In my recent post, word count precluded me from mention that I still have that initial copy of Playboy I purchased in January of 1964. I also have every copy that has been published since then. Some around the 80's, I realized that there might be future value in my collection. With that in mind, I took out a second subscription to the magazine. One copy was for reading, and the other was for collecting purposes. Therefore, the collectible editions have basically been untouched by human hands. They are all in Mylar sleeves and 12 issue library cases. Since I have duplicates, I put my total collection at around 1000 copies of the magazine. They are worth a substantial amount of money.
6
16th century Italy had Titian, 20th century America, Playboy. The Renaissance delighted in erotic, idealized nudes--male and female--as did the ancient Greco-Roman world. Why shouldn't we? Simple fact: people like looking at good-looking naked people. One of the great, delightful legacies of papal Rome is the abundance of beautiful naked marble bodies adorning fountains and populating gardens in the city.
9
I find most of the comments strange. It is know that men are excited by sexually stimulating sights. It is not necessary to "know" women or to appreciate their intelligence to find them sexually exciting. It is unlikely that no amount of changes, except perhaps biological ones, will change that. It does not mean that in any sort of relationship that men cannot appreciate women in all their complexity and talents. Jennifer Weiner does go down the anti-male route so common today and recognizes reality.
5
"...sex is the ultimate expression of love and intimacy between two consenting and financially independent adults in their 30s."
Let's parse this.
"Financially independent"--a Marxist idea!! Without independence, sex--for (mature) women--is mostly sex trading (strings attached); sometimes sex work (grin and bear it)--even intra-marital sexwork (dutiful) and trade (for presents, indulgences).
Independence liberates sex from work and trading--permitting pure sex-play--more like adolescent sex--due to raging hormones instead of trades for dinner and tickets--for starters--on up to trophy wives.
"Adults in their 30's"--Tongue-In-Cheek--hyper parental anxiety--due to memories about feel good, raging hormone sex. Pure giveaway sex--no strings attached--except maybe "Don't kiss and tell."
"Ultimate expression of love and intimacy" --more TIC--wishful thinking--about males--thus the ultimate string attached--the license to play. (Catholics limit licenses to reproduction).
But (seriously) sex, even sex-play is obviously more risky for girls/women. Wise ones worry about due care and not just "smokin' hot"--which is in the eye (!) of the beholder.
So risky that the desire for sex play must be very great--otherwise why would girls/women do it? Thus the folk tale that women enjoy it more than men--even if men seem more persistent. Quantity/frequency does not measure quality/intensity. But--How is comparative intensity measured?
But Yes--Playboy was innocent--now.
Let's parse this.
"Financially independent"--a Marxist idea!! Without independence, sex--for (mature) women--is mostly sex trading (strings attached); sometimes sex work (grin and bear it)--even intra-marital sexwork (dutiful) and trade (for presents, indulgences).
Independence liberates sex from work and trading--permitting pure sex-play--more like adolescent sex--due to raging hormones instead of trades for dinner and tickets--for starters--on up to trophy wives.
"Adults in their 30's"--Tongue-In-Cheek--hyper parental anxiety--due to memories about feel good, raging hormone sex. Pure giveaway sex--no strings attached--except maybe "Don't kiss and tell."
"Ultimate expression of love and intimacy" --more TIC--wishful thinking--about males--thus the ultimate string attached--the license to play. (Catholics limit licenses to reproduction).
But (seriously) sex, even sex-play is obviously more risky for girls/women. Wise ones worry about due care and not just "smokin' hot"--which is in the eye (!) of the beholder.
So risky that the desire for sex play must be very great--otherwise why would girls/women do it? Thus the folk tale that women enjoy it more than men--even if men seem more persistent. Quantity/frequency does not measure quality/intensity. But--How is comparative intensity measured?
But Yes--Playboy was innocent--now.
5
This article set me to thinking about the Playboy culture I remember growing up in a small rural community (I'm 61 now). Our local drugstore/soda fountain/pharmacy had a two-tiered magazine rack and a bay window beside it. My youngest brother used to grab a Playboy, climb into the window seat and proceed to unleash the centerfold. Might I add that he was about 8 or 9 years old at the time. The point is that we all thought it was funny--myself, my mother, the patrons of the drugstore and passersby. In high school you would see the ubiquitous dog-eared copy being passed around in class and during study hall (especially study hall).
My college roommate was an art major, and she would buy them to study the airbrush techniques, which was a revelation to me because I thought maybe one of the reasons these young ladies were picked to pose was because their pubic hair looked like spun sugar. I enjoyed reading them and remember the 1975(?) interview with Mel Brooks. Actually I read it again not too long ago and still find it funny.
But I digress. My point is I don't have one. After climbing out of the way-back machine I can only say that until today I hadn't thought about Playboy magazine for many years. But something else I remembered was that at some point it paled in comparison to Penthouse. And don't forget Hustler!
My college roommate was an art major, and she would buy them to study the airbrush techniques, which was a revelation to me because I thought maybe one of the reasons these young ladies were picked to pose was because their pubic hair looked like spun sugar. I enjoyed reading them and remember the 1975(?) interview with Mel Brooks. Actually I read it again not too long ago and still find it funny.
But I digress. My point is I don't have one. After climbing out of the way-back machine I can only say that until today I hadn't thought about Playboy magazine for many years. But something else I remembered was that at some point it paled in comparison to Penthouse. And don't forget Hustler!
3
She imagines herself not allowing her children to have sex unless they make their own money, which is the most irrelevant point that could have been brought up. And the thing with they being at least 30 in order for their mother to grant them the right to have sex is just meaningless to its bits, not to mention unrealistic. Extremely superficial article -unexpected of NYTimes- with an easily noticed pseudo-intellectual flavour. Mr. Hefner would have been proud, the feminists who do actually agree on a many reasonable things on the other hand wouldn't.
3
Culture vs. biology...
I have had endless discussions on what we try to accomplish by custom and by law in matters of sex, and I (personally) cannot escape the fact the we are, in the end, creatures who have evolved our sexual behavior as much from biological imperatives as from the norms of decency we set as how to behave around the opposite sex.
I highly doubt we males will ever not be aroused by a beautiful woman; and I highly doubt most women aspire to the same standard of beauty. If that is the case, as I suspect it to be, Playboy and its successors will be around for a long time to come, good, bad, or indifferent.
It is always going to be so, as it has been for thousands of years. As Robin Williams said, God only gave the human male so much blood....the trick is to properly direct it to the brain.
I have had endless discussions on what we try to accomplish by custom and by law in matters of sex, and I (personally) cannot escape the fact the we are, in the end, creatures who have evolved our sexual behavior as much from biological imperatives as from the norms of decency we set as how to behave around the opposite sex.
I highly doubt we males will ever not be aroused by a beautiful woman; and I highly doubt most women aspire to the same standard of beauty. If that is the case, as I suspect it to be, Playboy and its successors will be around for a long time to come, good, bad, or indifferent.
It is always going to be so, as it has been for thousands of years. As Robin Williams said, God only gave the human male so much blood....the trick is to properly direct it to the brain.
5
Somewhere between Kat and Susan and Thelma and Louise there was a phase where feminists sought to out-boy the boys?
2
Playboy is not a cause of our society's current state and to say that it is overstates its influence. It is merely a window into what was/is already there. Playboy would not have experienced its rapid growth into a publishing/entertainment empire if it hadn't tapped into an previously existing undercurrent. Blaming Playboy for rape and objectification of women is oversimplifying a problem of society. Rape and prostitution existed long before Playboy published nudity in the 1950's. Skirts had been getting shorter since the Victorian era in the 1800's. Pornography had existed since moving pictures were invented. Playboy just took a quantum leap and moved it into the mainstream. If Hefner hadn't done it, someone else eventually would have.
7
When I was 19, 20 I briefly tried to be cool, like Playboy, right. Bought nice clothes, knocked myself out to get booze, even smoked a pipe! But it didn't get me laid. Was I doing something wrong? Somewhere along the way I figured out it was just a big con, as in consumption. The playboy is just a high-functioning consumer of clothes, food, wine, entertainment, - and a consumer of women. You gotta buy the right stuff.
Well, Playboy may be moving on, but there is no letup in the use of women's bodies to sell stuff. The con goes on.
Well, Playboy may be moving on, but there is no letup in the use of women's bodies to sell stuff. The con goes on.
16
I think many here are missing the point. Ms. Warner is not seriously longing for the dirty-old Playboy. She longs for a time when this the dirty-old magazine was dangerous, forbidden, and not in open sight.
She longs for an age of innocence; or, at least, a time more innocent than our age of instant porn. I do, too.
She longs for an age of innocence; or, at least, a time more innocent than our age of instant porn. I do, too.
60
It's good that some people are longing for the innocence of Playboy.
Despite all the implants and the airbrushing, it offered a relatively natural and pleasing view of sexually-alluring women.
Though there may be other sources of sexual images online, how many are more vile than beautiful? How many are free of computer viruses and malware?
Playboy's move away from nudity will probably be the undoing of the magazine altogether. But what's replacing Playboy is unlikely to be more respectful of women, or safer, or more enlightening, or more beautiful. Quite the opposite.
Despite all the implants and the airbrushing, it offered a relatively natural and pleasing view of sexually-alluring women.
Though there may be other sources of sexual images online, how many are more vile than beautiful? How many are free of computer viruses and malware?
Playboy's move away from nudity will probably be the undoing of the magazine altogether. But what's replacing Playboy is unlikely to be more respectful of women, or safer, or more enlightening, or more beautiful. Quite the opposite.
10
Yet another feminist diatribe against human sexuality.
What a dainty essay. For a better look at what's going on, I suggest reading Chris Hedges' work. He has been investigating hard core pornography and what he found would shock many adults, not just 10 year old boys.
5
They will probably see fewer artificially pumped up breasts than were shown in Playboy after the 1960s.
1
I wonder if expanded economic opportunity for women would decrease the market for
nude photos and sexual abuse of women? Would there be fewer poor women, fewer who may be tempted to cross the line in order to put bread, or tuition, on the table?
There is a little known statistic that bares (no pun) repeating: As income for women
goes up, the birthrate goes down. Why is that?
What if our political leaders and our religious leaders actually did the hard, pragmatic,
work of strengthening families? Would there be fewer runaway children to seek the
fictitious care of predators?
Would a return to economic opportunity in the middle class strengthen families?
Sexualized evil will always be present. Playboy didn’t cause it. It will always be there in some form. But, are we really doing our best to strengthen families for everybody?
nude photos and sexual abuse of women? Would there be fewer poor women, fewer who may be tempted to cross the line in order to put bread, or tuition, on the table?
There is a little known statistic that bares (no pun) repeating: As income for women
goes up, the birthrate goes down. Why is that?
What if our political leaders and our religious leaders actually did the hard, pragmatic,
work of strengthening families? Would there be fewer runaway children to seek the
fictitious care of predators?
Would a return to economic opportunity in the middle class strengthen families?
Sexualized evil will always be present. Playboy didn’t cause it. It will always be there in some form. But, are we really doing our best to strengthen families for everybody?
1
Playboy sold images closer to art, something like the naked, wooden statue of female my parents had on display in the 70’s. I too saw a stack of Playboys in my dad's closet and my brothers room, for a brief time. In the 80’s I saw other types of porn in magazines a boyfriend collected.
A few decades later and a less innocent type of porn pervades the internet and also our culture. Teenagers experiment, and parents wonder about the effects of a brief visit to a certain website, no one can deny the internet is a gateway, and no well meaning parents wish their child ends up with a porn problem.
A lot of porn isn’t even generated from within the porn industry; images of sexual extremes reflect our own behavior. Should this be a concern? As anyone who has visit Your Mind on Porn and other websites devoted to porn-addiction, the effects on the brain are surprisingly contradictory and confusing.
Someday if there is a national dialogue, it might also include a discussion about adults who knowingly upload photos and videos online for everyone to view. Young people are not behind us on this.
And when it comes to extremes, drugs and alcohol are usually involved, for both viewers and those taking part, masking the pain of wishing there was something better, something truly real and pleasureable.
A few decades later and a less innocent type of porn pervades the internet and also our culture. Teenagers experiment, and parents wonder about the effects of a brief visit to a certain website, no one can deny the internet is a gateway, and no well meaning parents wish their child ends up with a porn problem.
A lot of porn isn’t even generated from within the porn industry; images of sexual extremes reflect our own behavior. Should this be a concern? As anyone who has visit Your Mind on Porn and other websites devoted to porn-addiction, the effects on the brain are surprisingly contradictory and confusing.
Someday if there is a national dialogue, it might also include a discussion about adults who knowingly upload photos and videos online for everyone to view. Young people are not behind us on this.
And when it comes to extremes, drugs and alcohol are usually involved, for both viewers and those taking part, masking the pain of wishing there was something better, something truly real and pleasureable.
1
I happened to see a couple of early Playboy centerfolds pasted to the wall of the head in a former Antarctic research station. The young ladies are photographed from behind, standing, looking over their shoulders, wearing sheer full length nightgowns, leaving what men lust for unseen, like the far side of the Moon.
2
Innocence gets shattered. It's the way of the world and always a bit of a shock.
The internet now - ancient Roman art showing people copulating with animals/threesomes/oral sex then - everything old is new again.
What leaves a bad taste in my mouth is Jennifer Weiner's 'joke' about her daughters virginal (fingers and legs crossed!) until 30+ daughters.
Such a demeaning way to write about your daughters.
The internet now - ancient Roman art showing people copulating with animals/threesomes/oral sex then - everything old is new again.
What leaves a bad taste in my mouth is Jennifer Weiner's 'joke' about her daughters virginal (fingers and legs crossed!) until 30+ daughters.
Such a demeaning way to write about your daughters.
4
Great column as always from Ms. Weiner (And people, wake up -- her "no sex until 30s" admonition to her daughters was obviously tongue in cheek.)
But I was intrigued by the writer's tacit admission that the feminist orthodoxy is in fact a shifting standard that can't -- and never has been able to -- account for the range of sexual activities acceptable to or desired by women.
From my own observation, some women like this but not that; others like that but not this; others like both or various other things besides. No prescriptive ideology like feminism (or fundamentalist religions of ANY stripe) can ever account for what remains an intensely PERSONAL form of self-expression: sexuality, and the circumstances in which it becomes manifest.
The personal is, well, personal ... not political. And it will be ever thus.
But I was intrigued by the writer's tacit admission that the feminist orthodoxy is in fact a shifting standard that can't -- and never has been able to -- account for the range of sexual activities acceptable to or desired by women.
From my own observation, some women like this but not that; others like that but not this; others like both or various other things besides. No prescriptive ideology like feminism (or fundamentalist religions of ANY stripe) can ever account for what remains an intensely PERSONAL form of self-expression: sexuality, and the circumstances in which it becomes manifest.
