Francois doesn't really do it for me, but I see your point. We should work on that...

But why would they use males? That's Playgirl's territory. I actually really like Playboy and have a subscription, so maybe I'm biased, but it doesn't really seem anti-feminist to me. I think there's something powerful about owning your sex appeal.

As long as these CEO's aren't taking their clothes off for Playboy (what? you never know!), I think it's all right! I'm sure these women all took it as a wonderful compliment - who wouldn't want to be an intelligent, powerful, AND sexy CEO?

I'm with bgorgeouss. I would love to be a successful CEO and pose for Playboy! It's cool to be recognized for beauty AND brains

Shouldn't we be protecting our power on the job by seperating our sexual selves from business?

Why are you complaining? And I'm with tlsgirl, it's stupid to expect a magazine about sexy women to include sexy men. That's like expecting Cosmo to include clothing for men. It doesn't make sense. I don't see why highlighting women who are sexy AND successful in business is worse than highlighting women only for their sexuality.

My only complaint about this is that it's featured in an issue with Lisa Rinna on the cover. Yuck.

"I know it's foolish to expect Hugh Hefner's empire to act in the best interests of feminism, but really, this is just wrong in so many ways"

Why is it wrong? because YOU are judging these women for being in playboy, and Hefner for celebrating them? I suppose you think Hooters girls are being exploited also? Playboy celebrates women, it always has. There is nothing demeaning or wrong with a woman taking pride in her body and showing it off, and there is nothing wrong with playboy being a showcase for those women. Its not raunchy, its tasteful and many of the women that have been in playboy go on to bigger and better things thanks to the exposure in the magazine (jenny mccarthy for instance)

This doesn't bother me at all. Boys will be boys, and Playboy is a million times smarter than Maxim and it's ilk.

To side with Tressugar, the spread is disturbing because no matter how intelligent and successful you are, females will always be treated like a sex object to be consumed by men. Of course, the whole point of Playboy is to turn women into eye candy, but I think its reflective of how our society tend to reduce women (even the most accomplished) into just ti*s and a**

It really sucks that women's bodies are seen as sexual plaything but you expect this out of a T&A magazine. It does not put us back into the dark ages. If the CEO's posed nude then it would, but being celebrated as a powerful and sexy woman is a compliment.

If we wanted to do it for men, then leave it to Playgirl or do it ourselves

I agree with you tres, this really is reducing women to just t&a, as a woman i find this highly offensive and upsetting, especially when other women think it "celebrates" us, those eyes looking at those women won't be thinking 'isn't it great that jane doe accomplished xyz' it'll be more like 'look at that (fill in the blank)'.

A woman's body is a sexual plaything to a man. Like it or not, that's how it is. I personally don't mind being seen as a sexual creature and I love when I feel and look sexy. Playboy is a very tasteful magazine and I respect the women that choice to be photographed and featured in it.

As for sexy male CEO's, I would much rather see a collection of sexy blue-collar workers. Yum.

So its not offensive to put up polls titled "do , dump, or marry" but playboy is? hypocricy.

I don't know if it's sexist, though would be pretty inappropriate and unprofessional if any of these women actually posed naked. It might even actually help the men who read playboy see that sexy and intelligent go hand in hand rather than sexy and vapid... Just throwing that out there. I don't know. I need to think more about it.