91 years, 1000 women, what's that average out to? - RIP, Hef

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Jae said:
Loving this quote, "At the center of Hefner’s legacy is the symbol of the sexual revolution—the shifting in American (and by extension the world’s) views on sex. It is unfair to lay the blame for our culture’s decline in sexual identity solely at the feet of Hefner. At the same time, it is undeniable that his brand has become synonymous in the public consciousness with sexual liberation, inhibition, and meaninglessness." - Ed Stetzer, Hugh Hefner, Mourning, and Legacies: Beyond the Pipe and the Robe

I think that's very well said.
Click to expand...

Thus strange sects mean nothing ... or meaningless word as god is the word?
 
Dirty old man, he was. His libido motivated him to achieve great wealth. There's not much else to it. I think seeing him sitting there surrounded by flakey looking women all the time,was demeaning to women - "Sugar Daddy" - didn't a young Gloria Steinem do a stint as a bunny waitresss then write about it? He didn't do much for feminism until Steinem exposed what was going on. So it was her, wasn't it? He was an iconoclast, at any rate. RIP Hef.
 
Last edited:
I found it interesting this morning when I heard that he had been instrumental in getting the sexual revolution moving. The magazine started in 1953. That must have been very shocking at the time. I guess hearing that made me think beyond the sexist stuff.

I also wondered what it would be like to live such a hedonistic life. We have so much pressure to work and play is often frowned upon.

Not that I plan to take up that lifestyle for the record. Just food for thought.
 
Kimmio said:
To be clear - my negative feelings about Hef are not nearly as strong as this writer's. He was who he was. I didn't give him much thought. For the most part I think his life was good for him but not so good for women's equality. But, I don't hold a grudge. Some, like this writer, do. Through her obvious anger, though, she makes a few good points:

When I heard Hugh Hefner had died, I wished I believed in hell
Click to expand...

How come you can let Hef off, yet so rail against Trump as you do?
 
Jae said:
How come you can let Hef off, yet so rail against Trump as you do?
Click to expand...
Hef wasn't POTUS. That's the difference. But they are similar types, imo. I don't even hate Trump - I think he is in the wrong job. Really wrong job. Although, who knows, maybe Hef would've been a cooler headed POTUS if he'd had the job.
 
Kimmio said:
Hef wasn't POTUS. That's the difference. But they are similar types, imo. I don't even hate Trump - I think he is in the wrong job. Really wrong job. Although, who knows, maybe Hef would've been a cooler headed POTUS if he'd had the job.
Click to expand...
He would have been way less hateful. Hugh Hefner certainly had faults and he used women. From what I saw though it was willing women (although probably some intoxicated and unable to legally consent).
 
It's not only about that, though, although that's important. It's about what makes women willing to objectify themselves to help a dirty old man get rich and famous (and maybe they get their 15 minutes of fame in the process, or not). And, quite frankly, they (and someone like Hef), promote an unrealistic picture of real women and sex, and what many young women see and aspire to, that isn't about equality. It's misogyny disguised, or marketed, as feminism. That brand of "feminism" plays right into the hands of powerful, misogynist, men. It's all marketing and branding. Hef was very successful at marketing the Playboy brand - he was a brand man, like Trump - and Trump is also a "playboy". What makes them willing, is just a rebranding of the same old misogyny that's existed forever. It's not really empowerment. They depend on misogynists (like Hef) to make their success happen, by objectifying themselves. It's not a lot different from Trump's version of women's equality. I'm not blaming the women though - the culture is at fault.
 
Last edited:
In the worlds of men like Hef and Trump, only really good looking women deserve to do well, with their permission and at their pleasure. Trump had Miss Universe contestants. Hef had "bunnies".
 
He was a modern day Emperor who kept concubines. Some were a fraction of his age. Hardly progressive. He supported birth control and abortion. That would make sense, Hef being Hef. That doesn't make him a model supporter of feminism. Maybe he got a lot of young women pregnant. 1000 women - what are the odds?
 
ChemGal said:
He would have been way less hateful. Hugh Hefner certainly had faults and he used women. From what I saw though it was willing women (although probably some intoxicated and unable to legally consent).
Click to expand...
By some accounts he was very abusive. And, considering he "kept" a bunch of young women in his mansion at any given time - some vulnerable and "new" to the decadent life, from humble beginnings - it's not a stretch for me to believe them.

Don't Mourn For Hugh Hefner
 
Kimmio said:
He was a modern day Emperor who kept concubines. Some were a fraction of his age. Hardly progressive. He supported birth control and abortion. That would make sense, Hef being Hef. That doesn't make him a model supporter of feminism. Maybe he got a lot of young women pregnant. 1000 women - what are the odds?
Click to expand...

Some women liked the old boule ... he didn't demand much as he was too concerned with keeping balance in the accounting end ... thus not much thought tuit ... those role 'dand E rounded out things ... the FQ goes on and on as we just don't know ... tis indeterminate ... but the others will debate it on pointed principles ... just admit difference and deviation and get on with the Passover The Odyssey; a funny pool when looked at from beyond ... outside visions? To be flayed out in the coming times --- HG Wells ... manager of the deeps!
 
PIMP el on his Passover parts ... now that he is gone and we have his legacy left (free sects of the alternate kind)?

Look what we done to our self with the gift ... the poison divine ... that'd be the nature of balance in the veil that divides ... watchin both ways and listening carefully for what sa mighty mist ... the fog of pure passion ... smoke and mires ...

Babylonian dust storms as dire vishes ... de "v" as de Niche varies ... as omega ... means to ends in ontological fashion ... this stuffing does go on ... producing copious continuation to de race ... the rush of humanity once referred to as a rheid ... from far out there ... farce IDe?

And geologically rheids creep although solid ... sort of like words as laid out ... frightening things ... to the naïveté host ... that may not be completely envisioned as appears other wise ... Sophia being out there too/Tue ...

As consequence words will be explicate ... due to rush of implications ... the virtue of impulse impaled? Thus stuck ... skewered and otherwise consuming as thought is ...
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
Hef wasn't POTUS. That's the difference. But they are similar types, imo. I don't even hate Trump - I think he is in the wrong job. Really wrong job. Although, who knows, maybe Hef would've been a cooler headed POTUS if he'd had the job.
Click to expand...

I have little doubt that he would have been. Say what you will about his treatment of women, but business-wise, he was a pretty cool, level-headed guy by all accounts. Still doesn't mean I would vote for him, but he likely would be more suited to the role than the present occupant. Which, of course, means he likely never would have sought the job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top