The personal is, well, personal ... not political. And it will be ever thus.
11
Playboy paved the way for hardcore exploitation of women and children by the sex industry. This is its legacy.
5
This author seems to clearly separate herself from "the feminists." Which highlights the fact that she really doesn't understand feminism at all.
2
PB is making the decision because of economics and will be gone in a few years. NO ONE actually reads PB, just Hef trying to be relevant.
2
The "sexual revolution" -- a sad affair, really, didn't leap full-grown from Zeus' head like Athena. It metastasized from the mainstreaming of porn culture led by Playboy itself. When sanctimonious twits like Jimmy Carter stooped to agree to be interviewed in Playboy's pages, he set back dignity for women far more than even Larry Flynt's degraded bilge-circus, which at least has the virtue of being unambiguously marginalized. Why this is difficult to understand, I don't know. Maybe our self-imposed dumbing down didn't stop with the centerfolds.
5
you know, the good old days were not that good. men can be worse than pigs. they could be and were voracious rapists in times of war and civil breakdown. but we have come a little way, baby.
in any case, the internet genie is out of the bottle, pornography (like prostitution) will never go away, pubic hair is passe, and playboy seems near bankruptcy. it's best to deal with the present situation the best that you can instead of pining for an wholesome innocence that never was.
in any case, the internet genie is out of the bottle, pornography (like prostitution) will never go away, pubic hair is passe, and playboy seems near bankruptcy. it's best to deal with the present situation the best that you can instead of pining for an wholesome innocence that never was.
9
What an absurd byline: Longing for the Innocence of Playboy
What we had with Mr. Hefner was a sly old flesh peddler huckster disguised with sophistry and crass "philosophy".
What we had with Mr. Hefner was a sly old flesh peddler huckster disguised with sophistry and crass "philosophy".
18
You don't have to turn on a computer to get all the porn you want on TV. The gratuitous addition of adding sex to every television show means you have to lock down your TV. Game of Thrones and Girls come to mind. There is nothing interesting about see someone pee on TV. I remember being in the kitchen cooking and my 12 year old was watching regular television and every second word was blow job (and I had parental controls on) and we got into a huge argument, because he wouldn't change the channel and seemed unconcerned that his mother found this offensive. And then we have the other porn that has entered our culture by way of Islamist extremists, where we're treated to murders on videos. The more you see something the more you become de-sensitized. I long for the old days when you could sit down with your family and watch a show together and romance rather than the actual sex act was featured more prominently. I glad my children grew up before this cynical age.
11
"I explain that sex is the ultimate expression of love and intimacy between two consenting and financially independent adults in their 30s."
In all likelihood they'll be having sex long before that, and in all likelihood, they know that already. A dumb lie like this will just damage your credibility.
In all likelihood they'll be having sex long before that, and in all likelihood, they know that already. A dumb lie like this will just damage your credibility.
2
Apparently Eli B (and a lot of others posting comments) don't recognize irony (or perhaps it's hyperbole) when they see it.
3
Having grown up in the 60's and being a woman with three grown adult daughters who were once teenagers, I don't see one thing to miss about Playboy. Sorry.
We can always find "something worse" to sort of state our story for the already not so great, no matter what. I wouldn't then (60's) and I wouldn't now call Playboy an exhibit of innocent naked ladies. And I hope my daughters wouldn't see it that way either, my granddaughter either.
And no, I'm not a prude. Just a regular woman who still thinks women have been and are still being exploited. "There could be worse" is not an excuse.
We can always find "something worse" to sort of state our story for the already not so great, no matter what. I wouldn't then (60's) and I wouldn't now call Playboy an exhibit of innocent naked ladies. And I hope my daughters wouldn't see it that way either, my granddaughter either.
And no, I'm not a prude. Just a regular woman who still thinks women have been and are still being exploited. "There could be worse" is not an excuse.
14
@Mima,
No need to say sorry! I remember that playboy not only made me feel uncomfortable but also angry; this 10 years later than you.
No need to say sorry! I remember that playboy not only made me feel uncomfortable but also angry; this 10 years later than you.
3
"...love and intimacy between two consenting adults... in their 30s"?! 30s? Now there you might just have placed the line a bit too far.
1
Seemed to me to be a humorous bit of self-mockery in this line.
4
Playboy and Hugh Hefner brought fantasy and the beauty of the feminine form to the world.
At first it was shocking and regarded as perhaps dirty or rude but later it was a magazine that could be left out exposed to all and sundry unlike Penthouse which was more blatant.
We were either becoming more hardened to seeing unclothed women or being more mature and realized women were indeed as beautiful as God made them and many became fantasy figures, girls of our dreams, as was Marilyn to millions.
To some a sitting, or lying, posed for Playboy was like a certificate of glamour or sexiness or both, and men loved the pictures.
As a photographer I loved the photographs and admired and envied the photographers taking those glamour shots.
Trying myself with fully clothed lasses of the girl next door category I found that the duplication of the poses and end product was no where near the standard of the Playboy artists. Yes it was not just the glamour gals, but the photographic and touch up, plus make up skills of the team at Playboy
that created the fantasy that the ordinary guy with a Kodak camera could not recreate.
Looking beyond the model and the pose there was a lot of art and creation and I say this at the risk of being ridiculed.
But I know mine is just another aspect of looking at Playboy, many might have bought the article for the articles.
I wish it luck for the future but cannot imagine it succeeding because Playboy today has to echo yesterday.
STAN CHUN
Wellington.NZ.
At first it was shocking and regarded as perhaps dirty or rude but later it was a magazine that could be left out exposed to all and sundry unlike Penthouse which was more blatant.
We were either becoming more hardened to seeing unclothed women or being more mature and realized women were indeed as beautiful as God made them and many became fantasy figures, girls of our dreams, as was Marilyn to millions.
To some a sitting, or lying, posed for Playboy was like a certificate of glamour or sexiness or both, and men loved the pictures.
As a photographer I loved the photographs and admired and envied the photographers taking those glamour shots.
Trying myself with fully clothed lasses of the girl next door category I found that the duplication of the poses and end product was no where near the standard of the Playboy artists. Yes it was not just the glamour gals, but the photographic and touch up, plus make up skills of the team at Playboy
that created the fantasy that the ordinary guy with a Kodak camera could not recreate.
Looking beyond the model and the pose there was a lot of art and creation and I say this at the risk of being ridiculed.
But I know mine is just another aspect of looking at Playboy, many might have bought the article for the articles.
I wish it luck for the future but cannot imagine it succeeding because Playboy today has to echo yesterday.
STAN CHUN
Wellington.NZ.
3
Be careful what you wish for...
5
'...with accompanying boyfriends to strip clubs...'
I never got this.
Why would any woman want to go with her boyfriend to a strip club and watch him be aroused by another woman, who looks a lot better than she does?
Would the boyfriend be willing to do the opposite with her?
Creepily self abasing, similar to women pretending to be bisexual and kissing women in front of men, because that is what men like to think, not because the woman herself is interested in that.
I never got this.
Why would any woman want to go with her boyfriend to a strip club and watch him be aroused by another woman, who looks a lot better than she does?
Would the boyfriend be willing to do the opposite with her?
Creepily self abasing, similar to women pretending to be bisexual and kissing women in front of men, because that is what men like to think, not because the woman herself is interested in that.
22
This man (Hefner) has the dubious honor of helping degrade women and bringing unbridled hedonsim to its depraved beginnings.
He is partly responsible for the ideology of today that has produced the latest statistics of one out of three teenage girls being pregnant.
In response to the ‘great’ articles in the magazine:
So you separate the good articles from the pornographic photos? That was Hef's marketing strategy!
They do the same thing in the movies. They make a great film but put in parts that deal with the prurient interests of the viewing public. That is how they destroy morals and decency. Take a look around you at the low-level of American "culture." Now even opera singers go on stage naked for their supposedly sophisticated and tony audience.
Do the men who view these Playboy photos separate them from them the real you or do they see you as a bimbo plaything like the featherbrain girls who pose or work for the magazine?
3
Anything that shocks will eventually devolve, by the sheer weight of time, into nostalgia.
At least with a magazine there was still the "danger" of being in the proximity of actually paper and text, and you still had to do the "heavy lifting" on your own if the pictures were to produce the desired effect.
Parents will try and describe the "download" to children twenty years from now, and their kids blink, changing portals while simultaneously rolling their eyes.
At least with a magazine there was still the "danger" of being in the proximity of actually paper and text, and you still had to do the "heavy lifting" on your own if the pictures were to produce the desired effect.
Parents will try and describe the "download" to children twenty years from now, and their kids blink, changing portals while simultaneously rolling their eyes.
3
Any MAN that bought Playboy JUST for the PICTURES....wasn't really a man....What made Playboy cool was the stories and interviews..I mean no disrespect to Miss Weiner...but '' I can't get him to tell me what he saw,'' my friend said. ''I'm sure it was awful,'' I'm sure it was, too....Now you both have kids = you both had sex = how awful was that...? Plus studies have been done women have been ask if the chance were there would they do Playboy...more then half said yes ether for the money the fame or both..Miss Weiner did you miss the boat..?
1
It simply is not possibly for a rape to be a woman's "fault", to any degree. Rape is a definition of a man's behavior -- action taken in the absence of explicit consent -- not a woman's. So she's drunk, so she's wearing a short skirt, so she's leaning on you and giving a look that might be inviting. None of these things assign to her a speck of liability for YOUR act of forcing sex on her without consent. You are not a wild animal or an avalanche -- you can't be provoked to a state where you are outside of human control.
Chrissie Hynde should be ashamed of herself, not for being raped, but for supporting the dilution of blame that so many rapists use in their defense.
Chrissie Hynde should be ashamed of herself, not for being raped, but for supporting the dilution of blame that so many rapists use in their defense.
12
As a young, well, not so young anymore male, I grew up seeing my first naked woman from a playboy brought to the boys locker room for all of us to gaze at. That is what Playboy represented to me, something to gaze at quietly, somewhere secret, not to tuck under my arm to read on the subway. And that was what sex was at that time, something to think about and look at, but not something tangible, not something vivid or real as pornography is today. Now, I'm no prude anti-porno crusader, but men today need to understand that just because in the porno they watched a smile meant "come up for some coffee and sex" what it means in real life is more than likely, "can't believe he thought that shirt went with those pants."
34
Oh for goodness' sake that old chestnut 'What do feminists want?' I suppose in your next column you'll be asking 'What do women want?' We're individuals not fembots. We're pretty articulate though and if asked will respond in actual language.
8
National Geographic was great. It had articles about fascinating people in Africa, the Amazon jungle, and the South Pacific. As a young kid I learned so much about the world. It was also the only place I saw tribal females with no bra or top. My dad did not subscribe to Playboy. We had NO sex education in school. I did not think the women of the Yanomami people in the Amazon were "objectified" because they went bare chested. I also never thought that "Lady Justice" holding the scales at the dept of justice was disrespectful to women until a right wind US Attorney General covered her up with bed sheets!
1
I see, feminist are prudes
4
Ah yes. The never-ending longing for a kinder, gentler Golden Age.
3
The "acceptance" of porn and accompanying men to strip clubs...and the pornification of women's fashion (businesswomen wearing stiletto platform stripper shoes to work) is a result of the male-dominated backlash against the feminist movement, and women's game attempts to try their best to be "one of the guys" so they can get along and get ahead and not seem "strident." I'd rather seem strident, homestly. It's still a man's world, and women are seen through a man's lense, so you're either a raging feminazi or a "guy's girl" who rolls with the punches thrown by the patriarchy. Which is why you'll never see an article like this reminiscing about the good old days of sweetly posed naked men.
59
innocent? or a gateway to objectification?
4
I echo Jennifer Weiner's sentiments but for my sons--knowing that they grew up watching online porn long before they found their way to the real act or feelings for a girl. I fear the state of young males' sexuality is upside down: all is permitted online but they need to be impeccable about obtaining female consent as they attempt to court the real item. It must be confusing!
28
There was never anything innocent about Playboy and its exploitation of women. The fact that the nudity was much less explicit 30 or 40 years ago means nothing more than social mores of that time put different limits on acceptable nudity. Legs splayed came later.
My father didn't buy, subscribe to, or read the magazine. I was spared a dirty old man father with a hidden stash of Hefner's perversions.
But I did have a neighbor down the street who subscribed, and felt it was a rite of male passage to hand them to his sons. This family was my first exposure to Playboy, and at the age of 10 I instinctively knew there was something very wrong with it, though I couldn't quite articulate it.
So I found the courage to ask my mother about it.
What an intelligent woman she was. Soon after, she bought a Playboy home and sat down with me to go through it. Carefully she explained what was wrong with Playboy was that it exploited women. It treated them like a commodity, an object, which dehumanized them. That any time, in whatever way, humans were turned into objects, or property, or disposable sex toys, it was immoral and sometimes even criminal. Think about it, she said, and left me with the magazine.
She'd named my distress perfectly. These weren't women -- they were things to use and discard. Treating my half of the human race this way made me very angry. It still does.
As my children grew up I shared my mother's words with them and said, think about it.
Playboy was never innocent.
My father didn't buy, subscribe to, or read the magazine. I was spared a dirty old man father with a hidden stash of Hefner's perversions.
But I did have a neighbor down the street who subscribed, and felt it was a rite of male passage to hand them to his sons. This family was my first exposure to Playboy, and at the age of 10 I instinctively knew there was something very wrong with it, though I couldn't quite articulate it.
So I found the courage to ask my mother about it.
What an intelligent woman she was. Soon after, she bought a Playboy home and sat down with me to go through it. Carefully she explained what was wrong with Playboy was that it exploited women. It treated them like a commodity, an object, which dehumanized them. That any time, in whatever way, humans were turned into objects, or property, or disposable sex toys, it was immoral and sometimes even criminal. Think about it, she said, and left me with the magazine.
She'd named my distress perfectly. These weren't women -- they were things to use and discard. Treating my half of the human race this way made me very angry. It still does.
As my children grew up I shared my mother's words with them and said, think about it.
Playboy was never innocent.
121
It didn't exploit them, it celebrated them.
2
As un-titillating as this will sound, my first experience with Playboy was in the late 60's babysitting for some neighbors. There was an interview with Norman Mailer. I was totally mesmerized. I immediately began to seek out his books..and those of his contemporaries. A whole world of books opened up to me that was miles away from what we were reading in school. It set a direction for me that led to a degree in 20th century lit and a lifetime of reading pleasure. I can still remember the feeling of a whole new world to explore that I had when reading that Playboy interview.
5
Aren't parents slacking in their responsibility regardless of whether their children are learning about sex from Playboy or the Internet? Or at least slacking in their opportunity to develop the health and happiness of their children? Why are we not providing children comprehensive education about their sexual nature and potential for sexual expression and pleasure?
