It’s official: Playboy is a hate site; Update: Playboy pulled it
posted at 1:05 pm on June 1, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Playboy likes to claim that it prints pictures of naked women as a means to empower them. Uh-huh. It seems that Playboy and Hugh Hefner only like to empower women to the extent that they’ll take off their clothes, but when they open their mouths and have an opinion … well, then it’s time to roll out the demonization. They have a new feature on the website that features — and I’m not making this up — conservative women they’d like to “hate-f**k” (link NSFW):
Obama promised us the dream of post-partisanship—a cuckoo land where party affiliation and factional animosity were forgotten. Turn on cable news or open any newspaper, however, and you’ll quickly discover that the dream has yet to materialize. But there is a way to reach across the aisle without letting principles fall by the wayside. We speak, naturally, of the hate [f**k]. We may despise everything these women represent, but goddammit they’re hot. Let the healing begin.
The hatred is certainly apparent on all ten of the entries on this list. The boss hits #1 on this list, Amanda Carpenter’s on it too, but perhaps the entry on Mary Katharine Ham demonstrates their misogynism best:
The Hate F**k Rating: You get this one pregnant, she stays pregnant. Karma’s a bitch, isn’t it?
Let’s be clear about terms here. A “hate f**k” sounds like something perhaps just short of rape, but degrading enough to entertain the perverted twerps at Playboy. The fact that the magazine published this piece of effluvium should be enough to show that everyone in the editorial process, from the writer to Hef himself, don’t want women empowered. They want silent sex objects, and when confronted with women whose opinions differ from theirs, want them humiliated.
This one on Megyn Kelly is too pricelessly ironic:
The Hate F**k Rating: You need to flagellate your genitals for wanting to f**k this woman.
Isn’t the entire Playboy empire based on self-flagellation of genitals?
Last I saw, Playboy’s losing so much money they have to cut back on the number of editions they print. Hopefully, that number approaches zero soon.
Update: Tommy Christopher concurs (link fixed).
Update II: Yid with Lid notes that the list also included another friend, Pamela Geller, and adds this:
The internet is a weird place, any Idiot with a computer can start writing. Some like myself are lucky enough to build up a following. There are times that we object to people’s ideas and make fun of them. We even make fun of their political crutches like TOTUS. But there are lines that most of us know not to cross, Guy Cimbalo leapfrogged over that line. His So Right it’s Wrong is not only an attempt to denigrate these fine writers, but all women, actually all writers everywhere. It has no other purpose, it doesn’t inform, it isn’t funny, the article’s only purpose is to be mean.
In my youth I read Playboy often, and never thought the pictures were pornography, but Guy Cimbalo attempt at writing at Playboy.com, THAT is pornography at it worst.
May I suggest a strongly worded email to the Lou Mohn, lmohn@playboy.com, Playboy’s publisher?
You may!
Update III: Playboy has pulled the article, with no explanation, Allahpundit reported on Twitter. I think we know the reason, though.
Update IV: Caleb Howe saved it from the memory hole.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
l
lOLOLOLOL
The women aren’t even that amazing.
Their breasts are ridiculous and should turn any person off. i hate most false breasts
I’ll never forget being at a party — the person holding the party had playboy on..
a woman was having intercourse and..
her nipple was moving around, but the rest of her breast wasnt — it couldnt because of the implant. gross.
blatantblue on June 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Looks like they yanked it. I hope some folks took screen shots.
So what do you think; non-apology-apology or just letting slide down the memory hole? I actually think they’ll print a retraction, for the fact that leftists that would blindly and hypocritically agree to rank misogyny like this would more likely frequent a site like Suicide Girls…
liquidflorian on June 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Don’t most people outgrow Playboy by about the same time they become legally old enough to look at it?
Crusty on June 1, 2009 at 5:25 PM
blatantblue on June 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM
*In his best Ren Hoek voice* THAT EES SEEEEEEEEEEEEECK, MAN!
Ryan Gandy on June 1, 2009 at 5:27 PM
Reading Playboy,
might lead to,
temporary blindness,
tee hee!!!!!!!!!!!!!
canopfor on June 1, 2009 at 5:28 PM
It was DISGUSTING
The whole thing was
Playboy is moronic:
*monotome voices*
“grrr here’s my big thing.”
“ooooh thats sooo niiiiiceee! im just a poor little waitress but my shaft, i mean shift is almost over and im in the mood for some meat.”
“that sounds cool. i have some for you.”
UUHH UHHH!
It kills your braincells
blatantblue on June 1, 2009 at 5:32 PM
The web is great. The leftist media forever got by with anything. Now stupid stunts like those pulled by Playboy get embarrassed in public.
seven on June 1, 2009 at 5:56 PM
I’m shocked. I have this fear that they are slimy enough to put it back up, though.
Blake on June 1, 2009 at 5:57 PM
Let me ask you this, I assume PB is lefty, but have they gone out of their way to insult conservatives in the past? It seems like their women of what ever are either volunteers or people in the news but flattering.
Blake on June 1, 2009 at 6:00 PM
This is certainly not a surprise, remember how the “caring, open minded” liberals brutalized Sarah Palin. It will get worse before it gets better. Liberals have no morals other than what feels good do it.
mgt on June 1, 2009 at 6:02 PM
The average IQ of a Playboy reader is sub-grapefruit level.
V15J on June 1, 2009 at 6:03 PM
On the Jezebel article, none of them can just say it is wrong. They have to go through this big distancing themselves ritual. I hate that. People will say, normally I hate your guts, but that was a great post. Keep it to yourself!
Blake on June 1, 2009 at 6:07 PM
It doesn’t matter that PlayBoy pulled it…it’s too late. Now, if ANYTHING bad happens to ANY of those 10 gals, anything at all…
My collie says:
CyberCipher on June 1, 2009 at 6:27 PM
Wow. Just wow.
Playboy may have just published the most offensive thing I’ve ever read. There is no other way to interpret this except to say that it is endorsing rape.
Unbelievable.
AnonymousDrivel on June 1, 2009 at 6:36 PM
Based on an episode of Californication – the only place I’d seen the term used before this – I don’t think it means rape at all. It just means having an encounter with someone you find personally distasteful but are nevertheless physically attracted to.
Sign of the Dollar on June 1, 2009 at 6:38 PM
Sorry anything that says Hate F*#k sounds like rape. How would he like if someone did a list with His mother and His sisters and his wife(I doubt he has one) and women he admired.
How would he like it then?
Gracelynn on June 1, 2009 at 6:39 PM
too late.
homesickamerican on June 1, 2009 at 6:43 PM
I can not say I disagree with the boss being #1 … she is too fine
Donut on June 1, 2009 at 6:50 PM
The question used to be:
“What sort of man reads Playboy?”
I think the question now is:
“What strain of sub-human slime writes, edits and publishes Playboy?”
Playboy: Entertainment For Men or Endorser of Rape?
YOU BE THE JUDGE!
SuperCool on June 1, 2009 at 7:19 PM
Screencap or it didn’t happen.
Rusty Shackleford on June 1, 2009 at 7:46 PM
I used to be an avid reader of Playboy.
Then I turned 15.
Rhinoboy on June 1, 2009 at 7:48 PM
Newsflash, libs!
Hef may be the face of Playboy, but he stepped down from his throne atop Playboy magazine ages ago His daughter has been running the show since the late 1980s.
Jack.
Jack Deth on June 1, 2009 at 8:12 PM
Hey, HEY, HEY!!!! Some people are having supper!
ladyingray on June 1, 2009 at 8:21 PM
Sick
CWforFreedom on June 1, 2009 at 8:22 PM
The fact that they called Michelle Malkin hot almost makes me want to cancel my subscription. I mean she looks like some kind of rodent. A rodent that is also constipated. Otherwise good stuff.
Terry Silver on June 1, 2009 at 8:36 PM
Sent along to Mr. Mohn, with a bit of stylish embellishment:
Dear Mr. Mohn,
I used to extole Playboy as a fun magazine that you could relax with at the end of a tough day, still wearing the tie you came home in, sipping a good drink. The articles were entertaining and thought provoking, the cartoons were as good as anything ever published in Punch or the New Yorker, and the atmosphere was ribald without being lewd. I haven’t taken time to read it for several years, but I always had fond memories of how it stood out from the swamp of its competitors.
