i'm more suggesting that given this absence, lecturing people on how to react to things, or science you've read about reacting to things, seems ill-advised
I guess it was a little pushy. I just felt it was a good time to bring it up, since not many people have a huge emotional stake in Mr. Hefner's passing and I wouldn't be ruining the moment for anybody. I won't bring it up again since that will defeat the whole purpose.
there is never a good time to tell people to not mourn the dead
Not unless it's a situation where you follow up with, "For he is risen!"
I give most people who praise Hef the benefit of the doubt and assume they just see him as "a suave dude who got allllll the ladies" and aren't aware he's actually the dude who "used his money and fame to run a really gross and manipulative harem of contracted women"
OkamiOn the internet nobody knows you're a dog. Nobody.Land of Ports, OreganoRegistered Userregular
edited September 2017
I'd never met Robin Williams, but I basically grew up with him as a big part of my life thanks to his acting work. His death definitely fucked me up for a little while.
I give most people who praise Hef the benefit of the doubt and assume they just see him as "a suave dude who got allllll the ladies" and aren't aware he's actually the dude who "used his money and fame to run a really gross and manipulative harem of contracted women"
I have this picture of a lot of them saying "m'lady" too much and also owning fedoras.
there are a hell of a lot of boy-men on the internet today vigorously defending Hef in part because they want to become him. ugh.
Clearly they are all appreciative of the work he did in service of publishing and civil ri- Oh wait no they just really like that he surrounded himself with women, dang, should have seen that one coming.
As a man-child, I am appreciative of the work he did in service of publishing and civil rights. I think I am a better person having read his magazine as a teen, as it taught me a bit of class and culture. I'd never for a minute want his mansion, women, or parties, that's no life for an introvert.
He sold a lifestyle, and I don't see a lot wrong with the ideals he put forward. The Playboy man is about confidence and respect, the archaic treatment of women was an artifact of the times that the magazine mostly shed by the time I was reading it. I like to think that if lad mags and the internet hadn't killed his empire, a lot of the grosser things he put forward in later years wouldn't have happened. But, I don't find fault in consensual objectification, and I know many do.
If he did anything non consensual, that's terrible, and I won't defend a shred of it. He lived an enviable life, and I think was a net positive on the world.
(For reference, I'm 40, so I only really know him pre-internet and reality tv. From what I've heard people saying in this thread, cable made a poor show of him - but he would not have been in control of his empire or really his image at the time)
Madpoet on
0
Options
Tommy2Handswhat is this where am iRegistered Userregular
I'd never met Robin Williams, but I basically grew up with him as a big part of my life thanks to his acting work. His death definitely fucked me up for a little while.
I could give a fuck about Hefner's death though.
I grew up watching robin williams but it didn't really hit me until about two days after the announcement while I was waiting in line at a pharmacy
This older woman with a cane overheard me making just..dumb fucking observational comedy type jokes to the person that was with me to cope with the long ass line we were in, and she grabs me by the arm and tells me that I look and sound exactly like Mr. Williams and that it's such a shame that he took his own life but that she's so happy that his humor is still alive
And at the time all I can think of is I look nothing like Robin Williams and all I can say is thank you and agree that it was a shame that he passed before wishing her a good night
when I finally got to my car I guess it hit me and I started thinking about Toys and I broke down a little bit
Anyways, fuck Hefner and fuck smoking jackets
0
Options
OkamiOn the internet nobody knows you're a dog. Nobody.Land of Ports, OreganoRegistered Userregular
I'd never met Robin Williams, but I basically grew up with him as a big part of my life thanks to his acting work. His death definitely fucked me up for a little while.
I could give a fuck about Hefner's death though.
I grew up watching robin williams but it didn't really hit me until about two days after the announcement while I was waiting in line at a pharmacy
This older woman with a cane overheard me making just..dumb fucking observational comedy type jokes to the person that was with me to cope with the long ass line we were in, and she grabs me by the arm and tells me that I look and sound exactly like Mr. Williams and that it's such a shame that he took his own life but that she's so happy that his humor is still alive
And at the time all I can think of is I look nothing like Robin Williams and all I can say is thank you and agree that it was a shame that he passed before wishing her a good night
when I finally got to my car I guess it hit me and I started thinking about Toys and I broke down a little bit
Anyways, fuck Hefner and fuck smoking jackets
I thought it was a bad joke when my coworker told me on our way out of work. I felt kind of hollow until later in the evening when I finally accepted it was real. Lead to me re-watching a lot of his movies.
MaddocI'm Bobbin Threadbare, are you my mother?Registered Userregular
It's less that cable made a poor showing of him and "people revealing what being a Playboy Bunny is actually like behind closed doors" made a poor showing of him, going back all the way to the 60s
there are a hell of a lot of boy-men on the internet today vigorously defending Hef in part because they want to become him. ugh.
Clearly they are all appreciative of the work he did in service of publishing and civil ri- Oh wait no they just really like that he surrounded himself with women, dang, should have seen that one coming.
As a man-child, I am appreciative of the work he did in service of publishing and civil rights. I think I am a better person having read his magazine as a teen, as it taught me a bit of class and culture. I'd never for a minute want his mansion, women, or parties, that's no life for an introvert.
He sold a lifestyle, and I don't see a lot wrong with the ideals he put forward. The Playboy man is about confidence and respect, the archaic treatment of women was an artifact of the times that the magazine mostly shed by the time I was reading it. I like to think that if lad mags and the internet hadn't killed his empire, a lot of the grosser things he put forward in later years wouldn't have happened. But, I don't find fault in consensual objectification, and I know many do.
If he did anything non consensual, that's terrible, and I won't defend a shred of it. He lived an enviable life, and I think was a net positive on the world.
(For reference, I'm 40, so I only really know him pre-internet and reality tv. From what I've heard people saying in this thread, cable made a poor show of him - but he would not have been in control of his empire or really his image at the time)
I hesitate to agree that “the Playboy man is about respect.”
there are a hell of a lot of boy-men on the internet today vigorously defending Hef in part because they want to become him. ugh.
Clearly they are all appreciative of the work he did in service of publishing and civil ri- Oh wait no they just really like that he surrounded himself with women, dang, should have seen that one coming.
As a man-child, I am appreciative of the work he did in service of publishing and civil rights. I think I am a better person having read his magazine as a teen, as it taught me a bit of class and culture. I'd never for a minute want his mansion, women, or parties, that's no life for an introvert.
He sold a lifestyle, and I don't see a lot wrong with the ideals he put forward. The Playboy man is about confidence and respect, the archaic treatment of women was an artifact of the times that the magazine mostly shed by the time I was reading it. I like to think that if lad mags and the internet hadn't killed his empire, a lot of the grosser things he put forward in later years wouldn't have happened. But, I don't find fault in consensual objectification, and I know many do.
If he did anything non consensual, that's terrible, and I won't defend a shred of it. He lived an enviable life, and I think was a net positive on the world.
(For reference, I'm 40, so I only really know him pre-internet and reality tv. From what I've heard people saying in this thread, cable made a poor show of him - but he would not have been in control of his empire or really his image at the time)
I hesitate to agree that “the Playboy man is about respect.”
I mean, geez, even a light skim of the articles Tynic posted bears that out quite clearly
I very rarely tend to be upset about anyone passing away that I don't know, unless they died too young in which case that gets to me regardless of why they are, really, or they were close to someone I know and therefore I feel upset for that person.
But experience and growth have taught me that many people are not like that and that's fine you know? I won't tell people if they should and shouldn't be upset about anyone's death. In the past I was not good at that.
One of those things where you realise not everyone feels like you do and that's a good thing.
Solar on
0
Options
Brovid Hasselsmof[Growling historic on the fury road]Registered Userregular
there are a hell of a lot of boy-men on the internet today vigorously defending Hef in part because they want to become him. ugh.
Clearly they are all appreciative of the work he did in service of publishing and civil ri- Oh wait no they just really like that he surrounded himself with women, dang, should have seen that one coming.
As a man-child, I am appreciative of the work he did in service of publishing and civil rights. I think I am a better person having read his magazine as a teen, as it taught me a bit of class and culture. I'd never for a minute want his mansion, women, or parties, that's no life for an introvert.
He sold a lifestyle, and I don't see a lot wrong with the ideals he put forward. The Playboy man is about confidence and respect, the archaic treatment of women was an artifact of the times that the magazine mostly shed by the time I was reading it. I like to think that if lad mags and the internet hadn't killed his empire, a lot of the grosser things he put forward in later years wouldn't have happened. But, I don't find fault in consensual objectification, and I know many do.
If he did anything non consensual, that's terrible, and I won't defend a shred of it. He lived an enviable life, and I think was a net positive on the world.
(For reference, I'm 40, so I only really know him pre-internet and reality tv. From what I've heard people saying in this thread, cable made a poor show of him - but he would not have been in control of his empire or really his image at the time)
I hesitate to agree that “the Playboy man is about respect.”
