Is Hugh Hefner poly?

[CielDuMatin]

Some thoughts sprang up for me from another thread.

Is Hugh Hefner poly? He has long-term relationships with many girls, who all know about each other and agree to the relationship style.

Is his style of relationship responsible non-monogamy?

I have my own opinions, but would love to hear from others first.

[LovingRadiance]

Lmao. I dont know.

[BoringGuy]

Lmao. I dont know.



You're LAUGHING your ASS off? This is srs bsns. Have some friggin respect, yo.

[LovingRadiance]

I can't Boring. Lol. I just can't. Giggle!
I don't have enough info to really comment on Hugh's dynamic. But, Im surprised how few ppl have responded. :)


*off topic

Ciel- I would love ur thoughts on my thread about metamours.

[BoringGuy]

But, Im surprised how few ppl have responded. :)



I know, right! This should really be the last thing we all think about before falling asleep and the first thing we think about when we wake up EVERY DAY.

I'm surprised there already isn't a thread about this in Golden Nuggets.

I'm adding tags so people can find this easier for future reference.

[LovingRadiance]

LOL! Naw, I don't think its important.

But-I think there are too many threads on here that someone thinks ARE important-when in fact, most of it is trivia.

We all need to take a break and ponder the unremarkably unimportant shit-take a break from serious shit all of the time. :)

[CielDuMatin]

Nice to see your normal level of snide hostility, BoringGuy! :rolleyes:

Since nobody else has really posted anything serious on this topic, let me give you my opinion, for what it's worth...

I have witnessed during polyamory discussions a strong desire to distinguish polyamory from the stereotypes of polygamy and swinging. I have been guilty of doing the same. As a consequence, a strong emphasis has been put on the egalitarian style of poly, to the point where when someone comes on talking about imbalanced structures, we either dismiss them, mock them, or direct them to a different forum. There have been several recent examples of this.

I brought up the example of Hefner because it is a classic example of an imbalanced structure which has, apparently, worked well for those involved. Based on my understanding it *is* polyamory, by all the common definitions, and I think we need to acknowledge that and not be quite so dismissive.

I strongly prefer the egalitarian model of relationships - what I seek for myself. But I think that there are many other types of polyamory which work for those involved - everyone gets what they are looking for and are happy. I feel that just because *we* wouldn't be happy in that circumstance doesn't give us the right to mock and denigrate those who happen to think differently.

So my question was very serious.

[WaywardDruid]

Yes he is.

And one lucky son of a gun too.

Just Me,
Tim

[BoringGuy]

Nice to see your normal level of snide hostility, BoringGuy! :rolleyes:

You know very little about my "normal" levels of hostility or anything else.


So my question was very serious.

I beg for your forgiveness (but not really). I'm sure I'm not the only one who thought this was a joke.

[GalaGirl]

I don't really care?

I figure if they all are free agents who have happily signed up for the deal -- then it's their brand of polyamory.

*shrug*

So long as they are happy with the arrangement -- who is to say boo? It's not what I want for myself in polyship, but so what? It's not me in there.

GG

[Pliglet]

Yes i think he's poly.

But i can understand why a lot of people who live more 'normal' (aka less plastic :p) poly lives would want to distance themselves from him.
Admittedly, i hadn't really thought of him when i thought of poly, because to me, poly is more about love than sex - and his set up seems more set up on sex than love. That said, i'm sure most of hollywood is set up around sex rather than love so he's certainly not unique there, just more flamboyant about it.

It wouldn't work for me - but that's because we have a bit of a matriarch thing going in our home, so the patriachal set up doesn't work for me [no one tell our boy though - he's covinced he's hugh :p ]

[nycindie]

I think he's poly because I believe he does fall in love with some of his girlfriends, but he's open, too, so he can also have his recreational sex partners as well.

[Emm]

I have my doubts about the quantity of love (for people) involved in his relationships. I suspect love of money and/or fame has more to do with it.

[LovingRadiance]

I honestly have no idea. No tv, no radio, no info outside of who he is and what I have read here.

But, I agree that ppl wanting set uos which aren't for me doesn't make the setup not poly.

For example-Nycindie has a totally different set up than we do. But completely functional for her. Shrug.

I dont care who does what outside of my 'polyship'. Lol. Shared that term with my sister today (she's also poly). She liked it. So we are adding it to our working vocab! :)

[dingedheart]

Old Hugh really likes the harem model. I think he demands exclusivity to him. A ....one very old limp dick policy. Opp=Ovolpp. So in his case poly would be short for polygamy.

