Friday, February 19, 2016

Playboy:Really, Truly Just for the Articles Now

2016 has not been kind to our icons.  Several titans have passed since the turn of the calendar-David Bowie, Justice Scalia, Playboy magazine.  Oh sure, Playboy relaunched this month without nudes, but rest assured, it is a Dead Mag Walking. While I applaud innovation, this seems less like innovation and more like limping to the finish line.

For red-blooded, heterosexual American males there was nothing more exhilarating growing up than stumbling upon some elicit stash of Playboys.  (Well, except, you know, that first time you actually got to touch a real boob.) You were immediately grateful that your friend had discovered this magical pile of glossy magazines in some remote corner of his dad's garage and had dared to share this forbidden knowledge with you.  Flipping open that centerfold for the first time sparked the imagination, opening up a whole new world. A new world you wanted to visit ASAP.  You did not know or care who Hugh Hefner was, but it seemed extremely important to know Miss July's turn-ons and future plans.  And that she looked great wearing nothing but earrings.  Playboy played a fundamental, if perhaps dysfunctional role in shepherding millions of boys through puberty.

The flip side, of course, is that Playboy, and the entirety of Hef's lifestyle and empire, can be considered misogynistic, degrading and encouraging the objectification of women.  It was a symbol of excess and inequality.  Playboy paved the way for other, more explicit, magazines which paved the way for dirty movies and the bajillions of  porn sites that clog the internet today.  Unfortunately I'm sure many of these sites mistreat and exploit young women.  Pornography, it can be argued, gives men license to treat women poorly.

However, is it inconceivable that Playboy also helped women find a voice? Were women in the Sixties able to shed labels and stereotypes as they shed their clothes? Did Playboy help bring nudity and sexiness out of the bedroom and into the light? And, if so, is that a good thing?  I am unqualified to answer those questions as I am neither a female, nor an anthropologist.  But I am the father of a young daughter.   I hope that her mother and I can equip her with the right tools and mindset to value herself and make decisions that serve her best.  Television and the internet don't raise her, we do.  Is it hypocritical of me to hope my daughter never aspires to be one of Hef's Girls of the Big 10, while still thinking Playboy serves a useful purpose in American culture?

Which brings me back to Playboy's current relaunch.  I don't lament the change because it means there is one less nudey magazine on the newsstand; except for flipping through the new issue to see the changes, I have not read Playboy or any porn magazine in years.  I lament the fact that an icon feels forced to change.  Be who you are, Playboy!  There is a place for a magazine that caters to the erudite pervs that want soft porn and interviews with world leaders.  Be who you are!  This is like McDonald's pushing salads.  If I have made the decision to walk into McDonald's, I have already made the bargain with myself to eat garbage.  If I want a salad,  I'll go to the produce section of the market.  If I want an Egg McMuffin at three in the afternoon, I'll go to Mickey D's.  Similarly, if I wanted some nudity, a page of dirty jokes and a preview of the upcoming NFL season all in one place I could grab a Playboy.  Until now.  Now I get some articles, some "artsy" photos of scantily clad women and inane style tips. In other words, I get Maxim or Men's Health.

Hef's reps argued that eliminating the nudity  would allow Playboy to move from NSFW to mainstream.  Does anybody really think we'll see Playboy sharing space with People and Reader's Digest in the dentist office magazine rack anytime soon?  Sure, circulation has plummeted.   Maybe because we can get our porn anywhere for free.  Maybe because tastes change.  Making the magazine less explicit will not boost sales.  I predict this relaunch is more Willie Mays wobbling in a Mets uniform, than a brand-saving innovation.

Another icon may be on it's way out, I just think it should go out the way it came in: unapologetic and unashamed. Be who you are, Playboy!

No comments: