Community Chat

[KathyPet]

---

@Blingqueen023 wrote:

Have to say he was way classier then Larry Flint.  

---

THat isn't saying much.  JUst about anybody is classier than LArry Flynt.

[mistriTsquirrel]

---

@sidsmom wrote:

---

@sunshine45 wrote:

@mistriTsquirrel

if you google, there are TONS of articles calling him a visionary.

maybe not everyone saw him in that way, but there are many who did.

Hugh Hefner, visionary editor who founded Playboy magazine, dies at 91

His magazine was shocking at the time, but it quickly found a large and receptive audience and was a principal force behind the sexual revolution of the 1960s.

Mr. Hefner brought nudity out from under the counter, but he was more than the emperor of a land with no clothes. From the beginning, he had literary aspirations for Playboy, hiring top writers to give his magazine cultural credibility. It became a running joke that the cognoscenti read Playboy “for the articles” and demurely averted their eyes from the pages depicting bare-breasted women.

Playboy also had a surprisingly high readership among members of the clergy — who received a 25 percent subscription discount — and women.

“Hefner was, first and foremost, a brilliant businessman,” David Allyn, author of “Make Love, Not War: The Sexual Revolution, an Unfettered History,” told The Washington Post in an interview. “He created Playboy at a time when America was entering a period of profound economic and social optimism. His brand of sexual liberalism fit perfectly with postwar aspirations.”

you can read more of this particular article on the washington post.

---

@sunshine45

Have you read the Rolling Stone article about him?

August, 2000 issue....just Google.

My radio station guys were talking about it.  

Interesting to hear a male’s perspective since a boy’s

first Playboy is almost a rite of passage.

---

Yes, and I'm sure it's the articles that draw them in.  I'm also sure that all of those guys are sad that a great civil rights activist is now gone.

I believe in freedom, and I think adult people have a right to pose nude, do adult films, publish adult material, etc., but I don't see why it should be considered an accomplishment or romanticized.  It's fodder for fantasies that is produced for money, not some noble pursuit.  It is what it is...let's not pretend it's something other than that.

It's great that HH had some sort of participation in the civil rights movement, but I don't think he really did women any favors.  And he wasn't Botticelli.  He put out a publication full of photos of "ideal" women that men put aside when they were done with it.  (You know what I mean.)

[Noel7]

---

@tansy wrote:

---

@NAES1 wrote:

---

@Oznell wrote:

Whew-- complex discussion.  Because of my particular world view, I believe that sexuality was created for marriage.  I think an intelligence greater than our own, knew that something as potent as sex was best served by the safeguards of marriage.

I do feel very sorry for Mr. Hefner, regret for the type of life he lived and encouraged several generations of people to live.

Perhaps, at the end, he regretted it in his heart.  I'm going to hope for that.

   I have read through ( I believe 'almost' every single one's thoughts) posts, and I do agree with @Oznell having- entitled to her own opinion as someone had said among these many ....> personal opinions. BUT! mine as well would be: 

 No one can say he's in a better place! 

---

Funny thing is though no one said Oznell wasn't entitled to her viewpoint...not that I saw:/

---

Not that I saw, either.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but that doesn't mean we all have to agree with it.

[truffle]

---

@Noel7 wrote:

Very interesting @truffle.   That information really surprises me.          

Holly Madison described unusual behavior, there are summaries in a Cosmopolitan article online.

What I appreciated about Hefner was that early on he condemned bigotry and supported gay relationships.

---

Yes he did but the life style that he was promoting lead to addiction - drug, alcohol, sex and did he promote safe sex? I doubt it. I'm sure people got the clap, HIV/Aids, herpes.  Before his mansions were renovated the smoke from cigs, hash, marijuana I'm sure permeated everything...the walls, curtains and furniture.  The mansion in LA was built around 1930 so not hard to imagine the dank smells everywhere and gross air.  But it's not like he associated with health nuts or people who thought very hard about how it would affect their future.   

[LinaL]

I'm a child of the 60s and 70s... sex, drugs and rock & roll. I have no problem with consenting adults engaging in any, all, or any combination of those things. I don't believe in censorship. I have no problem with porn. Nudity is not porn, btw. I, simply, found HH to be pathetic. He tried so hard with his caricature of an image.  And he put forth the image of women as objects. All his altruistic work is admirable.  BUT, you don't lift one group at the expense of another. 

I just found him to be a sad little man. Overcompensating for something, laughable and skeevy.

[Noel7]

---

@LinaL wrote:

I'm a child of the 60s and 70s... sex, drugs and rock & roll. I have no problem with consenting adults engaging in any, all, or any combination of those things. I don't believe in censorship. I have no problem with porn. Nudity is not porn, btw. I, simply, found HH to be pathetic. He tried so hard with his caricature of an image.  And he put forth the image of women as objects. All his altruistic work is admirable.  BUT, you don't lift one group at the expense of another. 

I just found him to be a sad little man. Overcompensating for something, laughable and skeevy.

---

I don't see HH as part of the se#ual revolution at all.  Aside from Cosby, HH also had his girlfriends pop pills before they got together.

HH was a very different class than Hippies and others promoting what was known as "free love". 

[giraffe77]

For the degradation he placed upon women ... he is now suffering the consequences.

[suzyQ3]

I've posted my opinion here already, but I was glad to see it so much more clearly stated in a piece today in the Los Angeles Times by Robin Acarian. A couple snippets:

Hugh Hefner preached sexual liberation, but he never stopped exploiting women's bodies

Above all, Hugh Hefner was in the fantasy business. Men’s fantasies, for sure. But women’s fantasies, too. Not their sexual fantasies, mind you. Their fantasies about male attention, self-esteem and success.

Really, he managed one of the greatest cons of all time: In the decades that American women were liberating themselves at home and in the workplace — and actually forcing the creation of new legal concepts like sexual harassment and date rape — he managed to convince many women that taking off their clothes for men’s pleasure was not just empowering, but a worthy goal in itself. The deception was also extremely profitable; Hefner became a multimillionaire along the way.

It's not a long piece and worth reading from the source: http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-abcarian-hefner-20170929-story.html

[Qshopper1991]

@sunshine45

An icon of what?  Of trashy porn?  Of sleeping around with every 20 something girl?  Of being a pimp?

A real non-class act.

Yeah, I would just love to be known for that.  LOL.