August issue comments, part 2

[Brian Wallace]

Ummmm...I really don't have a definite opinion on this but comments
were asked for.

> - Carnie Wilson: The photos aren't bad, but I think this is a poor
> choice for PLAYBOY.  This feature is of interest to women, not men,
> and PLAYBOY is really sending conflicting signals to its audience in
> running this.  I hate to be so glib, but I'll bet a woman editor came
> up with this idea.  I know for a fact that this feature caused one
> long time reader to cancel his subscription.

I don't understand WHY so many people have this aversion to the Carnie
Wilson pictorial.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion, blah, blah,
blah but I don't understand why it is a "poor choice".  You're not the
only one who thinks, this, Peggy.  I'm not singling you out.

I guess everybody hates it because:

1.  Most people think she's too fat to be posing for Playboy.
2.  They think it smacks of career desperation (a la Tiffany).
3.  She lost the weight surgically and had to be photographed with a
corset to hide excess skin, scars, etc.

The most depressing thing for me is that this all smacks of elitism.
Certain women are "Playboy material", certain women are not.  This
just reinforces a boring standard.  After years of complaining that
all the Playmates were "cookie cutter" a pictorial finally shows up
that is not the norm and people are "canceling subscriptions".

Why would someone cancel a subscription because there was an
eight-page Carnie Wilson pictorial?  What was that person so angry at?
Did he only want thin women in "his" magazine?  Did he only favor
surgical enhancements and not surgery for health and self-esteem
issues?

I don't understand your comment, Peggy, that a woman editor came up
with this idea.  Maybe a male editor wanted something different and
unique for a pictorial.

Why do you think the pictorial is only of interest to women?  Maybe a
male would think that Ms. Wilson is attractive as well.

I think all of the women featured in Playboy are attractive.  I don't
rate any of them or put one above the other.  I probably couldn't name
a dozen Playmates.  I like the idea of Playboy and the philosophy of
Playboy more than the specific measurements and hair colors.

I'm just puzzled by the harsh vitriol focused at Ms.  Wilson.  A while
ago, there was talk of a pictorial featuring "plus-sized" model Emme.
I can't imagine how much everyone would have hated that.

I admire Kaminsky for doing something that he knew most people would
hate.  If Janet Pilgrim were to pose today, she'd probably be
considered "too fat".

There recently was an interview with Liz Phair at Playboy.com and she
was asked whether she's pose in Playboy.  She responded:

"Well, I personally wouldn't, just because I don't think that's the
right forum for my nakedness. If I wanted to be naked sometime
somewhere, I don't have a problem with that, if that's what I
wanted. But Playboy isn't the way I'd like to be naked. It's really
not to me what sexuality is about. It's so obviously from a very
sanitized male perspective; the women just aren't erotic to me other
than the fact that, "Wow, young flesh." The way they're posed kind of
makes you see the male point of view. Like, it's arousing, but it's
not what I find satisfying."

That's closer to my point of view than anything else.

Brian Wallace