Also if you read anything candid about him, I don't even think he lived an enviable life. From all accounts he was kind of a miserable dude.
0
Options
Raijin QuickfootI'm your Huckleberry YOU'RE NO DAISYRegistered User, ClubPAregular
I used to find it weird that people mourned for celebrities and would get super judgy about.
Then Eddie Guerrero died and it hit me harder than I expected. He was my favorite wrestler, but he was also from my home town and one of the few Hispanics who made it big, so I had a big attachment to him.
Since then I try to be more understanding. I'm not proud that it had to personally affect me for me to grow, but at least it made me a slightly better person.
There are some things about Hefner, or at least the empire he created, that are admirable. I think it is certainly impressive that even with the nudity sprinkled throughout, the magazine he created does (or at least did, I don't really follow it now) have a reputation for being well written and intelligent. I don't know if that was his influence or not, but the idea that a "man's man" shouldn't just like naked ladies but also be well read and educated is something I wish more media would mirror.
I've read some really good interviews where they were the source. They also weren't afraid for an article to be many pages of text - something many magazines shy away from. Additionally, I think he probably created one of the first real lifestyle brands.
The man himself may have led a lifestyle that I certainly can't support (at least during the years I was alive to see) but I think there are reasons to respect what he created and left behind.
The Hef deserves a RIP from me. He seemed like a genuinely decent dude with some old fashioned views on women.
I have nowt to say about Hefner, don't really know much about him, but this post makes me frown.
I said I was wrong as I'm learning more about him.
Outside of what's been posted in the thread I read the post as problematic because it says being shitty to women and being a "decent dude" aren't mutually exclusive.
There are some things about Hefner, or at least the empire he created, that are admirable. I think it is certainly impressive that even with the nudity sprinkled throughout, the magazine he created does (or at least did, I don't really follow it now) have a reputation for being well written and intelligent. I don't know if that was his influence or not, but the idea that a "man's man" shouldn't just like naked ladies but also be well read and educated is something I wish more media would mirror.
I've read some really good interviews where they were the source. They also weren't afraid for an article to be many pages of text - something many magazines shy away from. Additionally, I think he probably created one of the first real lifestyle brands.
The man himself may have led a lifestyle that I certainly can't support (at least during the years I was alive to see) but I think there are reasons to respect what he created and left behind.
That "well-written" and "intelligent" magazine had a strong anti-feminism mandate and was very focused on tearing down the idea of independent women. Hef may have believed a "man's man" shouldn't just be about naked women but he also believed a "man's woman" shouldn't.
That's possibly true - to be completely honestly the last time I read one was in my early 20s and I probably wouldn't have noticed that slant. I just remember if you bought one you would probably also have a really good 6 page interview with a politician or someone like Seinfeld and that for something labelled a nudie magazine there was a shit-ton of actual content in it. If that content was tilted in one way, then I guess I stand corrected, I just remember being impressed with the depth of some of the stuff I read in it. Again though, I was probably too young and dumb to know that what I was reading was anti-anything.
Lindsay Lohan on
0
Options
Brovid Hasselsmof[Growling historic on the fury road]Registered Userregular
The Hef deserves a RIP from me. He seemed like a genuinely decent dude with some old fashioned views on women.
I have nowt to say about Hefner, don't really know much about him, but this post makes me frown.
I said I was wrong as I'm learning more about him.
Outside of what's been posted in the thread I read the post as problematic because it says being shitty to women and being a "decent dude" aren't mutually exclusive.
Which they are.
Also can we just say "sexist"? "Old fashioned views on women" is folksy and trivialises it. Like if someone said "He's decent, he just has old fashioned views on black people" I would think okay so you mean he's a racist.
edit: not attacking you Raijin I know you're good people.
About the journalism: I definitely bought into the idea that reading Playboy "for the articles" was a thing, though it bugged me that apparently good writing could only be sold on a foundation of women's bodies. Also, as the piece I linked earlier delved into, the viewpoints permitted were restricted in some... Interesting ways.
Then i read this yesterday and a few things kind of clicked:
Hey, what if the reason that Playboy had such good articles is because it was deliberately normalising the idea of male intellectualism being synonymous with female sexual availability and passivity? Maybe lauding it for its articles is EXACTLY part of the problem of shitty left wing men who claim to be all about freedom and progress but also think women exist to subordinate ourselves to their needs?
