I have the habit of editing and re-editing my posts. Takes me a few tries to get my thoughts in line
I understand, completely.
I think the first porn mag I ever saw belonged to a friend’s brother, but I don’t really remember; certainly not as well as I remember the first porno I ever saw, starring Nina Hartley.
were designed to enrich the intellect of the magazine’s male readers.
I’m not sure I get why this is a bad thing. M.A. wins. The readers of the magazine have enriched intellects… nobody got maimed or wounded or died… sounds fairly good from this distance in time and space.
Is this the genetic fallacy, where because someone is a jerk, even the good they do isn’t good because they did it?
Also, pretty sure Margaret Atwood, among other things, was smart enough to mind her own choices when it came to choosing to publish there. I sure trust her too, I really think it’s fantastic that a feminist second guesses her on it while seeing cynicism in them them them.
Overplayed, I guess is my opinion. I’d never call him a saint, but he did some good stuff. Another wonderful example is the publisher of a competetive magazine to Hefners, without whom we’d still have the media interpreting the First Amendment the way they did in the 60s.
Any of us can do good. We don’t have to have the right intention. Unless purity in others is something important, which, again, ironic from a feminist, right??
Hef makes the ladies cray cray. I think it’s a riot. Just ignore him, if you can.
I also grew up in the age of the internet, but I still encountered Playboy and other soft core magazines while babysitting at a neighbor’s house.
Myself as well.
I think the links I posted explained things quite well.
Unless purity in others is something important, which, again, ironic from a feminist, right??
What?
Hef makes the ladies cray cray. I think it’s a riot.
I’m sure you do. But I generally don’t find other people’s discomfort and dismay amusing.
Just ignore him, if you can.
I’ll do as I please, thanks.
were designed to enrich the intellect of the magazine’s male readers.
I’m not sure I get why this is a bad thing. M.A. wins. The readers of the magazine have enriched intellects… nobody got maimed or wounded or died… sounds fairly good from this distance in time and space.
What you’re missing is that the targeted enriched readers were men.
It’s like you don’t get some part of a sign implicitly posted on the Playboy Clubhouse door that says, “Girls not welcome, except on our circumscribed, demeaning terms.”
Stay on topic, not your feelings about one anothers feelings about the topic.
That would have stood so much better if you didn’t go and like the following “sniping” comment.
That’s far more in line than what we removed. I thought it was toning down!
His ideal ‘barbie doll’ aesthetic was indeed boring and cliched…
Was it, though? I’ve always felt like the barbie doll aesthetic became boring and cliché because that’s what Hef pushed. Not that it’s something that I look at a lot, but you made me wonder and I tried looking up some pre-playboy pinups: very few of them are what I’d call barbie doll.
Which actually brings up an interesting part of his legacy: if playboy really was all or mostly girls like that, he made porn way more boring and homogeneous.
Calmer threads will prevail.