The hardworking students at MIT have finally put together a complete gallery of every Playboy centerfold ever published. This was Miss July 1955, the fine powderpuff of womanhood who graced the month I was born in.
Sheeeet - that's too big! Anyone know how to reduce the picture?
Posted by at September 17, 2002 11:54 AMWoot! Pr0n!
Miguel, I'm removing "Green Lantern/Alan Greenspan [tie]" from the top spot of "Fes' List of Heroes and Personal Role Models" and moving you up to the top spot from #4.
Posted by: Unclefes on September 17, 2002 12:02 PMhere's mine (crappy html skills preclude my posting the image directly)
where have you been?
Taking a week off from things. My pearl, I owe you an email, I know, please forgive me...?
Posted by: Unclefes on September 17, 2002 12:07 PMWasn't she in Attack of the 50 foot centerfold?
Posted by: octobersurprise on September 17, 2002 12:13 PMI had this issue once, from the "nudie-treehouse" era i belive stavs posted about. (so well done, a convert i was) Great post at filter Miguel, the one about conservitives and all inthe Meta. I can hardly stand it over there at times. But that post just has what i call the Miguel effect. Itaddresses truth without anger and spite. something i need to learn. sorry to meta poop but i am very happy to see people here and wish to take the op to humblemyself. it is ugly yes, and perhaps disingenuos but i feel this is what dr. zaius REALLY wanted. communication between people across the globe. I see more humanity here then at the filter. Ok, enough of MEMEME.
Posted by: clavdivs on September 17, 2002 12:35 PMYou can see more than that in any women's magazine these days.
Not that I approve of course...but being born in'58, it is of some interest to note the changes in what society deems acceptable or unacceptable.
If we had a time machine and could transport people from that era to this, most of the women would be appalled and most of the men would be in full cardiac arrest.
Oh and is it just me or does that woman have sad eyes?
Posted by: b****fire on September 17, 2002 12:36 PMOh-and by my calculations, assuming the woman in question is 20, that would make her in the neighborhood of 67 years old now.
Posted by: b****fire on September 17, 2002 12:40 PMOf course, the really important month isn't so much the birth month but the one in which we hit puberty. As if anyone could remember...
Posted by: Miguel on September 17, 2002 12:45 PMMig, why the reduction? wallet sizes maybe...
Now to get blued with Mig's post...but this one was a dandy, Mig, thanks for the testo-boost..err B(.)(.)Bs
Posted by: thomcatspike on September 17, 2002 12:45 PMClav, this place is just more comfortable because there's more elbow room. If we had 10,000 people here it would be just as bad...in fact probably a lot worse.
Glad to have you, though.
Posted by: kafkaesque on September 17, 2002 12:46 PMUgh, it seems it's down. Who's forcing it so? Is it you, Thom? You're only supposed to look up the one Playmate, ya know...! It now redirects to some MIT "Fake or not?" joke site. Never trust a student, eh?
Posted by: Miguel on September 17, 2002 12:48 PMprobably a lot worse.
Which is WHY we have to NOT mention 9622 in effing Metatalk!
*puts fists on hips and glares at everyone in Colonel Klink-ian fashion*
Posted by: Unclefes on September 17, 2002 12:51 PMSee a female colossus... her mountainous torso, skyscraper limbs, giant desires!
Oh, baby.
Posted by: octobersurprise on September 17, 2002 12:52 PMI didn't know that Dianne Wiest had posed for Playboy!
Posted by: witchstone on September 17, 2002 01:00 PMThat photo is gorgeous. She looks sassy and hep, not the least bit sad. And the pink hue of the whole photo is just precious.
BTW, my mom just turned 65 this year and doesn't miss the 50s one bit--racism, homophobia, disposable culture, bleah. I think the commercial art and photography of that era is popular because of the sheer irony. At my previous job, for an alt newspaper, we used a lot of 50s-early 60s imagery in our designs.
Now why can't I find the woman from my birth month? argh. I wish there was a search feature.
Posted by: whatnot on September 17, 2002 01:01 PMWhatnot - it's a complete month-by-month full-size archive. As soon as it stops redirecting (when Thom gets off the keyboard), it should be fine once more.
Posted by: Miguel on September 17, 2002 01:04 PMDianne Wiest Vital Stats: Birth Name: Born: March 28, 1948
Not unless she was seven years old when she posed.