The idea that somehow there was a contradiction between the stories Playboy ran and the way it and its founder treated and regarded women is actually hilarious and deadset wrong.
It did always feel like people used "for the articles" as a way to hide the fact that they were actually just reading a porno mag, in a sort of pseudo-intellectual way.
You can find pretty decent articles of the same variety in a lot of magazines without needing vaginae to be there.
I feel the same way about "for the articles" as I do about Hooters' wings.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Which seems weird to me. I grew up in the 90s. You'd figure I'd have found some in the woods or something.
Here is something weird.
When I first started noticing having attraction to women I stole and underwear catalog from the junk mail to look at. I must have been like 10 and we didn't have the internet or even a computer thank goodness. Anyway I got in trouble for it. Which probably led to me heavily suppressing for a very long time.
It did always feel like people used "for the articles" as a way to hide the fact that they were actually just reading a porno mag, in a sort of pseudo-intellectual way.
You can find pretty decent articles of the same variety in a lot of magazines without needing vaginae to be there.
I feel the same way about "for the articles" as I do about Hooters' wings.
There's nothing inherently wrong with pornography. The culture of its production is another matter.
Also, pedantry, but Playboy classicly never showed vagina.
Which seems weird to me. I grew up in the 90s. You'd figure I'd have found some in the woods or something.
Here is something weird.
When I first started noticing having attraction to women I stole and underwear catalog from the junk mail to look at. I must have been like 10 and we didn't have the internet or even a computer thank goodness. Anyway I got in trouble for it. Which probably led to me heavily suppressing for a very long time.
Ah the ol' Sears' catalog.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
It did always feel like people used "for the articles" as a way to hide the fact that they were actually just reading a porno mag, in a sort of pseudo-intellectual way.
You can find pretty decent articles of the same variety in a lot of magazines without needing vaginae to be there.
I feel the same way about "for the articles" as I do about Hooters' wings.
There's nothing inherently wrong with pornography. The culture of its production is another matter.
Also, pedantry, but Playboy classicly never showed vagina.
Well yeah, nothing's wrong with any of it. Just felt disingenuous to say "well I actually read it for the articles" when they never did.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
It did always feel like people used "for the articles" as a way to hide the fact that they were actually just reading a porno mag, in a sort of pseudo-intellectual way.
You can find pretty decent articles of the same variety in a lot of magazines without needing vaginae to be there.
I feel the same way about "for the articles" as I do about Hooters' wings.
There's nothing inherently wrong with pornography. The culture of its production is another matter.
Also, pedantry, but Playboy classicly never showed vagina.
Well yeah, nothing's wrong with any of it. Just felt disingenuous to say "well I actually read it for the articles" when they never did.
That was the whole joke. You'd find someone's stash, they'd sheepishly defend themselves with the line, when everybody and their grandma knew damn well it had nothing to do with the articles. Cue laugh track.
"Go down, kick ass, and set yourselves up as gods, that's our Prime Directive!"
It did always feel like people used "for the articles" as a way to hide the fact that they were actually just reading a porno mag, in a sort of pseudo-intellectual way.
You can find pretty decent articles of the same variety in a lot of magazines without needing vaginae to be there.
I feel the same way about "for the articles" as I do about Hooters' wings.
There's nothing inherently wrong with pornography. The culture of its production is another matter.
Also, pedantry, but Playboy classicly never showed vagina.
Well yeah, nothing's wrong with any of it. Just felt disingenuous to say "well I actually read it for the articles" when they never did.
My grander point is yeah, a lot of people did. I had a Playboy subscription while magazines were still relevant, solely because of the quality of journalism and breadth of topics. As an adult magazine, Playboy was basically the bottom. Hyper airbrushed women of a very specific build, generally just sitting around with their boobs out. As far as erotic content goes, Playboy was basically crap. It was worth keeping a subscription to because it was actually worth reading. 'I read it for the articles' I always took as having an unstated '...because the smut isn't that great'
It did always feel like people used "for the articles" as a way to hide the fact that they were actually just reading a porno mag, in a sort of pseudo-intellectual way.
You can find pretty decent articles of the same variety in a lot of magazines without needing vaginae to be there.
I feel the same way about "for the articles" as I do about Hooters' wings.
There's nothing inherently wrong with pornography. The culture of its production is another matter.
Also, pedantry, but Playboy classicly never showed vagina.
