Categories
'bating homophobia misogyny porn transphobia

Playboy puts a man in lingerie on its cover and the MAGA crowd loses it, as they do

Bretman Rock in Playboy’s famous bunny suit

Playboy magazine, perhaps feeling a little starved for attention, decided to put a man in lingerie — the Playboy bunny suit — on the cover of its October issue. The man in question is “influencer” and former MTV star Bretman Rock, the first out gay man who’s appeared on a Playboy cover ever, looking a little bit fierce, if we’re still allowed to use that word.

History was made, and the histrionics were soon to follow. Fox News declared the cover to be a symptom of “culture rot” while a post on the Louder With Crowder website worried that the cover pic would confuse the heck out of “teenage boys discovering Playboy for the first time.”

Naturally, the right-wing mob had some thoughts on the matter as well, which they spelled out in Tweets bristling with all their favorite buzzwords.

ir crankypants
@kingcrankypants
Replying to 
@Playboy
 and 
@bretmanrock
Can't wait to see what your few remaining customers think of having this repulsive degeneracy rammed down their throats. Pun intended. But losing your customer base is worth it as long as a few deranged deviants tweet "YAAAS QUEEN" for the next 5 min then forget about you, right?

Dantes Inferno
@atrasz
Replying to 
@Playboy
 and 
@bretmanrock
Give me a break. No one who reads Playboy wants this mentally ill degenerate on the cover.
The_NPP
@NPPSA
@PlayboyTV
 Male Bunny??? Playboy is about to find out: Go woke, Go broke. Already a negative income venture, this should put a BIG hole in the brand. As I clean the vomit from my keyboard, I am erasing knowledge of Playboy's existence for the last 20 years from my mind. Oh well.
Lawrence Fearon
@LawrenceFearon6
Replying to 
@NBCNews
I'm not even conservative and find this repulsive.  The last thing straight men want to see is a male playboy bunny. We come here to see the beautiful women not men. 
@PlayboyTV
  is now irrelevant to straight men.

One commenter professed to have knowledge of every other man’s masturbatory habits.

Abnpfdr99
@ABNPFDR99
Replying to 
@Playboy
 and 
@bretmanrock
Ain't nobody pulling their pud to some dude..Even the Younger audience they are targeting don't engage their dick beaters to no dude..Just doesn't happen. F R U I T C A K E S

This “doctor” thinks the Playboy cover is a symptom of the emasculinization of America.

This lady worried about the evil GAY NARRATIVE!!!1!

This fellow was just a little bit sad. And, allegedly, bored.

Kung-Flu Fighter
@TakeHowWithYou
Replying to 
@Playboy
 and 
@bretmanrock
Playboy was: An iconic rite of passage, a celebration of just how attractive women are to men, naughty, rebellious, fun.

Playboy now: Another ubiquitous, carbon copy, woke hymnal exactly like literally every other cog in the pop culture SJW machine. Sad and boring.

Meanwhile, this fellow wondered if he has somehow gotten stuck in the Matrix.

Some were a little confused about Mr. Rock’s gender.

One commenter managed to work James Bond into th mix.

MonkDegen
@MonkDegenerate
They destroyed Playboy.

They will try to destroy James Bond. BUT, Bond is a much more valuable brand with a much more powerful marketing vehicle (clothes, cars, liquor, gadgets). They may not succeed.

But the strangest response I’ve seen so far came from the Gender Critical forum on Reddit-clone Ovarit, where one observer was actually cheering for the cover picture, apparently thinking it would offend “male perverts” and possibly trans people. Or something like that; you figure it out.

[–] NoOneSpecial 14 points (+15|-1) 5 hours ago Edited 1 hour ago
This is great! All the male perverts still buying Playboy in the year of 2021 (who only know fully well who a woman is when they can objectify and sexually coerce her) are going to be RHEEEEEEEEE-ing all over the interwebs. When they crafted their grand plans of stealing jobs from women, I don’t think these were the types of jobs they planned on giving to men.

Looks like there are a few “kinks” (pun intended ;)) in their MR activism. You get what you fucking deserve.

As they would put it, “THIS IS WHAT THE MENINISTS ASKED FOR!!!!1!!!”

I feel a bit dizzy after reading that. The culture war is weird enough without the TERFs poking their noses in it.

Follow me on Twitter.

Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.

We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

34 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Full Metal Ox
21 days ago

…are going to be RHEEEEEEEEE-ing all over the interwebs.

