Ding - Dong Daddy wrote:
>
> Roy wrote:
> > Yep, I agree. He did nothing for women exept EXPLOIT them while freeing
> > them of their dignity and making them whores.
> > ====
>
> NO one forced those gals to disrobe, Roy...for a number of them it was a ticket to a new career and a new life...

So true. Only the religious weirdos condemmed that.

wrote:
>
> I guess when you look at the clothing the 'bunnies' were required to
> wear you do realise how much respect he had for women - every dirty
> minded little boy claimed they read it because of the articles.

The Playboy articles really are top quality but certainly men
want to see the naked women pics too. Playboy took those pics
tastefully and didn't make the women look like sluts. Between the
nudie pics and the very well-written articles, this is why
Playboy magazine succeeded way more than the other dirty
magazines.

I know you are a die-hard feminist but Playboy was better than
average. At least don't be happy that he died. I wouldn't wish
that on anyone.

> wrote in message
...
> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 12:43:08 PM UTC-5,
> wrote:
>>
>> Oh? So they could have worked in his club with normal clothes on?
>>
>>
> NO one forced those women to seek jobs that the Playboy Club, no
> one. No one forces the girls at Hooters to wear low cut, tight
> T shirts and be amply endowed either. If they object to the
> attire they are expected to wear then they need to seek employ-
> ment elsewhere. There will always be bars, clubs, strip joints,
> etc. and those choosing to work in these establishments know the
> type of place they are seeking employment at before walking through
> the door. If they're going to whine, be embarrassed, feel degraded,
> feel exploited it's best to look elsewhere for a job.
>
> They seek employment at these places because they know they're
> going to be receiving some hefty tips. They're not working in
> these places because they'll be receiving paid health benefits
> and a pension plan.

But I do believe they did have those benefits, more than one had this to
say:

"Overall pretty satisfied with the benefits package. Company matches 401K
contributions and vision plan is paid for by the company. Company is
extremely flexible and there are some perks."

On 9/29/2017 1:55 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> As for the bunnies, like every other job as go-go girl, stripper, chorus
> line, the women do have the choice of seeking other employment.Â* While
> some find it shameful, others do not mind showing off for money.Â* They
> use their bodies freely to exploit a man's wallet.

Agreed. Over history there has been no shortage of people telling
women what they can and cannot do, if someone's comfortable making
money in those jobs and they're not being forced to, good for them.
Doesn't bother me in the slightest.

nancy

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:32:27 -0400, Gary > wrote:

wrote:
>>
>> Speak for yourself! He was a nasty, grasping dirty old man. Betty
>> Ford, in her day was brave for being frank and admitting she had
>> breast cancer. What did he do? A cartoon in the December issue with
>> what was clearly the White House at night with a one breasted
>> silhouette leaning out the window saying 'All I want for Christmas is
>> my right breast' - cruel in the extreme, totally unnecessary and
>> uncalled for and I certainly don't feel I owe him squat. In fact,
>> THREE CHEERS THE DIRTY BUGGER IS DEAD AT LAST!!
>
>You should never wish anyone dead. Hugh Heffner might go to
>heaven or hell but at least he lived in heaven on earth for the
>last 64 years. heheh All men will agree, no doubt.

Would you like a life surrounded by bimbo bunnies? And have you seen
the ingredient lists of those women? They're one big silicone fest.
And if you want to know what they look like, you need a hammer and
chisel to dig them out of their make-up.

In article >, says...
> Subject: Hugh Hefner - Pioneering Feminist
> From: Gary >
> Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
>
> wrote:
> >
> > I guess when you look at the clothing the 'bunnies' were required to
> > wear you do realise how much respect he had for women - every dirty
> > minded little boy claimed they read it because of the articles.
>
> The Playboy articles really are top quality but certainly men
> want to see the naked women pics too. Playboy took those pics
> tastefully and didn't make the women look like sluts. Between the
> nudie pics and the very well-written articles, this is why
> Playboy magazine succeeded way more than the other dirty
> magazines.
>
> I know you are a die-hard feminist but Playboy was better than
> average. At least don't be happy that he died. I wouldn't wish
> that on anyone.
>
You already did. Two days ago you posted

