.

You can read Steinem's article here:
http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/182677/13796539/1314043555150/I+Was+a+Playboy+Bunny.pdf?token=aHocsoq8kW8Tgfg6jZBLK2Ntpts%3D

[TheFrenchRazor]

315. good link; sadly, stuff written 150+ years ago by women like S.B. Anthony and E.C. Stanton is still

still just as relevant and to-the-point as it was when it was written. some of the particular issues have changed, but the arguments for and against are almost exactly the same. it's somewhat scary; it's almost like nothing has been learned; the specifics of the dearly held male and female gender roles have just evolved a bit.

[lunamagica]

116. K&R. Thank you for this thread

[Atman]

117. A friend of mine was one of the 25th Anniversary Playmates.

I'm still in contact with her on a regular basis. She did a beautiful, artistic layout in the magazine -- remember, it's not as if nudes were invented by Hefner -- and used her earnings to go to get a law degree. She never did any of the cheap films or things some of the models do after they leave Playboy, but she did return to the Mansion for anniversaries and parties. She was one of the first people I saw post about Hefner's death. She was very saddened and very grateful for everything the Playboy organization did for her and her career. Again, she's a lawyer now.

It's all a matter of perspective.

[Adrahil]

125. The fact that she did well with what she got...

Doesn't change the nature of the exploitation. Ultimately we all make our own choices, of course, but I'd prefer a world where a woman didn't have to sell herself as spank bank material to go to law school.

[Atman]

133. I think the key words are "have to."

Her family was not broke. She was a top student, probably could have (or did) get some scholarships. But when recruiters came to town she said "why not?" We lived in a beach town, it was late '70s. We all grew up practically naked anyway, wore bathing suits to school, modesty was not a big deal. She was already known as a local beauty, why not see what happens?

I totally understand what you're saying, and the overall tone of the thread. But I think what is missing is the underlying message that we're all different, we're all our own selves, and we all look at life from varying perspectives. I know people who won't walk across their own house naked. What kind of shame brings that on? I don't see it as an exploitation thing, because it is timeless. Fine art from as far back as history reaches features nude figures, both men and women. Some sexual, some pornographic, some artistic. It's who we are.

From the Playboy perspective, I celebrate the magazine. Each issue had maybe 16 pages of partially clad women amidst 150 pages of politics, opinion, news, pop culture, cartoons, satire, and literature. Yeah, literature. Some of the finest authors ever in print. Hefner was an iconoclast, a ground breaker, a visionary. Back in the day, when I subscribed, I had to wait a day or two to get my hands on the latest issue because my wife always got it first and read it cover to cover. Maybe she looked at the pictures, too.

Just sayin', I think Hefner gets a bad rap by many who don't really know the story. Check out the Amazon series about Playboy. It's a good look at the so-called empire.

[Dave Starsky]

148. My wife was a model in L.A. for a while.

After one of her shows, she and two of her modeling friends were invited to the Playboy mansion by someone affiliated with the organization. My wife didn't go, as it just seemed too weird and dangerous for her. But her two friends went. You have to do these things to advance your career in Hollywood.

And those two friends had sex with Hef. But they only had sex with him in the context of a nightly and mechanical orgy that was going on constantly. It seemed to me that if you showed up naked, did a few jerks every now and then, and then danced away, then that was all that was needed.

My wife didn't make it as a model in Hollywood. But neither did her friends.

[jcmaine72]

118. Huge K&R.

I don't understand how any genuine progressive who is against the sexual objectification of women could heap praise upon or even mourn the loss of this pig. Praising Hefner is little better than praising a dead pimp. Disgusting.

[Lazy Daisy]

119. May he find peace in death

as equally as all the women he exploited found in life. Let Karma measure his here after.

[NRaleighLiberal]

123. so, what is a "real man", anyway?

[Codeine]

124. You joined just to post that?

Go away now, kiddo.

[wryter2000]

143. Lordy

Look at the username.

[smirkymonkey]

168. I'm sure the reality is quite the opposite.

[wryter2000]

241. New user name

"message auto-removed."

[Floyd R. Turbo]

126. And what pray tell is your DI Username? 😏

[johnp3907]

130. Enjoy your stay.

[muriel_volestrangler]

135. "stakes were high, men were real men, women were real women, and ...

... small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri."

[Eliot Rosewater]

145. Misogynist, big time, real real bad actually

He was pretty good on race issues, but I wonder why he hated women so much.

We know for instance Johnny Carson had a terrible mom, was shitty to him and we know he treated women like shit in his personal life

Connections

[MineralMan]

175. Feh!

[vi5]

128. Really? The "ultimate" enemy of women?

I was no fan, but I'm sorry there are a more than a few men in the US and especially elsewhere deserving of that title. I don't agree with lauding the guy, and I was no fan. But I'd say that men who want to take away women's rights to make choices that are the best options for their lives and what they choose to pursue be it physical or otherwise are far worse and far more dangerous than Hefner.

