Title: Hugh Hefner, Founder Of Playboy, Dead At 91 Source:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hugh-hefner-founder-playboy-dead- URL Source:https://www.yahoo.com/news/hugh-hef ... er-playboy-dead-031914304.html Published:Sep 27, 2017 Author:Stephanie Marcus Post Date:2017-09-28 04:40:50 by XDMAR Keywords:None Views:2180 Comments:42
Playboy founder and legendary ladies’ man Hugh Hefner has died at the age of 91, according to Playboy Enterprises.
The magazine said he was surrounded by loved ones and “peacefully passed away today from natural causes at his home.”
Guys like Hefner don't want virgins. And they wouldn't encounter any in their line of work. Virgins are pretty unpopular overall.
The women who show up to pose for Larry Flynt at Hustler or Hefner are slutty enough to show themselves to millions of people naked for money. They are a variety of prostitute and not attractive enough to make it in legit modeling, nothing more.
The women who show up to pose for Larry Flynt at Hustler or Hefner are slutty enough to show themselves to millions of people naked for money. They are a variety of prostitute and not attractive enough to make it in legit modeling, nothing more.
I used to think along those lines. But modeling is itself a skill -- somewhat at least, as it's more than simply being physically attractive. And I've never quite been able to understand the qualitative difference between a traditional model and a playboy model. Both are being paid to show off their physical beauty. The difference may largely be only in what a culture considers acceptable.
But more to the point, It's natural for women to want to be physically attractive to men. I think I read one quote by a playboy model about how she wouldn't be so attractive for the rest of her life so why not show it off while she can? Something along that line of thinking.
and not attractive enough to make it in legit modeling, nothing more.
Now that sounds disingenuous. Playboy models absolutely are attractive.
Now that sounds disingenuous. Playboy models absolutely are attractive.
They aren't the thoroughbreds of modeling. They'll never be in fashion mag shoots or on runways in Paris, Rome, London or New York. Or the cover of SI.
They'll never be in fashion mag shoots or on runways in Paris, Rome, London or New York. Or the cover of SI.
Good. Those balloonheaded chicks look like scrawny heroin addicts who just saw somebody back over their puppy. Utterly cold, braindead and unattractive.
Geez, you must have spent a lot of alone time with Playboy mags.
I don't think anyone my age subscribed to them. Those guys were all 10-20 years older than me. They were always into it "just for the articles". People I knew were into Penthouse or, for the raunchy-minded, Hustler.
Geez, you must have spent a lot of alone time with Playboy mags.
Actually, I didn't, and never subscribed - exposure was limited to those that made it inside the orbit of my circle of friends. We all liked Barbie Benton, just like the rest of America.
Overall, I thought it pretty boring. The photos were outstanding, cartoons worth checking out and often the interviews fascinating, but the copy around the photos was insipid, the "lifestyle" stuff corny and worthy of mocking. Who thinks selection of a proper dinner jacket and loungewear had any importance to real guys?
But it made a real mark in fighting for individual liberty and free speech in the process of putting out the monthly rag - for that it's historic.
But it made a real mark in fighting for individual liberty and free speech in the process of putting out the monthly rag - for that it's historic.
Sure. And it was a major part of the general attack on the family, on marital fidelity and part of the Left's use of pornography to alter public morality.
This is why after decades of feminists attacking porn as exploiting women and objectifying them, the Left recognizes Hefner as their hero at his death. He attacked and helped destroy the integrity of the family and the social cohesion of public morality.
the Left recognizes Hefner as their hero at his death. He attacked and helped destroy the integrity of the family and the social cohesion of public morality.
#33. To: rlk, redleghunter, Pinguinite, Hank Rearden, no gnu taxes, goldilucky, XDMAR (#30)
A decent piece at National Review by David French, a perspective not seen much on this thread yet.
