[QUOTE=RobL;52725814]finding it odd that everyone is praising him so much, never knew when mental abuse and gaslighting became honourable
most of the playboy bunnies them die in their late 30s and 40s. Of the 'big three', too - murder, suicide, overdose
such a caring figure obviously[/QUOTE]
I looked this up and the only mention of this was from his former partner Holly Madison. There doesn't seem to have been much controversy at all surrounding him as even the wikipedia article makes no mention of Hugh Hefner being particularly manipulative to anyone.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52725879]I looked this up and the only mention of this was from his former partner Holly Madison. There doesn't seem to have been much controversy at all surrounding him as even the wikipedia article makes no mention of Hugh Hefner being particularly manipulative to anyone.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I'd like some sources as well.
The Hef has left the building
RIP
[QUOTE=GayIlluminati;52726120]The Hef has left the building
RIP[/QUOTE]
they certiainly will be cleaning up his messes for centuries though
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;52725879]I looked this up and the only mention of this was from his former partner Holly Madison. There doesn't seem to have been much controversy at all surrounding him as even the wikipedia article makes no mention of Hugh Hefner being particularly manipulative to anyone.[/QUOTE]
Not to mention he was one of the few people in the 50s to vocally support gay rights.
he did some good stuff and also some fuckin weird and screwed up stuff with the women he kept in his house.
[QUOTE=RobL;52725814]most of the playboy bunnies them die in their late 30s and 40s. Of the 'big three', too - murder, suicide, overdose[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=God of Ashes;52726465]he did fuckin weird and screwed up stuff with the women he kept in his house.[/QUOTE]
Aren't these urban legends? That was my understanding of it, at least.
George A, Romaro, Frank Vincent , Jerry Lewis and now Hugh Hefner. Its really sad to see these famous people passed away.
[QUOTE=CAPT Opp4;52726598]Aren't these urban legends? That was my understanding of it, at least.[/QUOTE]
yo your skepticism is how he was able to get away with it
[QUOTE=Nautsabes;52727970]yo your skepticism is how he was able to get away with it[/QUOTE]
Considering there were runner's up and 12 women picked a year, with over 60 years published well that would be a literal mountain of dead women wouldn't it.
News articles of this 100% suicide rate are where?
Proof is where?
[QUOTE=AJisAwesome15;52724869]Damn. He was pretty vocal too about social justice issues even in the early days, right? Dude was a champ[/QUOTE]
He claimed he was "the original feminist."
in his honor and memory, all boners shall be raised at half-mast.
If you are into retro shit you gotta pick up one of the older issues from the 70s or 80s. There's nothing like seeing all of the ridiculous hairstyles and fashions, simultaneously gorgeous and extremely tacky nudes, ads for cigarettes and radar detectors and stereo equipment everywhere...
A legend has passed, rest in peace.
I am sure many bunnies will miss him.
[QUOTE=Nautsabes;52727970]yo your skepticism is how he was able to get away with it[/QUOTE]
You're not getting far with hearsay
[QUOTE=Nautsabes;52727970]yo your skepticism is how he was able to get away with it[/QUOTE]
I dunno he can do whatever dark crap he wants as long as consent was given. Which might be opening up a whole 'nother can of worms when it comes to determining what consent is.
I'm sure Hugh Hefner is a weird guy but I've not heard too much untoward the guy. If there's some sort of proof, any proof, I'd change my mind.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;52731266]I dunno he can do whatever dark crap he wants as long as consent was given. Which might be opening up a whole 'nother can of worms when it comes to determining what consent is.
I'm sure Hugh Hefner is a weird guy but I've not heard too much untoward the guy. If there's some sort of proof, any proof, I'd change my mind.[/QUOTE]
I mean, "as long as consent is given" can be a bit lenient.
I came across some articles ([URL="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1342643/Hugh-Hefners-Playboy-mansion-like-squalid-prison-say-Playmates.html"]1[/URL], [URL="http://www.lifeandstylemag.com/posts/former-playboy-resident-jennifer-saginor-talks-rampant-drug-use-required-sex-and-forced-dieting-61546"]2[/URL]) on how it really kind of sucked to be one of the girls, and how they did it because the thought of "you might be famous and successful" was being dangled a bit in front of them. The second article also mentions how [I]underaged[/I] girls weren't uncommon, either. Then there was Playboy publishing an article regarding (even promoting) the sexuality minors/children ([URL="http://www.renegadetribune.com/flashback-1978-playboy-promotes-pedophilia/"]Source[/URL]) back in the 70's. He also apparently made his own sons share a bedroom with one of the Playboy girlfriends, which is fairly questionable, too ([URL="http://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/books/news/a42332/holly-madison-book-worst-things-about-hugh-hefner/"]source[/URL]).
And there's the shady line in that source where he said "in the 70's, they used to call these thigh openers."
I got all of these sources from a tumblr post I came across, and it might give some insight on why people are critical of Hefner. Take what you will from it, if you're willing to take Cosmopolitan as a source (they seem to be quoting a book, though, so I'm not too skeptical).
Idk it all feels really shady and creepy and even though "they agreed to it" it feels like a more of a pressured agreement than a mutually content scenario.
[QUOTE=psychofox67;52724820]we know someone who was on a playboy magazine[/QUOTE]
You and the corporeal hivemind?
Rest in pussy you magnificent bunny lover.
A lot of the "receipts" being pulled up on Hefner on the internet seem to largely be from less the reputable blogs (most notably Tumblr blogs) who use highly biased sources (ex: Daily Mail). Like one blog pulling these "receipts" is called "liberatewomyn" which looked like a troll/parody blog (though if they're serious then just..wow). I'm not saying Hefner did no wrong and was some pure innocent angel but I'm kind of skeptical of these "receipts".
[QUOTE=zizzleplix;52732685]A lot of the "receipts" being pulled up on Hefner on the internet seem to largely be from less the reputable blogs (most notably Tumblr blogs) who use highly biased sources (ex: Daily Mail). Like one blog pulling these "receipts" is called "liberatewomyn" which looked like a troll/parody blog (though if they're serious then just..wow). I'm not saying Hefner did no wrong and was some pure innocent angel but I'm kind of skeptical of these "receipts".[/QUOTE]
What about my post of sources which none of them are tumblrs that's right above you
I'm not sure why Hugh Hefner is revered as a leader of some sexual enlightenment movement when really he just dated lots of women and published a magazine celebrating the objectification of women
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52732863]I'm not sure why Hugh Hefner is revered as a leader of some sexual enlightenment movement when really he just dated lots of women and published a magazine celebrating the objectification of women[/QUOTE]
Because he never was disrespectful towards women and shunned people who were? Or maybe because he supported Gay rights in the 50s?
[QUOTE=LegndNikko;52732800]What about my post of sources which none of them are tumblrs that's right above you[/QUOTE]
The first source in your post is from Daily Mail, not exactly known for reputable reporting. Like it's on par with Fox News.
The second source is from "Life And Style Magazine" which based on looking at some of their articles seems like a Salon/general celebrity gossip tier source (think Perez Hilton).
The third source is from "renegadetribune.com" which based on my look into it seems like a shady as fuck website. Like if mediabiasfactcheck had a entry on it, it would likely be in the "Questionable Sources" section along with "Censored.News", "Eagle Rising", "Freedom Daily".
The fourth source is from Cosmopolitan which granted is probably the closest to a good source listed in your post, is still tabloid-ish. Just because it cites a book doesn't mean it's true.
[QUOTE=SpartanXC9;52732869]Because he never was disrespectful towards women and shunned people who were? Or maybe because he supported Gay rights in the 50s?[/QUOTE]
Haven't you heard? Sexy women = Bad
Acknowledging and celebrating the fact that people can be beautiful is a horrible, terrible, no good thing to do.
[QUOTE=BANNED USER;52724815]Overdosing on tits pussy and ass isn't a half bad way to go, the dudes basically been living in a proverbial Garden of Eden since the 70's.[/QUOTE]
i wouldn't say so, based on what's been said about him. he didn't sound like he had a very satisfying nor healthy sexual life
[url]http://www.cosmopolitan.com/entertainment/books/news/a42332/holly-madison-book-worst-things-about-hugh-hefner/[/url]
[quote]He would watch porn, smoke pot, and jerk off while his girlfriends and whoever else happened to be joining them that night pretended to get it on around him. Madison says they would take turns pleasuring Hef, but he always finished by himself. Madison reveals that she made her first foray into Hef's bedroom after a night out with "roughly a third of a bottle of vodka sloshing around in my stomach." "There was zero intimacy involved," she writes. "No kissing, nothing. It was so brief that I can't even recall what it felt like beyond having a heavy body on top of mine."[/quote]
[quote]The culture of isolation Hef created at the mansion even extended to his infamous parties where, Madison writes, "the protocol was that we stay at Hef's table all night." Dancing was permitted so long as it was right in front of Hef's table. Girlfriends were allowed to leave only to go to the bathroom. When Hef left the party, usually at 1 a.m., the girlfriends "had to go upstairs with him."[/quote]
i mean it would make sense that the king of the jerkoffs would himself be a master masturbator
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/12/hugh-hefner-i-have-sex-tw_n_643303.html[/url]
[quote]Another ex-Bunny, Jill Ann Spaulding, described the Hef orgy a few years ago:
"Hef just lies there with his Viagra erection. It's just a fake erection, and each girl gets on top of him for two minutes while the girls in the background try to keep him excited. They'll yell things like, 'fuck her daddy, fuckk her daddaddy!' There's a lot of cheerleader going on! The main girlfriend wipes off his [uncondomed] penis. She's the girl who actually shares the bed with him. She sleeps there all night. She's around 22 years old. He uses all the same girls. She's been there for three years now... When it first gets started his main girlfriend gives him [oral sex], then she has sex with him. She's the first to go because that's the safest for her. No protection and no testing. He doesn't care."[/quote]
i mean you would assume from outward appearances that because he had a harem of beautiful women around him constantly that he would have a decent sex life. instead he had to watch porn and he took so much viagra it turned him deaf, while the girls all danced around him before he jerked himself off to finish. it seems like he just became the pimp version of howard hughes to me
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;52732863]I'm not sure why Hugh Hefner is revered as a leader of some sexual enlightenment movement when really he just dated lots of women and published a magazine celebrating the objectification of women[/QUOTE]
Since you don't seem to like playboy or Hugh Hefner for "objectifying" women go and send
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playgirl[/url] an angry letter. Equality right?
[QUOTE=zizzleplix;52732878]The first source in your post is from Daily Mail, not exactly known for reputable reporting. Like it's on par with Fox News.
The second source is from "Life And Style Magazine" which based on looking at some of their articles seems like a Salon/general celebrity gossip tier source (think Perez Hilton).
The third source is from "renegadetribune.com" which based on my look into it seems like a shady as fuck website. Like if mediabiasfactcheck had a entry on it, it would likely be in the "Questionable Sources" section along with "Censored.News", "Eagle Rising", "Freedom Daily".
The fourth source is from Cosmopolitan which granted is probably the closest to a good source listed in your post, is still tabloid-ish. Just because it cites a book doesn't mean it's true.[/QUOTE]
Follow up on third source, Renagade Tribune is a literal website ran by white supremacists and its main theme is antisemitism
[t]https://i.imgur.com/DH4uHV1.png[/t]
[t]https://i.imgur.com/WO2DkY1.png[/t]
[t]https://i.imgur.com/6ybLOuc.png[/t]
soooo uhhh yeah
[QUOTE=Nautsabes;52727970]yo your skepticism is how he was able to get away with it[/QUOTE]
You must not be following R Kelly :v:
Money is power.
a good take
[url]https://static.currentaffairs.org/2017/09/good-riddance-to-an-abusive-creep[/url]
props to hef for managing to maintain a lifestyle based entirely around getting pulled off, for [I]decades[/I] w/o eating a bullet. maybe it's my nagging feelings of inferiority but i find it hard for that to remain fulfilling no matter how baroque the rhetoric gets
[editline]1st October 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Har Mar Super;52734316]Since you don't seem to like playboy or Hugh Hefner for "objectifying" women go and send
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playgirl[/url] an angry letter. Equality right?[/QUOTE]
look up institutionalised sexism op
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
