For those concerned with Free Speech (or Porn), it is time to get active.

I don't see how that dispelled what I said at all.I admitted the women tended to be young, though that average age clearly does not denote the full age range exhibited.That is essentially average height and weight for women is it not? That is to say when you average everyone and not what an "average woman" is?My guess the reason they will not tell the heaviest playmate is for the vanity of the playmate whoc would be identified as the heaviest.And 40% does not at all suggest that and ideal is presented for blondes. When you have 60% something other than blonde, that is a majority of something other than blonde. And it may be noted that blonde is itself an amorphous category ranging from bleach to nearly brown, so its not like that 40% has an identical hair color.In the end they do not show averages they show individual girls. Believe you me I was masturbating to girls without blond hair and slightly heavier build from when I was young and my main outlet was playboy. If they had had mainly the stereotype you described I would never have gotten a subscription to them.You are reaching on this one, and I know because I am a fan of the magazine. I freely admit that as a corporate mag it definitely alters photos to remove some of the reality of women and it does exclude certain women that would not have a broader appeal. That does not however suggest that they are as specific as you suggest or set an ideal. 5'6" - 5'8" is not that tall for women, and while I admit 115 means a woman of that height has to be toned, that is not overly thin... and it is an average.I have a visual preference for shorter, slightly heavy, dark haired girls. I got by just fine with playboy.I might add once again that Photography is a selective process and one that might actually create a demand for tall and less weighty people in general so as to look better in pictures, kind of like thing models work better as walking clothes hangers for fashion shows.For film one of the main attributes for being photogenic and so successful for men is relatively large head and hands, compared to the body. Thus poor Mel was short but his head and hands made him look the same as costars that might be larger.This could be the same for selection criteria for Playboy? I dunno. We are not dogs, schraf. Playboy did not "teach" me anything except how to balance a magazine in one hand to keep another one free.What this should tell you is that men in general, are less interested in those characteristics and so when they are shelling out money to jerk off to images they'd rather those images be free of those characteristics. Or at the very least that is the paradigm that Playboy works under to attempt to keep the largest fanbase possible.Barnacles are natural to boats, and some amount of rust to used cars, but when you want to shell out good money for the best car possible the best bet as a seller is to remove the barnacles and hide the rust.Nose and ear hair, as well as beards and back hair, and love handles are natural to men, but they are not idolized by women and good look having that pictured in Playgirl or women centered magazines. In fact even guys would probably want the back hair kept to a minimum if it is a couple's shot.In any case, you are correct that cellulite is natural and men that can't stand it are going to be hard pressed to be happy for long. I guess that is a problem for men that cannot figure out the difference between FANTASY and REALITY.You will note that Greek statues do NOT have cellulite depicted. They are fantasy and idyllic. I would hope you can agree that an ideal fantasy model would have little or no cellulite.By the way, here is another site which definitely has what you are looking for, and not even edited out on their first pages... joyofspex (dotcom).

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

I have seen scat, some bestiality videos, and pure S&M videos (all of these are legal here) and can tell you my appetite was not "whetted".I even mentioned anecdotally that this slippery slope style argument doesn't seem true as at theaters which allow people to choose which films they want to see, the really hard S&M is not the most watched at all, in fact they are usually empty.If you feel your taste is whetted after watching a guy whipping a midget who is blowing a horse while defecating on a transexual, the fact is you have that interest... not everyone else in the world.Let me know if you are ever going to respond to the direct points I put to you, otherwise my guess is this is over.Oh and by the way the Bible contains a passage which describes girls having sex with men that have dicks the size of donkeys and shoot sperm like horses. They are described luridly having sex since very young and eventually God gets jealous and to appease his anger has them raped and then murdered. Please respond as to how that is less than graphic and violent, and specifically okaying violence against women... okay?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

quote:

---

That is essentially average height and weight for women is it not? That is to say when you average everyone and not what an "average woman" is?

