For the conservative male

On the week of the Democratic national convention, a flap concerning Hugh Hefner’s Playboy mansion emerged. The flap ensued because the Democratic leadership would not let Democratic California Representative Loretta Sanchez speak at the L.A. convention as long as she planned to hold a Democratic party fund-raiser at the infamous Playboy mansion. Evidently, the Democrats did not want to alienate their feminist (and working family values) constituencies.

This flap was very interesting to me, because I happen to be a conservative Republican who enjoys viewing attractive women in the buff, which–I hasten to add–is perfectly normal for any young, healthy, devoutly heterosexual male like myself.

I must confess: I am no hypocrite. I am not ashamed to admit it. If you show me a picture of a ravishing woman in the nude, I would not likely refuse it. Religious zealots aside, most conservative Republicans would probably not refuse it either, especially if it is presented in a particularly tasteful, wholesome and fairly conservative manner.

Exactly what do I mean by “tasteful, wholesome and conservative” pornography? That’s easy. I simply mean no excessive leather accessories for openers.

I mean no sadomasochism whatsoever: no whips, balls and chains. No rubber hoses. No bizarre tools or toys.

No tattoos either. Nothing mars a beautiful woman more than ugly tattoos, which pretty much includes all tattoos in my conservative opinion. Oh, yuck! Just bloody awful. She might as well spray paint her whole body in graffiti.

And right up there with gross tattoos is radical, highly deviant body-piercing: pierced navels, pierced noses, pierced tongues, pierced genitals . . . absolutely disgusting liberal Democrat pornography in my considered opinion. Anything beyond pierced earlobes (i.e., one hole in each ear maximum) is for liberal Democratic deviants like President Bill Clinton and possibly even Senator Ted Kennedy.

Actually, the conservative pornography I have just outlined is pretty much consistent with the soft pornography of Playboy magazine, which is a liberal Democrat, Clinton-supporting rag in many respects. According to the Wall Street Journal, for instance, Hugh and Christie Hefner gave more than $100,000 to Democrat candidates since 1992.

As a result, I don’t buy Playboy magazine. I don’t buy Larry Flint’s Penthouse or Hustler publications either. Flint is a big Clinton supporter. As a conservative Republican with Libertarian streaks, I don’t support Democratic causes or Democratic contributors.

What the American market needs–and what I would personally like to see as a consumer–is soft pornography specifically targeted toward conservative Republican males like myself: a publication featuring informative business and economic news, stock market and securities analysis, personal finance articles, incisive conservative political commentary with philosophical treatments, all presented alongside Playboy-like nudes. In other words, I want to see Commentary, Reason Magazine, Forbes, The Weekly Standard, and the National Review with centerfold spreads–the ultimate magazine for conservative guys like me: a veritable celebration of free markets, limited government, private property rights, self-reliant rugged individualism, and straight sex. Who could ask for anything more?