>>>>It hopefully encourages thinking and discussion as to message possibilities.
(In this case, even in death, I have nothing positive to say about the man).<<<<
And I am grateful to you for that.
You get it.
If America's ideas of sexuality needed to be reformed -- and they did -- Hugh Hefner was not the one to do it and Playboy was not the vehicle for doing it.
America's sexual nightmare only got worse especially for women.
I agree with that more than I can say. IMO he was a slime ball that made a fortune off of beautiful women that had few if any options. I always thought he was a disgusting pig for doing that. I'm glad he's off the planet. I just hope his replacement isn't worse.
You're presuming god's hands are tied and he must choose one.
I would argue that of the two, Hefner has done far more damage to far more people as his actions directly influenced how all of society views all women. Monson's impact seems to be limited to Mormon widows.
God he was despicable, despite how they spun him in that TV show.
Is it the man or the work, or both, that offends you?
The man may have been a pig, but plenty of pigs have made outsized contributions to our culture. None of us like knowing about MLK's philandering. His swinish sex life does not diminish one bit the work and example that he created.
As for Hefner's work. One of the most dangerous outcomes of Anerica's puritan founding is the taboo on the nude form. "Official America", for lack of a better term, pretended that Janet Jsckson's "nipple-gate" was an actual problem, a moral crisis. Thank Heff it was all pretend.
The nude form is one of the most beautiful shapes that our eyes may behold. Making nudity taboo has had a disasterous affect on the American psyche. Releasing the female form from a puritan taboo, which was underwritten by shame and misogyny, was a work well worth doing. I thank Hugh Hefner for doing that.
I think Hef was indeed a pig. And he didn't promote female nudity with high motives to fight America's Puritan streak, he did it to make money and get laid, and to promote the idea of women being subservient sex objects to men.
Yet...I can't help but root just a little bit for those who thumb their noses at "convention" and unthinking "morality." Those who shake things up. Those who challenge our traditions and make us think. Hef did that.
ificouldhietokolob Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And he didn't promote female nudity with high motives to fight > America's Puritan streak, he did it to make money > and get laid
The motive is irrelevant. It's the work that counts.
> and to promote the idea of women > being subservient sex objects to men.
First, document this please. How do you know that he set out to do this precise thing?
But really, that is how a Playboy Centrefold makes you feel, like women are subservient sex objects? That is certainly not anything like what I feel. Perhaps your reaction to a Centrefold is more about you and says nothing about Heff.
Human Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The motive is irrelevant. It's the work that > counts.
We'll have to agree to disagree there. 'Cause I disagree strongly.
> But really, that is how a Playboy Centrefold makes > you feel, like women are subservient sex objects? > That is certainly not anything like what I feel. > Perhaps your reaction to a Centrefold is more > about you and says nothing about Heff.
Right back at ya. Interesting that you dismiss my feelings, yet consider your own as "defining." Hmm.
ificouldhietokolob Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Human Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > > We'll have to agree to disagree there. 'Cause I > disagree strongly.
I can agree to that.
> Interesting that you dismiss my > feelings, yet consider your own as "defining." > Hmm.
But I didn't dismiss your feelings. In fact I asserted that your feelings are defining of you. But I do disagree with your feelings in the sense that they are the furthest from my own.
I'm happy to agree to disagree about how it feels to behold a Playboy Centrefold.
Human Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > First, document this please. How do you know that > he set out to do this precise thing?
“Well, if we hadn't had the Wright brothers, there would still be airplanes. If there hadn't been an Edison, there would still be electric lights. And if there hadn't been a Hefner, we'd still have sex. But maybe we wouldn't be enjoying it as much. So the world would be a little poorer. Come to think of it, so would some of my relatives.” —Hefner in an interview for Playboy in 1974.
“I've had a bachelor party for 30 years. Why do I need one now?” —Hefner the night before his marriage to Kimberley Conrad in 1989
“My best pick-up line is ‘My name is Hugh Hefner.'” —Hefner to Esquire in 2007.
“How could I possibly know [how many women he slept with]? Over a thousand, I’m sure. There were chunks of my life when I was married, and when I was married I never cheated. But I made up for it when I wasn’t married. You have to keep your hand in.” — Esquire, 2013
“Everybody, if they’ve got their head on straight, wants to be a sexual object, among other things. They want to be attractive. Otherwise, what a sad and pathetic life. To really live a worthwhile life is to be attracted to and attractive to other people.” — Esquire, 2007
"[in]a 2010 interview with Vanity Fair, when told by the interviewer that feminists believe he treats women as objects, he answered with, “They are objects!”
