What ails Playboy....comments on your intro

[Steve Sloca]

I have been meaning to contribute my comments in response to Peggy's
call for them in her 2/4 submission, but it's been hard to find a
moment to write them down.  In the hopes that the text of the report
is not set in stone, I would submit for consideration the following
thoughts:

While I am in agreement with Peggy's critique of the argument that
Playboy must "dumb down" to reflect changes in society and her
conclusion that this argument is over-rated, I think there are two
other social trends that Playboy has ignored or failed to respond to,
which has contributed mightily to its current image as "my father's"
or "my grandfather's" magazine.  Those trends are (1) the gradual
breaking down of barriers to the presentation of sexual images and
ideas in popular media--coupled with a fierce reaction against this
trend by the radical Religious Right; and (2) a complete sea change in
the position of women in society, both in terms of their roles within
the home and in the work force, and in terms of their perception of
themselves.  Playboy's failure to adjust to these changes have made it
"dated" and out of touch with its potential readers.

When Playboy began in the '50's, a picture of a bare breast had shock
value.  It simply wasn't done in mainstream media, whose view of
morality was more in tune with the Comstock Laws than with human
nature.  Thus, by daring to move the boundaries of good taste to
encompass elegantly photographed female nudes, Playboy established
itself as a trend-setter, as a publication that was "with it" in the
minds of the 20-30 year olds who were outspokenly sexual in their
behavior and beliefs, and also in the minds of older men who had
repressed, but not forgotten their desires to enjoy the natural beauty
of women.  By staying ahead of, or at least on par with, the rising
sexual consciousness of the "Free Love" generation of the '60's and
'70's, Playboy maintained its place as "the" magazine for men in those
decades as well.  With the '80's and AIDS came a backlash against
sexual openness and a revival of conservatism evidenced by the Reagan
Administration's attempt to rein in sexual expression in the media.
Playboy bowed to the pressure then; and it seems as if the editorial
and photographic policy of the magazine has been mired in this mode
ever since.  Meanwhile, society has moved on.  Ten years ago, strip
clubs were a rarity.  Now they are everywhere; and the typical
"Playboy Man" has probably been to several of them.  Playboy TV
understands this and has many stripper shows on its menu, but the
magazine hardly mentions them.  Every area of media from comic books
to song lyrics and music CD's have portrayed explicit sex in both
words and images; hardcore adult videos are the most rented and
purchased videos on the market; and the internet has made adult
imagery--and images of every imaginable sexual fetish--available on a
large scale to a world-wide culture which is increasingly sexually
open.  The typical "Playboy Man" is likely a consumer of these books,
CD's, videos and internet sites; and yet the magazine does not address
his interests or provide guidance as to what he should look for and
where he should go for the best in adult entertainment.  Playboy still
occasionally provides articles and pictorials on drinks and cars, but
not on other aspects of male-oriented culture on which most men today
spend major dollars.  Thus, it is seen as irrelevant to even those who
might buy it for its association with the adult entertainment
business.  At the same time, the backlash against the growing trend in
human sexuality, from the extreme radicalism of the Taliban and the
Islamic fanatics to the prissy puritanism of the Ashcroft crowd, has
grown more vocal and even violent in their attempts to stem the tide.
By not standing up to this backlash and by failing to support the
movement to more sexual openness, Playboy has not only abdicated its
former leadership of the Sexual Revolution, but it has become
identified more with the repressers than with the liberated.  When it
is described as "my father's magazine," it is not just because its
graphics are dated or its text is too erudite, it is because it is
perceived as identifying with the values of a prior generation, not
the values of the "Playboy Man" of today.  Having a 77-year old Hef as
is principal (indeed only) spokesperson, and featuring retro- parties
at the Mansion as its idea of prime entertainment, certainly
reinforces this perception.  But also "coy" photography that pretends
to "innocence" (especially with hugely-enhanced models that look like
they belong on the strip club stage) is out of touch with a society
that tolerates near-nudity in commercials, full nudity in films and
explicit sexual acts in common forms of home entertainment such as
videos and the internet.  The facts that the Special Editions can and
do regularly publish more explicit--yet still Playboy quality--photos,
and that the TV and video divisions make substantial dollars
publishing explicit adult videos, mean that Playboy's potential
audience prefers more openness about sex and sexually titillating
photography; and the magazine's reluctance to provide that openness
brands it as an anachronism in today's media.

Then, too, the new role of women in society demands a change in
Playboy as well.  In the early days of the magazine, 90% of women had
as their primary goal marriage and a family; and the role of homemaker
and companion to a working spouse was the role most women forsaw
themselves fulfilling.  Thus, the idea of being beautiful enough to
attract a handsome, erudite, upwardly mobile "Playboy Man" had a lot
of appeal to women in the '50's and '60's; and being selected as a
Playmate or featured as a model in a Playboy pictorial became regarded
as a badge of honor.  However, the modern woman has a very different
view of herself--and of her relationship to men.  Now, the role of
"arm candy" or playing "second fiddle" to a man is anathema to a
majority of women, who see themselves as equal to their partners in
relationships. Being "a mere sexual object" is a disgrace to the
liberated women who now live next door to the "Playboy Man," and they
are not afraid to demonstrate their distaste for the old image of
women that they see exemplified in Playboy.  A large reason for its
loss of readers (and the consequent growth of non-nude men's magazines
like Maxim) comes from Playboy's rejection by women, who have the
power to influence their mates to avoid any association with what they
believe to be Playboy's anti-feminism.  Continually featuring women
who are primarily the product of plastic surgery, or whose claim to
fame is that of a paid companion to a 77-year old, insures that
Playboy will continue to earn the contempt of today's woman.
Downplaying the Playmate, making her secondary and unimportant in the
promotion of the brand, further insures that Playboy will not be
welcome in any home or on any coffee table where a woman has an equal
say in the way a couple spends its entertainment dollar.  Playboy made
its reputation in prior years by making the "girl next door" into a
sexy companion that any urbane man would be proud to have; however,
the modern, liberated, feminist girl next door is no longer what
Playboy delivers in its magazine pictorials or its centerfolds.
(Ironically, had Kimberly Conrad maintained her status as Mistress of
the Mansion and been able to demonstrate that she had a strong
influence on Hef and the magazine, women might well have perceived
Playboy differently.)  Moreover, the "Playboy Man" wants advice on how
to attract and develop a relationship with the liberated woman of
today; and the magazine provides little of it.  Most men are not
looking for Hollywood wanna-be's with $20,000 worth of plastic
surgery.  They want to see beautiful, but attainable women in the
pages of Playboy; they want to hear from such women as to how to win
their hearts and bodies; and they want to keep the respect of their
wives or girlfriends (present or future) while they pursue such
knowledge. That requires the right mix of Playmates, feature subjects
and articles; and Playboy's failure to even try to find that mix has
contributed to its being left behind as society has moved on into the
21st Century.

    --Steve Sloca