[–] Joe_McCarthy [S] 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago (edited ago)
She is correct but unless I am mistaken she was the first woman to turn a Playboy spread into a major entertainment career. I know she described posing for Playboy as 'fun'.
Anyway, this brings back memories. Very 90ish 'tis:
[–] Joe_McCarthy [S] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Come to think of it the primary effect of this whole story will probably be to spike searches for Pam's Playboy pics.
[–] Joe_McCarthy [S] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Also, having just read her WSJ article my guess is that her co-author, Rabbi Boteach, actually wrote the article. I don't believe she can write that well.
[–] Grospoliner 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Hypocrite bitch.
[–] Joe_McCarthy [S] 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago (edited ago)
Not sure how she explains that but she seems to be denouncing wide availability particularly for kids via the net and the degrading nature of porn. Admittedly, her Playboy shoots are Girl Scouts stuff compared to what one can access nowadays with a few clicks on a phone.
At any rate the argument stands or falls on its own merits irrespective of the personal conduct of the messenger.
[–] youareivan 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
isn't the fact that that kids have unfettered access to the internet a problem deserving of more attention than the effects pornography might have on adults who make a conscious choice to view it?
i'm all for protecting children but i also recognize that it's completely natural that children have to be sheltered from many aspects of adult life until they are developed enough to deal with them. however, the fact that children need protection from some things doesn't make those things inappropriate for adults.
[–] Rask-II 0 points 9 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago
This is a terrific summation:
“We are a guinea-pig generation for an experiment in mass debasement that few of us would have ever consented to, and whose full nefarious impact may not be known for years.”