It would seem that Guy Cimbalo, a writer for Playboy magazine, has a true fondness for women. He recently penned a list of the “Top 10 Conservative Women We Hate to Love”. Of course, by “Hate to Love”, Cimbalo was actually referring to the “Hate Fuck” (a phrase some are saying is a euphemism for rape). This is the most misogynistic piece of writing I’ve seen in a long time. What is wrong with people?? Why on earth would Playboy think it was acceptable to publish such a piece??
For years I have heard the debate over Playboy and other “men’s” magazines. They exploit women. No, they serve to celebrate men’s appreciation of women. As far as I am concerned, Playboy has clarified their position with this article.
I would link directly to the Playboy site, but they have pulled the article after what appears to be massive protest. Fortunately once you put something out on the internet, it will never truly disappear. You may see screen shots of the entire article here. You really must see the article to appreciate the vileness of it all.
Aside from the obvious, a couple of things really bothered me about this.
First is the apparent absence of mainstream media attention. If you do a search for “Playboy” on the sites for CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and FOX, you will find the following regarding this story:
- CNN – nothing
- MSNBC – nothing
- CBS – one mention, a editorial by Connie Erbe. Ms. Erbe makes it clear she is writing her editorial because “Teri Christoph, whom I have never met, asked me to stand up for conservative women who were maligned by an online article on Playboy magazine’s website.” Wow. No one has to ask me to stand up for women. She goes on to say, “I also want to note that at least one woman on the list is so venom-spewing, she unfortunately invites venom to be shot back at her: Michelle Malkin. Her posts and her ‘routine’ are so venomous and predictable, in fact, I stopped paying attention to her years ago.” Ok… if I interpret her response correctly, it would seem Ms. Erbe thinks Ms Malkin was asking for it??? Unbelievable.
- ABC – Posted a video response from Elisabeth Hasselbeck, co-host of the View. (Ms Hasselbeck was unfortunate enough to make this Top 10 list.) If ABC, who employs Ms. Hasselbeck, issued their own statement regarding this subject, I was unable to locate it.
- FOX – nothing
Why wasn’t there more outrage? I cannot believe FOX news wasn’t all over this. Isn’t such a vicious, misogynistic attack worthy of mention? Perhaps they don’t want to give Playboy the attention, however calling attention to negative issues seems to be a pastime for the media.
Can you imagine the media frenzy (and rightfully so) had these remarks been racist in nature?
I’m also disturbed that one liberal news site initially published only the headline from Playboy’s article and the names of the women who made this list. The article, written by Politico.com’s Anne Schroeder, was taken so seriously by this female writer that it was filed under the category “antics“. (Schroeder’s original article was also pulled. The result of protest? My guess would be yes.)
Imagine what you would have seen on Politico and other liberal news sites had this list contained the names of famous liberal women. I can’t say for sure that the response would be any different, but one does have to wonder. What difference does it make if the women listed are conservative or liberal? They’re human beings who do not deserve to be treated this way by anyone, much less a magazine that is the largest selling men’s magazine, selling about three million copies a month in the U.S.
I believe when magazines promote opinions like this, they help perpetuate misogyny. Hate quite often leads to violence. In the US there are 4.8 million intimate partner-related physical assaults and rapes every year.
No, Playboy is not responsible for all these things, but every pebble dropped in the pool of misogyny contributes to the problem. With a circulation of three million, they certainly have influence. While they withdrew the article, as far as I can determine there has been no apology, no clarification that Playboy does not support hatred or violence against women.
Isn’t it time we stood up to things like this and said, “No more!” I for one am composing my letter right now.
Related posts:
- Researchers and the Leggy Woman Despite what artists, fashion magazines, and country music lyrics...
- Valentine’s Day: Women Prefer Sex Toys More Than Flowers Durex has conducted a study to determine which gifts...
- It’s Her Fault When I was in my early thirties, I consulted...
Rock On, Lady Julia !
Hold to your great strength.
Respectfully,
willie
I am only mildly surprised that Playboy published Cimbal0’s list. Since the advent of the internet the empire once started by Hugh Hefner has had an increasingly difficult time making ends meet. If one considers that most porn publications and websites constantly push for more and more hard core depictions of sex, it is small wonder that Playboy took a risk on Cimbalo. Hey, if Howard Stern can make a good living speaking sexual rubbish for shock effect, why can’t poor old Playboy do well publishing it? It was a bad choice on their part and I would like to think that Mr. Hefner would never have allowed such depressingly angry waste.
The signs of degeneration are everywhere in civilization today. In public schools the girls try to look like hookers and the boys try to look like gangsta pimps. TV glorifies violence almost as if it were holy and hate crimes are considered cool rights of passage for many kids. Cimbalo appears to be a product of this generation, trying to look clever by being mean, trying to sound funny by joking about one of the lowest acts one human can commit against another. Judging from the vehement responses on the internet about his Top Ten List, Mr. Cimbalo seems to have failed on all counts. I doubt that Playboy will welcome him back, but this very sad world being what it is, I imagine that a less scrupulous, greedier, and more hard edged publication will make him an offer. And he, being the gutless wonder that he is, will probably accept and seek to exploit the publicity he has generated by being such a twit.
Arafin
Playboy usaully has a good editorial standard. Sad to see this degrading article.
In Australia, political elites often refer to the value of mateship to legitimise their policies. But too often men in Australia, treat their best mates, Women, unjustly! I hope and believe this is changing.
I believe men need to stand up and say to other men that violence against women is wrong.
The media has a serious disconnect from what normal people think. People from various political persuasions can come together at parties and find much more in common that there is difference. In this case, although the media bias is as claimed, for both major parties, women still have to fight for a place of equality that should be given. As a libertarian, I want the smallest possible government or interference in people’s personal lives. Unfortunately, the Republican party has forgotten its roots as expressed by Barry Goldwater. Basically, the government should not intrude into the bedroom where consenting adults should be able to do whatever they choose to do as long as it is consentual and non-harmful. Playboy and Rush Limbaugh are one and the same. As long as they can exacerbate the mob to earn more money, they hope that their ratings will go up and the hell with the country. As for me, a quiet evening of sensual torment by Lady Julia would be more than I could ever hope to make my life complete.
I knew there was a reason I didn’t read magazines like that in the first place.
What’s sad — there are probably guys who think the article is cool. Or something.
This just shows the corrosive effect of so-called “political correctness”. When the political becomes the first value by which to measure everything, universal values such as abhorrence of violence and respect for women are easily discarded. Of course the author can joke about raping conservative women; those aren’t REALLY women, you know, because the proper definition of “woman” does not include people who hold politically unpopular views. They are asking for it, as it were.
In order to have a tolerant and truly liberal society, we have to return to a standard where we judge people by what they do, not by what they think or believe.
Bravo, Lady Julia, for speaking up about this.
Best,
Felix
The author is entitled to his opinion as Playboy is entitled to publish it. If the feminists hadn’t gone off into a screaming fit that article would still be up there.
Your latest focus on the political leaves me cold. Your blog is supposed to be a sex blog. Where is the sex?
Sadly it seems the ethics (control) of the media has fallen to that of the bottom line above all else. True we are being force feed extreme after extreme, but this is sickening.
Harry, you’re right. I checked with the Blog Police and this is indeed supposed to be a sex blog. (I would love to suggest where you can find some sex, but I don’t want to sound misogynistic.)
Arafin
Okay, I can’t resist this one.
Harry, if the blog leaves you cold, then I suggest you return the favor and leave *it*.
Harry,
I have to disagree with you. I think how men and women view each other has everything to do with sex.
How would you feel if your name was on the list? What if he put ten guys on the list and no women? How would that change the dynamic? I think there would be a huge response from the media. If he lived long enough.
I think we should appreciate a woman’s beauty and not be leering. We can admire women without being disrespectful. We can be erotic without being crude and demeaning.
Playboy crossed that line and went well past it. The Playboy article diminishes us all.
Sexual assault is not about sex. It is about violence. I don’t think it is correct to condone violence to anyone.
Mike