---

quote:

---

5'6" - 5'8" is not that tall for women, and while I admit 115 means a woman of that height has to be toned, that is not overly thin... and it is an average.

---

Toned? That's more than toned, holmes, that's pretty skinny.You are also not addressing the trend over the years, which is that while the height of the women has increased two inches, the weight has only increased one pound.That translates into a taller, thinner woman overall being considered ideal now compared to just a generation ago.I am 5'4" tall, and when I was my thinnest and fittest as an adult woman I weighed 128 pounds and was a size 6. Even then my waist size was an inch larger than the average waist size of a playmate, while they were two inches taller and 13 pounds ligher.For a woman to be 13 pounds lighter and two inches taller than me, she would have to be considerably thinner and have pretty much no muscle tone.That means we are talking about an average Playmate who is 5'6" and a size 4 or 5 with a really tiny waist.That is far, far away from the general population of US women, even of the same age group.

quote:

---

We are not dogs, schraf. Playboy did not "teach" me anything except how to balance a magazine in one hand to keep another one free.

---

The media teaches all of us a lot, holmes, and to deny that is a bit silly.Seventeen magazine taught me that I wanted to look like the models on the pages. Playboy (and really the rest of the culture) teaches men what is sexy and beautiful and desireable in a woman and that they can gain considerable status among their peers by having such a woman on their arm, and teaches women that they should strive to reach that ideal. I am not saying that similar pressures regarding fitness aren't true for men, but that is very recent. The pressures to look a certain way in order to be desireable have always been greater for women than men, because men have most often been judged by accomplishments WRT desireability.The parties at the Grotto are legendary and everyone wants to be invited to them, don't they?

quote:

---

In any case, you are correct that cellulite is natural and men that can't stand it are going to be hard pressed to be happy for long.

---

Or, they keep divorcing their aging wives and get a new younger, firmer one. Come on, haven't you ever heard the long-used term "trophy wife?"Or, if their wife is motivated, she gets a little nip and tuck or suck to try keep the illusion of 29 years old (and her man) forever.

quote:

---

I guess that is a problem for men that cannot figure out the difference between FANTASY and REALITY.

---

But isn't the point of Playboy that it is supposed to be about the "girl next door"? The beautiful woman who is also attainable rather than a professional model? That's the whole point of the magazine, right, that these are "ordinary" women you might meet at work or the grocery store? The wives and girlfriends of readers, too.

I didn't address the trend directly because you are right that if a person is taller and yet weighs the same amount they will generally be thinner.The problem is that it is an adjustment over time, which does not indicate Playboy is set in stone and can change based on changes tastes, and it is still an average. Yeah, that's about it, you're still sounding hot to me.The question I would want answered, though you may not have it, is what is the average height and weight of women, and what is considered a healthy weight range for that height. The "average" that you mentioned for Playboy does not necessarily sound outside of either.I will admit that you do not sound like an immediate candidate for a Playboy Playmate, but I'm sure they'd consider running you if you became famous. They do have pictorials of girls that are not Playmates and perhaps that is what is skewing some of these stats away from what actually appears in Playboy? Playboy is international. Its known for being international. In some parts of Europe (Netherlands is a good example) the average woman is very tall and thin and blond compared to US standards. Some of the women here actually scare me. The media admittedly shapes some preconceptions or experiences about things. But the media is not one fantasy magazine. While Playboy is iconic it is also just one fantasy magazine.Guys also swarm to action films, especially James Bond, yet they did not all quit their jobs or educations in order to be master spies and feel dejected that their wives were not beautiful counteragents.And the problem which crops up in your argument is that you are discussing averages of Playmates, and not simply what is the content. Each model shown is NOT the average listing. Yes, they are generally hotter than the average girl. That should not be surprising when guys are looking to jerk off to images and a magazine is looking to cater to that desire.Again I point out that Greek statues were not flabby homely people, they were idyllic for people looking for pleasant imagery.If Playboy was sent to every boy from age ten on and somehow taught at school as this was an expectation, then you might have something. But what happens is boys seek out what they like and if they don't like it they don't but it.That is exactly why once the media became super cheap such that anyone could produce and distribute porn, there was suddenly a HUGE MARKET for average looking people! If that market went belly up instead of growing phenomenally, you would have a piece of evidence in your favor, but men actually plunked their money down in droves to see specifically nonPlayboy body types... and perhaps a bit more reality. I sure do, but would you? Sorry but this is a stereotype and not a reality. Although I suppose I can turn the tables and say well men wouldn't do it if their wives didn't suddenly give up on their looks now that they had a sugar daddy and gained 58 pounds in a year, as well as becoming shrill, frigid nags.Yawn. Everyone likes youth. People also like change and eventually feel restless in relationships. Men and women both leave partners for new ones, and women are not excepted from rushing for younger guys... not at all.Women have vanity and want to keep their youth and so opt for surgical techniques either out of laziness or last resort. Part of men's vanity is not to cheat by going to a doctor, or admitting they even might have a problem with their looks (hence the combover). They are however increasing in numbers in opting for surgical techniques.Youth is associated with increased vigor and health and for damn good reason, that is when people are at their greatest vigor and health. That is what we are naturally attracted to. No, that was Hustler. While Playboy may delve into that every now and then, and maybe they have tried to say they are that more recently (?), but the girl next door thing was by its competitors.Hustler also defied all men's magazines by actually allowing a woman's pussy to be viewed as something beautiful. I know this probably kills GAW, but Hustler is what broke ground in that field. I believe it is Betty Dodson who has continued it to some extent.Again you reveal a level of unfamiliarity with the material you are criticizing.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Why, Schrafinator, are women so obsessed with their looks? All this minute inventory over height versus weight, etc.?

Several acutely perceptive posters have noted that none of those arguing for the legislation, have actually tried to defend the legislation itself as a proper mechanism.What's more is that Knight has actually handed proponents of the legislation two rather well written posts for the defense of that legislation... and still no one picked the flag up and ran with it.Is no one going to address the actual legislation, trying to defend its necessity based on what it claims to be about?Maybe third time's the charm?What everyone has been hitting on is the badness of sexually graphic material. I have mentioned (and amazingly Tal has also mentioned) that the Bible itself contains sexually graphic and brutal passages.If no one wants to address the actual legislation of the OP, then how about explaining why it would be wrong to make films with the same level of content as in Ezekial 23? Remember it is not just porn but sexually graphic material itself which is under consideration.If I were to film the following section of the Bible, how would it NOT be considered sexually explicit and even pornographic? Granted it appears to be a metaphor, but it is a story that God is telling and there was no reason for his metaphorical story to be that lurid and explicit right?I mean that is part of the criticism against porn, that there would be no reason to be so lurid, yet here the greatest author there is finds reason to be quite explicit.How could one make a movie of this and not have it be lurid and explicit?I'll tell you one thing, that passage sure was an eye-opener in my Children's Illustrated Bible.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Yeah, I haven't even looked at it except cursorily, to tell you the truth. I've been talking off-topic the whole time because I had a point to make about a certain type of pornography. I'm not even sure exactly what the legislation consists of: something about record-keeping.I'll study the link and see if I agree with you or not about it being unjustifiable.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 06-30-2005 09:33 AM

I couldn't let this one slip by. Playboy doesn't teach men what is sexy etc, Playboy has to sell its product. It doesn't do that by telling the customer what they want, but by finding out what the customer wants and selling that. Playboy has to appeal to the most people that it is possible to appeal to. The market drives the product. Whilst the product might influence the market, if the models that Playboy posted weren't already attractive to men - they wouldn't sell as many magazines.Truly beautiful women to me are specific to me, it would be great if Playboy could tap into my mind and produce a magazine full of women that represent my desires. They can't, so they go with models that are attractive to most men. Some men are 'totally into' that 'type', some men find it appealing and attractive, if not perfect, and some men don't like (most) playboy women. I am one of the latter opinion.Playboy doesn't teach men what to think, men who think a certain way buy Playboy. Red Car Weekly wouldn't teach me that red cars were better than black cars, it would simply be bought by people who like red cars. Keeping in the porn world - Big Butt magazine won't teach a man that big butts and large ladies are sexy if he thinks they are repulsive...they will simply be bought by people who do think that way.

No offense taken.

quote:

---

Why, Schrafinator, are women so obsessed with their looks? All this minute inventory over height versus weight, etc.? Why, Schrafinator, are women so obsessed with their looks? All this minute inventory over height versus weight, etc.?

---

There's no one answer, but there are a number of factors that influence it:1) It is part of our culture for woman to be very concerned with their appearence. It is considered an important duty, really, for women to keep themselves visually appealing and desireable to men. If they fail to maintain a certain standard (even after having children), women are often said to have "let themselves go" and "no wonder he left her", whereas there is not a tradition of women leaving their husbands for gaining a bit of weight in later years.2) Most men go apeshit over thin, long-legged, stacked, young, long-haired women. That's the type that they are generally socialized to find most desireable. Women compete for men, so they try to fit that ideal.3) Girls are socialized from a very young age that their appearence is very important and that they are probably not good enough.Therefore we have to buy a bunch of stuff like makeup, hair dye, high-heeled shoes, fake nails, and of course we have to watch our "girlish figures" (with Weight Watchers or Bally's) very closely if we want to attract the best kind of man.4) Stylish clothing is very difficult to buy if you are a woman has anything other than a thin, teenager-like body. IF you have some curves, you have to head over to the "mature" woman section, AKA "tentland".It is really, really difficult to mentally combat all of that as a woman. It is relentless, everywhere, all the time.

quote:

---

Yeah, that's about it, you're still sounding hot to me.

---

...even though I am 20 pounds heavier now and am a size 10?I was a size six the last time, oh, 13 years ago.

quote:

---

The question I would want answered, though you may not have it, is what is the average height and weight of women, and what is considered a healthy weight range for that height. The "average" that you mentioned for Playboy does not necessarily sound outside of either.

---

OK I looked it up and the average height for an american woman is 5'4", and the weight reange considered healthy is 108-144 pounds.So, you can see that the 115 pound average weight for a 5'6" Playmate is actually quite low.

quote:

---

I will admit that you do not sound like an immediate candidate for a Playboy Playmate, but I'm sure they'd consider running you if you became famous. They do have pictorials of girls that are not Playmates and perhaps that is what is skewing some of these stats away from what actually appears in Playboy?

---

Well, the stats from the Playboy page referred only to Playmates, I believe.

quote:

---

No, that was Hustler. While Playboy may delve into that every now and then, and maybe they have tried to say they are that more recently (?), but the girl next door thing was by its competitors.

---

I am at work at the moment so I can't go to the Playboy website, but this was specifically mentioned as a longtime aspect of how they choose playmates.

quote:

---

I couldn't let this one slip by. Playboy doesn't teach men what is sexy etc, Playboy has to sell its product. It doesn't do that by telling the customer what they want, but by finding out what the customer wants and selling that.

---

It does both.It is both a follower of trends and an originator of trends.Playboy might have done what you are suggesting in the early years, but it is also now really an institution and an authority at this point. It can and does have influence on what it's readers considers hot and sexy in women's appearence.

quote:

---

Playboy has to appeal to the most people that it is possible to appeal to. The market drives the product. Whilst the product might influence the market, if the models that Playboy posted weren't already attractive to men - they wouldn't sell as many magazines.

---

As I said above, Playboy is in a fairly unique position to do both.Any good business works very hard to BOTH find out what customers want and to try to influence the market to buy what it's selling.

quote:

---

Truly beautiful women to me are specific to me, it would be great if Playboy could tap into my mind and produce a magazine full of women that represent my desires. They can't, so they go with models that are attractive to most men. Some men are 'totally into' that 'type', some men find it appealing and attractive, if not perfect, and some men don't like (most) playboy women. I am one of the latter opinion.

---

Then you are rare.

quote:

---

Playboy doesn't teach men what to think, men who think a certain way buy Playboy. Red Car Weekly wouldn't teach me that red cars were better than black cars, it would simply be bought by people who like red cars. Keeping in the porn world - Big Butt magazine won't teach a man that big butts and large ladies are sexy if he thinks they are repulsive...they will simply be bought by people who do think that way.

---

But I'm not talking about niche markets. I'm talking about what influences the majority of people, and Playboy does that.Look, how many young boys find their father's stash of Playboys and have some of their earliest sexual experiences with those women on the pages? That has to have some power in forming what those boys end up thinking is sexually desireable.AbE: Think about it. Their father, whom they look to as an example of what it means to be a man bought the magazines, the women on the pages are clearly displayed in a positive manner WRT desireability, etc. I can easily see kids thinking that if it's in Playboy, it's meant to be viewed as sexy, can't you?This message has been edited by schrafinator, 06-30-2005 08:04 PM

That's a bit heavier than my pref range but it all depends on distribution. In any case being outside a pref range does not make one necessarily unattractive, nor not hot in some objective way. Actually I do not see that at all. If a "healthy" woman of 5'4" can be 108 pounds, then I don't see how a woman of 5'6" at 115 pounds would be quite low. Yes it is at the low end of the healthy weight range, but that's not indicative of being too thin or in any way an unhealthy "ideal". Yeah, I went and checked myself. When the oldest Playmate they have is listed as 35, then they are classing "women that have appeared in Playboy" as different than "Playmate". This will definitely change the results of that "average" they have listed.And remember guys don't see the "average" they see a mix of body types, including nonPlaymates. The Iraq War is specifically mentioned as an aspect of fighting against those who attacked us on 911... does that make it so?If YOU can spot the fact that these girls are not generally the average girl next door. please give men the ability to figure it out as well. That is why other men's magazines popped up to actually deliver such content. Amusingly, having just browsed their info pages, I note that they deliberately never mention their main competitors, especially when discussing the "girl next door".As it stands Playboy did not say that they found the average girl that one finds next door. The point of their "girl next door" is to showcase (sometimes) women that are not already professional models. That is not the same as saying "average". Here is the wording from their site... You will note that Playboy had already been running for 2 years before they ever ran a "girl next door". If you read the selection process you will see that the average girl next door will be weeded out. They really do look for girls that guys can find at the grocery store, at a party, or at work... the HOTTIES at a grocery store, at a party, or at work.Note the tag on the end of that where Playboy tries to pass off other magazines that emerged to actually include girls next door, and average ones at that, are somehow exploitative by being more explicit. To answer Hef's question, the other mags showed the real girl next door and perhaps what she was really into, instead of being raised on a pedestal.Now don't get me wrong, I don't mean to slam Hef or Playboy. I think he was and is fantastic and that it is a great product. There's always been an odd antagonism between Playboy and its competitors which is sort of sad. I don't mean to contribute to that by making it appear that I think Playboy is somehow fake or shallow.It is what it is, a magazine devoted to providing the average guy with some interesting insights and literature and hot girls. Of course the girls will seem hot to each person according to their tastes, and not Playboy's.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

This is true, but you have made an error regarding what a trendsetter is. That really is a ridiculous and insulting proposition, especially to the countless other adult entertainment providers out there.It is at this point that "trendsetting" needs to be laid out. A trendsetter will experiment with some new things and AS THEY ARE FOUND POPULAR, stick with and so reinforce that taste, or fad. A trendsetter cannot ever tell you what you must like, unless you are a really shallow person with no tastes of your own.The drive for a trend has to come from the people, the market, and not from a singular men's magazine. I thoroughly agree that Playboy will attempt new things every once and a while, and they may become trends, and Playboy will help reinforce those tastes that have emerged, but if it was not enjoyed by the people Playboy would drop it in an instant. While true...1) They are selling a magzine with lots of different content including hot girls to jerk off to, they are not interested in pushing specific girls to be hot to jerk off to, just that guys if they are looking to jerk off should look to Playboy because they have hot girls. The guy then picks up Playboy and decides for himself whether Playboy has hot girls or not.A guy DOES NOT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM look at a Playboy and think to himself, gosh this must be what a hot girl looks like, and feel he must conform his tastes to that magazine. That is indeed why there are so many other men's magazines.2) Playboy is not trying to sell you your next wife or girlfriend. You seem to equivocate between selling themselves as a source of erotic fantasy, and a source for accurate information on evaluating who you should find attractive in your everyday life.Heheheh... if Playboy really set the standard for what men find attractive to the degree you suggest, I guess we'd all be disappointed that our gfs don't have staples in their bellies and fold up after sex. No, he is not which is why I was pointing out to you what was going on in the industry. The market for nonPlayboy types is huge and growing.Playboy does not make it as every guy's fantasy material. That is why even in its early days competition sprung up around it and survive till today.It is certainly a good magazine, it is one of the most popular and I'd say it certainly provides to the majority of men's tastes, but not so vast that a guy who finds Playmates generally not to their taste as being somewhat rare.Honestly ask your husband if he has his tastes defined by what he reads and sees, or rather defines what he reads and sees by his tastes.I grant that as a society as a whole distributes common images, that those common images may be the most familiar and deemed the more attractive. But such standards are not all encompassing, and neither do they hold for that long.Breast size and weight has swung back and forth in popularity at least 2 to 3 times over the last century. Only to the degree that it is reflected in most other media already, plus whatever personal tastes a kid already has.I did not jerk off to all of the models within Playboy, I jerked off to the ones I liked, and whole issues of Playboy would sometimes be ignored as they did not have anyone I found interesting.And I did have an interest in other things and so was happy to find other magazines, which I often used instead of Playboy.I will grant you that a boy whose only access to women in their lives, by which I mean seeing them, is Playboy, will likely have their personal exectations conform to that kind of image.The trouble is that that little boy you are talking about in reality usually has a life filled with encounters with girls of all kinds in real life. Regardless of media saturation they STILL have encounters with average women.Thus guys will always find "average" women of some kind attractive. Some may even find their interests stretch beyond just "average", and others may even end up prefering anything but the commonly accepted "hot" and "average" girl. I was a kid so I can tell you. He was a kids so he can tell you. You were a kid so you can tell us. I know I understood that the magazine was showing pictures of who they thought were hot women. Sometimes I agreed and sometimes I disagreed.When there was a disagreement I never in my life thought there was something wrong with me and I must conform my tastes. I have also never once in my life looked at a gf and thought she doesn't look like a Playmate so I can't like her. It is usually along the lines that I recognize that she is probably unlikely to be a Playmate, and that's too bad for Playboy.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

quote:

---

It is really, really difficult to mentally combat all of that as a woman. It is relentless, everywhere, all the time.

---

Have you tried turning off the TV?I'm not trying to be smart here. While it is true that these types of images are everywhere, they do seem to be more concentrated in certain areas of our culture, and certain types of media are more effective at promoting changes of attitude and expectations than others.The only time I watch a lot of TV is when I visit my mother -- there isn't much to do in my old home town, and my mom has cable. When I am watching TV I can actually feel my attitudes and desires being manipulated -- in fact, they are changed, even though I recognize that they are changing. Fortunately, once I am back home they change back to normal.I also note that studies done with women in East Asia seem to indicate that once American style advertising becomes the norm, women there also experience a drop in their self-esteem and body image. I don't normally watch much TV, and the only magazines I subscribe to are current events/political so I don't get a lot of advertising in my life.At any rate, I do sympathize with you. As a chronically underweight male (when I was in my 20s I was 6'2" and weighed only 135 lbs) I, too, grew up with a poor self-image. As a child it was always foremost in my thoughts and really affected how I thought about myself and how I related with other people. I hope you find a way to overcome this.