Are you offended by this magazine cover?
I am not. All I see is the typical Playboy cover; a suggestively clad woman with enough exposed skin to be scandalous, yet enough covered skin to be permissibly printed on the cover.
I do not see the need for Playboy Enterprises Inc. to apologise. Is not every single Playboy cover offensive to a group of people? Why single out Mexican Catholics as worthy of an apology?
Monday, December 15, 2008
Playboy apologises
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I see a white woman draped in curtains. Those do look like pretty high quality curtains, though.
ReplyDeletePeople are insane.
A woman named Maria, dressed in tapestry. An inadvertent homage to "The Sound of Music" perhaps? LOL
ReplyDeleteI think its funny that Catholics would be offended by this cover when really wouldn't they be offended by every cover? It makes me laugh to think of "God fearing" Catholic subscribing to this and then when he/she receives this issue they are going to speak up about it? Very funny.
ReplyDeleteI think the offense comes in perverting the image of the Virgin Mary. She's a sacred figure in the Catholic church. If this isn't offensive, let's just go all the way and put Jesus Christ on the cover of Playgirl. I'm Catholic (not the holier-than-thou "God fearing" kind of Catholic everyone likes to stereotype) but just roll my eyes at this. I think it's inappropriate but to each his own. I guess the question becomes what do we as a society believe to be acceptible and are there any boundaries anymore?
ReplyDelete@ModernMommy - Yes, it is very funny indeed. I, personally, would have liked to see someone ethnically accurate posing as Mary. And perhaps someone who looks more natural and less silicone. =P
ReplyDelete@Christine - The outrage does stem from the reference to the Virgin Mary, esp. as this was printed just before the Day of the Virgin of Guadalupe. What irks me is that Catholics worldwide denounced the protests against the Muhammad Caricatures printed in Jyllands-Posten, citing the right to free speech (and rightly so). How does that not apply to this cover?
I do not think it would help the magazine to put Jesus on the cover, but he has been emulated on a movie poster by a promiscuous, nonreligious partygirl: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3560807424/tt0145531.
It brings to mind the cover of the New Yorker a few months ago: http://www.newyorker.com/online/covers/slideshow_blittcovers
ReplyDeleteMost people deemed it as offensive and tasteless - of course, to the Obamas, but also to Muslims. People were demanding an apology (I don't remember if the magazine ever did). But the cover was free speech in action, right or wrong.
As for the Playboy cover - you're right. If Catholics supported the Muhammad Caricatures as free speech (and I don't have any data backing that up, just your word), then, as offended as they may be, they should not protest the Playboy cover.
Then, have we become a world that tolerates any form of hate, slander or misrepresentation all in the name of free speech?
I remember that magazine cover. It was obviously intended satire, but unfortunately was not so obvious to the not-so-intelligent masses. I think a caption such as “How the delusional see the Obamas” or something to that effect should have been printed right underneath. I do not recall The New Yorker having apologised – nor should they. It is not their fault that others are not smart enough to spot cynicism.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that free speech, hate, slander and misrepresentation are mutually inclusive. Free speech is a right to express one’s opinion. Hate, slander, and misrepresentation are abuses of that right and should not be tolerated. In my opinion, the difference lies in liability.
Agreed :)
ReplyDeleteBy the way - I hope I don't sound like I'm arguing :) Quite the contrary. I love your blog and appreciate topics like this that make a person think and look at all sides of a situation. Keep 'em coming!
I wouldn't mind if you argued, although I would call it debating - it sounds less negative. I always appreciate a nice, respectful clash of opinions. There is no better way to broaden your horizon other than exposing yourself to the criticism of others. I just draw the line when people become personally insulting. =)
ReplyDelete