Mothering › Forums › Natural Family Living › Books, Music and Other Media › Joe Millionaire runner up posing for Playboy - help me understand something
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Joe Millionaire runner up posing for Playboy - help me understand something  

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
I get that she is posing, so many do.

What I don't get is this:
Quote:
Kozer said she only agreed to pose for Playboy if the photos entailed no full-frontal nudity. ``I was a women's studies major,'' she said Monday
Is full frontal nudity more um, degrading to women? Is that what she is implying? That she would betray her education major by showing the nipple?

Does this mean she will show her yoni but not nipple? Is showing the yoni not in conflict with women's studies?

Maybe I have it all wrong and she's just going to show top of her breasts and an ankle or some such thing.

http://channels.netscape.com/ns/cele...85.htm&sc=1404
post #2 of 20

No Full Frontal Nudity...

I interpret that to mean that she will show her boobs, but not her bearded clam. I already forgot about Joe M, wasn't this the girl that appeared in some BDSM movies??? Or do I have her confused with someone else?
post #3 of 20
Same girl. How hilarious.

Taking some pretty pictures for playboy is a step above prostituting yourself on JM IMO.

Whatever. She sounds like quite the hypocrite although it's certainly her choice to be photographed however she wants.

Yucky.

Then again I did watch one episode of the stupid show so what does that make me?
post #4 of 20
Thread Starter 
Ah, okay. So she is doing partial frontal nudity which is boobs, not yoni. I guess she could do backside views, too.

I still don't get why she made her decision not to show her yoni based on her education. I am not a women's studies major, btw.
post #5 of 20
I watched the show and to be honest I'm not surprised. She's an opportunist, it seems to me. She seems very into money and getting her face (and boobs) out there.

As for the women studies' major bit, I don't know what to say about that.

Kylix
post #6 of 20
Thread Starter 
I agree she is as opportunistic as the next Playboy poser, but what in 'women's studies' critcizes full frontal nudity? We have countless women posing in Playboy and calling it 'empowering' and 'freeing', why does Kozer say no to coochie shot because of her educational focus?

I would really like to know! It's silly, but it's bugging me.
post #7 of 20
Perhaps she has crabs, or some other nasty genital affliction that she doesn't feel comfortable sharing with the world.
post #8 of 20
Thread Starter 
A medical exemption from showing genitalia hidden behind a PC 'women's studies' reason.

Could be.

Someone here will have to go and look when the mag comes out and let us all know what Sarah did show. I bet it's not much. But then, the big roar is about Larry Flynt and that million bucks he's offering for the "Naked Party" video with Barbara Bush.
post #9 of 20
Crazy, hypocritical opportunist. I have a few friends who subscribe. I'll be sure to ask around.
post #10 of 20
My DH has told me that when they do "Real women in the world" photos, like women who write in saying they want on the magazine, that they just put them in sexy lingerie but don't actually show nudity. Perhaps she's comfortable showing her butt, but not the boobs, and sacred womb area.
Women's studies my butt- what a crock. A woman's studies person who was trying to uphold the diginity of women wouldn't pose for S&M domination pictures or pose for Playboy period, IMO!
post #11 of 20
Hubby got it yesterday. I'll check it out and report back when I get home.
post #12 of 20
Thread Starter 
Oh, cool, Apricot! Maybe Sara has a pink ribbon across her yoni with 'Women's Studies Major' written on it.
post #13 of 20
Quote:
A woman's studies person who was trying to uphold the diginity of women wouldn't pose for S&M domination pictures or pose for Playboy period, IMO!
Heck, she wouldn't even be on Joe Millionaire, if you ask me.

I have a question about the term yoni. Does it refer to the vulva or just the vagina? I get so confused when talking about genitals. My daughter says vulva, but then when I was reading her that darn Once Upon a Potty book, I didn't think it sounded right to say that she has a vulva for making pee pee. But the "pee pee for for making wee wee" phrase from the book is just completely confusing because in this house we pee, we don't wee.

So I'm assuming that yoni and coochie both refer to the whole package. I usually use coochie when I have stabbing coochie pains. It just seems to fit. On a related note, I was glad to see that in Ina May's new book, she replaced the term puss with yoni.

The bearded clam--:LOL My husband uses that term, especially when I am bending over and he sees it through my legs. OK, TMI I'm sure.
post #14 of 20
T Amy, I think I'll start using the bearded clam from now on. It's almost poetic!

Hoo Ha- now is that a man's or woman's private parts? I like that one too!
post #15 of 20
Y'all are making some pretty big sweeping judgments on what a woman who studies women's studies should be like.

And you're wrong.

I think the chick's an idiot for saying that she won't show lips because she's a feminist or what have you but that's just me.
post #16 of 20
Thread Starter 
SG, can you enlighten ignorant me, then? If you say we are wrong, can you explain why? I know I'm asking alot.

I do not assume that a women's studies major should not show her naked body, for money, if that is what she wants to do. Sara Kozer said her educational focus was in contradiction to full frontal nudity, not me.

And I cannot understand where the contradiction is. Why would a women's studies major draw the line at full frontal nudity?
post #17 of 20
The idea that someone educated in this area doesn't belong in Playboy or on Joe Millionare like someone above said is painting with a very wide brush, that's what I'm saying.

Her statement that as a WS's major she shouldn't show her yoni tells me that she has more studying to do.

It makes NO sense to me.
post #18 of 20
Thread Starter 
Thank you much, SG. I don't get it either, obviously, from my OP.

Weird.
post #19 of 20
Quote:
The bearded clam-- My husband uses that term, especially when I am bending over and he sees it through my legs. OK, TMI I'm sure.
One of my favorite views, to be sure. Your husband must have more restraint than I have... Marg knows better than to bend over unclothed in front of me.

Personally, I've always preferred the P word for a woman's parts, probably because it offends my MIL.
post #20 of 20
Well, I am here to report back.
She isn't shaped like most of the models in Playboy these days. It took me a while to figure out what was different.
She is a little pear shaped. The usual models are all so top heavy. Their breasts are much larger than their ribcages and their hips are so slender and boyish. This woman is slender and large busted, but in a much more usual way. I am trying to say she looks like a real woman, not a youth in the process of growing up and not yet filled in or an anorexic woman with artificially large breasts.
If I have to "compete" with a photo of someone, I pick her!

Anyway, back to the topic, her nudity or lack thereof...

She is wearing clothing in almost every picture. Lingerie mostly, garter belt and stockings, merrywidow, wedding dress, feather boa. There is definitely a full back-al (dorsal?) nude shot with ass crack, but no hair and no lips in any photo. Much more like Playboy used to be before they started to compete with Penthouse.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Books, Music and Other Media
This thread is locked  
Mothering › Forums › Natural Family Living › Books, Music and Other Media › Joe Millionaire runner up posing for Playboy - help me understand something