"Are you just another worn out old bitter biddy? There are still a few
of you around. Your evil comments will die off along with you soon"

Janet UK

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 10:19:03 -0400, wrote:

>On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:32:27 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 04:40:44 -0700 (PDT), Ding - Dong Daddy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >Yup...Hef liberated gals from the constraints of prudish sexual morality. Women everywhere owe him a HUGE debt of gratitude...
>>>
>>> Speak for yourself! He was a nasty, grasping dirty old man. Betty
>>> Ford, in her day was brave for being frank and admitting she had
>>> breast cancer. What did he do? A cartoon in the December issue with
>>> what was clearly the White House at night with a one breasted
>>> silhouette leaning out the window saying 'All I want for Christmas is
>>> my right breast' - cruel in the extreme, totally unnecessary and
>>> uncalled for and I certainly don't feel I owe him squat. In fact,
>>> THREE CHEERS THE DIRTY BUGGER IS DEAD AT LAST!!
>>
>>You should never wish anyone dead. Hugh Heffner might go to
>>heaven or hell but at least he lived in heaven on earth for the
>>last 64 years. heheh All men will agree, no doubt.
>
>All I can glean from Lucretia's rant is that she's frigid, has never
>orgasmed, and was born without the humor gene.... the world would be
>far better off if all women like Bitter Lucretia were never born.

Redneck talk.

On 9/29/2017 9:46 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> Nude photos and the playboy lifestyle were just hype to sell a magazine
> that had top flight works of literature.
>

Oh I get it now - Hef was really a literary luminary incognito, and all
that debauchery and the pajama game was just a facade...thanks for
explaining...

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 16:25:31 +0100, Janet > wrote:

>In article >, penmart01
says...
>
>> All I can glean from Lucretia's rant is that she's frigid, has never
>> orgasmed, and was born without the humor gene.... the world would be
>> far better off if all women like Bitter Lucretia were never born.
>>
>> Personally I never cared for Hugh Hefner or his magazine but I don't
>> believe in censorship... no one is forced to read girly mags.
>
> Your post demonstrates exactly why Playboy was so objectionable; it
>encouraged men like you to treat women as you do.

He's a house proud closet *** with a man bag under his arm. He just
talks dirty so we don't see through him.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:11:51 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Janet wrote:
>>
>> Your post demonstrates exactly why Playboy was so objectionable; it
>> encouraged men like you to treat women as you do.
>
>Oh whine on, Janet UK. Playboy magazine was only objectionable to
>you women that never qualified to get photographed. Envy is your
>problem. Not good enough to be desired and never got paid well
>for a photoshoot.
>
>Compared to the other nudie magazines, Playboy was high class.

lol, Gary, please.

>Many of his women ended up with good careers, thanks to the
>initial nudie shoot.

Depends what you call a good career.

Hugh Hefner was a pimp.

On 9/29/2017 10:26 AM, Roy wrote:
> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 8:39:16 AM UTC-6, Casa de Masa wrote:
>> On 9/29/2017 8:19 AM, wrote:
>>> All I can glean from Lucretia's rant is that she's frigid, has never
>>> orgasmed, and was born without the humor gene.... the world would be
>>> far better off if all women like Bitter Lucretia were never born.
>>
>>
>> +1,000,000!!!
>
> You would agree you ignorant twit. **** off back to the institution you
> escaped from.
> ====
>
Ya know roy boy, she really is a hateful, shrewish, entitlement
mentality old biddy - that much is just so obvious.

Imagine getting that old with that much hate to carry around...

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:40:41 -0300, wrote:

>On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 12:22:18 -0400, jmcquown >
>wrote:
>
>>The one great thing Hugh Heffner did is fight against censorship. No
>>one was forced to subscribe to his magazine or go to the "Bunny" clubs.
>>He was pretty much the first publisher to push the envelope for freedom
>>of speech. And, BTW, there were some actual articles in that magazine
>>that didn't have anything to do with sex. And some funny cartoons, too.
>>
>>Sure, that's not the reason people subscribed to it. But there was
>>content that was not all about sex. Same thing could be said about
>>Cosmopolitan. LOL
>>
>>Jill
>
>I guess when you look at the clothing the 'bunnies' were required to
>wear you do realise how much respect he had for women - every dirty
>minded little boy claimed they read it because of the articles.