I suppose your editorial policies have changed, evolved. As the swamp dwellers have taken market share, or as the market has shifted to pleasing the wankers on the internet, you’ve ceded the high ground. Perhaps the humor of P.G. Wodehouse would go over many readers’ heads in these times of minimalist education, but where else would an educated man look for entertainment?
No serious, self-respecting man would go any further in a magazine that publishes an article such as ‘Top 10 Conservative Women We’d Like to Hate F**k.’ I’d have expected such an article to appear in Hustler, next to the latest Chester the Molester comic. Is this the arena in which you’ve chosen to compete? Shocking smut is pretty easy to find, and not very competitive. The clients aren’t very discerning. “Playboy, Swank, what’s the difference?” The difference used to be evident, and the target markets very different.
Who serves the market where the customers want their martinis shaken and not stirred, and they can tell the difference? My memory is that it was fun for the neighbors to notice Playboy coming in with my mail, and I could look forward to savoring it with a fiendishly expensive, smooth cigar and two fingers of 16-year-old Bushmills. Not now. Mr. Mohn, you publish an embarrassment.
You’ve abandoned the market with a taste for fine things for one seaking hot-wings and cheap thrills. The cheap thrills market is, and always has been, thoroughly saturated.
Peyton on June 1, 2009 at 9:00 PM
Terry Silver on June 1, 2009 at 8:36 PM
You can’t be serious. “Constipated rodent” is the last thing on my mind when looking at her.
Ryan Gandy on June 1, 2009 at 9:14 PM
That photo on the front of Hef is priceless. Proof positive that the only female to want to shag that disgusting bag of bones is one whose principles start and end with the size of a guy’s wallet.
Meanwhile it amazes me just how many libs routinely assassinate the character of any woman or minority with whom they disagree. I’d like to believe that some of them really do live up to their principles, but I don’t know any of them personally.
Wanderlust on June 1, 2009 at 9:17 PM
I guess it could be partly due to my being a gray hair, but I quit buying Playboy because I got so tired of their liberal crap. I won’t buy any magazine that boasts a liberal on the cover, in an interview, or the centerpiece of an article.
Although I don’t expect to see him on the cover of Playboy, I will not buy a magazine that has Barry on the cover.
Star20 on June 1, 2009 at 9:46 PM
You should take a trip over to Politico and see some of the “Enlightened” comments on their sight. B of O’R where are you?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/anneschroeder/0609/Playboy_s_Top_10_Conservative_Women_We_Hate_to_Love.html
Fynxbell on June 1, 2009 at 9:53 PM
There are some days when I know I just shouldn’t watch the news. First off, my respect to Michelle Malkin, Amanda Carpenter, Mary Katherine Ham, Megyn Kelly and anyone else who was on that list for standing up for what they believe in and taking such crap. I’d like to say I was completely surprised, but sadly, not so much.
I’ve never read Playboy, but I have read Hustler. After 9/11, I disagree with Larry on every issue politically. But he would often have letters from the troops in the magazine and send them care packages. I don’t think he’d stoop to this low a level though. Although, he’s come close. The incredibley tasteless cartoons for some reason don’t feature Muslims. I’d think a prophet that married a 6 year old girl would be a ripe target for humour. But just not that safe. Disgusting.
Canadian Infidel on June 1, 2009 at 10:04 PM
Exactly. And where ELSE is rape (“hate f***” attacks) upon females occur with cultural sanction? Oh, yeah, Iran, Afghanistan…
Lourdes on June 1, 2009 at 10:20 PM
You can get anything that leftist rag has ever published for free on the web.
All except those pictures of Hugh in the embrace of, ahem, another man.
benrand on June 1, 2009 at 10:25 PM
Applying Psychology and Criminal Justice 101 here, it’s reasonable to allege that this is not Cimbalo’s first venture into the areas of sexual crimes.
Lourdes on June 1, 2009 at 10:30 PM
Criminals usually don’t, especially serial rapists and other sexual predators. Not writing about themselves “in the third person” avoids them focusing on themselves, and, it assists cover for their alter-egos’ identities — who are “the ones who do it” when they act-out.