I don't think that was the case I think ten years or so ago. As a teenager the mailman mistakenly left some Playboys in our mailbox several times, and on one occasion my curiosity was enough to spirit it away and see what the big deal was. It was a college girl edition and I'm pretty sure they did show vagina.
Ultimately the magazine was wrapped into a container and tossed in the trash as I further questioned what the big deal was, unknowing what ace even was back then.
Reading your mum's clothing catalogue for the underwear section is definitely how a lot of people encounter sexy looking ladies for the first time
11 year old bowen was looking for stuff for christmas.
11 year old bowen couldn't remember where they were in the catalog.
11 year old bowen was very fascinated when he turned onto those pages.
It is very difficult to sneak the sears catalog from the living room. They were very large and, honestly, how often does one need to look through it for gift ideas?
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Oh - reading it for the articles was a joke, but the fact is they were there. If you wanted a magazine solely for smut, it probably shouldn't have been your first choice. I bought my first right around when I turned 19 because it happened that they had a big article on KISS reuniting (speaking of people with bad opinions, nothing better than a Gene Simmons interview). Honestly, even then (1996ish) the pictures were really tame compared to both other magazines and the internet/online bulletin boards so that aspect just wasn't a huge deal to me.
You can definitely get better or similar content in other places, I think what made it sort of a big deal when it was in it's heyday was it was one place where a "gentleman" could get information on everything in one place. You could read about the new Mustang, what the life of an NBA star was like, find out what suits were in style, read some jokes/comics, what movies were coming out and read an interview with a politician about foreign policy. Reading other posts, I'm sure those articles were pushing against feminism and by today's standards the idea of "this is what is manly" is pretty toxic/outdated, but I think the format of the magazine and the ideas behind it were certainly a big deal. In fact, I'd say some of these attempts at one stop nerd sites like IGN probably owe a bit to his idea of creating a lifestyle brand. Obviously I have no idea how much he personally dictated that though.
Reading your mum's clothing catalogue for the underwear section is definitely how a lot of people encounter sexy looking ladies for the first time
11 year old bowen was looking for stuff for christmas.
11 year old bowen couldn't remember where they were in the catalog.
11 year old bowen was very fascinated when he turned onto those pages.
It is very difficult to sneak the sears catalog from the living room. They were very large and, honestly, how often does one need to look through it for gift ideas?
We always kept those catalogs in the bathroom anyway, so it was very convenient for me.
Posts
Okay, this is WAY more important that Hugh whatshisface dying.
I could give a fuck about Hefner's death though.
I have this picture of a lot of them saying "m'lady" too much and also owning fedoras.
As a man-child, I am appreciative of the work he did in service of publishing and civil rights. I think I am a better person having read his magazine as a teen, as it taught me a bit of class and culture. I'd never for a minute want his mansion, women, or parties, that's no life for an introvert.
He sold a lifestyle, and I don't see a lot wrong with the ideals he put forward. The Playboy man is about confidence and respect, the archaic treatment of women was an artifact of the times that the magazine mostly shed by the time I was reading it. I like to think that if lad mags and the internet hadn't killed his empire, a lot of the grosser things he put forward in later years wouldn't have happened. But, I don't find fault in consensual objectification, and I know many do.
If he did anything non consensual, that's terrible, and I won't defend a shred of it. He lived an enviable life, and I think was a net positive on the world.
(For reference, I'm 40, so I only really know him pre-internet and reality tv. From what I've heard people saying in this thread, cable made a poor show of him - but he would not have been in control of his empire or really his image at the time)
I grew up watching robin williams but it didn't really hit me until about two days after the announcement while I was waiting in line at a pharmacy
This older woman with a cane overheard me making just..dumb fucking observational comedy type jokes to the person that was with me to cope with the long ass line we were in, and she grabs me by the arm and tells me that I look and sound exactly like Mr. Williams and that it's such a shame that he took his own life but that she's so happy that his humor is still alive
And at the time all I can think of is I look nothing like Robin Williams and all I can say is thank you and agree that it was a shame that he passed before wishing her a good night
when I finally got to my car I guess it hit me and I started thinking about Toys and I broke down a little bit
Anyways, fuck Hefner and fuck smoking jackets
I thought it was a bad joke when my coworker told me on our way out of work. I felt kind of hollow until later in the evening when I finally accepted it was real. Lead to me re-watching a lot of his movies.
Finding out what's behind the fantasy is never nice.
I hesitate to agree that “the Playboy man is about respect.”