If you find it creepy to think of your parents having sex, then you too are a victim.
Our understanding of human development already identifies clear periods in a person's life when they are both challenged and have their best opportunity to learn the many aspects of sexuality and gender . . . beginning at around 2 when children discover that other children may be equipped differently, but continuing on at ages of around 5, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 25, with each stage deserving of new and helpful knowledge and experience. Unfortunately, most of these opportunities are met with a sometimes rediculous concoction of misleading parental advice, yet more often no guidance at all. Some schools try to pick up the slack, yet their admirable efforts are more often too little too late.
The ill effects of children not receiving sound guidance and developing fully healthy sexual behavior are evident throughout society . . . mostly with people becomming victims of this developmental omission . . . in such forms as repressive or obsessive behavior, unwarranted anxiety or shame, sexual crimes, and so on. We can do better.
If you find it creepy to think of your parents having sex, then you too are a victim.
Our understanding of human development already identifies clear periods in a person's life when they are both challenged and have their best opportunity to learn the many aspects of sexuality and gender . . . beginning at around 2 when children discover that other children may be equipped differently, but continuing on at ages of around 5, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 25, with each stage deserving of new and helpful knowledge and experience. Unfortunately, most of these opportunities are met with a sometimes rediculous concoction of misleading parental advice, yet more often no guidance at all. Some schools try to pick up the slack, yet their admirable efforts are more often too little too late.
The ill effects of children not receiving sound guidance and developing fully healthy sexual behavior are evident throughout society . . . mostly with people becomming victims of this developmental omission . . . in such forms as repressive or obsessive behavior, unwarranted anxiety or shame, sexual crimes, and so on. We can do better.
4
Anyone notice the transition in TV sport reporting? Beautiful young women have replaced many male anchors on ESPN and do the sideline reporting at college and NFL games. And how about the pretty young women doing weather reporting on our local television stations? I can assure you their presence is not about gender equality. Advertising is the core of business and Female sexuality still sells.
14
If our only values are those that pertain to an economic transaction, then porn is on the up-and-up. As long as the participants, the director, and the viewer are consenting adults, there's nothing for a neoliberal to "call out."
The old "patriarchy" would have said that porn was wrong because some types of relationships are wrong (such as people having sex when they don't know each other), or because sex and reproduction ought to be treated with respect in their own rights, or that sex itself is somehow taboo. Or because women need to be protected from the sexual predations of men. But now all of these "normative" statements represent taboo approaches. Porn probably leads to a ton of abortions as well, but that's supposed to be beyond reproach.
It seems ironic that, having deconstructed and dismantled all of the reasons that "the patriarchy" would find compelling to avoid pornography, women are now trying to construct their own set of reasons for the same thing.
The old "patriarchy" would have said that porn was wrong because some types of relationships are wrong (such as people having sex when they don't know each other), or because sex and reproduction ought to be treated with respect in their own rights, or that sex itself is somehow taboo. Or because women need to be protected from the sexual predations of men. But now all of these "normative" statements represent taboo approaches. Porn probably leads to a ton of abortions as well, but that's supposed to be beyond reproach.
It seems ironic that, having deconstructed and dismantled all of the reasons that "the patriarchy" would find compelling to avoid pornography, women are now trying to construct their own set of reasons for the same thing.
5
I am coming from a socially liberal, libertarian (regarding social issues) background. While I am squeamish about regulating free speech, including pornography, I believe that so much of what is readily available is harmful to both children and adults. We are so deeply programmed to ape the behavior that we see that these types of depictions can interfere with our other drives towards healthy, deeply enriching human relationships. I am concerned about smorgasbord of sexual depictions that are so easily viewed, but am at a loss of how to make it better without violating the imperative of free speech and causing potentially greater harm.
51
My dad found a Playboy under my mattress (I was, I think, 11 at the time, way before the Internet) and tried to shame me for it, "What if that was your mother?!" Dad was rather conservative.
Later, my mother came into my room and said something stunning and wonderful to me. She told me to read and look at anything I pleased. She said she trusted me to know what was worth my time and attention. She even told me to examine pornography and then come to her if I had any questions.
My fearless, ahead-of-her-time mother was telling me that it was okay to be curious. About everything.
Later, my mother came into my room and said something stunning and wonderful to me. She told me to read and look at anything I pleased. She said she trusted me to know what was worth my time and attention. She even told me to examine pornography and then come to her if I had any questions.
My fearless, ahead-of-her-time mother was telling me that it was okay to be curious. About everything.
82
Now THAT is a great Mother !
5
Somehow the road to liberation became the road to irresponsibility.... alas....
Before the mythical 50s we had too many issues, body issues among them. Playboy, imperfectly perhaps, provided a corrective. Now, however, we have no issues... we've become barbarians...
Before the mythical 50s we had too many issues, body issues among them. Playboy, imperfectly perhaps, provided a corrective. Now, however, we have no issues... we've become barbarians...
1
Sorry but this is quite a bore. Who wants their children to learn about sex through a magazine? What a nice hole in the sand to stick ones head in
1
Longing for Playboy? Instead why don't you long for when your daughters will be equal partners to males and men will want real women who are smart and contribute to this world rather than a sex object who lives for the male's desires.
63
If you are waiting for the day when men won't be drawn to healthy young feminine women with good genes--the day when men will find Angel Merkel sexier than Jessica Alba--you'll have a long wait (think on an evolutionary, not historical/cultural, timescale).
This is not to say men can't appreciate Angel Merkel for her intelligence and contributions. We just don't want to have sex with her.
This is not to say men can't appreciate Angel Merkel for her intelligence and contributions. We just don't want to have sex with her.
2
Porn kills love. For sure.
I was just talking about this with my kids, ages 7 to 17. What to do when they encounter it . . .that's a discussion that parents have to initiate. Link to a great video for kids on what to do when (not if) they come across pornography. https://www.lds.org/media-library/video/2015-08-001-what-should-i-do-whe...
I was just talking about this with my kids, ages 7 to 17. What to do when they encounter it . . .that's a discussion that parents have to initiate. Link to a great video for kids on what to do when (not if) they come across pornography. https://www.lds.org/media-library/video/2015-08-001-what-should-i-do-whe...
4
Why did the author conclude:
"Playboy showed me what a pretty girl should look like — thin, white, young. More, it showed me what boys thought a pretty girl should look like."?
It's just a magazine. Hardly the bible or a book of etiquette.
If one's decisions about what it means to be a woman are created by Playboy, Cosmopolitan, or the "pink aisle" in Toys R Us, then it would help to observe other parts of society with different views, and apply more critical thought.
There is a persistent myth that we are helpless to form our own individual values in the face of advertising or culture. Yes, things are confusing if you are trying to conform to what you read, or to what other groups of people expect.
I believe humans, including young people, can learn to think for themselves, understand their relation to a complex culture, and take or leave what they read.
That education is part of our role as parents.
"Playboy showed me what a pretty girl should look like — thin, white, young. More, it showed me what boys thought a pretty girl should look like."?
It's just a magazine. Hardly the bible or a book of etiquette.
If one's decisions about what it means to be a woman are created by Playboy, Cosmopolitan, or the "pink aisle" in Toys R Us, then it would help to observe other parts of society with different views, and apply more critical thought.
There is a persistent myth that we are helpless to form our own individual values in the face of advertising or culture. Yes, things are confusing if you are trying to conform to what you read, or to what other groups of people expect.
I believe humans, including young people, can learn to think for themselves, understand their relation to a complex culture, and take or leave what they read.
That education is part of our role as parents.
3
Perhaps the small fry should have been dragged through the Met Museum, Louvre or Orsay. the latter isn't that old, but had one (among many) reclining nude which all the pre-pubescent young men would be hauled away from by their parents.
3
Perhaps women should not allow themselves to be exploited in any form whatsoever. Perhaps we should make them wear burkas. If humans survive the test of time I don't think sex will even occur amongst the well to do, only the poor will copulate.
1
"Most men my age, sons of the 1960's and 1970's". Then you go on to write that you were essentially born in 1970?! I'm sorry for a few lines there I almost thought you were an early to mid 1950's baby boomer, like myself! Outside of my family and the community I grew up in, Playboy gave me entertainment, and helped me appreciate women! And there's nothing wrong in appreciating and respecting a pretty lady! Most ladies besides their brains, like the idea that men think they are beautiful! And by nature men are voyeurs and women are exhibitionists! And there is nothing inherently wrong in that! Except in the mind of sanctimonious feminists!....The culture today, without the Mindset that Playboy advanced, degrades women! And yes, as your article rightly infers, just look around! And isn't it ironic at a time when many women are outpacing men in numerous fields (look at the college graduation rates too!) this is happening?! Go figure?!!!
7
I remember Playboy from growing up in the 70's and early 80's , it seemed quaint and irrelevant to my life , and I was free to peruse it at the newsagent ( I'm French )
I never felt the need to compare myself to anybody - much less these fake females , but I don't find it offensive.
It's just passe.
As a feminist , all I want is to be treated as an individual.
I never felt the need to compare myself to anybody - much less these fake females , but I don't find it offensive.
It's just passe.
As a feminist , all I want is to be treated as an individual.
2
Mr. Bill Cosby is the best example of the Playboy lifestyle. The love was always in his imagination because he feared his own reality.
3
Playboy magazine was a product of the American imagination, without which the concept of late modern sexuality was not possible. No other publication had such a strong and pervasive influence on the social and cultural attitudes of both men and women. The alluring images of women it contained defined ideals and misconceptions for billions of men and women. Throughout human history, women have been portrayed by tribes, societies and civilizations to define the values and ideals of those cultures. The decision by the publishers of Playboy to no longer depict and exploit the naked female for a multiplex of reasons reflects a transition and transformation of post-modern culture. Now that pornography has gone mainstream, the passive images that Playboy offered seem rather quaint and passe'. Perhaps the publishers of Playboy are now wary and even intimidated by a more aggressive image a new protean female; the unabashed and rapacious grandchild of Hefner's original vision.
"I sometimes long to go back to Playboy’s heyday, with its pose of sophistication and its airbrushed pubic hair, and wish that that — and not something on the Internet — would be my daughters’ first encounter with s-e-x."
Really? Because Playboy was such a positive first encounter for you? It wasn't for me. Those women made me feel creepy in my own skin---they represented the sex object I was to become, according to the magazine's worldview---and inadequate as well, because even as a preteen I compared myself negatively to their airbrushed, silicone-injected splendor.
It's true that the Internet offers much worse, but let's not rewrite the past.
Really? Because Playboy was such a positive first encounter for you? It wasn't for me. Those women made me feel creepy in my own skin---they represented the sex object I was to become, according to the magazine's worldview---and inadequate as well, because even as a preteen I compared myself negatively to their airbrushed, silicone-injected splendor.
It's true that the Internet offers much worse, but let's not rewrite the past.
18
Nice try - talk about airbrushed...
True, there is innocence in nudity and there is innocence in mutual sexual pleasure throughout life, throughout generations. But where hard core feminists got it right from the start - and where many women today miss that early advocacy entirely - whose innocence are you referring to? Fact: 80% to 90% of pornography is framed from the male point of view. Fact: at least 95% of that 90% is from the point of view of vile misogynysts. It's not the internet that's the problem - it's patriarchy. And its female enablers.
If Playboy had been photographic journeys of women, nudity, and sex from a mutual perspective - pornography might not be as horrible as it is today. But it wasn't equal - it was from the point of view of "what men want". The science is in: males (in all animal species) objectify females as they rely on visual cues. Females (as in all animal species), on the other hand - with the future of the species at stake - are selective. While it is obviously in male DNA to be stimulated visually by imagery - patriarchy reigns supreme in pornography, turning the entire sexual experience into "what [patriarchal sexist misogynistic] men want".
It all started with Playboy. It is heresy to desire for the days - when it all began. After all, Playboy (patriarchy) has given us hegemony, gender inequality, income inequality, and our police prison state. You really want to hark back to when it all began?
Ugh.
True, there is innocence in nudity and there is innocence in mutual sexual pleasure throughout life, throughout generations. But where hard core feminists got it right from the start - and where many women today miss that early advocacy entirely - whose innocence are you referring to? Fact: 80% to 90% of pornography is framed from the male point of view. Fact: at least 95% of that 90% is from the point of view of vile misogynysts. It's not the internet that's the problem - it's patriarchy. And its female enablers.
If Playboy had been photographic journeys of women, nudity, and sex from a mutual perspective - pornography might not be as horrible as it is today. But it wasn't equal - it was from the point of view of "what men want". The science is in: males (in all animal species) objectify females as they rely on visual cues. Females (as in all animal species), on the other hand - with the future of the species at stake - are selective. While it is obviously in male DNA to be stimulated visually by imagery - patriarchy reigns supreme in pornography, turning the entire sexual experience into "what [patriarchal sexist misogynistic] men want".
It all started with Playboy. It is heresy to desire for the days - when it all began. After all, Playboy (patriarchy) has given us hegemony, gender inequality, income inequality, and our police prison state. You really want to hark back to when it all began?
Ugh.
73
80-90% of pornography is from a male point of view if you ignore the form of pornography pitched to the female point of view, that is, romance novels.
I find it curious that you are fully aware of men's and women's differing natures as bequeathed by evolution, you find one of those natures "horrible," "vile," "misogynistic," "patriarchal," and "sexist." Why is the natural expression of female sexuality good and the natural expression of male sexuality bad?
I find it curious that you are fully aware of men's and women's differing natures as bequeathed by evolution, you find one of those natures "horrible," "vile," "misogynistic," "patriarchal," and "sexist." Why is the natural expression of female sexuality good and the natural expression of male sexuality bad?
2
Sorry but straight men like pictures of unclothed women, Brian. Heck we enjoy pictures of moderately clothed women too. I like them in all stages of deshabille, personally.
3
"It all started with Playboy"? Nice try but women have been treated unequally since before Cro-Magnon times. Our current income inequality, sad though it is, actually represents a radical step forward from an extremely recent past during which women had no income at all. Playboy was merely a continuation, not the cause.
4
"Most men my age, sons of the 1960s and ’70s, have a Playboy story"
Yes. Mine was when I was maybe 11 or 12, a bike ride through the woods to the backyard of a friend's house where sat a smallish barn with a loft, and in the loft and under the hay was a copy of Playboy from maybe the previous year.
I still get this weird feeling whenever I catch a whiff of damp magazines.
The only time I ever bought a Playboy magazine was in January 1981 when I was in grad school and it WAS for the articles, or at least the John Lennon interview.
I didn't look at the pictures. Honest.
Yes. Mine was when I was maybe 11 or 12, a bike ride through the woods to the backyard of a friend's house where sat a smallish barn with a loft, and in the loft and under the hay was a copy of Playboy from maybe the previous year.
