“It’s Disgusting”: Should Maxim’s Olivia Munn Issue Be Stocked In Titty Mag Section?
Jan 11, 2011 18 Comments ›› Pat Dollard
Maxim, the bawdy men’s magazine, isn’t exactly known for the modesty of its cover subjects. But at least one observer says that the February issue featuring “Perfect Couples” star Olivia Munn wearing little more than a pair of verrrry transparent lace panties is going a bit too far.
“It’s disgusting,” Dan Gainor, Vice President of Business & Culture at the Media Research Center, tells FOX411.“Maxim has moved their magazine from tawdry to full-on pornography.”
With America now privy to Munn’s personal grooming habits, Gainor predicts that retailers will race to put the offending issue under the counter.
“Any store could have children coming in. If I were a parent, and I walked into a store and saw that cover, I would make a scene until the manager hid it,” Gainor said.Wal-Mart shoppers, for one, won’t see Munn in her unmentionables, but that’s because the retailer hasn’t carried the magazine since 2003. The nation’s largest retailer permanently pulled Maxim from shelves after “listening to customers and associates.”
After being banned by Wal-Mart way back when, puzzled publisher Stephen Colvin told the New York Times, “I don’t think that these decisions are often rational; they are subjective. For any men’s magazine to put a woman on the cover seems a bit troubling to (Wal-Mart).”