[CielDuMatin]

Thanks to most of you for your constructive input - looks like we are on the same page with this.

[AutumnalTone]

Nice to see your normal level of snide hostility, BoringGuy! :rolleyes:


I thought this thread was a joke when I first saw it. If it weren't for your history here, I would have suspected trollery.

Here's the thing: when you post here, folks are going to react in all sorts of ways to what you offer up. Some of them will comment. Some of them will joke about it, which is OK if it doesn't completely jack the thread.

We simply require a basic level of civility on the part of posters and otherwise allow them to react how they will. We don't promise that you'll like everybody here or what they have to say or how they go about saying it.

So, if you post something that others think amusing or silly or some other form of Not Serious, it only follows that some of them may comment to that effect. That's part of public discourse. As long as they're not calling you names and the like, we won't have much issue with it (though we are likely to watch those threads more closely).

Note: I posted this as a reminder to everybody, actually, and just used this thread as a soapbox. Where I say "you," I'm referring to everybody.

[Derbylicious]

Since poly seems to be an self identity thing I think you'd really have to ask him if he considers himself poly. Personally I wonder if he just does it to maintain an image. I don't know how emotionally involved he is with his girlfriends since it seems that they get to a certain age and they're out the door. Normally one doesn't break up with someone they love for getting older.

[CielDuMatin]

I thought this thread was a joke when I first saw it. If it weren't for your history here, I would have suspected trollery. I hope that you see now how it was a quite serious question that was raising a point how we, on this board, think about polyamory, especially the types that differ from the norm.

And I hope you noticed the smiley after my statement that you quoted...

It didn't surprise me that folks didn't take it seriously and made jokes about it.

If Hefner were to come on here as an alias and tlak about his situation, would he get respect or mocked mercilessly? I fear the latter.

[BoringGuy]

Poor hugh hefner. Oppressed, marginalized, misunderstood AND rejected by the privileged community that is polyamory.com.

I'm getting verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves.

[lovefromgirl]

Poor hugh hefner. Oppressed, marginalized, misunderstood AND rejected by the privileged community that is polyamory.com.

I'm getting verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves.

Did you miss the mod note? As I read it, AutumnalTone meant all of us, together, should be a bit more civil. I would hazard a guess that does, indeed, mean all of us.

[Phy]

I'm getting verklempt.

Sorry, totally off topic: Is this an English phrase/word by now? Just wondering.

[JaneQSmythe]

Sorry, totally off topic: Is this an English phrase/word by now? Just wondering.

Popularized by a Saturday Night Live sketch from the early 1990s...Coffee_Talk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_Talk).

(See under "Ongoing Gags - Discussion Topics")

[Phy]

Thanks :) I was wondering about the 'misspelling' and why such a word made it to the English vocabulary :rolleyes:

On topic: I think he is. But as others said, I have never heard of the parameters of his relationships or if the women are/were allowed to have relationships outside this arrangement. Therefore I don't know for sure what kind of poly he is living there :)

And in regard to the variety of poly: I stumbled about all the different forms quite early when I searched for clues. So many different ways of actually living the same core idea ... there was one thread where we discussed this variety and someone talked about something like the Kinsey scale in regard to poly. I think this idea isn't that far off the mark. There are some forms of polyamory that are closer to the monogamous structure and some that fit in with the more general open relationship models. Why not? Just like my father phrased it: "You have to get along with this, as long as you are happy, everything is fine."

[AutumnalTone]

Did you miss the mod note? As I read it, AutumnalTone meant all of us, together, should be a bit more civil. I would hazard a guess that does, indeed, mean all of us.

Actually, my point was that you aren't necessarily going to like what others have to say and it is entirely OK that they say it. What BG posted there does not violate guidelines *and is perfectly OK.*

That you don't like it is also OK. I suspect that you're conflating "civil" with "nice." The two are not synonymous, at least as regarding the site guidelines. Mocking an idea offered up is equivalent to saying "That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard," which is perfectly OK on these boards. You may take umbrage at somebody mocking an idea you like. They're allowed to mock that idea, nonetheless.

You are always welcome to ignore any other member. There is no requirement that you read posts from anybody else and certainly no requirement that you respond to any particular post.

[PolyPhonic]

It is interesting from an anthropological point of view to see just how much thread-jacking the normal public discourse causes. I feel like there is a whole other subject going on about mockery and moderation and civil behavior, when I just wanted to read about opinions on Hugh Hefner.

Ah well, at this point I'm contributing to the discourse too.

Reminds me of a bit in one of my all time favorite films, THE LIFE OF BRIAN, where a dozen or so members of a cult rebellion are just sitting around talking about what they need to do to save Brian (thought to be the Messiah). Saying things like "What we ought to do, is get off our bums and get out there and do something about it!" to which others who are sitting down respond, "yeah! I agree. We should stop talking about it endlessly, and get motivated and band together and go help Brian!" to which others sitting down say, "That's right! And we should do that before anything else we do." Again others than chime in to say, "Precisely! We must get up off our butts on a first priority basis and get out there and do something about it all!" Everyone says "Yeah!..." etc etc

And as you can guess this goes on for infinitum and they never actually rescue Brian. That's what letting people talk endlessly about nothing in these threads feels like to me. It's utterly useless, self-serving, self-validating, wasting of a valuable place to talk about the actual subjects of the threads. I mean I wouldn't want to discriminate but some of these chaps ought to be singled out and done something about. As I see, someone has already been reprimanded, and I think that's a step in the right direction.

NOW, regarding Hugh Hefner, on the one hand I do indeed he is a Polyamorist, but the following is worth noting at this point, when you are putting two and two together:
- He doesn't really have sex with them anymore. He just watches. His back is too bad, and the viagra he used to take to be ready caused high blood pressure and nearly cost him a stroke.
- He doesn't really attach himself to the girls very much. They are accoutrements. He's always happy because any bad behavior is reprimanded with either a warning, withholding weekly allowance, or being asked to leave his home permanently and later easily replaced by any of the girls waiting to make a big impression and be his sidekick.

[Pliglet]

- He doesn't really have sex with them anymore. He just watches. His back is too bad, and the viagra he used to take to be ready caused high blood pressure and nearly cost him a stroke.
- He doesn't really attach himself to the girls very much. They are accoutrements. He's always happy because any bad behavior is reprimanded with either a warning, withholding weekly allowance, or being asked to leave his home permanently and later easily replaced by any of the girls waiting to make a big impression and be his sidekick.

I'm actually not genuinely disputing anything you have said. the fact that they're disposible makes it a weird situation.

Just had to point out...sex doesn't have to be the pinacle of it being a poly relationship. My fDP and i don't have sex, we're still in a [poly]relationship. :)

[PolyPhonic]

Just had to point out...sex doesn't have to be the pinacle of it being a poly relationship. My fDP and i don't have sex, we're still in a [poly]relationship. :)Right, I'm saying the fact that he is with them without sex shows it's more than sex. Whether it's love, the second point I mentioned goes towards that. I think even if you find someone disposable, it could still be love. That could just be the way you setup your boundaries. Thick skinned or something like that.

[MrFarFromRight]

I haven't got the time now to read through everybody's comments, basically I came here because I'm checking out pliglet (I think that I'm in love:o:rolleyes:...) and chasing up threads that she's commented on, but I'll throw in my 2p / 2c:

a) I agree totally that sex isn't the most important aspect of poly.

b) Hef is rich and famous. Also (I suppose) the boss of some of these women. I have to wonder how many of his companions are with him for reasons nothing to do with sex OR love.

c) It's my own little bugbear, but is Hef happy about the women having other partners [apart from voyeur-pleasing "lez-sex"] aside from him? If not, my take is that he isn't poly, he's got a harem.

[BoringGuy]

I find this thread amusing because after all the talk on this forum about not judging people who aren't here to give their side of the story, here is a thread completely dedicated to judging someone without having them here to give their side of the story. If someone could explain to me why it is beneficial to do that, I might be inclined to take this thread seriously.

ETA: if a poll could be added to this thread, it might generate more meaningful data. Bar graphs and charts provide an attractive visual element.

[xoxo52261]

Hugh Hefner is poly and so are his girlfriends. It is just a different kind of relationship than one where all partners share equal love. The girlfriends share a sisterly love, and Hugh has a different relationship with each of the women. The fact that they're young and beautiful does not matter...And they all know about each other.

[AutumnalTone]

The girlfriends share a sisterly love,

Unless the ladies are romantically involved with each other, their sisterly love is irrelevant to whether or not they are poly. I love my sister, too--and that has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not I'm poly.

The fact that there is no commitment is what troubles me about including Hef's harem among the variety of poly tangles. There seems to be something important lacking and that removes the relationships from consideration as truly loving. His attachment to the girls seems to be more akin to the attachment one has for pets--only with less commitment as most people won't kick the dog out for peeing on the kitchen floor occasionally.

[Anek]

I'd call it an open relationship rather than a polyamorous one.