I still get this weird feeling whenever I catch a whiff of damp magazines.
The only time I ever bought a Playboy magazine was in January 1981 when I was in grad school and it WAS for the articles, or at least the John Lennon interview.
I didn't look at the pictures. Honest.
15
Thank you for this article - but it scarcely scratches the surface of so many issues here. In fact, boys and girls are now seeing violence and subjugation as normal sex acts. Extremely young woman are being clearly and brutally taken advantage of for a few hundred bucks. Watch "Hot Girls Wanted" by Rashida Jones (available on Netflix). If you can make it through even half of the movie you will see something is terribly wrong. Is it society? Who is to blame in the anonymous world of the internet? I'm terrified to think of what sex acts are now considered normal for teens, between internet pornography and over-the-top pop acts like Nikki Minaj and Ms. Cyrus. The outcomes of all this? Who knows. What can we do? I guess I'm baffled as to why, as the auther asserts, you needed to walk into a store and shore ID to see/access adults materials but now we error on the side of parental control to limit this. Its outrageous and instead we need to have much more firm controls in place to prove you are ENOUGH to access it. Too many parents either don't understand the technology access their kids have or don't care to know. As kids can barely process this information and understand what it means, its a real shame its falling on them to set their own boundaries.
10 years old and innocence stolen. Its a real shame.
10 years old and innocence stolen. Its a real shame.
3
"“I can’t get him to tell me what he saw,” my friend said. “I’m sure it was awful.”
That pretty well says it all about America and its trauma over sex.
The simple truth is, some people like sex and some don't. More don't than do, apparently.
See the attitudes toward sexually active or aggressive women for proof.
Many men and women hold sexually active women in disdain.
Puritans still rule in America, even if on the sly they transgress.
The rest of the world regards the US as childish regarding sex with good reason.
That pretty well says it all about America and its trauma over sex.
The simple truth is, some people like sex and some don't. More don't than do, apparently.
See the attitudes toward sexually active or aggressive women for proof.
Many men and women hold sexually active women in disdain.
Puritans still rule in America, even if on the sly they transgress.
The rest of the world regards the US as childish regarding sex with good reason.
2
Ms Weiner,
I regret to inform you that we both know what your daughters will see when they go on line. You've got 'parental blockers'. Have you ever heard the phrase 'Maginot Line'?
All you can do is prepare them, not necessarily by telling them something that ends with 'adults in their 30s'.
You may miss Playboy, and I don't blame you. But it's gone.
Dan Kravitz
I regret to inform you that we both know what your daughters will see when they go on line. You've got 'parental blockers'. Have you ever heard the phrase 'Maginot Line'?
All you can do is prepare them, not necessarily by telling them something that ends with 'adults in their 30s'.
You may miss Playboy, and I don't blame you. But it's gone.
Dan Kravitz
2
You don't have to guess what people will see by typing "sex" into google. That's a real easy experiment to run.
If you think "sex" produces outrageous results, try typing "porn".
If you think "sex" produces outrageous results, try typing "porn".
1
Conservatives, like commentator George Will, are trying to solve this issue by claiming if a woman is in proximity to young, college men who are drinking, then it is not rape but "an ugly sexual encounter."
But not rape.
But not rape.
3
Have yet to hear if the Playboy Network is going to change it's format, or stick with their current softcore porn programming. Guessing that isn't as "passé".
1
The joke among the young men I knew in the 1960s was that we were interested in the magazine because of its literary content and not its beautiful, undressed women. Looks like we were ahead of the curve.
1
Wow. Nostalgia for a magazine that objectifies women, from a woman. I wonder what useful information the writer thinks her daughter would have learned about sex from a magazine with pictures of naked women. I learned 2 things: what an idealized airbrushed female form looks like, and that I would have to confront that objectification throughout my life. Nothing is forgiven.
81
My first encounter with Playboy was circa 1955, when it was difficult to find. Now, at age 79, I am still a subscriber. Compared with today's contemporary magazines, Playboy is more like Good Housekeeping. The magazine never went XXX. I found James Bond thanks to a Playboy short story in 1959. The list of authors who were published in Playboy is a virtual Hall of Fame. It's interviews were and are outstanding. It did help us get over our Victoruan puritanism. I will continue to subscribe, with no guilty feelings.
33
While the debate rages on and many find themselves in unfortunate circumstances let us not loose sight of the fact that many other women and men of all ages still make intelligent informed choices including not spending time with jerks, not getting drunk, not perusing internet porn, and not compromising personal integrity in search of ??????
2
in other words. Playboy has yet again read it right for the times.
We needed sexual liberation. The liberty of enjoying sex to its fullest.
But its not a never ending path to liberty. We have sexual freedom. And playboy helped to that end. But now sex online has morphed into extremist porn for profit. It is destructive and perverting.
We needed sexual liberation. The liberty of enjoying sex to its fullest.
But its not a never ending path to liberty. We have sexual freedom. And playboy helped to that end. But now sex online has morphed into extremist porn for profit. It is destructive and perverting.
5
I will never forget the time when I was fourteen and found a neatly stacked and tied pile of mint Playboys two feet high next to my neighbor's trash cans.
4
In the Sixties, my parents would have been thrilled to find a copy of Playboy secreted under my pillow, or under my bed.
Unfortunately, all they found were copies of Muscle and Fitness.
The grass is always greener...
Unfortunately, all they found were copies of Muscle and Fitness.
The grass is always greener...
13
Thank you, Jennifer Weiner for FINALLY broaching this difficult topic.
I feel certain that Brownmiller's brutal candor was not at all intended to shame young women but to point out this TRUTH: Most men wouldn't mind it at all if they were pressured into having drunken sex with a young woman who had lured them back to her dorm room. And if the young women's roommates had also chosen to participant, so much the better for him.
THAT difference is a reality, whether today's younger generations choose to acknowledge it or not.
I feel certain that Brownmiller's brutal candor was not at all intended to shame young women but to point out this TRUTH: Most men wouldn't mind it at all if they were pressured into having drunken sex with a young woman who had lured them back to her dorm room. And if the young women's roommates had also chosen to participant, so much the better for him.
THAT difference is a reality, whether today's younger generations choose to acknowledge it or not.
2
Block anything you want. Your kids are still going to find out about sex. Probably in the school yard.
4
Ms Weiner, as with your books, your approach to serious topics always has a light touch that conceals the depth of thought that goes into it.
Thank you, and keep writing.
Thank you, and keep writing.
2
Good show -- but are your daughters going to think that they have to reach their 30's before being eligible for sex?!
1
The writer's daughters are so very lucky to have a mother with such a fine sense of humour that she has no need to fear their Googling, which isn't to say their Googling wasn't an inspired conceit on which to hang such an insightful and highly amusing piece of writing as this.
2
A nice article. In fact, Playboy was, in its way, rather innocent from the beginning. What we've created since....well, we won't know for a long time what the eventual consequences will be. Except that they'll be bad.
As for "sex being an expression of love and intimacy between financially independent adults in their 30s", I'll differ (though the author's irony doesn't pass me by). In our case, it was marriage at nineteen, 48 years, 5 children, and 12 grandchildren ago. Financial independence came, but it took awhile.
If you wait until your 30s, you may never see grandchildren. Yet at 67, we travel, hike, ski and much else with grandkids, three of whom are in college.
Dive into life, get married, have kids. It is so simple; we've overcomplicated so much in this poor world....
As for "sex being an expression of love and intimacy between financially independent adults in their 30s", I'll differ (though the author's irony doesn't pass me by). In our case, it was marriage at nineteen, 48 years, 5 children, and 12 grandchildren ago. Financial independence came, but it took awhile.
If you wait until your 30s, you may never see grandchildren. Yet at 67, we travel, hike, ski and much else with grandkids, three of whom are in college.
Dive into life, get married, have kids. It is so simple; we've overcomplicated so much in this poor world....
5
What do feminists want? They want what all women want - to be loved.
What do men want? They want respect.
Respect your man and he will love you. Both will be happy. Just be sure your man is worth respecting (this is where women fail).
What do men want? They want respect.
Respect your man and he will love you. Both will be happy. Just be sure your man is worth respecting (this is where women fail).
3
So women don't want--or deserve--respect? And love and respect are two separate, unmeldable things? Wow. Ugh.
Ms. Weiner, you've got it all wrong. Freud said to explain sex to 5 year olds, and I agree with that advice. Take your kids to a computer and look at some porn sites with them. Show them it is human beings doing funny looking things to each other, but explain it to them. They will be fine, and better for you doing this, too.
I used to look at my brother's old Playboys after he had put them in our attic, and now I look at porn online. It's much better now than it was back then. One thing I will hand to Gen X and Gen Y: they are much better at porn than my Boomer generation, and even better than Hef's between the two Great Wars generation. That is partly why the Hef crowd has now decided to fold their hand, so to speak. I think they are fools to stop having nudes in Playboy, but that is their business decision to make. But, mother-of-God, porn online is great. Not all of it, but some of it is fantastic. And it's all categorized for you, too. You can find anything you like. Please, show your kids you aren't afraid of this stuff. It is imperative.
4
I was a politically aware girl geek back then. They really did publish great articles. And I heard they paid writers well. Male writers, of course, but you could say that about the publishing industry as a whole back then. What Playboy did was mix sex with intellect and social respectability. Even though they did that in a sexist way, women still came out ahead from where we were in the sixties. Back then they didn't even have restrooms for women in many of our hallowed halls of serious thought, because the serious thinkers believed female flesh had to be kept as far away from serious thought as humanly possible. Not Hef. He put them right in the same magazine together. That was progress, believe it or not, for that era.
38
Well written piece, honest and reflects feelings, experiences and concerns many of us have had over the years, especially regarding our own children as we've raised them.
And yes, Playboy was fun to look at when I was young, and it's hard to believe how innocent it is today relative to the menu of everything on the internet.
I think a good message or approach is to listen to what have others have to say on the issues of sex, porn, the internet and navigating the stew of life.
But in the end make up your own mind as to what's right for you - and convey this to your kids when appropriate. And above all, don't surrender your self respect. Or require others to either. You'll usually feel good about yourself that way. At least that's my experience.
And yes, Playboy was fun to look at when I was young, and it's hard to believe how innocent it is today relative to the menu of everything on the internet.
I think a good message or approach is to listen to what have others have to say on the issues of sex, porn, the internet and navigating the stew of life.
But in the end make up your own mind as to what's right for you - and convey this to your kids when appropriate. And above all, don't surrender your self respect. Or require others to either. You'll usually feel good about yourself that way. At least that's my experience.
1
Heteronormative sex and oppressive gender identities being pushed on children and parents. Was this cut and paste from the national review?
Yet another bit of sweet authentic writing that happens to be politically incorrect, because you're a real person with a real family making real choices to deal with real problems.
Keep it up.
Keep it up.
2
They'll find the same thing that the boys find.
1
You're longing for the innocence of Playboy? Heck, I'd settle for the innocence of Penthouse! Things are pretty randy out there in porno land. Probably has something to do with American exceptionalism.
3
I'll always remember the day my mom found something fishy from my father's drawer under my mattress. She suggested maybe I should look around and clean up.
Now, as a father of two, I find this oddly moving.
Now, as a father of two, I find this oddly moving.
2
Playboy was never innocent; they simply had laws restraining them.
6
Well said. Who-da-thunk we would reach the point where we viewed the naked girls in Playboy as quaint.
We seem dangerously close to the point in time where female 'pop stars' simply abandon the pretense of clothing.
We seem dangerously close to the point in time where female 'pop stars' simply abandon the pretense of clothing.
2
Here's an amazing concept, sex isn't the most endlessly fascinating thing in the world. And neither is gender differences about it.
1
Google search in the future ... all of my son's google searches pop up on my phone or my work computer since google associates our home computer with me and those other devices with me... what does google know...
Why didn't your friend google "sex" instead of imaging something awful?
3
You know, I long for the end of objectification of women. Playboy may seem tame by today's standards, but it contributed to rape culture and the objectification of women. So no, I don't long for 'innocent' Playboy, or Hugh Hefner's Playboy mansion culture. Women just want to be humans.
96
Interestingly, the rise of easy instant-access pornography has coincided with a big drop in the incidence of rape. Correlation is not necessarily causation, but it should at least give doubt to your theory--as should the existence of rape, of women and men both, long before Playboy.
2
"Women just want to be humans."
(All? Some? None?)
Humans are male or female (reproductive sex-equipment); there are more variations regarding sex play (masculine or feminine)
But very few girls/women (if any) wish to to be treated as genderless--regarding either reproduction or sex play.
"Objectification" of women is a bogus complaint. Nonsense or gross hyperbole--even perverts don't treat females like trees or rocks--but as human females.
The legitimate complaint is treating them--by individuals or by cultures--as merely sex-playmates. Just as (most) men are not mere sex toys--sex toy men aside.
Sexplay is very human. Sex-puritanism is dehumanizing. Just as treating women as unintelligent is dehumanizing. So is Catholicism's limiting sex-play to reproduction. But celebrating sex play is hardly dehumanizing.
There are no genderless persons either. Personalities come sexed--although sex can be abstracted out--set aside--bracketed.
And sex--play or reproduction--is often irrelevant and/or inappropriate in most circumstances.
(All? Some? None?)
Humans are male or female (reproductive sex-equipment); there are more variations regarding sex play (masculine or feminine)
But very few girls/women (if any) wish to to be treated as genderless--regarding either reproduction or sex play.
"Objectification" of women is a bogus complaint. Nonsense or gross hyperbole--even perverts don't treat females like trees or rocks--but as human females.
The legitimate complaint is treating them--by individuals or by cultures--as merely sex-playmates. Just as (most) men are not mere sex toys--sex toy men aside.
Sexplay is very human. Sex-puritanism is dehumanizing. Just as treating women as unintelligent is dehumanizing. So is Catholicism's limiting sex-play to reproduction. But celebrating sex play is hardly dehumanizing.
There are no genderless persons either. Personalities come sexed--although sex can be abstracted out--set aside--bracketed.
And sex--play or reproduction--is often irrelevant and/or inappropriate in most circumstances.
2
Jennifer, you and I are of an age, and most of what you said, especially about the trajectory of feminism, is familiar to me. However, you lost me with your longing to go back to Playboy's heyday, and its "innocently naked ladies." I had thought that, historically, Playboy opened the door to all this porn circulating today. I can't imagine the outcome being any different.
I certainly never saw Playboy as clean or innocent introduction to "s-e-x." It was a tool of harassment by boys on the bus, and it was a source of confusion when my father told me to "be a good girl," but cached "dirty magazines" in places where he thought I wouldn't find them. The hypocrisy and double-standards around sexuality still operate today, and Playboy has been and is a part of that. I don't know what the solution is, or what your girls will experience, but either way, Playboy ain't it.