Lourdes on June 1, 2009 at 10:33 PM
Politico’s comments section (and many of it’s writers) represent a cesspool of Leftwing disturbance. There are recurring Conservatives and some Moderates who write comments in sparse numbers, but the overall character of the comments sections on that site are Leftwing and extremely sick. The site doesn’t moderate those comments nor commenters, but they DO ban many Conservatives.
It’s said that Axelrod and Emanuel are keenly involved in Politico, certainly not something that is of surprise to me. I’ve read more interesting, worthwhile commenting on fark and on a few bathroom walls than the majority of the Leftwing comments on Politico throw up all over that site. Really a disgusting aberration of a website as to how it is administered.
Lourdes on June 1, 2009 at 10:36 PM
Just trying to imagine “the laydees” on The View even venturing to mention this issue is enough to make one’s head hurt. I can barely begin to imagine the hoops they’ll inevitably jump through just to avoid laying any responsibility on this ghastly Leftwinger or the publication, which I’m sure they’ll fashion, somehow, into the latest Tea Cozy for Lesbians.
Lourdes on June 1, 2009 at 10:43 PM
P.S.: domestic violence among lesbians runs very high.
Lourdes on June 1, 2009 at 10:44 PM
So Playboy says that they are “empowering” women while portraying them in the most demeaning way possible? Hmmmmmmm, seems like they mastered ObamaSpeak long before he did.
By the way I just want to thank the wonderful men on HotAir who defend the dignity of women & nobly stand up for us, as femininity is under major attack in our time. Love all you guys!
kg598301 on June 1, 2009 at 10:56 PM
So the stroke material for losers produced by the geriatric, vile old pervert still gets published? Who knew and who cares?
NoDonkey on June 1, 2009 at 11:07 PM
Pathetic, sad, Hefner is one of the most pathetic public figures I can imagine and that’s just looking from the outside. Maybe I’m wrong but I can’t help thinking that He’s experiencing an internal hell daily.
cjk on June 1, 2009 at 11:10 PM
I swear I was just in a waiting room and they had some stupid men’s type magazine that had a cover article that said,” Can Obama make you better in bed”? Egads, these people are nuts.
bloggless on June 1, 2009 at 11:11 PM
I understand that this rag also spent a lot of money on getting abortion legal in this country. How nice! After they use the ho’s they can scrape them out. I know that is crude, but hey, that is the way many men think about women who are pregnant with a child they fathered.
bloggless on June 1, 2009 at 11:13 PM
The photo looks like Hef is having another bout of incontinence.
Star20 on June 1, 2009 at 11:20 PM
I think I speak for many women, and certainly for nearly all Conservative women: the very idea of Hugh Heffner *in that way*: eewwwwwww….
Lourdes on June 1, 2009 at 11:29 PM
I think it looks like Hef AFTER another bout of incontinence: he’s pleased with himself.
Lourdes on June 1, 2009 at 11:30 PM
While the Left considers an affirmative action bake sale to be a hate crime, they endorse this garbage, which is everything that hate crimes (or terrorism) purport to be. This is designed not just to denigrate Michelle Malkin, Mary Katherine Ham, and Megyn Kelly for being women, but is aimed at ensuring that all conservative women are too filled with fear to engage in the public sphere.
Gone is the glass ceiling; now liberal men want trial by fire for conservative women who dare to succeed in the political and intellectual sphere. Demented beyond belief.
Of course, a small part of me can’t help but notice that the liberals do these things because conservative women are undeniably hotter than liberal women. We’ll got Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, Sarah Palin, Mary Katherine Ham, Carrie Prejean, Megyn Kelly, Laura Ingraham, and many others. They have… Hillary? Nancy Pelosi?
Roxeanne de Luca on June 1, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Hugh is a celebutard pimp. Pam Anderson is a celebutard ho. Both are liberals.
Geochelone on June 2, 2009 at 12:03 AM
That Liberalism sure is strong religion. They sure hate their [Conservative] demons, don’t they?
watson007 on June 2, 2009 at 12:07 AM
Somebody has to have said this already, but I just saw the full list on MM’s site, so here it goes. Peggy Noonan’s a conservative?