[WoonTars]

142. Except not really...

Today's modern gop are entirely more dangerous, in real terms.

[k8conant]

144. May he rest in pieces...

[obamanut2012]

150. He was just a click above being a human trafficker

And sometimes, was below that click.

I don't believe in Hell, but if there is one.....

[obamanut2012]

154. There is a reason Bill Cosby liked the Mansio and Playboy parties

He knew he could get away with being a sexual predator there, because Hefner was one.

I am not anti porn, not that that makes a difference, but Hefner was beyond being a pornographer. He was a predator, and a predator enabler.

[Egnever]

162. Hyperbole much?

Fucking ridiculous.

Sometimes the crazy just oozes from this place.

[Locutusofborg]

170. Christy Hefner

Christie Ann Hefner (born November 8, 1952) is the former Playboy Enterprises Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. She stepped down from her position at Playboy in 2009. She has often worked with the progressive political organization Center for American Progress. Their site describes her as having "long been involved in electing progressive candidates, advancing women, First Amendment issues and advancing treatment for people with HIV/AIDS."

Hefner was born in Chicago, Illinois. She is the daughter of Mildred (Williams) and Hugh Hefner. She graduated from New Trier High School. She attended the National Music Camp at Interlochen during the summers from 1964 to 1969.
She graduated summa cum laude from Brandeis University with a bachelor's degree in English and American literature in 1974. She was elected to Phi Beta Kappa in her junior year.

On December 8, 2008, she announced her plans to step down as CEO of Playboy as of January 31, 2009. Hefner said that the election of Barack Obama as president had inspired her to give more time to charitable work, and that the decision to step down was her own. "Just as this country is embracing change in the form of new leadership, I have decided that now is the time to make changes in my own life as well," she said.

Hefner created the Hugh M. Hefner First Amendment Award in honor of her father, and has helped to raise $30 million to build the CORE Center in Chicago, the first outpatient facility in the Midwest for people with AIDS.--Wikipedia

[Raven]

174. Oh yes, he liberated women...

to become sex objects. He was a disgusting man.

[Loki Liesmith]

177. Oh god

[dubyadiprecession]

178. Hefner united feminist and evangelicals against him.

A strange, strange mix.

[Kaleva]

179. Author of article in OP is a transphobe

[Major Nikon]

182. It's already been pointed out, but doesn't seem to be much of a buzzkill

It's as if the voice of a bigot is OK, so long as they are saying what you want to hear.

[Kaleva]

184. There was a former member here who was a hard core feminist and transphobic

Using Julie Bindel as a source should be done at one's own peril.

[edbermac]

188. Wasn't sure what TERF meant.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=TERF

Isn't it mindboggling that the Royal College of Psychiatrists would invite a TERF like Julie Bindel to come talk at a study day on transgenderism and transsexuality? That's like inviting Fred Phelps to come deliver the keynote at a gay pride.

[RhodeIslandOne]

197. It's ironic

Pointing out Hefner's good points is completely irrelevant but mentioning Gail Dines bad ones is also irrelevant.

[joshcryer]

196. A certain group has returned here.

It's unfortunate, but what can you do.

[snooper2]

225. I wouldn't say "returned", have you checked out the HoF forum lately?

LOL

[Phentex]

237. It's been very quiet in there lately...

48 posts in the last 30 days. What is your point?

[Squinch]

299. Some here are thrilled that some of the feminist voices have been sent away.

Go figure.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

199. We have a problem of doing nuance well . See the circumcision wars.

On certain issues like Trump there is no room for nuance. He is just a bad guy and it is incumbent upon us to oppose everything he does. On other issues nuance is demanded. I stand foursquare against objectifying anyone. That being said men and women have been objectifying one another since time immemorial. Several posters have said Hefner created ideals for feminine beauty that women struggle to live up to and are damaged in the process in all kinds of ways. Ideals of feminine beauty and male handsomeness have always been around and men and women have struggled with them. See foot binding, corsets, and Charles Atlas exercise programs.

It's ironic. Playboy struggled because Hefner refused to follow Bob Guccione and Larry Flynt into publishing more graphic content. Both of them mocked the more genteel Hefner.

Hefner's legacy is complex. He is Neither saint nor Satan. Demand precedes supply. People, regardless of their gender or orientation, want to see naked people . They also want to see other people having sex.

[Yavin4]

229. "People, regardless of their gender or orientation, want to see naked people "

Since the beginning of time, this has been true. It's like Hefner invented adult content.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

231. They found pornographic drawings on the walls of the ruins of Pompeii.

I will just make some points sequentially

1) Objectification is wrong.
2) Hefner didn't invent it
3) As I said before his magazine suffered because he refused to follow Penthouse and Hustler in publishing more and more graphic content.
4) Playboy tried to eliminate all nudity, their sales slipped even further, and they had to go back to it.
5) His legacy is complex. He certainly didn't pave the way for Trump and Trumpism.

[oberliner]

202. The author of this piece is known for being transphobic

Among other things.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

221. Really ?

Bigotry sucks regardless of the target.

[oberliner]

222. Are you aware of the term "TERF" ?

That's what this author has been accused of being by some activists.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

223. I googled it. I would wish posters wouldn't bring the work of such authors here.

[Blue_Adept]

230. There are better articles that cover mostly the same points

Without giving people like the author of this article any space. It's disturbing to see her work brought here as it marginalizes the actual criticisms that can be justifiably leveled (and argued about).

[DemocratSinceBirth]

233. Hefner's legacy is complex. I see his detractors and proponents turning him into a caricature.

[Johnny2X2X]

228. Nothing Hef did helped women

Hefner harmed women and their causes for his whole life. The only sliver of good he did was help society break away from its puritan views on sexuality, but even that was distorted by misogyny.

We have a President that is a reflection of Hugh Hefner.

[Yavin4]

239. Was helping women his stated mission?

I don't think that it was.

[Johnny2X2X]

240. No, but people are trying to spin it that way

As he dies the press has tried to spin it like he was responsible for the sexual revolution. He hurt women's rights, not helped them. Women's sexual expression would look different today if not for Hefner. He was a creepy pig.

[Yavin4]

284. Whatever he did does not compare to what a majority of White women did to elect Trump

That group alone put Trump over the top.

[oberliner]

277. He fought for marriage equality before most politicians came around to support it

Including many prominent Democrats.

[Sgent]

303. Considering

he had pro equality essays published in the 50's, he predates just about every politician I know of.

[NNadir]

305. Yeah. He was a jerk for jerk offs, not much of a human being. His consumerist nightmare was...

Last edited Sat Sep 30, 2017, 05:55 AM - Edit history (1)

just as bad as his misogyny.

I confess that as a young man, I used to read his dumb ass magazine, but then my pimples cleared up and I worked hard to become something known as "a man."

Speaking of pimps, Theresa Carpenter's "Death of a Playmate," was one step along the way to waking me up and making me become a man.

It was beautifully written, in the hey day of the Village Voice, and it won Carpenter the Pulitzer Prize, which she certainly deserved.

In it, she covers the death of "Playmate of the Year" Dorothy Stratten at the hands of her estranged husband, Paul Snider, in a murder-suicide, an act he carried out after learning she was going to marry film director Peter Bogdanovich. Hefner was obsessed with having her become what no other playmate had become because of him and his adolescent fantasy magazine, a legitimate star.

I'll never forget the closing paragraphs comparing the three men in her life, Hefner, Snider, and Bogdanovich:

Whether or not Dorothy Stratten would have fulfilled her extravagant promise can’t be known. Her legacy will not be examined critically because it is really of no consequence. In the end Dorothy Stratten was less memorable for herself than for the yearnings she evoked; in Snider a lust for the new score; in Hefner a longing for a star; in Bogdanovich a desire for the eternal ingénue. She was a catalyst for a cycle of ambitions which revealed its players less wicked, perhaps, than pathetic.

As for Paul Snider, his body was returned to Vancouver in permanent exile from Hollywood. It was all to big for him. In that Elysium of dreams and deals, he had reached the limits of his class. His sin, his unforgivable sin, was being small-time.

"Less wicked than pathetic..."

Maybe. In the end, Hefner was that only that...pathetic.

[Squinch]

312. I was just thinking of her while I was reading all the posts that talk about how

all the women in porn are self-determining and choose to participate.

[whathehell]

323. THANK you, Niyad

for posting that incredible article.

I realize I'm late reading it in full, but it deserves commendation.

[Vinnie From Indy]

327. Ultimate enemy of women?

Meh, I can think of worse.

[JCMach1]

328. Thumbs down for the absolutist position... of course people

can do both good an ill.


My bottom-line... Is the world a better place overall, or a worse place because of Playboy and Hugh Hefner?

Slightly better= win

[Demsrule86]

329. Yeah it shows how far we need to go as women to protect our rights when supposed liberals on this

site defend a fake 'liberal' like Hef...he pretended to be this great civil rights person when it was popular and cool but was a woman hater and exploiter his entire life. Those standing up for him and saying he was some sort of progressive merely offend women...and are completely wrong. This is those making a stab at 'identity politics' which always means women's rights.

[niyad]

333. you are absolutely correct.