So, Hugh Hefner died Wednesday. On Thursday articles deluged the Interwebs debating various facets of these two main arguments:
Argument One: Hefner, and Playboy’s 63-year existence, have been tremendously DAMAGING to women, our body images, our sexuality and our sense of self as sentient, independent beings. Playboy supports the male patriarchy; it objectifies and OPPRESSES women.
Argument Two: Hefner, and Playboy’s 63-year existence, have been tremendously BENEFICIAL for women, our body images, our sexuality and our sense of self as sentient, independent beings. Playboy supports feminists’ ideas and LIBERATES women.
At best, these arguments lack nuance. At worst, they ignore that men too are increasingly more objectified in the media. But this post isn’t about those arguments.
The Kinsey Scale is better than what came before it, but...
As I scrolled through the various Hefner and Playboy headlines, I noticed a distinct lack of debate on the impact 63-years of Playboy has had on MEN. Yes, you read me right: the impact Playboy has had on men.
For decades, Hugh Hefner, via Playboy, dictated a particular, and narrowly-scoped template for male sexuality (within the prescribed bell curve). Hefner's man is hyper-masculine, perpetually on the lookout for a new sexual partner, and unquestionably a “0” on the Kinsey Scale. He’s a mash-up of James Bond, Jay Gatsby, and the Energizer Bunny. Most of all, Hefner's ‘Playboy’ is having ‘ fuck’tons (lol) of sex!
These labels did not exist in 1948 when Kinsey released his "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male" report. Hopefully, we'll advance to the point where we do not label our gender and sexual identity at all.
In the World According to Playboy, gender identity and sexuality are fixed constants. Cis male always equates to masculine; men are either 100 percent gay or 100 percent straight. A man’s libido only has two settings: ready to go or completely disinterested. Nothing ever diminishes a man’s sex drive and virility: not stress; not age; not illness; not medications that lower blood pressure (think about it), alleviate Depression or minimize pain. Nothing EXCEPT the lack of sexual attraction.
In fact, gender identity and sexuality run along a broad spectrum. Libido varies highly among individuals, and multiple psychological and physiological factors affect one’s sex drive, in addition to sexual desire.
Hefner’s ideal is absurdly unrealistic. Playboy sends an obvious, damaging message: if you do not fit the template, then you are abnormal and broken sexually in some way.
If Cosmo, and other fashion mags, damage women (their core readership) because they perpetuate unrealistic feminine ideals, it follows that Playboy, which also perpetuates unrealistic masculine ideals, is detrimental to men.
May this antiquated, destructive archetype rest in peace.