Gosh, thanks for the side order of ableism!

(Also: Playboy is still available in paper?)

Last edited 21 days ago by Full Metal Ox
Jess
Jess
21 days ago

Now degeneracy has even tainted our wholesome porn? Won’t someone think of the children?

Surplus to Requirements
Surplus to Requirements
21 days ago

Say what you will about Playboy, at least the term “Playboy Playmate” could be construed as suggesting a relationship of equals. Unlike, notably, “Penthouse Pet”.

Viscaria
Viscaria
21 days ago

“teenage boys discovering Playboy for the first time.”

Are they sending the issue back in time to 1960? A bold and interesting choice.

Ninja Socialist
Ninja Socialist
21 days ago

A man dressed as a bunny on a nearly defunct magazine is no less ridiculous than all the years of women dressed as furry animals. Does anyone even read this relic anymore, even for the articles? I thought we were all getting our porn from the net. If boys want spank material it’s free and at their fingertips (pun intended).

Lumipuna
Lumipuna
21 days ago

Does anyone even read this relic anymore, even for the articles?

I heard “a” and “the” are pretty good.

Banananananana dakry: still fat and deranged
Banananananana dakry: still fat and deranged
21 days ago

Their lips are moving but all I hear is “WAAAAAAHHHH THE UNIVERSE DOESN’T CATER TO US AND ONLY US ANYMOOOOORRRE!”

Also, note to Lady Gratham: not all of us are straight and will never be, either. Deal with it.

Last edited 21 days ago by Banananananana dakry: still fat and deranged
CanuckAmuck
CanuckAmuck
21 days ago

To be honest, I thought Playboy had already gone out of business. Why is anyone upset about this? Has the internet run out of pictures of nude women, or something?

LollyPop
LollyPop
21 days ago

A personal thing but one thing I cannot STAND is self-dramatising, childish fake retching. Like when a grown adult is presented with food which isn’t their preference and instead of saying “oh, not for me, thanks”, they’re like *fake retch retch* urgh that’s DISGUSTING *retch*. So the inclusion of all the over the top retching gifs is just really annoying. It’s a bloody man in a not even very revealing outfit, for gods sake. Are they so repulsed by their own bodies? Just GROW UP.

@Jess

Now degeneracy has even tainted our wholesome porn? Won’t someone think of the children?

Lol.

Waywatcher of the green
Waywatcher of the green
21 days ago

To quote Krusty the Klown

“Sex cauldron!? I thought they closed that place down!”

Snowberry
Snowberry
21 days ago

So they’re merging Playboy and Playgirl now? Bold move. 😜

I do have personal memories of Playboy, though the videos and not the magazine. After my mother moved out, my father sometimes rented softcore porn VHS (this was during the late 1980s), mainly Playboy ones, and didn’t particularly care if his kids watched. Note: when that started, I was 14 and my brother was 9. He was not a good person. Anyway, seeing the girl-on-girl scenes helped me realize I was bisexual. But there were some things about it that rubbed me the wrong way, though I couldn’t have easily explained it at the time.

As an adult I figured them out: For one thing, there were a lot of scenes which women were just kind of “there for the taking”, for lack of a better description, even if it was depicted as consensual. I mean, while I fully embrace the label of “slut”, I wouldn’t react *that* positively to attentions from a random stranger, I don’t know anyone else who would, and I would be weirded out if anyone I hit on acted like that. I’m aware it’s a fantasy, but that’s really not my fantasy. And I’m also aware of how damaging it is when poorly socialized men idealize that kind of behavior in women.

For another thing, the women are usually portrayed in ways which are nonthreatening to fragile male egos, sometimes in ways that also felt subtly infantilizing. Yeah, no. You want me to pretend to be that way, you pay me. My own ego is fairly robust, and I’d prefer to date people who are the same, regardless of gender.

I also have a memory of a scene where a woman was repeatedly molested by a doofy, Benny Hill-esque man, and while she didn’t reciprocate his “affections”, she also wasn’t very forceful in getting rid of him and seemed more mildly annoyed than distressed. I wanted to hit him and chastise her for being spineless. Not 100% certain this was one of the Playboy ones, though.

The one positive point that I can say about them is that I saw more intimacy and less stunt sex than industrial hardcore porn, though that’s hardly enough on its own for me to consider it “good”.

