**If you don't like that sort of thing... I'd not be looking any further here**
Dean fires a shot across the bow of the morality conservatives and I want to join in with him on this.
First, Blogs for Bush carries the torch for the Opinion Journal article.
First things first. Shame on blogs for bush, it started out as a way for the vast right wing blogger conspiracy to unite behind the President. I really think at this point if they are going to go out on a limb like this they need to support both sides of the equation (mark goes even further in this post)
I guess it helps Hefner to say that - after all, the truth would hurt a bit: that in order to gratify his own desires, he set afoot a process of moral depravity which has now blossomed into a multi-billion dollar industry dedicated to the objectification and exploitation of some human beings for the personal pleasure of others. And lets not forget the massive explosion in "kiddie porn", which rides along with the growth of "legitimate" pornography.
First of all, to call Playboy pornography is not just laughable, it is contrary to the very history of Playboy. You see Hef in his robe, clutched with beautiful women in his mansion it was not to cultivate the image of pornography which is why his images were more artistic then the pornography of its day (of which resulted in the starting of Magazines like Hustler). Hef went to make naked pictures of women respectable as part of his "playboy lifestyle" which was contrary to the way porn was sold at the time.
Secondly with factors like women entering into the job market, the Birth control pill entering circulation, and the baby boomers growing up with the particular demographics and social forms that their parents gave to them the birth of adult entertainment was going to happen. So should we bash Hef because he saw the tea leaves and said "Hey, I can make some money there to?"
Please don't think I'm some sort of prude - I have an active sex life and have a keen eye for feminine beauty. Sex is a good thing - of course, only within proper bounds. What Hefner did was take it outside its proper bounds, call sexual promiscuity good (ie, call evil, good - there's a Person where such ideas originate, ya know?) and rake in the money.
I am not a prude either, and I am a enjoyer of sex and the female form. Is having sex outside of a relationship Evil? No of course it isn't. Is it good? No it isn't either. How can you evaluate it? You evaluate it on the people in question. Sex for the sake of sex is unhealthy, but we can't blame Hef for that. It comes down to the mores and values of the people. Hitler didn't kill the jews but he opened the door to the inner demons of peoples natures to do that. Did Hef promote having sex irresponsibly? no he just said you can have it responsibily without marriage.
Never forget that - as a pornographer, Hefner has prospered mightily....and I do wonder just what percentage of his "playmates" are still doing ok. After all, an 80 year of cretin can still ruthlessly exploit young women bamboozled in to that sort of thing...but where does an 80 year old ex-playmate go? What happens to them? Has anyone ever asked?
they end up like 80 year old former actresses, and 80 year old former models
We can pray that Hefner, before he dies, will come to realise what a horrible thing he has done - but no matter what happens to Hefner, the terrible affects of his monstrous lust will be with all of us for quite a long time to come.
And he shoots out the religous buckshot here.
But on to Mark's second article to show just where he is coming from.
I imagine that most people who read this will have to admit that they have at one time or another viewed pornography. Not just the incidental pornography you might see from time to time involuntarily, but the actual act of going and looking at pornography with full knowledge that you wanted to do so. What I'd like everyone has done this to do is a little mental exercise (which will mostly apply to men, but I guess women might have done these sorts of things, too):
two words man "Romance Novels"... women masterbate and women do indeed go after porn. their numbers are smaller so you go into some of the less obvious things. Those trashy books with men and their heaving chests on the cover and long wavy hair. But as you will see it is much more important for Mark's thesis for it to be all about Men.
Go back in time and think of the first pornographic thing you saw. Perhaps it was just a picture of a woman showing her bare breasts - something mild, like that...nothing to get too worked up about, right? Except, waaaay back when, it did work one up, didn't it?
No it didn't mark... and thats because visual stimulai isn't what makes my crank turn
Oh... I'm sorry did I destroy your entire point right now? I am sorry about that....
I recall the senes of thrill and fascination I felt the first time I did so...now I could pass a naked woman on the street and hardly give her a glance.
Ok Mark here is the thing.....
If I were to walk down yee old street and see a naked woman I'd look. Why because a naked woman on the street is...ya know... not something you see on the street. So you have to put this shell of ultramorality to build up to an appeal to authority.
Repetition makes for boredom - once you've seen a hundred sets of breasts, you've pretty much seen them all (as an aside, I think the decline of Madonna's career can be directly traced to the fact that everyone has seen her breasts - and much else of her - and so there's no reason for anyone to watch her anymore).
The Madonna crack: hehehe
Now on to the subject of Repetition. Sorry I am not Bored by naked women's breasts. But it is not the Breasts that stimulate me, but it is the woman behind them. So once again what turns my crank doesn't turn yours... and it won't turn yee old guy down the roads crank.
