When did it become acceptable and fashionable for women and particularly young women to purchase and own bed sheets & car seat covers and wear underwear & clothes all adorned with Hefner’s playboy bunny logo?
Many mainstream retailers including the homewears store ‘Adairs’ and even the ubiquitous store ‘Bras n Things’ are stocking Playboy merchandise. Is this the new generation of empowered, sexually liberated women reclaiming a once oppressive icon? Yeah right. My arse.
Enjoy the following quote, brought to my attention by my outraged house-mate. It is an excerpt from an interview with Oriana Fallaci (1967), in which Hugh Hefner explains why he chose the ‘bunny’ as the icon of Playboy:
“The rabbit, the bunny, in America has a sexual meaning, and I chose it because it’s a fresh animal, shy, vivacious, jumping – sexy. First it smells you, then it escapes, then it comes back, and you feel like caressing it, playing with it. A girl resembles a bunny. Joyful, joking. Consider the kind of girl that we made popular: the Playmate of the Month. She is never sophisticated, a girl you cannot really have. She is a young, healthy, simple girl – the girl next door…we are not interested in the mysterious, difficult woman, the femme fatale, who wears elegant underwear, with lace, and she is sad, and somehow mentally filthy. The Playboy girl has no lace, no underwear, she is naked, well-washed with soap and water, and she is happy.”
My outrage keeps returning to and being reignited by the perverse associations between:
Bunny > fresh > shy and sexy > never sophisticated’ > simple > healthy > well washed with soap (i.e. pure) > happy > desirable.
And how these above associative ideas are contrasted with the following:
Women who are not simple > not fresh > sophisticated > mysterious > elegant > difficult > mentally filthy > unsexy > sad > undesirable.
Really and truly …..