Colin Harris on June 2, 2009 at 12:08 AM
How about a list of “Liberal Skags that I’d Sooner Turn Gay Than To Sleep With”? I’ll start the bidding with Janet Napolitano.
Lou Budvis on June 2, 2009 at 12:33 AM
Michelle Obama Abdul-Jabbar. Her underbite would make an angler fish proud.
Colin Harris on June 2, 2009 at 12:53 AM
What is this “perhaps just short of”?!? It is rape.
Neither your boss, Michelle, nor anyone else deserves that kind of treatment. What gets me the most about people targeting Michelle is that they never, ever fail to insult her with highly sexual insults aimed at her Filipina heritage. I have heard enough of that same kind aimed at Puerto Rican women like me, and every single time it makes me crunch my fist in return.
This is nothing else than the dehumanization of Conservative women everywhere. This is a message to other Conservative women who might even consider ever running for some kind of national office: “We will destroy you, humiliate you, and denigrate you, your family, and even your dog – if you have one. If you want to keep your reputation intact, you better stay away from us. We have POWER, and we intend to keep it, even if that means we have to take you through the seven rings of Hell. Don’t even TRY to run against us. Ever.”
Remember that rape is more about raw animal power overtaking the victim than anything else. This makes the rapist no better than a wolf. Someone once said it best (I don’t remember who),
I’d advise each and every woman on that list to carry a weapon of some kind on her at all times. And not be afraid to use it.
newton on June 2, 2009 at 1:25 AM
OMG I just read some of Playboy Article they took down.
IT Proves that Liberals are sick, twisted and full of HATE HATE HATE.
You have to be a liberal to even conceive of the term HATE F*CK. These progressives are scary.
Blue Dog Dems are OK but Liberals and Progressives are the most hate filled humans. And they won the election and they still HATE HATE HATE anyone who disagrees with them. The demand 100% obedience like Nazis.
Hey Playboy! Not all women are liberal sluts who dish out HATE.
Hey Liberals! Not all women are liberal sluts who dish out HATE.
Libs have been on a rampage degrading women. Look what they did to Palin and Carrie.
THEY HAVE NO SHAME.
Geochelone on June 2, 2009 at 1:37 AM
Agreed.
In fact, I blocked that show, “Girls Next Door”, on my cable TV. The hubby doesn’t even have a clue about the password: I keep it to myself. And nope, I don’t miss it one bit.
newton on June 2, 2009 at 1:38 AM
My thoughts exactly.
Just when you think liberals could not possibly be more bigoted,idiotic,and hateful, something like this comes along
and lowers the bar a little bit more.
It’s like these infantile simpletons get up every morning and try to out hate each other.
It would be nice to see this kind of venom spewed at terrorist and oppressive leaders like Hugo and Castro but liberals are to busy sucking up and excusing their atrocities so they can go after their real enemies like Republicans and Christians.
What a bunch of sick, pathetic,Neanderthals liberals show themselves to be.
Baxter Greene on June 2, 2009 at 1:44 AM
Say something like that to a man. To his face.
Johan Klaus on June 2, 2009 at 1:54 AM
These scum bags are also cowards.
Johan Klaus on June 2, 2009 at 1:59 AM
You know what. I have never read anything so disgusting. Nothing comes to mind that is more offensive than this. It is that bad.
I had to stop it was so disturbing. They targeted respectable women and said the most vile things about them in a sexually degrading way.
Many hardened criminals would find this distasteful; but not liberals.
Geochelone on June 2, 2009 at 2:02 AM
\
This is rich coming from the group that gets their panties up in a wad if someone tells them “Merry Christmas” or says Obama’s middle name “Hussein”.
You can bet the liberals won’t be calling for Hefner’s head like they did Imus just for saying “nappy headed hoe’s”.
liberals are so drunk with power they don’t even realize how many people they are turning off with their bigotry and hatred of people that disagree with them politically.
I think it is a safe bet that liberals can’t even tell you with a straight face that they stand for anything other than their own political and economic advancement.
No morals,no standards,no ethics,nothing but pathetic hateful bigots obsessed with their own ideology.
