--and not just the NYT: prime time TV, Hollywood movies, fashion magazines, "fitness" magazines, and so on. If we must refuse contributing to media that reflect and reinforce male supremacy, according to Chip, his position is pretty much tantamount to arguing that people shouldn't make a living generating media content.
Perhaps Chip means that Hustler is a very egregious example of male supremacist media, and that's why we should not submit articles. This is the assumption I'd like to challenge: that there is something distinctly pernicious about Hustler, compared to other media that reflect and reinforce male supremacy. Consider the effects of Hustler compared to (say) mainstream fashion magazines. Far more people read and see images in fashion mags than in Hustler (I'm sure Yosh or Michael P. will dig up the numbers). Moreover, pretty much everything that people excoriate Hustler for--commodification of women's bodies, objectification of women, reinforcement of the view that women should act and dress to sexually titillate men--can be found in a fashion mag. I mean, c'mon, take away the crop top and the lowcut jeans, and the models in many of the fashion ads could be posing for Hustler!
So, to reiterate Gar's question: what is so bloody bad about Hustler, compared to other mass media, if our paramount concern is gender equality?
Miles