Posted by: b****fire on September 17, 2002 01:09 PMMigs, isn't the URL "temp-mirror-do-not-bookmark"?
Maybe you shouldn't have linked it?
Posted by: kafkaesque on September 17, 2002 01:18 PMYes, it was. I thought it was a joke, as in "Do link it". I guess I screwed up again, right?
*gloom*
Posted by: Miguel on September 17, 2002 01:24 PMYou just ahve to think about the bandwidth considerations, ya big lug. Have some vodka or something.
Posted by: kafkaesque on September 17, 2002 01:25 PMYou just have to think about the bandwidth considerations, ya big lug. Have some vodka or something.
Posted by: kafkaesque on September 17, 2002 01:25 PMHey, same error folks, I wish I could view,& hog it all. There not too work safe for me, the URL name saved me though.
Now to find July 68, you know what a 68 is per George Carlin?
Posted by: thomcatspike on September 17, 2002 01:30 PMahve is written in modern Dogmatish in the first example?
Posted by: Miguel on September 17, 2002 01:31 PMAh-HA! I knew there was a searchable playmate database mentioned on the blue a while back. Sadly, the database itself is down. I remember teasing my hubby because my gal (may '69) was prettier than his (feb '68). Did February '68 have goofy tan lines or something? hmmm...
Posted by: whatnot on September 17, 2002 01:53 PMCan I at least try to make up for my atrocious post by offering two monkey games?
[Click "Enter", then "Monkey Shoot" or "Monkey Thought".]
Posted by: Miguel on September 17, 2002 02:11 PMSo am I guessing if the tits are real? I'm confused. Whats the point? If the "model" pictured is from pre-1990 (or whenever breast enhancement technology became available) then I just guess "real". Do I win a pony or something? I'm so confused. I'll hang up and wait for my answer.
Posted by: KevinSkomsvold on September 17, 2002 03:04 PMIt was better when it just linked to the directory. The voting thing is lame, I just want to look. Is there a way to just get the directory again? I want someone else to do the work.
Posted by: anathema on September 17, 2002 03:05 PMOk, this thing is changin, if someone finds July, 68, give me a heads up, please, as my access is from work. Now to go erase my cookies.
Posted by: thomcatspike on September 17, 2002 03:28 PMYou don't need the directory.
http://web.mit.edu/waksman/www/temp-mirror-do-not-bookmark/19XX_XX.jpg
Insert your "year_month" of birth for XX_XX, cut and paste into your browser window, et voilą! Just don't try to link to that URL from another page.
Posted by: romakimmy on September 17, 2002 03:34 PMThanks, roma, I guess I'm like any man, needs a woman's help. Wow, Miss July 68 has the same color hair as me. It was a classic shot, did't show all, a tease. As I'm leaving for the day, the answer to George Carlins #68 is, like for you romakimmy,
I owe you one.
Brilliant, Romakimmy! It makes a difference, being intelligent, confess!
So, yes, whatnot's May 1969 is definitely better than her hubby's playmate.
Posted by: Miguel on September 17, 2002 04:04 PMFontslurper? Is that what the kids are saying these days?
Posted by: eyeballkid on September 17, 2002 04:43 PMMmm. I'm not feeling that intelligent right now. In fact, I'm downright cursing my previous snobbery in refusing to learn VBA and stupid Word macros...anywho, anything for the spreading of porn and momentary distractions from work, boys and girls. Yer welcome.
Posted by: romakimmy on September 17, 2002 04:45 PM(pssst. roma-k, if you need vba help, I know a bit)
Posted by: eyeballkid on September 17, 2002 04:47 PMWaddya mean, "the kids", EBK? Are you trying to appear adult all of a sudden? I hear the latest term is bottomthreader...
Posted by: Miguel on September 17, 2002 04:51 PM9622: Mammotary distractions and bottomthreaders
Posted by: romakimmy on September 17, 2002 05:08 PMOoh, Anathema's is cool, but I like Miguel's best. Speaking of bottomthreaders, when did Playboy start including the lower half in its centerfolds?
Posted by: whatnot on September 17, 2002 05:53 PMnow that I'm home from work... superb job on the pr0n people!
let's keep up the good work
Posted by: tj on September 17, 2002 06:00 PMOh my god,
using the interface and just refreshing
this came up
That pinball machine was in my basement growing up, and is still in their basement.
(probably not that particular one...)
I'm afraid to go any further, because of other childhood memories.
