quietrob posted at 2:57AM Mon, 19 October 2015 - #4234213

moogal posted at 8:10PM Sun, 18 October 2015 - #4233901

[Byrdie]

I own a few issues myself, special celebrity editions with the old movie stars in them. And yes, I did read the articles. All in all, pretty good. But then again, I am not a heterosexual male, so I really can't speak for anyone in that category who claims "It's only for the articles!" when the mother, wife or significant other discovers his stash. I do, however, take such claims with a honkin' big heap of salt.

I am a heterosexual male, but honestly always felt the articles truly were the only reason to read Playboy. The girls were all too similar, either the "girl next door" or "rich daddy's girl gone off to college"... Thin, blonde, airbrushed and not my cup of tea at all. (The kind of girls upward moving American men in the 1950s-70s sought for trophy wives?) Too modestly posed to even be provocative, just easy on the eyes and nothing more.

Standing a bit to the side so I don't get hit by a bolt of lightning! Really? Seriously? Denial apparently just isn't a river in Egypt.

I think it's just a matter of not preferring the same kinds of girls Hef does. The Playboy ideal is tall, tan and athletic... Sporty, outdoorsy... I'm not saying I couldn't be attracted to a specific woman of that type, but I'm not attracted to that type in general. I prefer petite to tall, pale to tan and curves to tone/definition. I like the hipster librarian types... the curvy girls in hip-hop videos... emo girls with purple hair and maybe just a little bit of ink. I find the girls in Playboy attractive, just not very arousing. Honestly, I really thought that was the point of Playboy.