The last two somewhat go to your point, and those remarks make me uncomfortable.
But you're a long way from demonstrating that he actually set out to, on purpose, encourage the idea that women are only subservient sex objects for men.
Human Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But you're a long way from demonstrating that he > actually set out to, on purpose, encourage the > idea that women are only subservient sex objects > for men.
So many thoughts about Hugh Hefner... some I agree with, and obviously, some I don't, JMO. Regardless, here are two interesting and informative articles with opposing viewpoints:
Hefner lived a life that a lot of men secretly desired. There is also a contingent of woman that were willing to use there looks to get ahead in life. Hefner had a product that people wanted or wanted to participate in. I only read Playboy for the articles...
I'm not taking any position on this topic, but I confess I am a little surprised to see so much disapproval of a man and his liberal works, which are after all repulsive to the LDS church, and often desirable to those who have left the church and are trying to establish a new lifestyle. I have read a lot of encouragement over the years on this board given to new exmos as they test the waters of sexual freedom and license. I haven't read much condemnation of posters who admit that they are participating in a promiscuous and casually sexual lifestyle. Which is very much in the style of Hefner and his magazine etc..
Porn is most often defended, approved of, joked about and boasted about on this board, IME.
I don't understand Steve Benson? Was/ is he TBM still? I perceive him to be a puritanical Mormon by his disdain for Hef? Has he never looked at the magazine ever? It did have good articles and jokes. It just seems like he really could not stand the guy? I think there are underlying issues here.
I am missing something here Help me understand please.
I don't know what to think of a guy who was/is not interested in seeing nekkid women? OH, dam. I am sooo sorry if you are gay.
I am new here remember. I have read Steve Benson's bio here so I do know he is somebody to listen to and reckon with. Just don't understand this one thing? I sound like Columbo.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2017 09:36AM by cutekitty.
What fascinates me is how many people who are probably feminists, that don't want women to have the right to choose.
Did Hefner force any of those women to do whatever they did?
I assume they were paid. Why is it demeaning for women to be paid for work? Why is it assumed they didn't want to earn money?
Why isn't it demeaning for men to have to pay for Playboy? We're the ones having to pay for the magazine and hide it under our mattress or wherever, and be shamed if we're caught with it.
Why do so many consider anything sexual to be disgusting? Why is it disgusting for Hefner to have had so many women? Is it disgusting for a man to have too much money?
If you want disgusting, I have relatives in the septic and sewer business who have taken blasts of sewage in the face when things didn't go right.
Why aren't those men protesting their objectification? Guess it never occurred to us that if we were being paid for a disgusting service, it wasn't demeaning.
My SIL was in a hole fixing a woman's sewer line and asked that she not flush the toilet until they were done. She flushed it anyway, and he got to bathe in her crap. When asked why she did it, she said she thought they were done. Despite that ten foot wide hole in her yard. No apologies. That is what you call objectification. Men were there to satisfy her needs, and she didn't like the inconvenience she was put through.
So men across the land are doing dirty, nasty jobs to keep women happy, keeping the power on and the food on the shelves, and gasoline in cars and roads and roofs, etc, etc. They also happen to like looking at women, but if they do it they are told it is the women who are being objectified and oppressed.
The only way I can make sense out of this nonsense is that many women don't like competition. Which is why they shame certain women as whores or sluts if they are too good looking or too sexual or expose too much of their body.
In the business world, would be nice if we could just shame our competition and prevent their ability to advertise or whatever.
I realize some women can never compete with the best looking women, so perhaps they are angry. Welcome to the real world. Some of us will never be billionaires or tall, dark and handsome, as the pornographic romance novels and movies show.
@Free Man I've got to agree with you, I don't understand some of the comments. I had an ex-TBM that used sex to get what she wanted (I wonder how many TBM and ex-TBM woman acted like this). Worked ok when she was younger. Nobody likes to talk about sex but most of us are thinking about it. Why do all these high ranking politicians and movie stars have young hot woman? Because they can. Most men figured this out by high school. (I was in the have not nerd crowd) I certainly don't think Hefner was a pig and not sure what that even means. I equate it to a common quote I say when someone calls a woman a slut. My definition of a slut is someone that is getting more sex than you are.