Is Hugh Hefner my enemy?
Feminism is all about giving women choices. And Hefner just so happens to facilitate one choice. This choice, however, brings women a step back into the pit men have dug for them.
Isn't that also the definition of the devil? To facilitate a choice that tempts us away from all we can be? Perhaps we should create an outfit for Hefner to walk around in, custom made, complete with those adorable little devil horns.
Just a thought...I made a model of his new outfit on paint, check it out.
Update: Anonymous blogger who commented; I commented back. Please read and others, feel free to pitch in!! All comments that at least somewhat employ understanding and passion are welcome.
Here is my response to yours:
I knew by saying that men dug the hole for women..that would be a controversial statement because of its tone. Which is exactly why I chose those words. I understand that women were granted free will, but in the beginning it was always men who had discouraged this free will and we are now taking the steps to claim it as our own. I believe that feminism is the belief that women should reclaim this free will...and that is all. But there are many obstacles, which doesn't include men per say, but also the mindset garnered with it.
Going on to Playboy, I disagree with you, still in many respects. While I do enjoy artis gratia artis, art for the sake of art which may include nudity,I don't enjoy art for the sake of masturbation. But it's not the magazine that I feel is a woman's enemy, but it is the IDEA that Playboy offers. Women SERVING men in bunny outfits, suggesting women as subservient sex toys? Not very liberating. And who is the mastermind behind this? Men. And most women who work as playboy bunnies only do it because they are desperate for cash or fat out of luck-so much for artis gratia artis for free will.
I certainly do not want to create a pseudo-SCUM Manifesto using this blog post, but I do want to create a new way of thinking perhaps about an issue.
And you also commented on my "going around" the internet. I actually just sit here and write this blog, why? How do you "go around" the internet? Perhaps I need a permit? You should give me a lift sometime.
These are my opinions and you have yours. I respect yours gravely, however as you seem educated enough to make a decision you employ with understanding. And, I'm sorry...but...no...that still means I disagree with you.
.jpg)
i completely disagree with your post and your ideas about feminism. hugh hefner isn't the one to blame for women becoming playmates. if a woman wants to pose topless for a photographer, that's her own choice. it's all about choices right? the type of feminism you're supporting is the ever-present mindless stereotypical male-bashing feminism that gives feminists a bad name. you're saying that women are not responsible for their nude posing--it's all the male's fault.
ReplyDeletealthough i consider myself a feminist, i am a strong supporter of playboy and their tasteful erotic pictures. playboy celebrates the beautiful female form and helps to ease our society into becoming more accepting of nudity. if anything playboy helped free women and gave the world a new perspective on female sexualtiy--the sexual revolution--read about it. we shouldn't be afraid or intimidated by sex or the naked body for that matter. i'm not saying that playboy is for everyone--but if you don't feel comfortable looking at it, don't blame hugh hefner or call him the devil.
compared to most pornography, playboy images are tame. have you ever taken a look at a playboy magazine? i would definitely recommend editions from the 60s and 70s. these editions show women of all different shapes and sizes in their most natural forms.
i consider playboy to be a form of art. it's been around forever and has changed with the times. please don't go around the internet bashing things you don't understand. i hope you can take the time to see hugh and his bunnies in a different light. even if you don't agree with me know that there are different ways to interpret this art.
CALLING PLAYBOY ART,IS A DISGRACE TO ART.
ReplyDeletePlayboy is not about sexual liberation.It caters to a very basic instinct of voyeurism.I believe that women posing without any clothes for playboy do that because they want to.Its a matter of choice.I don't agree with their choice but its their prerogative.Calling it art,however, is just blasphemy.
Anonymous-
ReplyDeleteI knew by saying that men dug the hole for women..that would be a controversial statement because of its tone. Which is exactly why I chose those words. I understand that women were granted free will, but in the beginning it was always men who had discouraged this free will and we are now taking the steps to claim it as our own. I believe that feminism is the belief that women should reclaim this free will...and that is all. But there are many obstacles, which doesn't include men per say, but also the mindset garnered with it.
Going on to Playboy, I disagree with you, still in many respects. While I do enjoy artis gratia artis, art for the sake of art which may include nudity,I don't enjoy art for the sake of masturbation. But it's not the magazine that I feel is a woman's enemy, but it is the IDEA that Playboy offers. Women SERVING men in bunny outfits, suggesting women as subservient sex toys? Not very liberating. And who is the mastermind behind this? Men. And most women who work as playboy bunnies only do it because they are desperate for cash or fat out of luck-so much for artis gratia artis for free will.
I certainly do not want to create a pseudo-SCUM Manifesto using this blog post, but I do want to create a new way of thinking perhaps about an issue.
And you also commented on my "going around" the internet. I actually just sit here and write this blog, why? How do you "go around" the internet? Perhaps I need a permit? You should give me a lift sometime so I can experience this. You also said I am bashing things I "don't understand", as you appear to be bashing my idea of Playboy without even having read my comments to your argument.
These are my opinions and you have yours. I respect yours gravely, however as you seem educated enough to make a decision you employ with understanding. And, I'm sorry...but...no...that still means I disagree with you.