It went like that in the use of pornography, at least for me - what thrilled at one point failed to thrill later, and so more "out there" pornography was sought in an attempt to recapture the first thrill of it all.
I think we should be proud of Mark for admiting to having sexual compulsive behavior. I can drink, and I can drink to excess. But I do not need to drink to get through the day, nor do I need to drink more and more to get the same effect. That is because I am not equiped with the Neurochemistry of addiction for drinking. Mark is for Porn and its good then that he shouldn't see porn... but he is not alone and nor does he have the only brain type for porn.
Mark now decides that he wants to reveal to us.... MURDERERS LIKE PORN
but I do recall a criminal case from a few years ago about the rape and murder of a little girl. On the perpetrator's computer was pornography...and the older the porn on the computer, the more mild it was. He, apparantly, did not hold back.
Did Porn make him murder? or did a sexual compulsion he had make him be addicted to porn and murder? or did he like porn for reasons unrelated to his murder?
Hmmm no going into either of those three points huh mark, and you know why? because you need to demonize Porn. This puts mark into the category of addict who needs to demonize his former vice.... but thats ok eventually he will have a healthier attitude about his addiction.
But Mark is of course not the root core of this little thread of hate on Hef so lets go to the Opinion Journal.
Hugh Hefner turns 80 next Sunday, and The Mansion is once again the place to be. "A major pajama party" is planned, as he told Maclean's, along with other observances equal to the dignity of the occasion. But this milestone also has "Hef" in a reflective mood, wondering how he will be remembered and trying to sum up "the major message in my life."
As a old man who tossed most of his earlier children out of the bulk of their inheritance in favor of the most recent children from the most recent spouse. This includes the children who built the Playboy empire up when you retired to your life as the Mascot of the playboy lifestyle.
The vanity of an old man who has to buy the favor of his youngest wife through their child.
But I am going to roll further and give heff and Matt here their swipes.
One might have thought that the woman, in life, had enough trouble with users and operators. But of course Hef, an exploiter to the end, doesn't see himself that way, and what's clear from all his legacy projects is that he wants to be remembered as anything other than what he is. We're to think of him as Hugh Hefner, social philosopher and cultural revolutionary. Hugh Hefner, entrepreneur and Charity Events Man of the Year. Hugh Hefner, friend of Marilyn. Hugh Hefner, luckiest cat on the planet. Anything, please, but the truth about Hugh Hefner, pornographer.
The women are paid massive amounts of money. Yeah Heff makes his money but can we divorce the women from the responsibility of their own choices? As I said earlier the idea of Heff as a pornagrapher is really laughable.
There was a dark and joyless time in America when one could actually go about daily life without ever encountering pornographic images. A child could grow up scarcely knowing that "adult entertainment" existed, much less acquainted with its many varieties. Hotel stays, in that prudish, stuffy era, had to be endured without pay-as-you-go porn, in-room and On Command. American males could not avail themselves of hundreds of millions of obscene films every year--as they do now, courtesy of even respectable corporations like Time Warner and Comcast--or take in the show at "gentlemen's clubs" when porn is not enough.
Porn always existed on the fringes of society. But in the end as society changed it became accessable.
Access isn't always good but it is a reality that occurs. When doors open up people will look in, and people will even go inside them.
Playboy Enterprises itself, years ago, dropped the pretense of refinement and delicacy, following the money into hard-core cable. Soft-core, hard-core, these were all along just degrees of exploitation and self-debasement and for the procurers a purely legal and commercial calculation.
You know why that happened? Its because Heff was losing money, Heff was losing market share.
You know who made that choice? Heff's daughter. Heff's oldest daughter has been running his media empire for years. So why attack Heff who when Playboy was ran by his own hand did no such a thing... its because Heff exists as an idea to kick. And when we talk about Heff the man we have to embrace the fact Porn goes both ways.
Enough to say that police investigators, in the sex-crimes units that have expanded roughly in proportion to mass-market "adult material," rarely conclude that the rapist or child predator lacked for pornographic inspiration before committing the crime.
again with this falacy....
Do these people exist as wounded and damaged individuals who seek out the black wound in their souls, or do they fill a empty spot and create the monsters.
I think the reality is more the former then the latter.
But as to the public legacy of Hugh Hefner, he should have no illusions. All of us have our share of faults and sins to account for. But the lowest of vices and "strangest secret of hell," as G.K. Chesterton called it, is the desire to pervert others, to coax and corrupt them and drag them down with you. And any man who at the age of 80 has that to answer for is by no stretch the luckiest cat on the planet.
Heff opened the door man, people walked in.
The problem is people who look to the religous end to attack pornography fail to understand the first gift of our creator.
Our mind, and our free will to see the evil and good in this world, and to choose.