While speaking about the phenomena of Playboy and Bunnies, it is possible to agree with Hugh Hefner’s words regarding the triumph or power of sexuality in this context. However, it is important to state that women’s sexuality and men’s sexuality should be viewed differently when referring to the role of Bunnies in the development of this concept. The sexuality of Bunnies as “free-spirited” females seems to be promoted and accentuated. Their sexuality and attractiveness are emphasized to represent them as objects associated with provocativeness and pleasures. In this context, Bunnies’ sexuality is “artificial,” and women should address certain standards and rules in order to look and behave sexually (“Bunny Training”). On the contrary, Playboy has contributed to the development of men’s “real” sexuality because their “male gaze” is associated with their actual reactions to observed women and feelings of possession and domination.
We will write a custom Essay on Representations of Sex and the City in 1960’s Pop Culture specifically for you
301 certified writers online
The phenomenon of Playboy has contributed to viewing women as sexy objects of men’s dreams. Kathryn Leigh Scott has noted that Bunnies were viewed as promoters of the sexual revolution, and their activities added to the social change (“The Bunny Years”). The reason is that women were represented as friendly and attractive. Still, it is possible to note that such ideas were developed to mask the “male gaze” and the problem of objectification in the male-dominated society. Therefore, sexuality should be defined as certain reactions to sexual objects, and this definition can be supported with reference to males’ visions of accentuated femininity. While stating whether sexuality is associated with power, it is important to note that the answer is “yes” when one speaks about men. Playboy or different sexual images emphasize the power of males in terms of sexuality as the public opinion regarding women and their right to sexuality is usually contradictory. On the one hand, women’s sexuality is promoted; on the other hand, it is condemned.
While responding to the post on the phenomenon of Bunnies and sexuality promoted in the 1960s, it is important to concentrate on some key points: the perception of women’s sexuality with reference to Bunnies; the objectification and the male gaze; and the definition of sexuality. It is possible to agree with the author of the post that Bunnies were traditionally viewed as embodiments of female sexuality because their behaviors and actions were associated with women’s beauty, freedom, and control. It is also important to agree that the reason was in the fact that sex and sexuality were not openly discussed for many years, and such revolution in people’s views added to creating the phenomenon of Bunnies.
However, the author’s ideas regarding the objectification of women and the male gaze are also interesting and important to be discussed. Some people agree that each social phenomenon has two opposite sides. On the one hand, women, and Bunnies, in particular, were declared to be free in relation to their sexuality. On the other hand, all their actions were directed to accentuating the power of men in the world of Playboy. Women were not free; on the contrary, their roles as sexual “objects” were rather obvious.
The definition of sexuality proposed by the author is also interesting, and it seems to reflect the nature of this notion. Thus, it is possible to agree that sexuality is a combination of certain behaviors and people’s ideas or dreams about sex. It is also important to note that this idea of sexuality is closely related to the problems of objectification and suppression typical of the society where the image of Bunnies was promoted. From this perspective, the author’s discussion of the complex nature of sexuality in the society of the 1960s can be considered as successful and thought-provoking.
“Bunny Training.” Ex-Playboy Bunnies, 2017, Web.
“The Bunny Years by Kathryn Leigh Scott.” Ex-Playboy Bunnies, 2017, Web.