You have a hard fight on your hands. You're the voice of reason among
a bunch of rednecks

On 9/29/2017 11:03 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 9/29/2017 9:32 AM, Gary wrote:
>
>> You should never wish anyone dead. Hugh Heffner might go to
>> heaven or hell but at least he lived in heaven on earth for the
>> last 64 years. heheh All men will agree, no doubt.
>>
>
> I'd not want to trade places with him.Â* Sure, a few days here and there
> would have been fun but that aside, my everyday life is more fulfilling
> to me.

I can not conceive of a life spent inside in PJs - it's like being sick,
but not really.

On 9/29/2017 11:09 AM, wrote:
>
> https://postimg.org/image/puxvi3eyd/
>
>
>
>
<chuckle>

On 9/29/2017 11:29 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> I am more desirable to men.
>
> -sw


Whoa!

Do tell...

On 9/29/2017 11:43 AM, wrote:
>> NO one forced those gals to disrobe, Roy...for a number of them it was a ticket to a new career and a new life...
> Oh? So they could have worked in his club with normal clothes on?

Normal bunny attire, of course.

On 9/29/2017 11:50 AM, Cheri wrote:
>> I guess when you look at the clothing the 'bunnies' were required to
>> wear you do realise how much respect he had for women - every dirty
>> minded little boy claimed they read it because of the articles.
>
>
> I disagree with "dirty minded little boys" it is perfectly normal for
> them to be curious, has been since the beginning of the human race, and
> nothing "dirty" about it.
>
> Cheri

To peek is ingrained from birth, literally.

On 9/29/2017 11:56 AM, Ding - Dong Daddy wrote:
> Playboy's journolism cred is unimpeachable...

Well...it was...for a goodly time too...

On 9/29/2017 12:03 PM, wrote:
> They seek employment at these places because they know they're
> going to be receiving some hefty tips. They're not working in
> these places because they'll be receiving paid health benefits
> and a pension plan.

And still...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...res-1960s.html

A recruitment brochure for Bunnies working at Hugh Hefner's Playboy
Clubs in the early 1960s touts custom outfits, a glamorous lifestyle,
access to celebrities and promises 'you'll earn far more than other girls.'

Playboy Clubs were exclusive bars, nightclubs and casinos that served
food and drink from 11.30am until 'the wee small hours' that began
opening in 1960 and thrived from Las Vegas and New York to London and
Tokyo through the 1980s.

The lovely young waitresses and servers were the the signature
attraction at the clubs. Each one wore a skimpy bunny costumes -
complete with ears and a bushy tail.

Some of the Bunnies were former Playboy magazine models, but most were
aspiring actresses, models, singers or other ambitious women who were
hoping to tap into the glamorous world of Playboy.

In article >, says...
>
> Janet wrote:
> >
> > Your post demonstrates exactly why
>
> Oh whine on, Janet UK. Playboy magazine was only objectionable to
> you women that never qualified to get photographed
> Envy is your
> problem. Not good enough to be desired and never got paid well
> for a photoshoot.

Thanks for proving my point.Playboy is objectionable because it
encourages misogynist creeps like you to treat women as you do.

> Compared to the other nudie magazines, Playboy was high class.

Only to lonely ******s like you.


Janet UK

On 9/29/2017 12:12 PM, Gary wrote:
> Casa de Masa wrote:
>>
>> On 9/29/2017 9:25 AM, Janet wrote:
>>> In article >, penmart01
>>> @aol.com says...
>>>
>>>> All I can glean from Lucretia's rant is that she's frigid, has never
>>>> orgasmed, and was born without the humor gene.... the world would be
>>>> far better off if all women like Bitter Lucretia were never born.
>>>>
>>>> Personally I never cared for Hugh Hefner or his magazine but I don't
>>>> believe in censorship... no one is forced to read girly mags.
>>>
>>> Your post demonstrates exactly why Playboy was so objectionable; it
>>> encouraged men like you to treat women as you do.
>>>
>>> Janet UK
>>>
>>
>> By ogling their boobs?
>>
>> Do elaborate, vinegar tits!
>
> I sure as hell hope neither posts pic of their boobs.
>

Well...since you triggered an old cartoon "mamary"...


https://img0.etsystatic.com/052/1/61...58958_tvaj.jpg

On 9/29/2017 12:13 PM, Gary wrote:
> Playboy magazine certainly had first class articles. The nude
> photos were actually taken with class. Showed the women naked but
> still classy. Other magazines made the nude women look like
> sluts. Big difference. Playboy magazine outclassed all the
> others.

