play on boy sex

= = = = = = = = = = = = =

Black And White

In advocating sexual  intercourse  outside  marriage for both the married and unmarried, Mr. Hefner, in my judgment, evades and ignores some of the most stubborn facts of life, and to the extent he does, so he may be justly accused of the very sham and hypocrisy he is so fond of condemning in modern  society.

One of these  stubborn facts is that sexual intercourse  outside Sex in Marriage produces children.  The unprecedented availability of contraceptives today is accompanied by an unprecedented number of unmarried mothers and father.  If you doubt  this, consult any reputable welfare official or juvenile-court judge.  The Playboy  Philosophy is helping flood  the  country with unwanted children.  In refusing to face  this situation.  PLAYBOY is guilty  of the  worst sort of sham and hypocrisy.  As  a minister, I have  often had to spend long, painful hours with families whose  troubles  have been brought on in part by The Playboy philosophy.

Another stubborn fact ignored and evaded  by playboy is that great  and  good marriages are never built  on the casual attitude toward sex propagated by playboy.

You make much of Dr. Kinsey's  finding  that mot married  people who had premarital  or  extramarital  intercourse  think it has not had  any harmful effects.  I am totally  unimpressed, because all such findings treat marriage as an undifferentiated, entity.  The stubborn fact is that there are second-and third-and fourth -rate marriages, and all too few first-rate marriages.  The married  Sex in Prison who claims  there is no harm in extramarital sex would have to convince me that  the  marriage in question is of high quality.  My experience  leads me to believe that such   marriages  are miserable  affairs, so  lacking in the element of greatness that they would flunk the  simplest and most  minimal test.   The fact that two married people who engage in extramarital sex inhabit   the same house  and have not as yet been divorced proves nothing to me except  that they  have a most poverty-stricken Sex in Sensorship.
Really, there is very little  meeting of minds  when I try to communicate  with you.  We don't  seems to get together on what is black and  white  is white.

It has been our experience that life very rarely exists in simple terms of black and white.  But at least a part of our non meeting of minds seems to be based on a misunderstanding:  Hefner has never  advocated "sexual  intercourse outside  marriage for both the married  and unmarried," as you suggest.  While establishing his belief that all private sex behavior between  consenting  adults should be a matter of individual moral determination and not subject to regulation by the government.  Hefner  has made clear that he considers premarital intercourse and extramarital  intercourse  two entirely different problems.

We agree  with your statement  that a successful marriage  requires more than  a casual approach to the  responsibilities of the relationship -sexual and other and we  believe that extramarital sex is usually a cause and/ or symptom of marital maladjustment.  The Sexual Morality of adultery  is not in the act of non marital sex per se, however, but in the betrayal of the faith and fidelity that  bind the members of a marriage  together   and to which both partners have willingly committed themselves.

Premarital sex is quite a different  matter.  No commitment to any third  person exists as an extenuating circumstance; the interests and wishes of the couple  alone ought to then become the major moral consideration.  If they decide to be sexually intimate, they have every moral right to do so- provided  the behavior is neither  exploitive nor irresponsible.  The fact that any Prostitution of our organized religion happens to oppose premarital sex as immoral is completely beside the point -or should be, in this supposedly free secular  society.

And it must be mentioned that there is no  unanimity on the immorality of single Sex And The Law   among the major  religions of America today- a growing number of liberal clergymen, of  various denominations, are no longer  willing to state categorically that premarital sex is sinful or wrong, pointing out that this rigid  and restrictive view does  not come  from either early Jewish scripture or from Christ.  In fact, the major antisexual element in our Judaeo-Christian tradition is derived from the Dark Ages dogma of the medieval Church and, following the Reformation, from the teachings of Calvin, after  which both English and American Puritanism  were patterned

We have stated our opposition to irresponsible sex.  Having an illegitimate child is irresponsible in  most instances, because a child very much needs, especially in the first, formative years,  the affection and attention of both  parents and the security that a marriage -family  environment provides.  You offer illegitimacy as your chief argument against premarital sex  and even make the incredible assertion that "The Playboy Philosophy is helping  flood the country with unwanted children."   But illegitimacy is actually perpetuated by the puritan moralists in our society, not  by PLAYBOY.

There has always  been premarital sex and there  always  will be; however, recent scientific advances have finally given us a simple, inexpensive, effective  answer to the problem to unwanted pregnancy .  If our society is not using this  sex knowledge to full advantage, if birth-control  products and information are not readily available to every member of society who wants them young or old, married or single- it is the hypocritical super moralists who are most to blame:  They decry the social evils   of unwed motherhood and fatherless  children, but they also oppose universal  use of oral contraceptives, because they fear this would  lead  to sexual promiscuity.  Thus is the  problem  of illegitimacy perpetuated.

Puritanical Parents

My husband and I had sexual relations before we were married  and my conscience was untroubled  about it.  Then I become pregnant, and when my parents  discovered my situation, I was treated coldly, since I had "betrayed their trust in me."  They suggested that I do exercises to abort the baby; my sister  stated flatly that she didn't  respect me anymore; and when I was married, only one parent attended the wedding.  When I had the  baby, they suggested I lie about the birth date or the wedding date.
When I became pregnant  again, I relived all the anxieties I'd gone through  the first time.  To this day, six years later, I find it difficult to enjoy sexual relations  with my husband, due to the stigma attached.  If I had  had my family's  support, regardless  of society's attitude, I wouldn't have felt so cheap.  What justification is there for my being made to feel so bad  about something  done out of love?.

PREVIOUS NEXT