Hugh Hefner’s Legacy of Despair
Hugh Hefner didn’t invent pornography, and it would no doubt be thriving today even if he hadn’t founded Playboy magazine those many years ago. After all, man is fallen, and somebody would have filled that depraved niche in American life. Hefner, however, played his part, and the part he played was immensely destructive to our nation’s cultural, moral, and spiritual fabric. Hefner mainstreamed porn, he put it in millions of homes, and he even glamorized it — recasting one of America’s most pathetic industries as the playground of the sophisticated rich. He then grew to a ripe old age, consorting with women young enough to be his granddaughters. He was America’s most famous dirty old man.
And now he’s dead. May God have mercy on his soul.
It’s hard to calculate the damage he did, but the cultural rubble is all around us. My generation is perhaps the first to grow up with easily accessible porn. Every one of us knew whose father had a Playboy subscription (only the scary pervs subscribed to Penthouse or Hustler), and their kids knew exactly where dad kept his stash. They’d sneak out old issues, bring them to school, and pass them around. Before teens could rent porn on tape, they could see porn on the page, and once they saw it, they were hooked.
The effects have lasted a lifetime. Boys grew up believing they were entitled to sex on demand, and the sex would always be amazing. They learned to grow bored of the “same old thing” and instead to seek new adventures. They learned that monogamy was confining, that promiscuity was liberating, and that women should always be hot. The normal female form was no longer enough. It had to be enhanced, sculpted, and waxed.
Though that kind of reality can’t exist for the vast majority of men, that didn’t stop the desire. So, they did and do the pitiful thing — retreated to bathrooms and bedrooms and masturbated nonstop to the women they could never have and the life they’d never live.
How many families have broken to pieces when a wife discovers her husband’s secret addiction and realizes that she’s not enough — that she’s never been enough — and he spends much of his life fantasizing about thousands of others? How many men have grown to hate themselves for their psychological dependence on the saddest of habits? The testimonies from porn nation are devastating.
“I watched so much porn that I can’t really enjoy sex with my wife.”
“He wants me to be something I can’t. I’ll never be as good as the girl on the screen.”
“I can’t imagine being content with just one woman. I’ve had sex with thousands in my mind.”
To see men become addicted to porn is to watch character formation in reverse. Their integrity and fidelity unwind before your eyes. They lie habitually to cover the extent of their habit, even when their wives are allegedly “open” and sexually liberated. After all, if she knew how much he watched or exactly what he looked at, even she would be shocked. The screen alone is never enough, the wife is never enough, and the addict so often seeks mistresses, prostitutes, or both.
Another family breaks. More lives fall into despair.
All this is known. Everyone has seen it happen in their churches, in their neighborhoods, and in their families. This cycle has likely happened to thousands of men who’ll read this column. And yet, the secular, progressive guardians of our public morality — you know, the people who think you’re a horrible person if you don’t recycle or if you use the wrong pronouns — all so often don’t just tolerate but celebrate the sexual “liberation” that is part and parcel of porn nation.
So many A-list celebrities spent time at the Playboy Mansion, especially at its peak, that there was a time when one could wonder who hadn’t embraced Hef or the magazine he made. Our president has. The evidence is on his office wall. These were the people setting the tone for American culture. These were the people mocking the values that kept families strong. These were the people who were teaching a nation that fulfillment could be found in sex, and that the joy of sex was worth more than marriage itself.
They were wrong, and the cultural harm done outweighs the cost of botched presidential elections, bad congressmen, or a judiciary riddled with knaves and fools. The cultural harm done is even now ripping kids from parents and husbands from wives. When I think of Hugh Hefner, yes I mourn, but I mourn because the bitter fruit of his life’s work has helped poison the families of people I know and love. He is gone, but his legacy lives on. And his is a legacy of despair.
He deserves a large share of the credit (or blame).
He'd resent it if you denied that he was a major player in the broad assault on traditional morality.
I think he'd demand that you give him his fair due in the sexual revolution. And you don't get to have it both ways, no matter how many thousands of times you jerked your little pud while giving a glassy-eyed stare to his airbrushed whores.
