August issue comments, part 2

[Alfred Urrutia]

--- Brian Wallace <brian_c_wallace@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 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.

Yes, yes and yes.  To blow these reasons off as not good enough is to
beg for a sex-changed man who used to be a 300lb football player to
pose because now s/he's as "close" to Playboy material as Wilson.  No,
not *everyone* can pose in the magazine.  That's a given.  If not
everyone can pose then there must be criteria, there must be a minimum
level or bar that must be attained.  She didn't get near there.

> 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".

Wrong way to look at it.  Standard does not equal all women looking
identical ala your "cookie cutter" accusation.  I, too, can get tired
of blond after blond with fake chests.  But that's not all that's in
Playboy.  Also something that shouldn't be in Playboy is marginal
women.

> 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.

Most people, in everyday life, end up having favorites.  If for no
other reason than they can't possibly remember everything they see.
Like how you say you couldn't name a dozen Playmates.  I can name them
all but I have no idea when they were born, where they were born, etc.
Other people can.  But favorites are a natural for most people whether
it's cars or art or songs or whatever. So while (almost) all women in
Playboy are attractive, few would be considered the most attractive by
most anyone.

> 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.
> 
Prettier, not a has-been, natural body.  It wouldn't bother me too much.

> 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.

Interesting.  I went to www.liz-phair.com and took a look through her
picture galleries.  She's either got the expected concert pics of her
singing, the "artsy" posed photos of herself ala Bikini magazine or
predictable posed pics. Not what I'd expect from someone who made the
above statement.  And good thing she wouldn't pose for Playboy, she
doesn't rate.  Too sad-faced.





Alfred.

=====
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"When you're surrounded by midgets with hammers, you know
 you're going to get a pounding."
 - Triple-H, on how horror movies can help you to evaluate
   real life dangers.
Alfred Urrutia                     rampagingsloth@yahoo.com