I mean, geez, even a light skim of the articles Tynic posted bears that out quite clearly
3DS Friend Code: 0216-0898-6512
Switch Friend Code: SW-7437-1538-7786
But experience and growth have taught me that many people are not like that and that's fine you know? I won't tell people if they should and shouldn't be upset about anyone's death. In the past I was not good at that.
One of those things where you realise not everyone feels like you do and that's a good thing.
I have nowt to say about Hefner, don't really know much about him, but this post makes me frown.
Also if you read anything candid about him, I don't even think he lived an enviable life. From all accounts he was kind of a miserable dude.
I said I was wrong as I'm learning more about him.
Then Eddie Guerrero died and it hit me harder than I expected. He was my favorite wrestler, but he was also from my home town and one of the few Hispanics who made it big, so I had a big attachment to him.
Since then I try to be more understanding. I'm not proud that it had to personally affect me for me to grow, but at least it made me a slightly better person.
I've read some really good interviews where they were the source. They also weren't afraid for an article to be many pages of text - something many magazines shy away from. Additionally, I think he probably created one of the first real lifestyle brands.
The man himself may have led a lifestyle that I certainly can't support (at least during the years I was alive to see) but I think there are reasons to respect what he created and left behind.
Outside of what's been posted in the thread I read the post as problematic because it says being shitty to women and being a "decent dude" aren't mutually exclusive.
Which they are.
That "well-written" and "intelligent" magazine had a strong anti-feminism mandate and was very focused on tearing down the idea of independent women. Hef may have believed a "man's man" shouldn't just be about naked women but he also believed a "man's woman" shouldn't.
Also can we just say "sexist"? "Old fashioned views on women" is folksy and trivialises it. Like if someone said "He's decent, he just has old fashioned views on black people" I would think okay so you mean he's a racist.
edit: not attacking you Raijin I know you're good people.
Then i read this yesterday and a few things kind of clicked:
You can find pretty decent articles of the same variety in a lot of magazines without needing vaginae to be there.
I feel the same way about "for the articles" as I do about Hooters' wings.
Which seems weird to me. I grew up in the 90s. You'd figure I'd have found some in the woods or something.
Here is something weird.
There's nothing inherently wrong with pornography. The culture of its production is another matter.
Also, pedantry, but Playboy classicly never showed vagina.
Ah the ol' Sears' catalog.
Well yeah, nothing's wrong with any of it. Just felt disingenuous to say "well I actually read it for the articles" when they never did.
That was the whole joke. You'd find someone's stash, they'd sheepishly defend themselves with the line, when everybody and their grandma knew damn well it had nothing to do with the articles. Cue laugh track.
My grander point is yeah, a lot of people did. I had a Playboy subscription while magazines were still relevant, solely because of the quality of journalism and breadth of topics. As an adult magazine, Playboy was basically the bottom. Hyper airbrushed women of a very specific build, generally just sitting around with their boobs out. As far as erotic content goes, Playboy was basically crap. It was worth keeping a subscription to because it was actually worth reading. 'I read it for the articles' I always took as having an unstated '...because the smut isn't that great'
I don't think that was the case I think ten years or so ago. As a teenager the mailman mistakenly left some Playboys in our mailbox several times, and on one occasion my curiosity was enough to spirit it away and see what the big deal was. It was a college girl edition and I'm pretty sure they did show vagina.
Ultimately the magazine was wrapped into a container and tossed in the trash as I further questioned what the big deal was, unknowing what ace even was back then.
Yeah but I got in trouble for it and it fucked me up really bad.
11 year old bowen was looking for stuff for christmas.
11 year old bowen couldn't remember where they were in the catalog.
11 year old bowen was very fascinated when he turned onto those pages.
It is very difficult to sneak the sears catalog from the living room. They were very large and, honestly, how often does one need to look through it for gift ideas?
You can definitely get better or similar content in other places, I think what made it sort of a big deal when it was in it's heyday was it was one place where a "gentleman" could get information on everything in one place. You could read about the new Mustang, what the life of an NBA star was like, find out what suits were in style, read some jokes/comics, what movies were coming out and read an interview with a politician about foreign policy. Reading other posts, I'm sure those articles were pushing against feminism and by today's standards the idea of "this is what is manly" is pretty toxic/outdated, but I think the format of the magazine and the ideas behind it were certainly a big deal. In fact, I'd say some of these attempts at one stop nerd sites like IGN probably owe a bit to his idea of creating a lifestyle brand. Obviously I have no idea how much he personally dictated that though.
We always kept those catalogs in the bathroom anyway, so it was very convenient for me.