1426
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 195 points 10 months ago

Wasn't Play Boy rather progressive at all times? What's the broken clock?

I really hate peoples' misconstruing of attraction with objectification. The presence of nudity doesn't make something bad, exploitative, or wrong. The presence of someone attractive does not mean that is the entire point.

[-] ysjet@lemmy.world 35 points 10 months ago

Good lord no, playboy was always super misogynistic. Hugh Hefner was MASSIVELY problematic lol.

[-] mildlyusedbrain@lemmy.world 28 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

For sure but that doesn't mean he couldn't be progressive especially for the time. Know nothing about him tbh but many historical progressive figures are pretty problematic

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago

There is definitely something to be said of context. Any learned feminist should know that. First and second wave feminism would be (and are) downright toxic by today's standards, but back then, that veneer of vicious independence was absolutely necessary when pitted against that very ingrained patriarchy of the time.

Not to say the patriarchy is solved by any means, just that fewer and fewer positions of power are gendered by expectation.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Yeah and it should be noted that second and third wave feminism weren’t happening separately, most of their existence was simultaneous, it was thesis and antithesis, call and response. Second did things and third called it out. Anti porn feminism came about criticizing men taking sexual advantage of women and then the third responded with shit like all women porn collectives creating porn by women for women and presenting the statement that porn isn’t inherently exploitative, men use porn to exploit women for sexual pleasure and financial gain.

Criticism of playboy from a feminist perspective is deeply rooted in the second wave. It was Steinem who led it and she was as many iconic second wave theorists were, not wrong but incomplete. (Side note, I’m mentioning her a lot and need to point out her role in the satanic panic, she’d 1000% be into Qanon today). But Steinem wouldn’t care that playboy published everything from Hunter S. Thompson to Margaret Atwood to a frank discussion about her transition with Wendy Carlos.

They absolutely exploited women’s bodies to sell good journalism, but it was damn good journalism, so in the end it’s just kinda weird

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)
this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
1426 points (97.2% liked)

People Twitter

5226 readers
2346 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS