No. Fucking. Way

[trashcanman]

Apparently, Hugh Hefner has already featured every famous sexy woman in the world that will take their clothes off for money in his magazine. This is how I know:





Seriously? Marge Simpson? And apparently she won't even actually nude in the magazine either which begs the question "what's the fucking point?" For starters I would not under any circumstance pay to see a fucking drawing naked, but if I did I would expect to see the goodies. I thought it was amusing when Playboy featured a video game character in it's pages, but now it's cartoons? And as far as cartoon characters go, I wouldn't say Marge Simpson is the sexiest one on the planet. God, I want to hear the pitch that got this okayed.

[The Curmudgeon]

Ha. Cute. The thing is, until Miley Cyrus or Britney Spears strip off (although the latter I'm sure we've pretty much seen it all anyway.. ever seen THAT knickerless pic?) this is probably the only issue of Playboy I'd even consider buying.

The clue is in the corner of the cover - Collectors Issue. It's a novelty gimmick that will attract more press and attention than any Playboy cover this decade (the fact we're talking about it, and the fact it was in the UK news says it all), and the gazillion Simpson fans may well pick up a copy. Certainly more interesting than any of the other blonde clones Hugh's created anyway.

[trashcanman]

I seeeeee. It's funny, but somebody actually bought me this bizarre Simpsons calender when I was in high school that had them as these classic works of art. I was embarrassed because one was Marge as Aphrodite complete with an exposed breast. So weird. It's got to be a collector's item now. Wish I'd kept it. Hefner's clones are dull as hell. I hate airbrushing and silicone.