Community Chat

[Iluvhandbags]

---

@QueenDanceALot wrote:

I see nothing wrong with the naked female form.  Not at all.

I find a lot wrong with sleazebags who exploit them, though.

---

Yes, this!!! This is good! Thanks for saying it so succiently!

[Plaid Pants2]

Women are not exploited if they choose of their own free will to pose for Hef's magazine.

No one held a gun to their heads and forced them to do it.

In fact, a lot of women are PROUD of having been in his magazine.

They were not exploited.

[Nancy Drew]

I just felt nothing when he died. He was no great sexual liberator. The whole bunny thing proved that they were objects/animals for men. He paid women to take their clothes off. Some would do it for free. Good for them. The female body is beautiful but I don't think the men were just staring at the beauty but other activities so gross. As far as any social causes he might have gave money to, yeah big deal. Like mob bosses who rob and extort give to global warming and cancer research.

[Iluvhandbags]

---

@Plaid Pants2 wrote:

Women are not exploited if they choose of their own free will to pose for Hef's magazine.

No one held a gun to their heads and forced them to do it.

In fact, a lot of women are PROUD of having been in his magazine.

They were not exploited.

---

@Plaid Pants2

Free will, yes. They made a choice to do so. But make no bones about it, their choices allowed them to be exploited for the specific use of fulfillying another man's fantasy. By your same thought process, the many illegal immigrants who toil away in deplorable working conditions in our agicultural industry are not being exploited either, right? I mean no one is holding a gun to their head and forcing them to do these jobs either......

[Noel7]

Realistically, many were exploited even though they signed on the bottom line.  They did it for the money or the fame, and many had no idea what they were getting into.  Hef's women were all expected to partner with him, it was part of the price.  I will site Holly Madison as that source.

[Moonchilde]

---

@Noel7 wrote:

Realistically, many were exploited even though they signed on the bottom line.  They did it for the money or the fame, and many had no idea what they were getting into.  Hef's women were all expected to partner with him, it was part of the price.  I will site Holly Madison as that source.

---

I can't imagine that any of the Playmates or bunnies would have believed that wouldn't be the case. I don't think many extremely naive, sheltered and sexually inactive women would have even considered applying for positions in the Playboy "stable."

Not to forget this all came to the fore in the 60s when many young women were happy and eager to enjoy their sexuality and experience "free love" without any payment; the payment for doing what they would have done anyway, with the perks, was just a bonus.

As a child of the 60s growing up in a household where Playboy was read, I have never bought the tricked sweet innocent young things forced into a life of unwanted sex aspect of the Playboy empire. I do think it's something women might say later in life to excuse their behavior and actions if they felt they needed to be excused.

Of course they did it for the money and fame. But I don't believe they were clueless even if they said they were; I just don't believe it.

[Preds]

The woman chose. Yes, he used them, but he told them that when they came in.  He paid them and laid them.  He didn't hide the fact and they were educated and kept safe.  Do I agree with the situation ... no, but at least these woman had a protecter and were keep safe, educated and most went on to a good life ... off the streets. 

He was a wild generation man in a wild generation time that made it work.  He didn't use brutality to "control" his woman.  He didn't degrade them any worse than the rappers do now.  He never called the B's and W's like the lyrics heard everyday now. 

[suzyQ3]

---

@Plaid Pants2 wrote:

Women are not exploited if they choose of their own free will to pose for Hef's magazine.

No one held a gun to their heads and forced them to do it.

In fact, a lot of women are PROUD of having been in his magazine.

They were not exploited.

---

Free will, eh? Are you so sure about that? There are issues that many women have that lead to being easily exploited for their physical assets rather than their whole package as a human being.

I'm not suggesting that all Playboy centerfolds and "bunnies" had such issues. Sometimes you do what you think you need to do for money and possibly a chance at a career out of it.

BTW, I totally appreciate the beauty of the female body in art. But to equate that with Hefner and his life is an insult to artists everywhere.

[suzyQ3]

---

@Preds wrote:

The woman chose. Yes, he used them, but he told them that when they came in.  He paid them and laid them.  He didn't hide the fact and they were educated and kept safe.  Do I agree with the situation ... no, but at least these woman had a protecter and were keep safe, educated and most went on to a good life ... off the streets. 

He was a wild generation man in a wild generation time that made it work.  He didn't use brutality to "control" his woman.  He didn't degrade them any worse than the rappers do now.  He never called the B's and W's like the lyrics heard everyday now. 

---

@Preds, I understand what you're saying, but the sentence I bolded bothers me very much. First of all, I don't know that it is totally accurate. But more important is that is sounds like the kind of rationalization I've heard for other types of exploitation.