Posted by: tj on September 17, 2002 06:12 PMThis gal looks a little like one Miss Britney Spears, 'cept not all buffed up.
Posted by: brittney on September 17, 2002 06:20 PMnow that I'm home from work... superb job on the pr0n people!
Now he tells us, after all the craven apologies, hairshirt-wearing and administrative lambastings! ;)
Posted by: Miguel on September 17, 2002 06:55 PMYou people don't know how hard I work, day in day out, posting your silly monkey comments. Can't you recongnize my pain, my hurts? Couldn't you be more polite and say something like, "If you've got a minute, I sure would like it if you could post this for me. Thanks." But nooooooo. "Post, dammit!" is all I hear. And now in French! Feh.
Posted by: 9622.net on September 17, 2002 07:12 PMSee, you've got me so ruffled I can't even spell anymore.
Posted by: 9622.net on September 17, 2002 07:13 PMSome of these are just dying for captions (s'il vous plait): "oops, is that my bustier on the floor?" "Do you think riding a harley naked causes chafing?"
Liv Tyler's mom is November 1974. Marilyn Monroe (december 1953) is ranked #72?!
Posted by: whatnot on September 17, 2002 07:24 PMNot that I've been looking at this all day or anything, BUT.......
.....to answer an earlier question, it looks to me like Miss January 1971 has the distinction of being the first centerfold with visible um, bush pubic hair. Ah, the year of my birth, what a year it was.
I'm glad I don't do drugs anymore, the twins from October 1970 (1970_10, for the numerically challeged monkeys) look like they are conjoined, their midsections just blend in with each other. Maybe it was a "special" issue.
Posted by: anathema on September 17, 2002 07:47 PMI think the more important month to link to is the month in which you were likely conceived. And so...
Posted by: nprigoda on September 17, 2002 07:47 PMWelcome Nadia, and if you've already been welcomed and I missed it then I'll just fling some in your direction. By the way, how do you feel about playing croquet while wearing a powdered and listening to the Wiffenpoofs of Yale?
Posted by: anathema on September 17, 2002 09:17 PMWelcome Nadia, and if you've already been welcomed and I missed it then I'll just fling some in your direction. By the way, how do you feel about playing croquet while wearing a powdered wig and listening to the Wiffenpoofs of Yale?
Posted by: anathema on September 17, 2002 09:18 PMAnd I thought I caught before it posted without the word "wig."
That is driving me nuts. Me is please hoping.
Posted by: anathema on September 17, 2002 09:26 PMAnd I thought I caught it before it posted without the word "wig."
That is driving me nuts. Me is please hoping.
Posted by: anathema on September 17, 2002 09:27 PM*goes back to reading deposition of Lead Flying Monkey*
Posted by: anathema on September 17, 2002 09:29 PMI just ran through my birth year. There a lot of diaphanous wedding nite scenes. For jonmc- a girl and her strategically placed platters and the very startling "Miss Banned Books" month. Great link!
Posted by: tizzie on September 17, 2002 09:47 PMMiss My Birth Month. What a superior posterior as they say.
Life was far better pre silicone and botox, you ask me.
tizzie-apparent music can do other things to the savage breast than charm it, i guess
Posted by: jonmc on September 17, 2002 10:42 PMCan we agree that the more "contemporary" centerfolds just plain old suck. The older ones are so much sexier and they actually have some class. Nothing like two hunks of silicone to turn a person off.
Posted by: anathema on September 17, 2002 10:43 PMAnyone know how to reduce the picture?
Miguel - just for reference's sake, you can define the size of a picture, regardless of it's original size, but adding something like width="x" into your img tag. Height will take care of itself. Artifacts might eventuate, but are generally not too bad, provided you're not changing too radically.
syntax example : [img src="http://xxxx.com/x.jpg" width="350" /], replacing brackets with angles, of course.
Posted by: stavrosthewonderchicken on September 17, 2002 11:00 PMAll Time Fave. Not only is she absolutely gorgeous, but I love the whole motif. I suppose this makes me some kind of sick sports fetishist. I need help, I guess.
Posted by: jonmc on September 17, 2002 11:00 PMIn case you'd like to put a name with the...uh...face of your favorite Playmate, a complete listing can be found here, alphabetically by first name and indicating month and year of Playmatehood.
Me, I'm a sucker for Anna Nicole Smith, but I think Candy Loving is my all-time favorite.
Posted by: Crash on September 17, 2002 11:28 PMOh, and I went to high school with this one.
