Thoughts about Playboy

There are many thoughts going around about Hugh Hefner, now that he's passed. As with many people, he was complicated. He did some good things (made sex less shameful, championed some groups' rights); he did some not-great things (objectifying women). My biggest issue with him is that he put forward a standard of feminine beauty and sexuality that is extremely limited and almost impossible to achieve.

Playboy for so many of us around my age (yes, girls as well) was one of our first experiences with the idea of sex. Of course I had a friend who knew where there was a stash of them in the woods. (Serious question: who was putting all the Playboys in the woods? Why would you put a stack of magazines in the woods? And, yet, there they were.)

I remember looking at those magazines and there were feelings. I knew that these images were forbidden but, at the same time, they were appealing. Every girl was so perfect. Their skin was smooth and almost glowed. They had long flowing hair, beautiful smiles, and tiny, tiny waists.

This was my first image of real sex appeal. This was what men wanted. This was what a girl should look like. The hourglass (but basically thin) figure, the smile under all circumstances, the perfect hair, teeth, and skin. And since it was there for everyone, this is what should be expected, this very narrow definition of beauty.

Yes, it was Hefner's magazine, and he could do what he wanted to do. Of course, he was going to publish the type of woman he felt was attractive. But I can't help but wish he had expanded his definition of what could be sexy. That women of different shapes and sizes and looks weren't celebrated.

Of course, no one wants to be thought of as an object. I am sure those Playboy-perfect women have issues of being treated with little respect. But a women who doesn't have that Playboy-perfect body/face/hair/etc still wants to be thought of as beautiful and sexy. And I know that those Playboys in the woods gave me lessons that I shouldn't have had about how I should be a woman.

Comments

But the passengers were bound to resist

I used to think that sexism would announce itself loudly. "You can't get that job because you're a lady!" "Let me chase you around this desk!" That's the easy stuff to see. It's the quiet, maybe even unconscious, sexism that's the challenge. I remember the first time this was pointed out to me. And once I saw it, I couldn't unsee it. I was at a town hall for graduate students. It was a general one for grad students in Arts & Sciences. It was hosted by some faculty member (male) and there was mostly just Q&A. Frankly, I don't think there was a theme besides the airing of grievances. The guy next to me had this grid and, after every question, made a tic in a box. Question, tic; question, tic. I tried to figure out the pattern, but I just couldn't see it. Finally, I just asked him. "What are you counting?" "Watch the guy with the microphone. When a guy asks a question, he hands him the mic and let's him...

WTF

Anyone who's dipped their toe into exploring podcasts knows about "WTF with Marc Maron." Marc Maron is a mid-level comedian who started a podcast interviewing people. He was one of the first to explore this medium, and he has taken advantage of what you can do. He conducts long-form (about an hour) interviews with celebrities that are generally without much direction. WTF is on a lot of best-of lists, so it is worth some exploration, if you're into podcasts. There are things to like about the podcast. He gets some great people and, because of the lack of structure, the interviews sometimes have some surprising insights. But I have a number of issues with the podcast. First of all, Marc Maron is exhaustingly up his own ass. He constantly brings the conversation back to himself, over and over and over. he has three main topics: 1) "I am SO very damaged. So damaged. So very damaged." 2) "I am an awesome comedian who was never appreciated in my time...

Florence Onassis the Second

Search This Blog