Monday, October 12, 2009

Ay, Caramba!

Well, with Levi Johnston appearing in an upcoming issue of Playgirl, I guess the folks at Playboy felt the need to do something that would be an equivalent boon to their sales. Judging from who they convinced to spread for the spread, I'll go with Playboy as the higher selling monthly periodical of the two. I mean, I know that they're not in competition with each other. One's naked men, one's naked women, even though both are read strictly for the articles. But the key indicator that they're not competitors is that they're owned by the same guy. What's his name? The be-jammied fellow? Oh, right. Hugh Hefner. (Seriously, when was the last time that guy wore a pair of pants? Wouldn't that get old after a while? To be constantly clad in satin? Satin isn't even that comfortable. Oh, sure, it looks grand (albeit rather shiny), but the novelty wears off rapidly. I always felt like I was sliding around when I'd attempt the satin. It's like you have no control in your own bed. That's never good. One could be in the middle of perfectly decent fornication and next thing you know? Whoosh! Right off the mattress! Awkward. How did I get on this bent? Oh, right. Wear some damn pants!)

But back to Playboy....who do they have gracing the cover in a pose of seductiveness that will make overweight, balding, bug-eyed, too-small shirt wearing, yellow men everywhere go, "Grrrrrrrr......" Wait. Yellow? As in.....? As in yellow-yellow?

Yes. Not yellow as in afraid, but rather yellow as in the color. You may know this particular shade of yellow as Simpsons yellow. And you may know this particular upcoming centerfold as Marge Simpson. Behold!

Oh, good Lord. We have completely devolved as a society, haven't we? This is one of the first signs. Well, OK, the first sign was President Barry getting the Peace Prize, but this has got to be a close second, right? Right.

Now, according to the gossipy folks over there at Entertainment Weekly, specifically those in the PopWatch division, say that "The issue on stands Oct. 16 has the blue-haired beauty gracing its cover" in order to "...commemorate The Simpsons’ 20th anniversary." Great idea. Thank God my Mom never thought to do that for her and my Dad's 20th anniversary. Thank. GOD.

An article in the Chicago Sun-Times quotes the "genius" behind this move, a one Scott Flanders (no known relation to Ned, but you never know) who says that "The idea is to attract readers in their 20s ". Right. Because readers in their 20s need to be enticed by a cartoon character to look at a magazine that has naked women inside of it. Wait. What? That's not true is it? No. Far from.

That article goes on to say that the issue "...will feature Simpson in a three-page pictorial...described as "sexy" with "implied nudity." Well of course it's "implied nudity". It's a cartoon. Even if there were "nudity" it would be with "implied" body parts, as they were just DRAWN that way!

They must be serious about trying to attract new readers because "Subscribers, who make up 40 percent of Playboy's readership, will get a celebrity on the cover rather than Marge." THAT I don't get at all. I hate it when a company does all of this stuff for people who aren't even buying their product or who are just signing on to their service, meanwhile, those folks who have been buying the product (and keeping those rat bastards afloat all of these years) and who have been using their service (think those lying, cheating, blood sucking cell phone companies) get squat. Zero. Nada. Zip. The only way I'd feel like I had gotten something better than Marge (and I'm only saying this because it was one of the names on the Marge cover) would be if Farrah Fawcett were on the front. THEN I'd be OK with it. Anyone less than Farrah? That'd be a screw job of epic proportions. (Her death already got bumped out of the spotlight by having Jacko die on the same damn day! Does she really need to get bumped again by someone with slightly more human characteristics than Jacko had? I think not.)

But you know what I think this is going to lead to? I think it's going to lead to a whole bunch of metaphorical doors being drawn for other female cartoon characters to be drawn metaphorically knocking on or knocking down to get their place in the sun or moment in the spotlight or whatever metaphorical "Look at me!" phrasing would work there. I mean, there are plenty of other cartoons out there who could easily follow in Marge's four-toed footsteps with a spread of their own and garner the same sort of interest. I've thought of a few who are probably already being drawn having talks with the Playboy folks about their own covers.

Naturally, since they were technically the first ones around (it was the Stone Age after all), Wilma and Betty would get a Playboy cover and spread. It'd be some sort of prehistoric cave shoot with the very first traces of that whole girl-on-girl thing that guys like so much of.

The modern day version of Wilma and Betty would be the Velma and Daphne Playboy cover. Velma, the closeted, lovable, butch lesbian pairs up with Daphne, the closeted, lovable, hot lesbian. Sex toys would be involved, most notably The Mystery Machine.

As a cartoon character that keeps her feminine side whilst running with the boys, we have a one Penelope Pitstop, taking a break from the Wacky Races to grace the cover.

Not to leave out midwest America, who better to represent the lusts and desires of the hardworking, blue collar guy, smack dab in the heartland of the U.S., but none other than Mrs. Peggy Hill. Hank Hill did not have a comment.

I don't see how a one Jessica Rabbit has not bestowed her cartoon loveliness upon us via the Playboy cover before. In her defense, she's not bad; she's just drawn that way.

If this whole thing with Marge goes well, you can bet that next up will be Lois Griffin. She will give hope to huge, fat men everywhere because if someone like Peter Griffin can be drawn as fat and as dumb as he is and can still manage to have a hot MILF like Lois drawn for his wife, then who's to say that they can't actually find a real woman that will love them as much as Lois is drawn to love Peter?

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content


grannyann said...

I really enjoyed your post. I had to laugh about Hef's pj's. I like you had a pair once - only once- and felt like I was going to slide out of bed. I think I only wore them once. I can't believe I wanted those in the first place.

Mare said...

Me neither! And I thought the same thing (as I was trying to avoid sliding out of bed)! Why did I want these things?

~ M