Playboy's airbrushers are amazingly talented.
Posted by: Crash on September 17, 2002 11:35 PMAnd we should throw in a special mention for Janet Lupo, for Lupo.
Posted by: Crash on September 17, 2002 11:55 PMMmmm, janet lupo.
As my Cubano co-workers down in Miami used to say--Tantas cuervas y yo no tengo frenos, mamacita.
Posted by: jonmc on September 17, 2002 11:59 PMbebe buell is more than a mother - she is an original groupie.
Posted by: goneill on September 18, 2002 12:25 AMok, that might not have made any sense. bebe buell was liv tyler's mother. (referenced above).
Posted by: goneill on September 18, 2002 12:27 AMaw man, i don't have the time to keep up with these threads, but porn! i must keep up in the name of porn!
by the way, what happened to the no-porn rule? :D
Posted by: pikachu lolita on September 18, 2002 02:41 AMCheers, Stav. As long as you know what you're unleashing with that "for reference's sake"...!
Posted by: Miguel on September 18, 2002 03:03 AMThis isn't pron per se, it's something else, it's..........ah, little help here folks.
Posted by: anathema on September 18, 2002 06:38 AMIt's historical. And educational, to boot! How would we be able to place the progression from Betty Page and Jayne Mansfield to Pam Anderson and Jenny McCarthy into proper context without it?
Posted by: yhbc on September 18, 2002 07:48 AMit's not the links to porn that's a problem, it's poting porn itself on the site, or something. or maybe we've given up all hope of controlling this unruly monkey site.
Posted by: tj on September 18, 2002 08:42 AMit's not the links to porn that's a problem, it's poting porn itself on the site, or something.
Always remember: when poting porn, give the roots room to grow and give the porn plenty of direct sunlight.
Posted by: ColdChef on September 18, 2002 09:25 AMhm maybe I should read what I wrote before I hit that post button, huh?
Posted by: tj on September 18, 2002 09:29 AMWormer have you been up all night with these guys looking at pRon?
Posted by: Thomcatspike on September 18, 2002 11:37 AMI think Miguel's post was OK as long as it's clear that boobitude would result from a click-thru. Of course, after great off-site debate, wailing and gnashing of teeth, Miguel has confessed to being a goat's anus, so that's alright. Right?
Posted by: kafkaesque on September 18, 2002 11:49 AMI confessed too early. You people out there, the innocent customers, the happy-go-lucky punters, have no idea how harshly the cold feces whistle round the administrative corners of 9622's inner sanctum.
Posted by: Miguel on September 18, 2002 11:54 AMyes, yes, yes.
I'm an ass who doesn't even think to read what he has typed before hitting the post button.
AND I got all squawky when the image was up there instead of the text that is there now.
I suck.
Posted by: tj on September 18, 2002 11:57 AMPost to make sure the other one goes up:
And I'm snarky about turning 29 on Saturday
Oh Saturday, Saturday - will we have a surprise for you, tj!
*furiously starts emailing Mars*
Posted by: Miguel on September 18, 2002 12:02 PMoff-site debates? where what who? My fear is that there is a secret sub-9622 site you all are at and only come here like you go to the blue pages. it's just a website
Posted by: anathema on September 18, 2002 12:03 PMI would like to categorically deny the existence of a 9622 cabal, if only for the reason that it's so last week. There may, however, be a 9622 chapter of the Knights Templar in which a few of us get together, put on antlers and velour robes, and do really weird things.
Then again, there might not.
Posted by: kafkaesque on September 18, 2002 12:16 PMwhat about the goddamn aprons? really, kaf. can't forget those.
Posted by: witchstone on September 18, 2002 12:21 PMAprons are provided by necessity only, and always during the annual 9622 Chili Cook-Off.
Posted by: kafkaesque on September 18, 2002 12:23 PMWhat's with the velour, Kaf? That's the third time this month you've used that word.
Posted by: Miguel on September 18, 2002 12:40 PMI don't suppose there any magial speech writing caps to go with those aprons? No? Damn.
I'm hoping to come down with a severe 3 day bout of laryngitis on oct. 14th. Most likely induced by screaming out of frustration. If the words "Power Point presentation" are mentioned in the next two weeks, I *will* become homicidal.*sigh* Back to smacking my head against an oratory wall.