Moggie
Moggie
21 days ago

“Go woke, go broke”, they say, referring to a magazine which already closed its print edition because it was losing money hand over fist. I don’t know what the finances of the online operation are like, but I have a hard time imagining that it’s a money spinner, when there’s a seemingly infinite supply of porn available online for free. So, this might be more a case of “go broke, go woke”: if you’re not making money using the existing formula, why not try something new?

moregeekthan
moregeekthan
21 days ago

I notice many of those comments speak about this being something “they” are doing. Some folks are very desperate for any move away from post WWII societal attitudes to be a conspiracy because they really don’t want to admit the truth: their views are no longer popular, and they are being left behind.

Alan Robertshaw
21 days ago

Finding out there’s still print porn in this internet age is like when you come across one of those rural filling stations where they still put the fuel in for you!

LouCPurr
LouCPurr
21 days ago

Playboy magazine went all digital last year. The weird thing is, a quick google doesn’t bring up a place to specifically read new issues. There’s a big archive on Playboy.com that you have to pay to access, so I guess the new issues are there? The site seems to exist mainly to sell merch. They’re trying to sell NFTs, too.

Anon Get-it-On
Anon Get-it-On
21 days ago

Glad to see a bastion of misogyny fall!

I found another male supremacits site:

https://boydoesntmeetgirl.wordpress.com

don’t read the comments they are filled with racism and weird veiled threats!

Remember to report to wordpress any content that violates the Terms!

Dalillama
21 days ago

@Alan
Where I am it’s the opposite: you pump your own in rural areas, but in the city you’re legally required to let the attendant do it. Until a few years ago there was no self-service at all in the state.

hammerofglass
hammerofglass
21 days ago

I’m always amazed blatant this can get and the marks still do not realize that stirring up their response is the entire point. How many billions of dollars of free marketing does a right wing meltdown generate for a brand? Way more than they lost from any of these fools who actually did not pay money they would have otherwise.

I think I need to update myself on the TERF dialect, I have no idea what that last one was even trying to say.

Elaine The Witch
Elaine The Witch
21 days ago

I wish more men would wear lingerie . it’s really hot.

.45
.45
21 days ago

@ Elaine

I think for men it is often considered something of a joke or novelty item. I was gifted some one Christmas and ended up throwing them out. They were neon colored and coated with glitter, not to mention ridiculously tight and uncomfortable. This might have been OK had I had someone special to wear them for on occasion, but since I didn’t, I was evaluating them for use as underwear.

GSS ex-noob
GSS ex-noob
21 days ago

Hey, he might BE a playboy, just with other boys.

I didn’t know Playboy was still a thing that was on paper, where boys could see it. Is Playgirl (aimed at men, despite the name) still a thing?

Is any teenage boy in America needing a magazine to look at nude women who are heavily airbrushed and not moving?

(Narrator: No, of course not. As the song goes, that’s what the internet is for.)

Anyway, well done to Playboy for managing to get some interest and riling up all the worst people.

Threp (formerly Shadowplay)
Threp (formerly Shadowplay)
20 days ago

@hammerofglass

I think I need to update myself on the TERF dialect, I have no idea what that last one was even trying to say.

Eh, why should you know what they obviously don’t?

However, since my dolt to person translator has just been recalibrated, permit me:

“WHARBLEGARBLE!!! Men bad!!! Attraction badder!!!! Sex WORSE!!!!! ALL beasts!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lumipuna
Lumipuna
20 days ago

I think for men [lingerie] is often considered something of a joke or novelty item.

Personally, I find the English concept of “lingerie” curious, and still somewhat foreign. The underlying idea certainly exists in Finnish culture, too, but you’d have to express it differently.

Lingerie seems to mean alternatively “underwear for women”, “sexy underwear” or “sexy underwear for women”. Sometimes used ironically for underwear that doesn’t fit some/all of these definitions. There are complicated interrelations between female/male gender presentation, culturally coded femininity/masculinity, culturally coded sexiness, culturally coded kinkiness and the specific fetishes of specific people like myself.

The notion of wearing sexy underwear in everyday life, as opposed to special occasions, is especially odd to me as a straight man. Who is it for, anyway? Do women commonly go out of their way to look sexy under their street clothes, because they feel it’s important? Or is it generally possible for women to have practical/affordable underwear that’s also sexy, if only because any feminine designed underwear is coded as inherently sexy? (By “commonly” I don’t mean “most women most of the time” but rather “it’s a thing people do”.)

Some kinksters do regularly wear impractical fetish gear under their street clothes, to feel sexy all day, but that’s fairly uncommon, and it’s certainly not my thing. I like my everyday underwear cheap, comfy and simple. I could very well pose erotically for a partner, if I had one, and sometimes I do pose for a mirror. I also like feeling sensual in fetish gear, but that’s different from feeling I look sexy, and it’s not something I could do much of the time without getting inured.

There seems to be little cultural consensus of what even constitutes “sexy” underwear for men – though that might be because I intuitively expect something fairly specific, since my own personal concept of sexiness is fairly specific. I do have some clothing fetishes that aren’t particularly feminine coded (hah) and also aren’t necessarily sexy or kinky in conventional sense, regardless of who wears them. As a kinkster, I’d presume to accommodate my partner’s wishes within limits, but only on their explicit specific request, rather than trying to present sexy in some generic sense.

Alan Robertshaw
20 days ago

The wonderful and much missed Victoria Wood referred to lingerie as “complicated underwear”.

https://theartsdesk.com/comedy-tv/our-friend-victoria-review-–-victoria-wood’s-genius-irreplaceable

Lumipuna
Lumipuna
20 days ago

Me, an ESL learner: So, what kind of underwear exactly is “lingerie”?

Victoria Wood: It’s complicated.

Alan Robertshaw
20 days ago

Some friends linked this to me. Sort of animal related; but thought people might find amusing; or disconcerting. It’s a fine line.

Someone offered $1,000,000 donation to troops if Trump did Veganuary. But according to the new whistleblower book, he wasn’t keen.

“No, no. It messes with your body chemistry, your brain,” Trump said of a vegan diet, according to Grisham. “And if I lose even one brain cell, we’re fucked.”

Phew, thank goodness he remained a ‘stable genius’, otherwise who knows what might have happened.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-said-going-vegan-messes-with-your-body-chemistry-book-2021-10?r=US&IR=T

Surplus to Requirements
Surplus to Requirements
19 days ago

Have some sympathy for the poor man! “Give up one brain cell” is a much bigger ask when the one being asked only has one …

RICHARD IAN WILDE
RICHARD IAN WILDE
18 days ago

Playboy’s “Cocktober” issue is another example of the stereotyping of gay men. A big Fail in my book. I’m a gay man, but this cover is disgusting.

RICHARD IAN WILDE
RICHARD IAN WILDE
18 days ago

…another thing. I don’t normally speak up for straight guys, but you’re losing your sex freedoms to those who tell you that your bad.

Anonymous
Anonymous
17 days ago

I think they actually tried this sort of thing in the ill-fated Playgirl. As you can guess, it was mostly for straight women, which is probably why it didn’t work out. If only they had considered the possibility of marketing it to gay men…

Natsume
Natsume
16 days ago

@ Anonymous

While playgirl is marketed to straight women, they’ve never been the demographic who buys it most. That’s gay men and it’s pretty much an open secret since Playgirl’s inception. Mostly because straight women tend to prefer erotic literature over porn. Partly because of how women process information, a very small part at that. Mostly because it’s more socially acceptable.

Surplus to Requirements
Surplus to Requirements
14 days ago

Partly because of how women process information

I am deeply skeptical of all such gender/sex-essentialist claims. I suspect there’s very little actual difference between the brains of men and women, at least initially, before they are shaped by social experiences and expectations. If humans had any significant degree of brain dimorphism I doubt there’d be trans and nonbinary people. That there are indicates that, brain-wise, “anyone can be anything”, or near-to. Most of gender and sex linked mental traits are likely set during “critical windows” in childhood, analogous to the language-learning window. There may be such windows for every aspect of social cognition, with language and role-performance being just two of those (and roles in most societies being influenced, and sometimes rigidly determined, by gender; it would be interesting to see data from a society like India with a strong caste-determined aspect to accepted roles, or from one that pretty much ignores gender).

epitome of incomrepehensibility

@Surplus – Same with the skepticism. It does seem that different hormone distributions might lead to some brain differences (measured through averages of lots of people), but that doesn’t translate to All Men Are Like This and All Women Are Like That. Or that the differences are that huge in the first place.

And of course experience will affect how the brain processes things.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee
weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee
14 days ago

Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine, who is a neuroscientist is a great book debunking the myth of the male brain and female brain.