Guccione and Flynt were the worst!

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:11:51 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Janet wrote:
>>
>> Your post demonstrates exactly why Playboy was so objectionable; it
>> encouraged men like you to treat women as you do.
>
>Oh whine on, Janet UK. Playboy magazine was only objectionable to
>you women that never qualified to get photographed. Envy is your
>problem. Not good enough to be desired and never got paid well
>for a photoshoot.
>
>Compared to the other nudie magazines, Playboy was high class.
>
>Many of his women ended up with good careers, thanks to the
>initial nudie shoot.

Steve's post was to the point and a good argument. Your post is nasty
and unnecessary.
Janet B in the United States

On 9/29/2017 1:22 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:32:27 -0400, Gary > wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Speak for yourself! He was a nasty, grasping dirty old man. Betty
>>> Ford, in her day was brave for being frank and admitting she had
>>> breast cancer. What did he do? A cartoon in the December issue with
>>> what was clearly the White House at night with a one breasted
>>> silhouette leaning out the window saying 'All I want for Christmas is
>>> my right breast' - cruel in the extreme, totally unnecessary and
>>> uncalled for and I certainly don't feel I owe him squat. In fact,
>>> THREE CHEERS THE DIRTY BUGGER IS DEAD AT LAST!!
>>
>> You should never wish anyone dead. Hugh Heffner might go to
>> heaven or hell but at least he lived in heaven on earth for the
>> last 64 years. heheh All men will agree, no doubt.
>
> Would you like a life surrounded by bimbo bunnies? And have you seen
> the ingredient lists of those women? They're one big silicone fest.
> And if you want to know what they look like, you need a hammer and
> chisel to dig them out of their make-up.
>

Whereas your life as a nancy boy rump ranger is somehow preferable?

On 9/29/2017 1:24 PM, Bruce wrote:
> He's a house proud closet *** with a man bag under his arm.

Project much, Bwuthie dear?

On 9/29/2017 1:27 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> Many of his women ended up with good careers, thanks to the
>> initial nudie shoot.
> Depends what you call a good career.


Ask:

Marilyn Monroe

Debby Harry

Pam Anderson

Barbie Benton

Jenny McCarthy

Kate Moss

et al...

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 10:49:16 -0700 (PDT), Ding - Dong Daddy
> wrote:

> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:56:43 -0700 (PDT), Ding - Dong Daddy
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Roy wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 7:02:35 AM UTC-6, wrote:
>> >> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 04:40:44 -0700 (PDT), Ding - Dong Daddy
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > >Yup...Hef liberated gals from the constraints of prudish sexual morality. Women everywhere owe him a HUGE debt of gratitude...
>> >> >
>> >> > Speak for yourself! He was a nasty, grasping dirty old man. Betty
>> >> > Ford, in her day was brave for being frank and admitting she had
>> >> > breast cancer. What did he do? A cartoon in the December issue with
>> >> > what was clearly the White House at night with a one breasted
>> >> > silhouette leaning out the window saying 'All I want for Christmas is
>> >> > my right breast' - cruel in the extreme, totally unnecessary and
>> >> > uncalled for and I certainly don't feel I owe him squat. In fact,
>> >> > THREE CHEERS THE DIRTY BUGGER IS DEAD AT LAST!!
>> >>
>> >> Yep, I agree. He did nothing for women exept EXPLOIT them while freeing
>> >> them of their dignity and making them whores.
>> >> ====
>> >
>> >
>> >NO one forced those gals to disrobe, Roy...for a number of them it was a ticket to a new career and a new life...
>>
>> Oh? So they could have worked in his club with normal clothes on?
>
>
>Define "normal"...

No plunging necklines, bunny tails on their behinds and ears on their
heads. Not normal clothing for work.

On 9/29/2017 1:29 PM, Bruce wrote:
> You're the voice of reason among
> a bunch of rednecks

You're the petulant floater nancy boy riding on a sea of emotional nitwits.

I think that might be torturing a seaweed analogy some...

On 9/29/2017 1:39 PM, Janet wrote:
>> Compared to the other nudie magazines, Playboy was high class.
> Only to lonely ******s like you.
>
>
> Janet UK

Not getting much action these days are ya?

Lol.

On 9/29/2017 1:46 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> Gary seems to be in permanent Dick Mode lately.


Well doggies, lookie who found a new whipping post that (this time)
isn't a woman!

Wow.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 10:59:59 -0700 (PDT), Ding - Dong Daddy
> wrote:

wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:56:43 -0700 (PDT), Ding - Dong Daddy
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Roy wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 7:02:35 AM UTC-6, wrote:
>> >> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 04:40:44 -0700 (PDT), Ding - Dong Daddy
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > >Yup...Hef liberated gals from the constraints of prudish sexual morality. Women everywhere owe him a HUGE debt of gratitude...
>> >> >
>> >> > Speak for yourself! He was a nasty, grasping dirty old man. Betty
>> >> > Ford, in her day was brave for being frank and admitting she had
>> >> > breast cancer. What did he do? A cartoon in the December issue with
>> >> > what was clearly the White House at night with a one breasted
>> >> > silhouette leaning out the window saying 'All I want for Christmas is
>> >> > my right breast' - cruel in the extreme, totally unnecessary and
>> >> > uncalled for and I certainly don't feel I owe him squat. In fact,
>> >> > THREE CHEERS THE DIRTY BUGGER IS DEAD AT LAST!!
>> >>
>> >> Yep, I agree. He did nothing for women exept EXPLOIT them while freeing
>> >> them of their dignity and making them whores.
>> >> ====
>> >
>> >
>> >NO one forced those gals to disrobe, Roy...for a number of them it was a ticket to a new career and a new life...
>>
>> Oh? So they could have worked in his club with normal clothes on?
>
>
>Of *course* not, have you never heard the term "dress code"...??? Even *I* have a work dress code, I'd prefer wearing shorts, t - shirts, and sneakers, but I need the job so I follow the dress code...no disgrace in that.

But does the dress code at your work demean you ?

On 9/29/2017 2:02 PM, wrote:
>>>> NO one forced those gals to disrobe, Roy...for a number of them it was a ticket to a new career and a new life...
>>> Oh? So they could have worked in his club with normal clothes on?
>>
>> Define "normal"...
> No plunging necklines,

Why not, it was a temperature controlled environment.

> bunny tails on their behinds and ears on their
> heads.

Yes, and?

> Not normal clothing for work.

Never been to Disney?

Lol.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:13:26 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> The one great thing Hugh Heffner did is fight against censorship. No
>> one was forced to subscribe to his magazine or go to the "Bunny" clubs.
>> He was pretty much the first publisher to push the envelope for freedom
>> of speech. And, BTW, there were some actual articles in that magazine
>> that didn't have anything to do with sex. And some funny cartoons, too.
>>
>> Sure, that's not the reason people subscribed to it. But there was
>> content that was not all about sex.
>
>Playboy magazine certainly had first class articles. The nude
>photos were actually taken with class. Showed the women naked but
>still classy. Other magazines made the nude women look like
>sluts. Big difference. Playboy magazine outclassed all the
>others.

Oh puleeze!!!

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:14:15 -0400, Gary > wrote:

>Roy wrote:
>>
>> On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 7:02:35 AM UTC-6, wrote:
>> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 04:40:44 -0700 (PDT), Ding - Dong Daddy
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> > >Yup...Hef liberated gals from the constraints of prudish sexual morality. Women everywhere owe him a HUGE debt of gratitude...
>> >
>> > Speak for yourself! He was a nasty, grasping dirty old man. Betty
>> > Ford, in her day was brave for being frank and admitting she had
>> > breast cancer. What did he do? A cartoon in the December issue with
>> > what was clearly the White House at night with a one breasted
>> > silhouette leaning out the window saying 'All I want for Christmas is
>> > my right breast' - cruel in the extreme, totally unnecessary and
>> > uncalled for and I certainly don't feel I owe him squat. In fact,
>> > THREE CHEERS THE DIRTY BUGGER IS DEAD AT LAST!!
>>
>> Yep, I agree. He did nothing for women exept EXPLOIT them while freeing
>> them of their dignity and making them whores.
>> ====
>
>Well now we know, old Roy. You are ***.

Really? Perhaps you are judging by yourself??

On Friday, September 29, 2017 at 1:18:44 PM UTC-5, Cheri wrote:
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > They seek employment at these places because they know they're
> > going to be receiving some hefty tips. They're not working in
> > these places because they'll be receiving paid health benefits
> > and a pension plan.
>
> But I do believe they did have those benefits, more than one had this to
> say:
>
> "Overall pretty satisfied with the benefits package. Company matches 401K
> contributions and vision plan is paid for by the company. Company is
> extremely flexible and there are some perks."
>
>
I could see Playboy providing these benefits but your local strip
joint, I don't think so.

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:16:29 -0400, Gary > wrote:

wrote:
>>
>> I guess when you look at the clothing the 'bunnies' were required to
>> wear you do realise how much respect he had for women - every dirty
>> minded little boy claimed they read it because of the articles.
>
>The Playboy articles really are top quality but certainly men
>want to see the naked women pics too. Playboy took those pics
>tastefully and didn't make the women look like sluts. Between the
>nudie pics and the very well-written articles, this is why
>Playboy magazine succeeded way more than the other dirty
>magazines.
>
>I know you are a die-hard feminist but Playboy was better than
>average. At least don't be happy that he died. I wouldn't wish
>that on anyone.

He highly deserves people to be happy he died.

On 9/29/2017 2:04 PM, wrote:
>> I need the job so I follow the dress code...no disgrace in that.
> But does the dress code at your work demean you ?

Do you think UPS drivers enjoy wearing shit brown?

On 9/29/2017 2:08 PM, wrote:
> He highly deserves people to be happy he died.


Now now dear, your time will come too...

On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:01:05 -0600, Casa de Masa > wrote:

>On 9/29/2017 1:27 PM, Bruce wrote:
>>> Many of his women ended up with good careers, thanks to the
>>> initial nudie shoot.
>> Depends what you call a good career.
>
>
>Ask:
>
>Marilyn Monroe
>
>Debby Harry
>
>Pam Anderson
>
>Barbie Benton
>
>Jenny McCarthy
>
>Kate Moss
>
>et al...

Ok, you made the usual mistake of equating a lot of money to a good
career.

And boy did Marilyn Monroe make a great life for herself. A bit on the
short side, but you can't have it all.

On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 05:29:25 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:

>On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 14:40:41 -0300, wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 29 Sep 2017 12:22:18 -0400, jmcquown >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>The one great thing Hugh Heffner did is fight against censorship. No
>>>one was forced to subscribe to his magazine or go to the "Bunny" clubs.
>>>He was pretty much the first publisher to push the envelope for freedom
>>>of speech. And, BTW, there were some actual articles in that magazine
>>>that didn't have anything to do with sex. And some funny cartoons, too.
>>>
>>>Sure, that's not the reason people subscribed to it. But there was
>>>content that was not all about sex. Same thing could be said about
>>>Cosmopolitan. LOL
>>>
>>>Jill
>>
>>I guess when you look at the clothing the 'bunnies' were required to
>>wear you do realise how much respect he had for women - every dirty
>>minded little boy claimed they read it because of the articles.
>
>You have a hard fight on your hands. You're the voice of reason among
>a bunch of rednecks

I knew that when I made the first response but all these years later I
have never forgotten that cruel cartoon about Betty Ford. I didn't
buy Playboy, it was left open on a table at work, to that page.
However if some people admire men like that, especially if they are a
woman, good luck to them, may they have a similar one in their life
Meant to read something like the Chinese 'may you live in interesting
times' curse.