Posted by: romakimmy on September 18, 2002 12:42 PMEhh..velour's OK, but it's not flannel. I waiting for Victoria's Secret to produce a line of teddies and camisoles in plaid flannel, the catalog pages of which I will view in conjunction with the Baseball centerfold linked above, thereby satisfying all my kinks in one place.
Posted by: jonmc on September 18, 2002 12:45 PMnever mind the aprons ... kaf, as our new velour overlord, i demand that in future you drive these wheels ...
Posted by: walrus on September 18, 2002 12:55 PMEhh..velour's OK, but it's not flannel.
*shaking head ruefully* And that, my good man, is why you will never be an Overlord.
As for Vicky's, they do flannel, but it's more of the Little House on the Prairie gingham variety rather than the "I've worn this shirt for 15 years" variety.
Posted by: witchstone on September 18, 2002 12:57 PMWalrus, you're confused. It's the overlords that do the demanding, not us underthings, errr, underlings.
Posted by: tizzie on September 18, 2002 12:59 PMya know, if I had velour underwear, I'd probably be in a much better mood most of the time...
Posted by: tj on September 18, 2002 01:01 PMSo, I'm not an overlord. I always saw my self more as a cave-dwelling mutant anyway.
The Little House on the Prarie connection may not be a bad thing, since Melissa Gilbert grew into a hottie.
Posted by: jonmc on September 18, 2002 01:03 PMI was scarred by velour as a child. Its faux-velvet mockery will surely haunt me all the days of my life.
Posted by: kafkaesque on September 18, 2002 01:06 PM9622.net: Its faux-velvet mockery will surely haunt me all the days of my life.
Posted by: walrus on September 18, 2002 01:14 PMAlthough sister Sara is the hottest(and coolest) Gilbert.
OK, I'll stop.
Posted by: jonmc on September 18, 2002 01:17 PMAlthough sister Sara is the hottest(and coolest) Gilbert.
OK, I'll stop.
Posted by: jonmc on September 18, 2002 01:18 PMHa! I never knew they were sisters. Also just found out that their brother Jonathan played Wille Olsen on LHOTP.
The Internet: is there anything it can't do?
Posted by: witchstone on September 18, 2002 01:25 PMjon, some day I'll give you the complete SG story.
Posted by: anathema on September 18, 2002 01:27 PM...and now she looks like an error message.Same pic, different url
anathema, I think I speak for the entire 9622 community when I say, cough it up dude.
Posted by: jonmc on September 18, 2002 01:31 PMI know, I know, I'm always doing that. Whatever. Raymond Burr where are you when I need you!
Posted by: anathema on September 18, 2002 01:31 PMIs anathema going to show you his disturbing collection of meticulously collected Sara Gilbert hair clumps and toenail clippings?
Posted by: kafkaesque on September 18, 2002 01:36 PMDamn! The overlords can read our minds!
*shuts celebrity toenail clippings drawer*
mmm, whose toenail clippings do I prize most Sara Gilbert's or Janeane Garofalo's or even Alyson Hannigan's?
I may need to get a bigger drawer.
Posted by: jonmc on September 18, 2002 01:47 PM...swaggering with the old bravado, even then, but with his breath smelling suspiciously of badly digested hair clumps and charred velour (or was it flannel?), while a stray, bright pink toenail clipping, stuck provocatively between his front teeth, seemed to whisper: "I vont you now!"...
Posted by: Miguel on September 18, 2002 01:50 PMHey, I'm a Gilbert!
Sara and Melissa, though, are both fine representatives.
Posted by: brittney on September 18, 2002 01:58 PMHonestly, brittney... if that webcam pic is real you're a dead ringer for my sister... which is odd since she was the normal one of the family.
Posted by: tj on September 18, 2002 03:16 PMThe pic is real, tj, though I am not sure how to construe that "normal" comment.
;)
Got a recent photo of her?
Posted by: brittney on September 18, 2002 03:17 PMNow that I think about it, she made me delete all the pics of her from the camera on Saturday (she's preggers right now)
Posted by: tj on September 18, 2002 03:45 PMA note about posting images:
We encourage users to post images, especially those hilarous pics of monkeys
wearing dresses or programming for Linux. But posting images that reside on someone
else's server is considered by many to be bandwidth theft. Our thoughts
on the matter, along with some solutions to the problem, can be found
here. Thanks.
In an effort to help eliminate spam (and to preserve the sanity of the 9622 Volunteer Simian Spam-Cop Brigade) all threads older than 30 days will now be closed to comments.