Baxter Greene on June 2, 2009 at 2:02 AM
You hit the nail on the head with that statement.
Johan Klaus on June 2, 2009 at 2:40 AM
And it’s why I think we are headed towards civil war in this country.
Alana on June 2, 2009 at 4:33 AM
Christie has put the whole Playboy empire, including the mansion, up for sale for $40MM. Would make a nice new HQ for Pajamas Media…
wordwarp on June 2, 2009 at 4:43 AM
This is pretty hateful sutff from someone accusing others of hate.
drjohn on June 2, 2009 at 7:12 AM
Playboy pulled it? lol
RobCon on June 2, 2009 at 7:34 AM
I heard that playgirl of the month duties include changing Hef’s diapers. Is that true?
SKYFOX on June 2, 2009 at 7:39 AM
I agree with everything you ever said.
DrMagnolias on June 2, 2009 at 7:47 AM
Two words: Jeaneane Garafolo.
ZK on June 2, 2009 at 8:25 AM
Medea Benjamin is kind of hot.
SlimyBill on June 2, 2009 at 8:38 AM
Where are the feminists? Have we heard an outcry from NOW, Gloria Steinem or even (gulp) Janeanne Garafallo?
metrygirl on June 2, 2009 at 9:10 AM
Ding. Ding! DING!!
We have a winnah!
(Obviously, Hef is chief among the self-flagellationists)
locomotivebreath1901 on June 2, 2009 at 9:34 AM
I contended that if Playboy is a hate site for their article, HotAir is a hate site for their response article. Six people responded to my comment. Only one made any attempt at a substantive response; the others were just name-calling and such. Kind of sad, but pretty typical of the level of discourse around here. Very low signal-to-noise ratio.
Anyway, here’s the one response which actually tried to make a point:
Satire? I dont see the high-minded wit of “Righty chicks are totally hotter than lefty chicks”. Or “it would be great to hate-f**k liberal chicks if not for the fact that they’re all ugly.”
Sorry, no. It’s just as dumb and sexist as the Playboy article. However, it has the added bonus of making HotAir hypocritical. Thus, it’s even dumber than the Playboy article.
And now, Playboy has had the good common sense to take down their article. HotAir? Not so much.
orange on June 2, 2009 at 11:50 AM
I agree. Many of us believe the vulgar term Playboy used was a call for rape; I will never find any satire of someone calling for rape to be amusing or appropriate.
DrMagnolias on June 2, 2009 at 1:06 PM
Dr. Judith Reisman offered some interesting history regarding Hugh Hefner, his early mindset and Playboy Magazine. Now he’s old like the cuddly lion without teeth but there was a time…
Google: How to get rid of the UN Pedophile Agenda
*Pages 5,6,9 of 47
The entire file is chilling.
sinsing on June 2, 2009 at 1:49 PM
There’s no fool like an old fool (re:story picture). Playboy is a bygone publication that has allowed itself to be infected with progressive hatred for this country and a whole new style of the hatred of women.
Hening on June 2, 2009 at 2:05 PM
Hey a**hole. Maybe you can express your nasty opinion’s about Michelle’s looks on a site that doesn’t belong to her? Ever heard of good manners, ***khead?
Too much to hope you’ll get banned but you should be. d*ck.
austinnelly on June 2, 2009 at 2:25 PM
LOL. I used to enjoy Men’s Health Magazine until one day about 6 months ago it arrived with Obama on the cover! He is a SMOKER!
I could never handle “Men’s Journal” as it is so obviously an elitist, limousine liberal type of mag but I liked Men’s Health as it had a lot of material. Needless to say, I did not renew my subscription to Men’s Health after seeing that poser on the cover.
It is amusing to me how the bleeding hearts just can’t help themselves by slobbering all over Obama. I would not expect that they would ever put George Bush on the cover, even though he is a true health fanatic, but to put a smoker on the cover of a health magazine was beyond the pale.
I would like to think that their subscription level fell way off after putting Obama on the cover…
yubley on June 2, 2009 at 2:27 PM
His daughter shares it because $$$ is the justification.
shick on June 2, 2009 at 2:41 PM
I threw up in my mouth.
shick on June 2, 2009 at 2:48 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »