"I was married and faithful for eight years in the 1980s, and following that, as an overreaction to that failed marriage, I wound up with seven live-in girlfriends. Dealing with those seven girlfriends was easier than dealing with one wife."
Says Hugh Hefner, leaving us to fill in the details.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
३२ टिप्पण्या:
By other reliable accounts, Hefner is a control freak. His "girlfriends" are more akin to a harem and as such, he has no emotional responsibilities. While the "girlfriends" have some freedoms, there are many strict rules on behavior and when Hefner says something shall happen, it shall, or they get kicked out of the mansion. In truth, these really aren't girlfriends, but live in prostitutes paid in salary (room & board & cars and an allowance), not per performance.
The fact that he's 84 probably helps as well. When he falls asleep at 7pm, his "girlfriends" probably spend the rest of the evening counting his money.
It really wasn't such a management problem: they were kept in different holding cells.
Hugh Hefner rates right up there among my heroes, right after Larry Flynt. Who cares about how many babes he's bedded?
Historically, almost all women were "live-in prostitutes," especially the broads the patriarchs bedded. Now that women can choose their mates, it is often the vacuous youth who lose out to the smart and experienced viagrons.
I'm sure Tiger Woods will take great consolation from this nuggert of wisdom, but it's not really applicable to most of us.
It's not hard to keep 22 year old girlfriends "happy" when a) you have plenty of money and b) they don't really expect anything from their relationship with you.
I am very proud of Hef, a fellow graduate of the University of Illinois.
Go Illini!
I propose that the Illini erect (pun intended) a statue of Hef next to the famous statue of the Alma Mater in front of Altgeld Hall.
Historically, almost all women were "live-in prostitutes,"
Actually, historically there have always been distinctions between the two, not least related to child-rearing and the formation of a household; these distinctions have been enshrined legally, socially, morally, economically, spiritually, and (more often than you might think) also in the sentiments of the parties involved. These distinctions are seen in the earliest literature and texts as well.
But you do sound a lot like some of the radical feminists who say that there was very little difference between marriage and prostitution.
Well, HKatz,
A prostitute to me is a person who has no rights to property, no wealth, no independent income. She lives and breeds by the schedule of her lord.
Thus were the concubines of the Patriarchs, at least after Adam. Do you have any contrary evidence (excluding Ruth)?
A prostitute to me is a person who has no rights to property, no wealth, no independent income. She lives and breeds by the schedule of her lord.
That's an interesting definition of prostitution. I think it's also an inaccurate definition. Prostitutes are paid for sex, which payments constitute their independent income which they use to acquire property and wealth.
To me a prostitute is someone who sells her body for sex. That is the full extent of the relationship. There is nothing else going on there - no other bond or social tie.
She lives and breeds by the schedule of her lord.
If you actually read the Bible, none of the matriarchs were treated by their husbands as broodmares. Some of them couldn't even have children (or did not have children for many years) and were still beloved to their husbands - they ran the household, and they were one of a pair at the head of the house: economic and social companions. This includes Sarah and Rebekah, Rachel, and later in the Bible, Hannah - just a few I'm thinking of off the top of my head.
(There's certainly a distinction between the wives of the patriarchs, and the concubines of the patriarchs; the patriarchs did have concubines as well, who could exert influence on the course of events in the household, but did not have the status of wife or the power over the household or children.)
The rule for sheep herding is that three (four?) sheep equals one sheep.
Anyway, once there's enough of them, the herd is as easy to manage as a single sheep.
It's the middle numbers that give you the trouble.
Similar to serfs married women usually owed duties and had immunities and protections. Then there were the working girls. But when Christianity came it worked its magic. Jesus had taught that women were equal in God's sight to men. The Byzantine Christian Church/Emperor that lasted until 1452 (a thousand years longer than Rome) had many Christian man and wife teams as Emperor, and 3 times a sole woman as Emperor.Extra credit: Is this why Mohammed's Jihadists desperately want to exterminate Christians like we do Canadian Geese. They tried that at Constantinople in 714 and were beaten. Next they tried that in Gaul (France) 17 years later and were hammered. Let's not invite them in to take over here as a gesture of stupid tolerance. Make them beat us first.
That's right DKWalser: my definition is interesting and it's mine. A prostitute is a kept woman, a kept lawyer, a kept doctor, etc.
A woman who charges men for sex is no prostitute; she is a businesswoman.
Our Amerikan inability to absorb this is what has maintained our subjugation of women by means of marriage and breeding. cf Hugh Hefner
There is an EXCELLENT article on him in the current issue of L.A. Weekly (Avail online) that is about as good as anything I've read (And I'm 66.) Go see.
(And I'm originally born and raised a Prairire Stater too)
Hefner has a lot of hangers on, who stay for a while, bang the boss, and eventually go on their way. How long they stay depends on Hugh. If they get catty or dare speak up to the power, he sends them packing. They are hoping being around Hugh gets them fame and fortune. Yeah of course that is easier than dealing with an equal life partner.
I am not sure I equate every paid profession with the oldest one. But I cannot dismiss it out of hand either. It depends on the individual.
In insect societies the queen is genetically female and the drones are male. Hef just inverted the concept, took on the role of regent, and allowed the drones to be workers as well.
Smart guy.
I always go back to the bumper sticker of the 60s, "Hugh Hefner is a virgin". How many women he really had is up for grabs.
"It's the middle numbers that give you the trouble."
I respect you a lot, rh...and fortunately, from a distance where my eyesight gets fuzzy.
Joe you don't know what a prostitute is.
You don't pay her for sex.
You pay her to go away after sex.
They don't become prostitues until after they leave.
I'm looking at you Holly.
Clearly his definitions of marriage and of girlfriend are very different from just about anyone elses.
Prostitutes live pretty bad lives: emotionally isolated, often drug addicted or drunk, used by pimps, high threat of violence, threat of arrest (though some get used to it)..
but they also make choices, and they choose to take take advantage of the stupidity, lust, and loneliness of the johns.
No easy answers here.
Hefner is a clever and talented man (built an empire), but hedonistic I think and slave to his own, ultimately, destructive ideas.
He's just a doddering old fool now with little bunnies around who haven't heard Playboy is passe.
Trooper,
I think he does pay them to go away, at least to the other side of the mansion. The girls only see him when he wants to be seen which apparently is about once a week at the most.
Holly who, Troop?
Holly Hunter?
Or were you channeling Holly Golightly?
Perhaps you want to meet them both for breakfast at Tiffany's when the hounds and the foxes have worn each other out?
OMG! You meant Holly Madison Wisconsin!
Ha ha
Too friggin' funny!
economic and social companions.
And I'll also add, as the text reveals, companions on a mental and moral level as well.
There is one Q&A from the interview that made me laugh:
Is there anything off-limits for Hugh Hefner in bed?
Absolutely. I'm actually a very moral guy. No horses, no reptiles.
Though it raises an interesting question in itself. Where does one draw the line morally? (because even people who argue for sex practically anywhere, everywhere, have their limits... limits that may be constantly pushed, but to what extent before a sense of wrongness and revulsion creep in).
Hmmm, seems Hugh is admitting that he's failed at understanding women. He has been unsuccessful at sustaining over his lifetime an intimate, loving relationship with one woman. . . He's a failure with women. Is that what he's admitting here?
Men, it's easier to be with many on the surface than to go deeper with one meaningful relationship with one woman.
Some men idolize Hugh. Some men will attempt to avoid Hugh's biggest failure. I guess it depends on your character and that "selfishness" thing mostly. What kind of man do you want to be?
Little Towhee...Hefner is admitting that he is stuck on sex objects. He admits that he does not know any women. That may be his wisest move considering the sex objects he has encountered. They did not have minds worth sharing deep thoughts or real emotions with. Thank God I was not stuck with Hugh Hefner's emotional lifestyle of an eternal horny 18 year old. There but for the grace of God go I.
Some men idolize Hugh
Do they?
Mostly, it's "Thanks for all the boobies."
What kind of man do you want to be?
Is this a trick question?
btw, i am pretty sure that the three girls on "the girls next door" are pretty much prostitutes. i don't believe for one second they are sincerely into him. this is a paycheck, a job. my only question is whether they actually have sex with him and its the only source of doubt that they are prostitues. i could fully believe that hugh only keeps them around to maintain his image as a playboy, regardless of the reality.
The giveaway is when they exchanged the first three for the second three. Its treating being his girlfriend like a job that needs to be filled rather than a result of any meaningful relationship.
And that is why he says its easier with them than a wife. because its not a relationship, its a transaction.
Of course that is just my opinion based on watching the show like twice and seeing endless clips on "The Soup." so its not based on me knowing anything you can't learn by watching the show, but that is my opinion.
This is a tacit admission that hes not bedding ANY of them.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा