Hugh Hefner's Playboy Bunnies' heartbreaking confessions - from abuse to humiliating sex rituals

[xyz48B]

I don’t care if sex is understood. If you say “no” then it’s “no.”

The victim blaming here is really unsettling. There’s an inherent power imbalance between these women, no matter how un-unprivileged their upbringing, and Hugh Hefner, known round the world as a playboy.

There’s no misunderstanding about sex when we hire either, but if someone – escort or client – insists on something that makes either party uncomfortable, that’s wrong. Full stop. That’s not a difficult concept.

[marylander1940]

4 hours ago, pubic_assistance said:

There is never any "misunderstanding" about sex at the Playboy Mansion. No one has ever walked through those gates shocked to discover that sex with rich and famous people was part of the invitation.

That is what is SO disingenuous about claiming sexual impropriety. You're there to have sex. So don't act shocked when it happens. 

posing for a magazine doesn't make a woman a prostitute and I doubt it was implicit in the contract. 

This reminds me of expressions like: "she got drunk, she asked for it, she had it coming", etc. 

Edited January 24, 2022 by marylander1940

[BSR]

2 hours ago, xyz48B said:

I don’t care if sex is understood. If you say “no” then it’s “no.”

The victim blaming here is really unsettling. There’s an inherent power imbalance between these women, no matter how un-unprivileged their upbringing, and Hugh Hefner, known round the world as a playboy.

There’s no misunderstanding about sex when we hire either, but if someone – escort or client – insists on something that makes either party uncomfortable, that’s wrong. Full stop. That’s not a difficult concept.

Of course, if a provider wants to end the session for whatever reason, s/he has every right to do so, and the client must respect that choice.

Likewise, Hefner's "girlfriends" could have said no or stop and then left, either left the room on one particular occasion or left the relationship/arrangement permanently.  If Hefner did not take "no" for an answer, that's a very different issue.  But unless you have proof otherwise, that's not what happened.  The women are miserable now because they didn't say no or stop back then.

[+ FreshFluff]

I happen to have a book by one of the gfs in my Kindle. This was written around 2006, and it’s clear that the author, one Izabella St. James, was trying to stay in Hef’s graces. Judge for yourself. 

If she represents the situation correctly, I’d say it’s pretty close to the bounds of non-consent. 

Another passage says that the gfs had to ask for their weekly allowance. Hef gave them a hard time about it if they hadn’t performed well enough in the bedroom.

 

[BSR]

3 minutes ago, FreshFluff said:

I happen to have a book by one of the gfs in my Kindle. This was written around 2006, and it’s clear that the author, one Izabella St. James, was trying to stay in Hef’s graces. Judge for yourself. 

If she represents the situation correctly, I’d say it’s pretty close to the bounds of non-consent. 

Another passage says that the gfs had to ask for their weekly allowance. Hef gave them a hard time about it if they hadn’t performed well enough in the bedroom.

 

OK, I concede Hefner was gross.  But what prevented Izabella St. James from walking out of the Playboy Mansion, leaving that life behind, and never looking back?

[xyz48B]

1 hour ago, BSR said:

The women are miserable now because they didn't say no or stop back then.

You know that? Because Hugh Hefner is such a good guy who would never use is power or influence to get what he wants. The naïveté is gobsmacking.

You think the women aren’t victims and Hefner is a saint. I have nothing more to say to you about it. You clearly don’t understand the power dynamics at play here and no amount of online forum back-and-forth will change your mind.

Selah. 

[BSR]

36 minutes ago, xyz48B said:

You know that? Because Hugh Hefner is such a good guy who would never use is power or influence to get what he wants. The naïveté is gobsmacking.

You think the women aren’t victims and Hefner is a saint. I have nothing more to say to you about it. You clearly don’t understand the power dynamics at play here and no amount of online forum back-and-forth will change your mind.

Selah. 

I've said several times already that Hefner was gross.  I'm sure what his "girlfriends" went through was disgusting and even humiliating.  But from the very beginning, these women were free to walk away.  At any point in all the grossness, these women could have said "no" or "stop" and then left.  I keep asking for evidence that Hefner coerced them in any way, but so far nothing.

[+ FreshFluff]

1 hour ago, BSR said:

I've said several times already that Hefner was gross.  I'm sure what his "girlfriends" went through was disgusting and even humiliating.  But from the very beginning, these women were free to walk away.  At any point in all the grossness, these women could have said "no" or "stop" and then left.  I keep asking for evidence that Hefner coerced them in any way, but so far nothing.

According to Izabella, if Hef wasn’t happy, they’re pack up your things and leave them on the curb the same day. So unless they had somewhere to go right away, they were more or less stuck.

CA law says you need to evict, which means giving 30 day notice.

[pubic_assistance]

13 hours ago, marylander1940 said:

posing for a magazine doesn't make a woman a prostitute and I doubt it was implicit in the contract. 

Your obvious ignorance about the history and culture of the Playboy Mansion doesn't change the reality of the situation. Sympathetic feelings toward scammers and liars makes you look naive. I suggest you learn a bit more about the issue before you start commenting

[xyz48B]

I don’t understand this vehement defense of a dead playboy…”Wait for the evidence” you say…

But you seem to have made up your minds the women have no reason to be upset.

And what evidence are we looking for exactly? It’s not like Hefner can mount any kind of defense…I guess he has the folks of this forum who will defend his good name though! 

[Todd Jenkins]

21 hours ago, nycman said:

You joined the circus. Don't act surprised when you have to have to shovel the elephant shit. 

THIS RIGHT HERE. THIS COMMENT IS A PERFECT DESCRIPTION.

So, you went to live rent-free at an old man's mansion who - by the way - runs a PORN magazine and now, years later, you are claiming all this BS after the guy dies? 

Girls, ladies, whores - SIT DOWN.

Now, I am not casting judgment on whores. Hell, I've hired them. We all have. But, this "OH NO! CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT I HAD TO DO to keep my place in the house and life?" YES, we can. You weren't held by gunpoint, kidnapped or made to do anything against your will. You were free to leave at ANY time. 

 

[marylander1940]

1 hour ago, pubic_assistance said:

Your obvious ignorance about the history and culture of the Playboy Mansion doesn't change the reality of the situation. Sympathetic feelings toward scammers and liars makes you look naive. I suggest you learn a bit more about the issue before you start commenting

No need for name calling or getting personal. 

I hope you're never in juror in a rape trial because I doubt you'll feel sympathetic towards the victim/accuser.  

I would suggest you wait to hear the accusations of several women before you start judging them... I'd rather be naive instead of being mean and judgmental, obviously is so easy to be tough from behind the laptop. 

[marylander1940]

1 hour ago, xyz48B said:

I don’t understand this vehement defense of a dead playboy…”Wait for the evidence” you say…

But you seem to have made up your minds the women have no reason to be upset.

And what evidence are we looking for exactly? It’s not like Hefner can mount any kind of defense…I guess he has the folks of this forum who will defend his good name though! 

Great point!

Unfortunately, automatically siding with the powerful make some folks feel powerful themselves. 

[xyz48B]

There’s a lot of unnamed patriarchy and misogyny going on in this discussion. 

Edited January 24, 2022 by xyz48B

[marylander1940]

3 minutes ago, xyz48B said:

There’s a lot of unnamed patriarchy and misogyny going on in this discussion. 

Yes, even among gay men.

[xyz48B]

14 minutes ago, marylander1940 said:

Yes, even among gay men.

Especially among gay men. 

[+ sniper]

It's possible for both things to be true...Hefner was a manipulative jerk, and most if not all of these women had other options that they were choosing not to exercise.  An attractive able-bodied young person can generally find A job that will at least keep them off the street. 

[+ WilliamM]

15 hours ago, BSR said:

OK, I concede Hefner was gross.  But what prevented Izabella St. James from walking out of the Playboy Mansion, leaving that life behind, and never looking back?

Not easy to never look back from a terrible experience. 

[+ WilliamM]

9 minutes ago, sniper said:

It's possible for both things to be true...Hefner was a manipulative jerk, and most if not all of these women had other options that they were choosing not to exercise.  An attractive able-bodied young person can generally find A job that will at least keep them off the street. 

Not if the woman did not graduate high school.

[BSR]

1 hour ago, xyz48B said:

There’s a lot of unnamed patriarchy and misogyny going on in this discussion. 

Expecting women who have reached the age of majority to act like adults is neither patriarchy nor misogyny.

[+ sniper]

Just now, WilliamM said:

Not if the woman did not graduate high 

Restaurants and retail do not require a HS diploma. I'm not saying it would be a great job, mind you. Just that the subset of women who get picked for the Playboy Mansion are not generally unemployable. 

[maninsoma]

1 hour ago, sniper said:

It's possible for both things to be true...Hefner was a manipulative jerk, and most if not all of these women had other options that they were choosing not to exercise.  An attractive able-bodied young person can generally find A job that will at least keep them off the street. 

This.

This isn't an either/or situation.  I have no doubt that Hefner was a lech. 

I have no doubt that some women involved with him found that involvement disturbing, and once they were involved I'm sure some of them felt trapped because they didn't know what else to do.  However, that's very different than actually being trapped because one is either physically or psychologically tormented in a manner in which to coerce them to stay. 

I'm not defending Hefner because I don't have the details.  But I think those who want to assume that because, on the surface, it seems "creepy" that an older man had sex with all of these young men better look in the mirror and ask themselves, "What about all of the providers hired by forum members?  Are all of them 100% happy engaging in sex work, not just at the time of the engagements but after they are no longer working as escorts?"  I assume that many people outside of this website would automatically judge a lot of clients here in the manner in which some seem inclined to judge Hefner -- wealthy older men, frequently white, sexually exploiting younger men who clearly wouldn't want to have sex with them were it not for the money.  (Yes, I know that doesn't describe all escort/client hires; not every provider is young and not every client is old, white or even wealthy.) 

I guess I'm trying to say that if Hefner was simply a horndog and used his position in life to surround himself with young women who were willing to be with him in exchange for money, I'm certainly not going to judge that.  Maybe the young college student I hired regularly 20 years ago looks back with disgust at his time doing sex work, but in the moment both he and I were willing participants.  I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with prostitution as long as both parties are willing participants.  Now if evidence comes out that Hefner took steps such that the women no longer had a choice in the matter, I'll join the chorus of contempt.

What's funny about trying to frame this as patriarchy or misogyny is that the same charge might be leveled by a pro-sex feminist.  There are women who engage in sex work because they want to, and to suggest that we automatically assume that they are victims is patronizing and a clearly sexist. 

[jeezifonly]

The Hefner Mansion with a sexual abuse problem?? Wild accusations.

What’s next??? The Roman Catholic Church?????

[+ nycman]

7 hours ago, jeezifonly said:

What’s next???

News flash….

Old Women regret being whores when they were younger!

For the record….I don’t regret any of it. I had a fucking blast.
I knew what I was doing and I was free to leave at any time. 
Did I get myself in over my head and into "creepy" situations?
Oh hell yes! All the fucking time. But all I had to do was politely
excuse myself and leave. It was never once a problem. 

Sorry girls, this old whore is calling you bitches out.
In your own words, you were free to keep your panties on.

Edited January 25, 2022 by nycman

[+ FreshFluff]

6 hours ago, xyz48B said:

There’s a lot of unnamed patriarchy and misogyny going on in this discussion. 

Misogyny? On this thread?