I certainly never saw Playboy as clean or innocent introduction to "s-e-x." It was a tool of harassment by boys on the bus, and it was a source of confusion when my father told me to "be a good girl," but cached "dirty magazines" in places where he thought I wouldn't find them. The hypocrisy and double-standards around sexuality still operate today, and Playboy has been and is a part of that. I don't know what the solution is, or what your girls will experience, but either way, Playboy ain't it.
92
I agree with your opinion about Playboy. But understand that the fact that your father felt like he had to hide his "dirty magazines" is, in a weird way, a testament to his inherent morality, and the morality of the age. Now people don't even hide the fact that they look at porn, and unashamed about it.
2
The porn was always there, but one had to look for it. Guys will always be guys, but that doesn't have to be bad. And, there was a certain kind of innocence that was OK, and not as weird as your take on things.
1
I like the "In the thirties remark." I told both my sons not to marry until they were in their thirties, They have heeded that advice. Based on my own experience, I consider people in their twenties like teenagers with paychecks.
5
RE: If things were a mess 20 years ago, they’re even more confusing now.
No not a mess and not confusing. There are some people who mistakenly think that sex and marriage are about individual happiness. They're not. They're about propagation of the species (sex) and stable societies (marriage.) There also are people who try to deny that men and women are different. They're innately different and all the political correctness wishing in the world will not change the fact.
No not a mess and not confusing. There are some people who mistakenly think that sex and marriage are about individual happiness. They're not. They're about propagation of the species (sex) and stable societies (marriage.) There also are people who try to deny that men and women are different. They're innately different and all the political correctness wishing in the world will not change the fact.
7
I think I was 8 or 9 when I found my Uncle Al's Playboy. I remember him saying, when he found me with it, that it was perfectly natural for boys to be curious about women's bodies.
For his part, Al was married all of his life to my very high achieving, totally sex positive aunt (I know the latter because of a story she told, the point of which was that he was still more interested in intimacy with her than in his favorite hobby, even after he'd been denied the hobby for several weeks due to a breakdown in the machinery), and I'm sure she didn't have a problem with his reading Playboys.
For his part, Al was married all of his life to my very high achieving, totally sex positive aunt (I know the latter because of a story she told, the point of which was that he was still more interested in intimacy with her than in his favorite hobby, even after he'd been denied the hobby for several weeks due to a breakdown in the machinery), and I'm sure she didn't have a problem with his reading Playboys.
5
It is porn on the internet shattering my daughter's innocence now, it was Playboy shattering my innocence then. Imagining my straight as as a reed 13 year old self with the buxom blonde on the centerspread is a statement in itself. "Am I as pretty as that languorous body or will 'boys' find me pretty?" If that was the reaction Playboy evoked, then it is in no way innocent. Only the medium has changed with a change in generations. But at least, we have some parental control. As you know, it was not fool-proof then, it is not fool-proof now.
Seems no matter how sex changes in our culture, it's still a very popular subject to write about. I expect that will be the case when sex robots become mainstream and 3-D TV makes today's Internet porn passe.
Sex, war, politics, religion. They may change, but they'll always be with us.
Sex, war, politics, religion. They may change, but they'll always be with us.
1
The best, and funniest, line in this essay, as Jennifer talks to her children, "I explain that sex is the ultimate expression of love and intimacy between two consenting and financially independent adults in their 30s."
Can't wait to tell my kids the same thing. I'm sure they'll listen and obey.
Can't wait to tell my kids the same thing. I'm sure they'll listen and obey.
6
"... sex is the ultimate expression of love and intimacy between two consenting and financially independent adults in their 30s." Words spoken hopefully by every parent (especially of daughters) in the history of the world.
6
So, no more nudes. Meh. My first Playboy (yes, I still have a copy) included no nudes. (We're talking the Fifties here.) In fact, aside from that first Marilyn Monroe nude in issue #1, I recall very few totally naked young women. No nipples. Absolutely no pubic hair until Penthouse forced the issue in 1969. So, back to the future for poor old Playboy.
2
I was 14 in 1964 when I first saw Playboy, most certainly I remember seeing "totally naked young women" then showing their totally naked nipples and buttocks. Yes, no pubic hair until 1969 but please admit the women shown in Playboy were "totally naked" in 1964!
I hope you're kidding when you state this:
I explain that sex is the ultimate expression of love and intimacy between two consenting and financially independent adults in their 30s.
Because the best sex I had in my life could not be described like that. And, for my part, I never lied to my kids.
I explain that sex is the ultimate expression of love and intimacy between two consenting and financially independent adults in their 30s.
Because the best sex I had in my life could not be described like that. And, for my part, I never lied to my kids.
12
Perhaps the definition of irony should have been added to this paragraph.
1
Playboy was never innocent and the goal was never that. So for those of my generation, lets not get on our high horses, sanctimonious and bemoan our next generation's forbidden foray into sensuality and sexuality. The closest kind adjective for Playboy was naughty. And that was an understatement, considering the antics of the octogenarian owner, Hugh Heffner. At least there are parental controls now ( agreed, not fully fool-proof ). And most important, our daughters are less likely to be swayed by Barbie types. And that is real feminism! Go Girl!
12
"Awful" doesn't come close to describing some of what's one click away in the vast cauldron of images called "porn." Because of the combination of the Internet, easy access to digital photo editing technology and the global psychological bell curve, what used to be the darkest thoughts of the darkest minds now appear as snapshots - pictures so mindbendingly, horrifically violent that they probably could cause PTSD in some viewers.
8
Playboy was the gateway to an imagined adulthood for us boomer boys. Along with the naked ladies - and complete lack of pubic hair - there was this brand of life style, with beautiful, nice things fitting into it and associated with sex in our hot little minds. There were also great articles and short stories, which we even occasionally read. It was the start of my fascination with design, with moderately liberal political notions, and with cosmopolitanism.
1
As suggested, I just searched "sex" on google, and all the images were rated PG-13 (my "SafeSearch" was deactivated). Google must have cleaned up its search algorithm since a few years ago when your friend's son did the same search.
Needless to say, the search term "sex" turned up all white, beautiful, young, heterosexual partners in air-brushed, golden lit embrace (in very expensive lingerie and bedding).
So, the marketing fantasy is as unrealistic as it was since the 1960s.
Needless to say, the search term "sex" turned up all white, beautiful, young, heterosexual partners in air-brushed, golden lit embrace (in very expensive lingerie and bedding).
So, the marketing fantasy is as unrealistic as it was since the 1960s.
2
Yes, an even cursory look for porn on the internet reveals frighteningly graphic and demeaning (to all) videos. They're free and easy to find. And blockers are unwieldy. Can't we require an XXX in the web address to identify and block such sites? Such content is scary and damaging to children. At least playboy was adult women, without graphic acts, and not available on any device connected to the internet.
5
I remember my dad's old Playboys -- they had to be from the 60s, or very early 70s. We thought we were being very daring, when our parents went out for an evening, and we sneaked peaks at the Playboy magazines.
Boy, were they innocent by today's standards! The women were topless. That was the big thing. There was no "full frontal" nudity, and NO depiction of sex acts -- not at ALL. They were decorously posed ladies, with breasts shown but their legs were cross or hands artfully placed.
And the women, while young and pretty, were often "girl next door" types. They were not super models, and they were absolutely NOT porn star types. That was the whole "schtick" of Playboy -- getting ordinary pretty girls to take off their tops.
One interesting thing: breast implants were pretty unknown in such magazine photography. If you look at old Playboys (I think you can find "vintage Porn"online pretty easily), the women have NATURAL breasts -- normal sized, and NO surgical scars. At most, they are airbrushed a bit. But today, you literally could not find work in the porn industry without significant plastic surgery, including huge breast implants.
Boy, were they innocent by today's standards! The women were topless. That was the big thing. There was no "full frontal" nudity, and NO depiction of sex acts -- not at ALL. They were decorously posed ladies, with breasts shown but their legs were cross or hands artfully placed.
And the women, while young and pretty, were often "girl next door" types. They were not super models, and they were absolutely NOT porn star types. That was the whole "schtick" of Playboy -- getting ordinary pretty girls to take off their tops.
One interesting thing: breast implants were pretty unknown in such magazine photography. If you look at old Playboys (I think you can find "vintage Porn"online pretty easily), the women have NATURAL breasts -- normal sized, and NO surgical scars. At most, they are airbrushed a bit. But today, you literally could not find work in the porn industry without significant plastic surgery, including huge breast implants.
1
I really did read the articles, but got the mags free from a friend of mine who worked in a drug store. Otherwise, I'd be asking for my money back. They really were pretty lousy.
2
So, Ms Weiner tells us that we "ladies" grew up with Playboy too; that makes me wonder if she and the ladies had never heard of PlayGIRL. This was the magazine that my girlfriends and I purchased when we became interested in the other sex. It took a lot of courage to do so and not many magazines were necessary to satisfy our curiosity.
Furthermore she seems to regret that her daughter's first encounter with sex will be via the internet. Yes, indeed, that is something we parents do not wish for our boys and girls. But that should not make us long for the return of Playboy with its unreal looking women. While the misogyny on the internet sites Ms Weiner refers to is visible right away, Playboy's is hidden and has nothing to do with "sophistication".
Furthermore she seems to regret that her daughter's first encounter with sex will be via the internet. Yes, indeed, that is something we parents do not wish for our boys and girls. But that should not make us long for the return of Playboy with its unreal looking women. While the misogyny on the internet sites Ms Weiner refers to is visible right away, Playboy's is hidden and has nothing to do with "sophistication".
17
The women in Playboy -- at least prior to the 90s -- were far more "real" than what you see in today's porn or on the internet. Today, a woman could not even get into the porn industry without plastic surgery including giant breast implants. Today, women are forced to remove every hair on their bodies, including all their pubic hair -- that was unheard of in old magazines or old-style porn.
"Natural" beauty is a rarity in modern porn, where even young girls have surgery on their faces and bodies to look a very particular way -- high cheekbones, "duck lips", huge breasts.
If you look at old Playboys (1960s or 1970s era), it is surprising that so many of the girls have soft, rounded bodies. Today, they would be denigrated as "fat". Also, the poses of the photos are rather coy -- they didn't show genitalia until the 80s. Today, porn shots look like gynecological displays in medical school!
Which is more unreal? Frankly, the old Playboy was mostly about breasts and showing them -- NATURAL breasts. I never thought that was such a big deal, as teenage boys and adult men have (and should have) a natural interest in looking at images of women. But we've gone far, far beyond that in our pornified culture, and lot of porn today is not about sex really, but about demeaning and degrading women.
"Natural" beauty is a rarity in modern porn, where even young girls have surgery on their faces and bodies to look a very particular way -- high cheekbones, "duck lips", huge breasts.
If you look at old Playboys (1960s or 1970s era), it is surprising that so many of the girls have soft, rounded bodies. Today, they would be denigrated as "fat". Also, the poses of the photos are rather coy -- they didn't show genitalia until the 80s. Today, porn shots look like gynecological displays in medical school!
Which is more unreal? Frankly, the old Playboy was mostly about breasts and showing them -- NATURAL breasts. I never thought that was such a big deal, as teenage boys and adult men have (and should have) a natural interest in looking at images of women. But we've gone far, far beyond that in our pornified culture, and lot of porn today is not about sex really, but about demeaning and degrading women.
2
So "hidden" misogyny is worse than all-too-visible misogyny? Huh? I believe internet porn is a disaster for the awkward-but-necessary emotional and intellectual development teens have towards the opposite sex. I'm thankful I'm not a fourteen- year-old boy growing up today. If there's any area the Right and Left should come together on, it's restricting porn.
1
Adolescence innocence unfolds stepwise and needs six years to overcome awkwardness and insecurity. The natural maturation process is healthy and good. Young girls and boys are bombarded to speed up sexuality without any benefit to traits like shyness or modesty. If I had a teenager, I'd move to a deserted island for as least ten year of innocence.
8
My history of Playboy consumption was during the late 1960's thru the early 1970's. I think that the John Lennon or Jimmy Carter interview publications were the last that I ever saw. But Playboy helped shape my life in a positive way. The pin ups at that time were innocent compared to pornography of today. The short stories and interviews were excellent.
Even though early feminists may have condemned Playboy, the publication promoted female equality. Playboy also advocated racial equality and decriminalization of homosexuality. It was liberal in outlook, which shaped my early political leanings.
This may seem stupid to say, but I partially attribute graduation from college to the magazine that I read as a youth and my early yearnings to emulate "the man who reads Playboy".
Even though early feminists may have condemned Playboy, the publication promoted female equality. Playboy also advocated racial equality and decriminalization of homosexuality. It was liberal in outlook, which shaped my early political leanings.
This may seem stupid to say, but I partially attribute graduation from college to the magazine that I read as a youth and my early yearnings to emulate "the man who reads Playboy".
17
Studies have shown that, after looking at images of Playboy nudes, men not only found their wives less attractive (duh); they loved them less.
The truth is: Men are the one's being taken advantage of by the porn industry. If/when they realize how much Actual Good Sex the have been robbed of, as a result of the commodification of their predisposition towards visual stimulation, they will never touch the stuff.
The truth is: Men are the one's being taken advantage of by the porn industry. If/when they realize how much Actual Good Sex the have been robbed of, as a result of the commodification of their predisposition towards visual stimulation, they will never touch the stuff.
37
A couple of interesting things about that study. One is that men did not report not being attracted to or in love with their wives after viewing Playboy nudes.
When women looked at images from Playgirl vs abstract art, their feelings of love and attraction for their spouses were the same regardless of which they looked at.
Men reported feeling less love and attraction after looking at Playboy. But regardless of whether they looked at Playboy or abstract art, their feelings of love and attraction were at least as high, or higher, than the women's feelings about their husbands.
There was also no baseline measurement for men or women.
When women looked at images from Playgirl vs abstract art, their feelings of love and attraction for their spouses were the same regardless of which they looked at.
Men reported feeling less love and attraction after looking at Playboy. But regardless of whether they looked at Playboy or abstract art, their feelings of love and attraction were at least as high, or higher, than the women's feelings about their husbands.
There was also no baseline measurement for men or women.
2
You have grossly misstated that study. It was done on college males, ages 18-24, and they were shown slides of ordinary women at first (not their own girlfriends or wives), and ranked them by how attractive they were. And then later, slides of beautiful models & actresses. After seeing the very beautiful women, they were re-shown pictures of ordinary women -- and ranked them as very much less desirable than BEFORE they saw the super-beautiful actresses and models.
It had noting whatsoever to do with Playboy magazine, nor were the photos of nudes -- they were just pictures of women's faces.
It had noting whatsoever to do with Playboy magazine, nor were the photos of nudes -- they were just pictures of women's faces.
3
"Studies have shown that, after looking at images of Playboy nudes, men not only found their wives less attractive (duh); they loved them less."
Citations needed! As both a scientist and a man, I am skeptical of these supposed studies.
Citations needed! As both a scientist and a man, I am skeptical of these supposed studies.
3
"Feminists still can’t agree." That's because there's no feminist party line. There are individuals, and there are movements within a larger social movement. There are many paths to social change, and each person gets to decide how to think about equal rights issues. Many second wave feminists got us looking at sexual exploitation. This was a very good thing. It was also confusing, as it always is when we realize the way things've always been don't't have to be the way they always will be. Most people understood that exploitation was a bad thing, but what to replace it with wasn't so clear. Most women understood the idea that they had more to offer than beauty and Bunny dips, but a lifetime of training in the necessity of attraction hard to let go of. Cultural shifts take time. They take generations. Saying that calling attention to sexual exploitation is anti-sex is a convenient push back, which leads to "sex positive feminism" and the idea that saying pole dancing (for example) exploits women is slut shaming. Frankly, it's a shame, because when you reduce people to the sum of their corporeal parts, that is pretty much a definition of exploitation. Pointing that out does not damn the dancer but, rather the culture in which, for many reasons, pole dancing exists. Finally this: "Can a magazine exploit women if it’s a woman doing the alleged exploiting?' Are you serious? Yes, women can take active roles in the exploitation of other women. Ever heard of madams?
5
It may come as a surprise to some, but Playboy was actually instrumental in teaching me - as a early-stage teenager, some centuries ago - about respect for women, the reality and validity of female sexual desire, and moral imperatives of gender and racial equity. What I found in those magazines was educational, in more than the obvious ways.
4
Speaking of 'women's lib', not a bad story about showing some skin but not all ( to keep women's mystery alive), reason that attracted us to Playboy's freedom to show more than naked beauties. As some of us enjoyed the most interesting part, the interviews, gave us permission to subscribe to it, and start a collection (by now an antique, I admit, but still). We would be hypocrites if we couldn't admit the sheer pleasure, sexual beings as we are, in front of beauty and its natural attraction, fully realizing such a perfection ought not be a reflection of our expectations in real life, meeting a real person to like, and love, in spite of imperfections, where we can, finally, use our emotions to connect. And further, a real person, as opposed to a glamorous page, does not disappear as we turn the lights off.
1
A better prescription than Playboy might be time on a farm where reproduction puts food on the table and all this squeamishness about teens learning about sex is a lot less leering and a bit more informed. We live in an experimental society. Things are so complicated today, right? When the good old days hearken back to Playboy or Twenty Muleteam Borax we may lose our self-absurdness our moral compass per se. We definitely lose our connection to the real organic world.
Only catastrophes can reunit us with our humanity today. But then, W stole that too, when he used the security blunder of 9/11 to herd us like cattle into a coral of fear and distrust which Republicans strive to prevent us from leaving.
Murder, shootings, exploded or burning bodies, brutality of every kind is displayed everyday on television, in movies, on the news. It is acceptable in America to have mass shootings on a regular basis, yet, sex still rankles our consciousness while guns are defended as a right? This sounds disjointed. It is disjointed. Parents are so worried about their children discovering sex which all children find out about as nature intends. Grow up. Worry about guns. Support Planned Parenthood and support re-instituting a "well regulated" gun law. Sex education is a parent's job, not preventing it or spying on your kids. There are distasteful dehumanizing things on the internet but there are also healthy sexual "teachable" moments too. Tiptoeing around arouses curiosity.
Only catastrophes can reunit us with our humanity today. But then, W stole that too, when he used the security blunder of 9/11 to herd us like cattle into a coral of fear and distrust which Republicans strive to prevent us from leaving.
Murder, shootings, exploded or burning bodies, brutality of every kind is displayed everyday on television, in movies, on the news. It is acceptable in America to have mass shootings on a regular basis, yet, sex still rankles our consciousness while guns are defended as a right? This sounds disjointed. It is disjointed. Parents are so worried about their children discovering sex which all children find out about as nature intends. Grow up. Worry about guns. Support Planned Parenthood and support re-instituting a "well regulated" gun law. Sex education is a parent's job, not preventing it or spying on your kids. There are distasteful dehumanizing things on the internet but there are also healthy sexual "teachable" moments too. Tiptoeing around arouses curiosity.
8
I'm likely your age, and sneaked a peak, as a lad, at my dad's Playboy issues. Two observations: I wasn't interested in most playmates. Just the ones that seemed the most "real", and sleeping on the other side of the wall from my parents room they seemed to have a enjoyable sex life; which sounded pretty "mutual". This monthly magazine probably had a role.
Even at age 13, I could explain to you the difference between a woman as an object (PB centerfold playmate) and a real human being. I infinitely prefer the latter.
Even at age 13, I could explain to you the difference between a woman as an object (PB centerfold playmate) and a real human being. I infinitely prefer the latter.
5
I remember staying at my older brothers seaside college apartment with my parents during summer break. Not only was I exposed to the wonders of living in a cheap apartment replete with fleas waiting for a body to feast on but also the joys of stumbling upon his & his fellow male college roommate's closet filled floor to ceiling with Playboy magazines. I thought I'd stumbled upon Sodom & Gomorrah as described to me in the fire & brimstone Sunday school stories where loose women lay spread eagle with suggestive bedroom eye glances at the camera in which every young male in the privacy of his own bedroom or bathroom stall could invoke fantasies of inconceivable Earthly delights. I must imagine that I marveled at the sheer physicality of the bodies which looked like real flesh like incarnations of my multiple Barbie doll collection. Reading about their favorite things to do which always seemed to gravitate towards the sensual was entertaining even as a mere child of 9 years old. At that age, I had a elementary school boyfriend with whom we shared dreams of joining the Peace Corp. & helping save the world. Now, fast forward forty sum years & the internet pushes pornography into internet searches of every elementary child whether they're exploring or not just by typing the same four letter words. It's almost as if every child lives around the corner from the red light district & they're exposed to explicit sexual material as a norm rather than an aberration.
4
I don't think anyone is sure what a 'real feminist' is anymore.
But the news that clueless 20 year olds are tweeting criticism of the great scholar Susan Brownmiller - and the great musician Chrissie Hynde - that's sad news indeed.
Every woman in this country owes a debt to Brownmiller who in 1975 wrote the first comprehensive book about sexual assault defining rape as a crime of violence rather than sex - I don't know where rape laws and our public perception of sexual assault would be today if not for Brownmiller's book. She helped all of us. She deserves our deepest gratitude.
Chrissie Hynde - a brilliant, uncompromising artist who confidently fronted an extraordinary rock band with her tough songs like "Brass In Pocket" and "Back On the Chain Gang" during the same years when Madonna was cavorting onstage in her underwear - the idea that people are criticizing Hynde for speaking honestly about being gang raped decades ago - I couldn't be more sad to hear that. Hynde has a right to remember and describe her assault any way she wants without conforming to other's expectations or politics because it happened to HER. I doubt she believed when she disclosed it that people would try to shame her about her perceptions. We love you, Chrissie. Women must speak honestly about their sexual assaults without criticism or blame because anything else is perpetuating a lie. Susan Brownmiller taught us that.
My deepest admiration and gratitude to both of these courageous women.
But the news that clueless 20 year olds are tweeting criticism of the great scholar Susan Brownmiller - and the great musician Chrissie Hynde - that's sad news indeed.
Every woman in this country owes a debt to Brownmiller who in 1975 wrote the first comprehensive book about sexual assault defining rape as a crime of violence rather than sex - I don't know where rape laws and our public perception of sexual assault would be today if not for Brownmiller's book. She helped all of us. She deserves our deepest gratitude.
Chrissie Hynde - a brilliant, uncompromising artist who confidently fronted an extraordinary rock band with her tough songs like "Brass In Pocket" and "Back On the Chain Gang" during the same years when Madonna was cavorting onstage in her underwear - the idea that people are criticizing Hynde for speaking honestly about being gang raped decades ago - I couldn't be more sad to hear that. Hynde has a right to remember and describe her assault any way she wants without conforming to other's expectations or politics because it happened to HER. I doubt she believed when she disclosed it that people would try to shame her about her perceptions. We love you, Chrissie. Women must speak honestly about their sexual assaults without criticism or blame because anything else is perpetuating a lie. Susan Brownmiller taught us that.
My deepest admiration and gratitude to both of these courageous women.
17
A wonderful article, especially the "confusing" part. I remember explaining to my son that if you are not confused you don't understand the situation...
We live in a largely puritanical society where if something feels good, it must be bad. We even use subtle expressions, like "decadent" chocolate and "obscene" prices, all the while admitting that Hugh Heffner really lived "the good life" in his mansion.
I remember the long series of articles regarding the Playboy Philosophy. Yes, I read most of those articles, after checking out all the pictures, of course, and it was excellent. Feminists who got past the photographs will probably agree that the Playboy Philosophy was impactful at the time and very helpful in the pursuit of equality.
A measure of the times is the title of this article: Longing for the Innocence of Playboy. Wow, have we progressed!
We live in a largely puritanical society where if something feels good, it must be bad. We even use subtle expressions, like "decadent" chocolate and "obscene" prices, all the while admitting that Hugh Heffner really lived "the good life" in his mansion.
I remember the long series of articles regarding the Playboy Philosophy. Yes, I read most of those articles, after checking out all the pictures, of course, and it was excellent. Feminists who got past the photographs will probably agree that the Playboy Philosophy was impactful at the time and very helpful in the pursuit of equality.
A measure of the times is the title of this article: Longing for the Innocence of Playboy. Wow, have we progressed!
4
"I explain that sex is the ultimate expression of love and intimacy between two consenting and financially independent adults in their 30s."
Simply comical, fantastical thinking of a mother who wants to avoid the difficult work of preparing her children for the world. Research clearly shows that most Americans are teenagers when they have sex for the first time and that sex is many different things to many different people and love often has nothing to do with it. Being honest with your children about the realities of sex is one the most caring things you can do as a parent.
Simply comical, fantastical thinking of a mother who wants to avoid the difficult work of preparing her children for the world. Research clearly shows that most Americans are teenagers when they have sex for the first time and that sex is many different things to many different people and love often has nothing to do with it. Being honest with your children about the realities of sex is one the most caring things you can do as a parent.
2
Pretty sure that was a joke. Made me laugh.
after all those Playboy magazines I learned the most beautiful woman is one I can share my ideas and dreams with more than one I can just look at in lust. I remember my beautiful girlfriends telling me their bodies were a curse that made them wonder what men really wanted. taking away the mystery by exposing sex explicitly online somehow reduces the mystery that Playboy so expertly presented. now that Playboy will show less flash they may open our minds through imagination
I'm less worried about my daughter stumbling onto hardcore porn by accident than I am by the idea of my sons finding it on purpose.
I'm one of those sons of the '70s who had experiences with Playboy. But there were other rougher, rawer images in circulation back then as well. In 1981, every sixth-grade boy knew of the movie "Deep Throat" and more or less what it was about. And then somebody would find a sodden cache of hardcore mags under a scrap of plywood in the woods, corrugated with water damage but still useable for their intended purpose. We boys--THIS boy at least--found those images of staged but actual sex disturbing but intensely interesting and, yes, arousing, and when some other kid had taken the magazines away to hoard them for himself, I continued to fantasize about what I had seen, jonesing for another look.
My fear about the ubiquity of porn today is that it will ruin actual sex for my sons. When there is a bottomless ocean of masturbational fantasies available at your whim, each one engineered to make the male brain light up a hit of crack and when a teenaged boy is free to take that hit five times a day if he likes, what happens to him when he enters the messy, confusing, profound dance of giving pleasure to and receiving pleasure from another person?
I'm one of those sons of the '70s who had experiences with Playboy. But there were other rougher, rawer images in circulation back then as well. In 1981, every sixth-grade boy knew of the movie "Deep Throat" and more or less what it was about. And then somebody would find a sodden cache of hardcore mags under a scrap of plywood in the woods, corrugated with water damage but still useable for their intended purpose. We boys--THIS boy at least--found those images of staged but actual sex disturbing but intensely interesting and, yes, arousing, and when some other kid had taken the magazines away to hoard them for himself, I continued to fantasize about what I had seen, jonesing for another look.
My fear about the ubiquity of porn today is that it will ruin actual sex for my sons. When there is a bottomless ocean of masturbational fantasies available at your whim, each one engineered to make the male brain light up a hit of crack and when a teenaged boy is free to take that hit five times a day if he likes, what happens to him when he enters the messy, confusing, profound dance of giving pleasure to and receiving pleasure from another person?
52
What happens to him?
Tinder. Hook-ups. Internet porn.
Tinder. Hook-ups. Internet porn.
Meh. The millennials, who grew up with the internet are from all evidence less promiscuous than the Baby Boomers or Gen X. So there's not a whole lot of evidence that things are getting worse and worse in terms of sex for women or for men. Perhaps the internet is scaring people away from promiscuity. Arguably, the internet is an improvement over Maxim and Playboy in one respect - it demonstrates male taste varies a lot and therefore a woman shouldn't get anxious about fitting a particular ideal because that ideal doesn't really exist.
3
Many magazine cater to a given reader segments fantasy or imagination be it Cosmo, Playboy, Esquire, Car & Driver, Homes Beautiful, etc. The intention of the magazines and the respective advertisers is to lull the reader's imagination and naturally, get the reader to buy something either refrerenced in an article or from the advertisement. None of this is bad unless it becomes a substitution for everyday reality. Voverism let's a reader if only temporarily esacpe one's mundane or overloaded life, it's cheap way to live one's dreams without the expense or the risk. The shame that the article fails to mention is how many fewer men and women read anything and magazine are in danger of becoming extinct or at least horrible shambles of their former selves in terms of content and quality. Mazine content these days is getting thinner than my hair.
4
Sumeria, Thomas Edison, Hugh Hefner, and AOL all started the easy use of organized civilization, distribution of electricity on wires, pics of naked females, and email in turn - and all were put out of business by others with better ideas.
This is a testament to personal initiative and private industry in a capitalist system. Were we always stuck with authoritarian government full of elites determined to run everybody else's lives, there would be no end to the frustration of people looking for true freedom of choice.
As we enter a political season whereone side insists that government must be trusted to make everyone's decisions through more and more regulation, I hope voters will see where some of the noisiest would take us - had they the power.
This is a testament to personal initiative and private industry in a capitalist system. Were we always stuck with authoritarian government full of elites determined to run everybody else's lives, there would be no end to the frustration of people looking for true freedom of choice.
As we enter a political season whereone side insists that government must be trusted to make everyone's decisions through more and more regulation, I hope voters will see where some of the noisiest would take us - had they the power.
1
The current porn overload that my teens, 15 year old boy, 13 year old girl, are no doubt seeing while multitasking homework appalls me. If they find it erotic I cannot believe that this will not pervert their senses.
When I grew up I had not a clue how womens genitalia looked. And despite the Vagina monologues saying I should it did not stop me and my mate pursuing every possible means of sexual pleasure.
Fast forward to my daughter thinking ANAL is a right for her boyfriends. That hook ups must be short term. To my son thinking that bondage to the nth degree with its downright sadism merged with sex, is what women want. To the only success being granted to Madonna, Mylie, Kim, Rihanna, who sell their bodies along with very very bad music. To the preference the New York Times gives to "Anaconda" over Sophie Anne Mutter playing Beethovens Violin Concerto...
Its a race to the bottom of crass ugly culture where porn rules. That is not liberation. Its subjugation.
When I grew up I had not a clue how womens genitalia looked. And despite the Vagina monologues saying I should it did not stop me and my mate pursuing every possible means of sexual pleasure.
Fast forward to my daughter thinking ANAL is a right for her boyfriends. That hook ups must be short term. To my son thinking that bondage to the nth degree with its downright sadism merged with sex, is what women want. To the only success being granted to Madonna, Mylie, Kim, Rihanna, who sell their bodies along with very very bad music. To the preference the New York Times gives to "Anaconda" over Sophie Anne Mutter playing Beethovens Violin Concerto...
Its a race to the bottom of crass ugly culture where porn rules. That is not liberation. Its subjugation.
71
I'm flashing on the movie, "It's a Wonderful Life", and thinking that we now live in Pottersville.
Gone are the days when folks made a living wage...now we are all commodiities for someone to make money from. Everything is marketed including human interaction.
Gone are the days when folks made a living wage...now we are all commodiities for someone to make money from. Everything is marketed including human interaction.
1
Ignore the hype. The evidence is that millennials average fewer sexual partners than Generation X or Baby Boomers. Hook-up culture is like swingers from the 1970s - it gets a lot of press but most people aren't involved. And all the evidence is that most young adults want to get married, sooner or later. Just because there's all this weirdness online doesn't mean you want or have to access it. If your daughter thinks her boyfriends have a right to sexual demands that's on you for not teaching her to drop such boys and find someone who treats her like a person. As for Madonna et al - modern pop culture has a lot more strong female characters now than in the 1980s. I'm not saying we're in an egalitarian utopia, I'm just noting that popular culture has gotten a lot better for women even as the internet grew and went mainstream. Any feminist longing for the good old days has a poor memory.
As a pseudo sophisticated 13 and 14 year old boy I was glued to a column in Playboy called the Playboy Advisor - a guide from everything from the most "sophisticated" choices in home stereo systems to wine and clothing to "relationships".
As a sign of how innocent that age really was, the most terrible sexual malady to make it to print in Playboy was "premature ejaculation" - something that, four years before I would ever have sex, I worried that I had!
Imagine a world without HIV, where the only limitations on sexual experimentation were the fear of an easily treatable venereal disease, and where sexual sensibilities were still innocent enough to be aroused by an image of a partially clad female wearing cutoff jeans - no whips or chains in evidence.
As a sign of how innocent that age really was, the most terrible sexual malady to make it to print in Playboy was "premature ejaculation" - something that, four years before I would ever have sex, I worried that I had!
Imagine a world without HIV, where the only limitations on sexual experimentation were the fear of an easily treatable venereal disease, and where sexual sensibilities were still innocent enough to be aroused by an image of a partially clad female wearing cutoff jeans - no whips or chains in evidence.
1
When I was fourteen in the 60's I occasionally babysat for friends of my parents. One evening after having put their kids to bed and having finished the homework I'd brought, I began to lazily scan the titles on their well stocked living room bookshelves. When I saw Henry Miller's "Tropic of Cancer" I was aware enough to know that I had stumbled across forbidden (at least at my age) fruit, and began to leaf through the pages looking for anything related to "sex." I found plenty, but most of it pretty incomprehensible (tame by today's standards) and it actually left me feeling queasy for days afterwards. My parents were not at all "puritanical", but I wouldn't have dreamed of mentioning it to them. I truly shudder when I think about the things adolescents and even children can access on the Internet and can well imagine them being" freaked out" and their parents even more so.
7
Wonderfully crafted and fun article. However, the comment that “sex is the ultimate expression of love and intimacy between two consenting and financially independent adults in their 30s” illustrates a fundamental obstacle to finding a solution to the worldwide practice of rape.
There are five basic drives common to all mammals. Humans have added elaborate ritual and significance to each of these. Hunger: the concept of gourmet. Thirst: wine tasting. Sleep: king size beds. Breathing: Yoga. Sex (reproduction): Pornography, romantic love.
Each of these basic drives manifests itself with a compelling physical urge. Most animals simply reduce the tension and eat, drink, sleep, breath, and have sex when the opportunity presents itself. Only humans try to thwart the very urges that produced our species in the first place. Farm children grow up knowing that sex is a grunty, sweaty, awkward joist between two animals who may or may not even know each other…usually, but not always involving a male and female. The idea that sex is exclusively about romantic love is not a sellable concept to farm kids. In general we teach our kids not to eat junk food, not to drink alcohol, not to fall asleep in class, not to breathe under water. In short, we teach our children that urges should be regulated. The same approach should be taken about the urge to have sex. There are times and places that are suitable and others not. Basic lesson: Boys…Girls are not toys. Girls…Boys think you are a toy.
There are five basic drives common to all mammals. Humans have added elaborate ritual and significance to each of these. Hunger: the concept of gourmet. Thirst: wine tasting. Sleep: king size beds. Breathing: Yoga. Sex (reproduction): Pornography, romantic love.
Each of these basic drives manifests itself with a compelling physical urge. Most animals simply reduce the tension and eat, drink, sleep, breath, and have sex when the opportunity presents itself. Only humans try to thwart the very urges that produced our species in the first place. Farm children grow up knowing that sex is a grunty, sweaty, awkward joist between two animals who may or may not even know each other…usually, but not always involving a male and female. The idea that sex is exclusively about romantic love is not a sellable concept to farm kids. In general we teach our kids not to eat junk food, not to drink alcohol, not to fall asleep in class, not to breathe under water. In short, we teach our children that urges should be regulated. The same approach should be taken about the urge to have sex. There are times and places that are suitable and others not. Basic lesson: Boys…Girls are not toys. Girls…Boys think you are a toy.
10
I think you forgot elimination.
Girls…Do not treat yourself as if you are a toy.
(Legitimate) filmmakers and art photographers have long understood that the suggestion of nudity or a sex act is much more erotic than the explicit display of that nudity or act.
That helps explain why regular consumers of video of frank nudity/sex are the fringe, and are probably deviant individuals in everyday social interactions.
Thus, it should not worry the author (or others) what today's youth find on the Net; i.e., The worst stuff is boring to normal adolescents and adults alike.
That helps explain why regular consumers of video of frank nudity/sex are the fringe, and are probably deviant individuals in everyday social interactions.
Thus, it should not worry the author (or others) what today's youth find on the Net; i.e., The worst stuff is boring to normal adolescents and adults alike.
1
The Salamagundi Club was the setting, women were eying in my direction and I felt self conscious because I had not created an art piece that the Club was exhibiting that evening in the 1970s, even though I had delved in painting and had an appreciation for the creative and beautiful. To my surprise and disappointment however, the stares weren't for me but for Betty Friedan who was circling back to back with me, in unison as we viewed the exhibit.
Playboy, like Ms. Friedan started a revolution and they both had their place at the time.
Playboy, like Ms. Friedan started a revolution and they both had their place at the time.
3
Intensely objectifying women in the era being discussed hurt progress for women as men and women were openly encouraged to treat women as walking floor shows to be judged, used, and dismissed. We were turned in to consumers of everything visible, textural, and so on about women. There’s no putting the genie back in the lamp immediately but stoking consumer lust hurt men as well since they too were objectified as chiseled jaws, sports masters, and suits. When we talk about the loneliness in society and all the health and social problems it causes we should look early at how wrongly we have objectified people of all stripes and how it ultimately bankrupts us all and completely devalues our real lives. We fuel our lust with our very souls.
1
Victoria's Secret is in in every major mall, and the Sports Illustrated swim suit issue is a major national event. It is ironic that the flagrant marketing of women as sex objects does not seem to trouble those who oppose abortion and birth control. Perhaps they are the two sides of the same coin, an effort to put women in their place.
69
Most people who oppose abortion and birth control (the former are much more numerous) do so because they claim they respect a right to life, even a life that may be if copulation and post copulation are not interfered with. It has noting to do with respecting or disrespecting women.
2
There is no easy answer to the topic but it is sad and revealing that even in the 21st century in the USA, women's bodies are used to advertise almost everything that we are supposed to want and need and buy. Close ups of breasts and posteriors are all totally OK to sell a car or perfume. The issue is not actually pornography at all but how our society actually values and regards women. Porn is just one aspect of that.
31
The arrival of Playboy, like so many other "products", marked the gradual movement toward treating sexuality as something ordinary. Human beings, insatiably curious, need to pull things apart; in the process, we strip the object of its essence, its value. So it is no suprise that we went from girls, to barechested freaks, to shots of pubic hair, to labia. Many men of the age probably would argue that the first titillating shots, before the tri-fold center, were breathtaking...eventually we needed to carpet-bomb the magazine with more routine displays of nudity. In the end, nudity makes the human form less poetic and strips the love relationship of all the depth that our less human side possesses.
My college-age son said that he wished he could have grown up in an age when "dating" and courtship was the common means to melt another's heart. But college encounters are now uncreative, often drunken, acts of immediate gratification today; negotiations of quick pleasures that fail at longer-term fulfillment.
The conversation with my son reminded me of my older brother, a Playboy hoarder who stashed a dozen copies under his nightstand for nocturnal perusal. His wife, the first of three, became increasingly insistent that he read something more uplifting, eventually throwing them out and incurring his wrath.
I like the path my son is searching for a lot more than the one my brother chose. There are few colleges with the wisdom or the courage to stand up and help him.
My college-age son said that he wished he could have grown up in an age when "dating" and courtship was the common means to melt another's heart. But college encounters are now uncreative, often drunken, acts of immediate gratification today; negotiations of quick pleasures that fail at longer-term fulfillment.
The conversation with my son reminded me of my older brother, a Playboy hoarder who stashed a dozen copies under his nightstand for nocturnal perusal. His wife, the first of three, became increasingly insistent that he read something more uplifting, eventually throwing them out and incurring his wrath.
I like the path my son is searching for a lot more than the one my brother chose. There are few colleges with the wisdom or the courage to stand up and help him.
22
Excellent article, thank you. My father had a stack of Playboys in the closet. I found them at 13. This was an early experience of women made into a marketable commodity, as sex objects. Later, my mother admitted that the mags in the closet bothered her all the years they were married.
I contend that Playboy was not innocent, that the early feminists were right, that pornography in any form is a very dangerous and unhealthy experience.
I am distinctly in the minority.
Pornography encourages sexual response to something that is not human, but bits of light on a computer screen, or paper. It creates an idealized, unreal version of the sexual experience, in which our personal gratification is paramount, and the object of our arousal is not human, but an image made to serve our pleasure. Research shows that this is carried into a real sexual experience, with many destructive results.
No one has yet grasped the seriousness of the pornography epidemic which the Internet has unleashed. In a terrifying portion of American households, the kids of all ages have seen porn on the Internet, warping their understanding of sex. In just as many households, fathers are behind closed doors masturbating to computer screens, while the family is carrying on without them. There are many hours lost to porn watching in the workplace.
Porn is an extremely dangerous drug and must at least be regulated as drugs are. As with smoking, we must know the hazards.
I contend that Playboy was not innocent, that the early feminists were right, that pornography in any form is a very dangerous and unhealthy experience.
I am distinctly in the minority.
Pornography encourages sexual response to something that is not human, but bits of light on a computer screen, or paper. It creates an idealized, unreal version of the sexual experience, in which our personal gratification is paramount, and the object of our arousal is not human, but an image made to serve our pleasure. Research shows that this is carried into a real sexual experience, with many destructive results.
No one has yet grasped the seriousness of the pornography epidemic which the Internet has unleashed. In a terrifying portion of American households, the kids of all ages have seen porn on the Internet, warping their understanding of sex. In just as many households, fathers are behind closed doors masturbating to computer screens, while the family is carrying on without them. There are many hours lost to porn watching in the workplace.
Porn is an extremely dangerous drug and must at least be regulated as drugs are. As with smoking, we must know the hazards.
37
Pornophobia in the guise of science leading to emotionally derived censorship is not the answer. There are so many changes occurring so quickly in our culture it is nearly impossible to study cause and effect of any single change, but we should try.
How exactly is access to porn affecting relationships? What if just the lack of genuine eye to eye communication between children is a much more socially debilitating circumstance as they spend their time gazing at their smart phones instead of engaging directly with their piers?
In the end, probably the only way to turn back culture is by was of draconian government intervention, but meanwhile, let's not jump to conclusions based on fear of change. Gauging the effects of explicit pornography on our culture is a huge scientific challenge.
In any case, I'm not sure Playboys artificial representation of sex is any less detrimental to our mental health than the most raunchy internet porn.
How exactly is access to porn affecting relationships? What if just the lack of genuine eye to eye communication between children is a much more socially debilitating circumstance as they spend their time gazing at their smart phones instead of engaging directly with their piers?
In the end, probably the only way to turn back culture is by was of draconian government intervention, but meanwhile, let's not jump to conclusions based on fear of change. Gauging the effects of explicit pornography on our culture is a huge scientific challenge.
In any case, I'm not sure Playboys artificial representation of sex is any less detrimental to our mental health than the most raunchy internet porn.
1
From the point of view of a boy who entered adolescence pre-internet I can only imagine the pitfalls nowadays when even if your smartphone is blocked your friend's might not be. Some of your concern is real, but I think for many people religion, family, a good work ethic, etc. can temper the need for sex as a commodity. Men have daughters and mothers too. It's a point feminists for some reason forget.
"I contend that Playboy was not innocent, that the early feminists were right, that pornography in any form is a very dangerous and unhealthy experience.
I am distinctly in the minority."
What did you look at when you were young and masturbated? Pictures of anvils and trees?
Pornography isn't the issue. Mass media titillation is. Young people learn all the wrong things about sex, life and values more from the Kardashians and their ilk than they do from what is most commonly described as pornography.
I am distinctly in the minority."
What did you look at when you were young and masturbated? Pictures of anvils and trees?
Pornography isn't the issue. Mass media titillation is. Young people learn all the wrong things about sex, life and values more from the Kardashians and their ilk than they do from what is most commonly described as pornography.
6
When I was a kid, our young uncle lived with us for a time, in the attic bedroom. We mostly stayed out of there, but one day I went in, and saw several pictures of naked women ("3-page pullouts") taped to the walls.
I was surprised more than anything, and asked my mother why my uncle had done this. My mother said, "He likes to look at them."
That seemed like a good explanation to me. And part of the reason it still seems like a good idea is because it maintained his privacy.
Some naked ladies, who like walks on the beach. OK.
It's that sense of privacy we've lost--it's almost as if privacy has become more offensive that naked ladies.
I was surprised more than anything, and asked my mother why my uncle had done this. My mother said, "He likes to look at them."
That seemed like a good explanation to me. And part of the reason it still seems like a good idea is because it maintained his privacy.
Some naked ladies, who like walks on the beach. OK.
It's that sense of privacy we've lost--it's almost as if privacy has become more offensive that naked ladies.
14
Innocent naked ladies are harmless guilty pleasure for many males. Internet porn is harmless guilty pleasure for many males. I don't think that either much matters in the scheme of things because guilty pleasures will never be as pleasurable and guilt-inducing as dealing with real females.
12
Dreamer!
If your daughters are old enough to have a cell phone and a laptop, then they have already crossed that threshold and you simply aren't aware of it.
I so very many ways, we are on the threshold of a human experience undreamed of in our way too short existence on this planet. Never has the Chinese Curse been more appropriate: "May you live in interesting times."
If your daughters are old enough to have a cell phone and a laptop, then they have already crossed that threshold and you simply aren't aware of it.
I so very many ways, we are on the threshold of a human experience undreamed of in our way too short existence on this planet. Never has the Chinese Curse been more appropriate: "May you live in interesting times."
8
the author says she has guards on those items.
1
You missed the point completely. Trying to stop a little kid from seeing porn is like trying to stop cosmic rays in today's "Brave New World".
1
I'm of the same generation. What a pity I had to learn about sex behind the barn door as it was put in those long ago days of the early sixties. Yes we all have Playboy stories. Mine was with an budding young entrepreneurial friend who would let you look at a issue for a quarter that came out of his dad's stash out in the garage. What bothers me about this piece is that the young boy was 'freaked' out. Why had he not been counseled earlier. I did the google search mentioned and found it all rather tame and mostly not as suggestive as many ad's on TV. Let alone the 'hot babe' of many games common to this age group. Sex happens. You could sooner stop the planet in it's orbit than stop it. This kid should have been prepared at a much earlier age. It's doable.
5
"consenting and financially independent adults"
That's rich. Perhaps meant as a joke, but cynical as I am, I sort of doubt it. Maybe if you, and other parents, got rid of the computers and the phones, told them to go outside, they'd play Doctor on their own and learn something. It worked for most of us.
Oh, but I forget. Technology is good for us.
LOL indeed.
That's rich. Perhaps meant as a joke, but cynical as I am, I sort of doubt it. Maybe if you, and other parents, got rid of the computers and the phones, told them to go outside, they'd play Doctor on their own and learn something. It worked for most of us.
Oh, but I forget. Technology is good for us.
LOL indeed.
8
It was a joke. The end of the sentence (" . . . in their thirties.") cemented that.
2
Playboy was a pioneer in visually sculpting women, not necessarily photographing them. The "innocence" was fabricated, often surgically.
4
Ah, for the halcyon days of discovering a stack of dusty Playboys in dad’s garage under piles of old rags; of the pithiness of the articles (ahem); of the brilliant sophistication delivered by every Gahan Wilson cartoon. Them’s was the days, never to come again, at least for me – and, apparently, for anyone else, as well.
But … now for something completely different.
Innocence is overrated. With every American age there come new tests that are hard on people. Our age is challenged by the freedom that comes not just of the ubiquity of Internet sex but of the freedom to express political opinion by Citizens United. We’re inundated with sex just as we’re inundated with conflicting and excessive opinion seeking our votes. We need to get through it and recognize in the midst of such chaos the value of balance.
There was a time when young people came to NYC to test themselves, because then as now you could indulge any imaginable vice and see if you could survive it whole, build a worthy life of character and purpose despite the temptation to lose oneself in license. Then, it was a choice people could make who wished to test themselves. Today, it’s everywhere and ALL are forced to such tests.
I don’t long for the innocence of Playboy, or for pre-Citizens days. I recognize that today we have different and more demanding and universal tests separating losers from winners while still young; and parents are more pointedly challenged to support their kids in becoming winners.
But … now for something completely different.
Innocence is overrated. With every American age there come new tests that are hard on people. Our age is challenged by the freedom that comes not just of the ubiquity of Internet sex but of the freedom to express political opinion by Citizens United. We’re inundated with sex just as we’re inundated with conflicting and excessive opinion seeking our votes. We need to get through it and recognize in the midst of such chaos the value of balance.
There was a time when young people came to NYC to test themselves, because then as now you could indulge any imaginable vice and see if you could survive it whole, build a worthy life of character and purpose despite the temptation to lose oneself in license. Then, it was a choice people could make who wished to test themselves. Today, it’s everywhere and ALL are forced to such tests.
I don’t long for the innocence of Playboy, or for pre-Citizens days. I recognize that today we have different and more demanding and universal tests separating losers from winners while still young; and parents are more pointedly challenged to support their kids in becoming winners.
4
"Winners and losers" and there you can trace the path through Pinochet loving Hayek right back to the aristocrats who feared Democracy. Hierarchy loving, democracy hating paleo conservatives vs people who actually believe that all human beings are worthy.
1
Don:
Welcome to reality: I know it doesn't suit some, but, oddly, reality couldn't care less whom it suits.
Welcome to reality: I know it doesn't suit some, but, oddly, reality couldn't care less whom it suits.
"Right now, I’ve got parental blockers on their phones and laptop . I monitor their TV and movies. I explain that sex is the ultimate expression of love and intimacy between two consenting and financially independent adults in their 30s"
It is called censorship, and it never, ever has solved anything. To re-use a good quote: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself" You scare me.
It is called censorship, and it never, ever has solved anything. To re-use a good quote: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself" You scare me.
4
“You can’t paint yourself into a corner and then say, ‘Whose brush is this?’ ”
This is getting to the heart of the "blaming the victim" problem. Let's take a standard example. You are wearing high heels, a short skirt, and a cleavage-revealing top, and as you walk down the street past a group of guys hanging out on a corner, you get some unwanted attention. Maybe you get groped. Whose fault is that? This one's easy -- in most jurisdictions the law says you were assaulted, so the guy is clearly at fault in the eyes of the law. But let's back it off. Maybe you just get some comments and wolf whistles making you very uncomfortable. Whose fault is that? Since there's no law against acting like a boorish jerk, the law is silent here. Some might say you are guilty of failing to dress in a milieu-appropriate manner. Or that you're guilty of having unreasonable expectations of how a bunch of guys on the corner might respond to your appearance. I think the use of the word "guilty" here is inappropriate.
But are we "blaming the victim" to say this outcome shouldn't have come as a big surprise?
This is getting to the heart of the "blaming the victim" problem. Let's take a standard example. You are wearing high heels, a short skirt, and a cleavage-revealing top, and as you walk down the street past a group of guys hanging out on a corner, you get some unwanted attention. Maybe you get groped. Whose fault is that? This one's easy -- in most jurisdictions the law says you were assaulted, so the guy is clearly at fault in the eyes of the law. But let's back it off. Maybe you just get some comments and wolf whistles making you very uncomfortable. Whose fault is that? Since there's no law against acting like a boorish jerk, the law is silent here. Some might say you are guilty of failing to dress in a milieu-appropriate manner. Or that you're guilty of having unreasonable expectations of how a bunch of guys on the corner might respond to your appearance. I think the use of the word "guilty" here is inappropriate.
But are we "blaming the victim" to say this outcome shouldn't have come as a big surprise?
8
DMG please stay with me on this. Let's turn the tables.
I'm hanging out with a couple of my gal pals working on the town garden in front of City Hall. A handsome young man wearing only athletic shorts and running shoes saunters by, sweat dripping from his brow.
Do we wolf whistle? No.
Do we (grope) sexually assault him? No.
Women understand that such behavior is inappropriate and that the young man isn't sending out the signal that he wants sexual attention from us. He's just in his own groove, just like the 20-something restaurant hostess with the leggy stride and the short skirt on her way to work.
Enjoy the view. That's human nature. But please keep your comments and wandering hands to yourself. That's called civil society.
I'm hanging out with a couple of my gal pals working on the town garden in front of City Hall. A handsome young man wearing only athletic shorts and running shoes saunters by, sweat dripping from his brow.
Do we wolf whistle? No.
Do we (grope) sexually assault him? No.
Women understand that such behavior is inappropriate and that the young man isn't sending out the signal that he wants sexual attention from us. He's just in his own groove, just like the 20-something restaurant hostess with the leggy stride and the short skirt on her way to work.
Enjoy the view. That's human nature. But please keep your comments and wandering hands to yourself. That's called civil society.
6
I don't associate Playboy with innocence. I associate it with predatory dirty old men like Hugh Hefner and Bill Cosby. Yuck.
90
I associate it with women who pretend to enjoy having sex with men like Hugh Hefner and Bill Cosby for money or fame.
Yuck.
Yuck.
1
"Feminists still can’t agree."
Um, that's the point of feminism. Women being free to think for ourselves. No "agreement" is required!
Um, that's the point of feminism. Women being free to think for ourselves. No "agreement" is required!
77
However, if you don't agree with the politically correct thinking, you may be called a "female impersonator".....as one "revered" feminist icon referred to Texas senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson a while back.
2
On the serious matter of young women and drinking: Rape is wrong. Sex with a partner unable to give consent is wrong. Notwithstanding, it is never a good idea for young women-- or anyone else-- to drink to the point that they are more vulnerable to unwanted sex.
101
"Unwanted sex"? I think there's a single-syllable word for that.
2
The Fifties never fails to evoke nostalgia...
Playboy was a fantasy mag designed to promote the so-called "good life" and sell the associated bourgeois accouterments, in my view.
Nothing real about it...not sexy.
Marketing vehicle, pure and simple.
The women were like the ones in the beauty contests or the ones who draped themselves incongruously against cars at the auto expos, their photos destined for calendars on the wall of some gas station.
Like most men, I love to look at beautiful women, even now that I am old.
Unfortunately, most images, then and now, betray the beauty of the female form. The crass artlessness of commercialism is somehow capable of rendering even the most beautiful women in the world unattractive.
Most images of models from today's fashion world leave me utterly cold.
My wife still captivates me, though, even after thirty-five years of marriage. Love enhances a woman's image in ways a photo-shop program simply cannot touch.
Playboy was a fantasy mag designed to promote the so-called "good life" and sell the associated bourgeois accouterments, in my view.
Nothing real about it...not sexy.
Marketing vehicle, pure and simple.
The women were like the ones in the beauty contests or the ones who draped themselves incongruously against cars at the auto expos, their photos destined for calendars on the wall of some gas station.
Like most men, I love to look at beautiful women, even now that I am old.
Unfortunately, most images, then and now, betray the beauty of the female form. The crass artlessness of commercialism is somehow capable of rendering even the most beautiful women in the world unattractive.
Most images of models from today's fashion world leave me utterly cold.
My wife still captivates me, though, even after thirty-five years of marriage. Love enhances a woman's image in ways a photo-shop program simply cannot touch.
145
Let's hear it for Marilyn Monroe and Jack Kennedy!
taopraxis, your wife is one lucky woman.
2
Pornography all starts so "innocently" until it eventually leads to hard-core pornography.
Hef is partly responsible for the acceptance and ideology of the clean-cut, all-American. neighbor-next-door center spreads of naked women that has helped produce the latest statistics of one out of three teenage girls becoming pregnant.
Ex-Playboy harem-mate, Holly Madison described Hefner (who personally interviews all girls) in her book, “Down The Rabbit Hole” as a “controlling megalomaniac” who enforced strict 9 p.m. curfew for his harem of “girlfriends” and forbade from fraternizing with mansion staffers.
She said his biweekly bedroom routine involved blondes in flannel pajamas smoking marijuana and watching pornography., among other things.”
1
For now, at least we still have sex. We don't create ourselves in test tubes only. We haven't gotten into GMO'ing humans, and pray we never do, but that might be a decision we will need to make, if we want to stay being authentic humans as nature designed us and not us desiging nature. Meanwhile, let's enjoy our humanity, whether we air brush it or not.
36
@Carolyn Egeli
Your tepid defense of sex, monogamy, and fidelity gives ground in a thousand little ways each decade that passes.
We will GMO our food, because we can. We will manipulate human genes when we are able. And we will test tube our children, because nobody has the courage to stand up and tell another person it is wrong.
Chance and suffering are great developers of character. And the present generation, airbrushed and groomed for greatness, are struggling under their parents quest for immortality, freedom, and "humanity"...however you choose to define that very vague term.
Your tepid defense of sex, monogamy, and fidelity gives ground in a thousand little ways each decade that passes.
We will GMO our food, because we can. We will manipulate human genes when we are able. And we will test tube our children, because nobody has the courage to stand up and tell another person it is wrong.
Chance and suffering are great developers of character. And the present generation, airbrushed and groomed for greatness, are struggling under their parents quest for immortality, freedom, and "humanity"...however you choose to define that very vague term.
Wonderful essay. I'm glad my Idaughters have to deal with this, and not me. And 32 years from now, will modern porn be to 2047 porn as Playboy was to the present incarnation. Virtual reality? Fembots?
37
".. 32 years from now, will modern porn be to 2047 porn as Playboy was to the present incarnation. Virtual reality? Fembots?"
Probably.
Probably.
1
@Richard
"I'm glad my daughters have to deal with this, and not me."
Quite a statement for a father to make. The march of liberal and libertine ways leaves many victims in its wake. Sometimes we would be wise to own up to the bankruptcy of granting ourselves unbounded liberties and consider those, like your daughters, who will be ground under its wheels.
Urban liberals are blind to the many ways that the less educated and less wealthy, but no less American, are force-fed the ideals of the privileged. Fidelity and monogamy are quaint relics, and the single Moms and two-income households straining to pay for childcare are its products.
No problem the liberal claims: start more government programs to watch the children and lawyer up when your rights are abridged.
"I'm glad my daughters have to deal with this, and not me."
Quite a statement for a father to make. The march of liberal and libertine ways leaves many victims in its wake. Sometimes we would be wise to own up to the bankruptcy of granting ourselves unbounded liberties and consider those, like your daughters, who will be ground under its wheels.
Urban liberals are blind to the many ways that the less educated and less wealthy, but no less American, are force-fed the ideals of the privileged. Fidelity and monogamy are quaint relics, and the single Moms and two-income households straining to pay for childcare are its products.
No problem the liberal claims: start more government programs to watch the children and lawyer up when your rights are abridged.
1