Consent and Manipulation in Olivia Munn’s Playboy Shoot
When Playboy offered Oliva Munn the chance to pose nude on the cover of the magazine, she declined. When Playboy offered Munn the chance to pose clothed on the cover of the magazine, she accepted. But once Munn got to the set, Playboy's photographer, stylist, and team of handlers staged a day-long attempt to coerce Munn into taking it all off anyway.
Munn details the event in her book Suck It, Wonder Woman!: The Misadventures of a Hollywood Geek. After signing a comprehensive contract specifying which specific areas of Munn were on-limits and off for the photographer—side boob and underboob, yes; nipple, butt crack and vagina no—Munn describes all the ways Playboy attempted to convince her to show what she didn't want to show. Munn presents this as a lighthearted story, but it's actually a pretty frightening account of how manipulators attempt to coerce their targets into consent:
STAGE 1: Control. Prior to the shoot, Munn requests her "normal glam team—makeup artist, hair stylist and wardrobe stylist," but the Playboy photographer insisting on using his own stylist for the shoot. The photographer "was really pushing his stylist on me," Munn writes.
STAGE 2: Denial. Once Munn meets the stylist, a "tall, heavyset, bald man from Scandinavia with a very heavy accent," the attire was "nothing like we discussed." He "quite horrifyingly" offers up "a black, fishnet, one-piece bathing suit where you can see everything going on" for Munn to wear. On top, the stylist explains, "you would be wearing nothing under here and then your boobs just hang right over ze pink part." Writes Munn: "Here we are, contracts decided, conversations spanning weeks about this day, and everyone has a different agenda."
STAGE 3: Social pressure. When Munn insisted that this was a "non-nude shoot," the stylist told her that in Playboy, "you show everything!" Munn says she felt "woozy" explaining her contract and "tried to understand what the hell was happening." The stylist then told her that the photographer "says all nude today for Playboy. It's Playboy!"
STAGE 4: Appeal to her sense of trust. After Munn calls her publicist to come advocate for her on the set, the photographer offers this compromise: "Oh, yeah, you'll be nude but we'll just Photoshop everything out."
STAGE 5: "Accidental" exposure. The photographer continues to insist on poses that aren't in Munn's contract: "The photographer isn't doing much to help ease the tension. He wants me to pose nude, while strategically placing my arms and legs; my publicist of course doesn't. He wants to do a shower scene nude with strategically placed bubbles and steam on the glass; my publicist of course doesn't. It's exhausting. All the while I'm trying to pose flirty, fun, summery with about five dudes—strangers working the set—watching my every move. One of the shots has me without a top and my long, thick hair covering my breasts. The whole time I'm worried about the wind blowing, exposing a nipple, the filthy five and the photographer snapping away because that's the shot he wants." (Playboy ended up publishing shots of Munn with only her hair or limbs covering her breasts).
* STAGE 6: Downplaying her concerns. The photographer and stylist "insist they've shot more revealing stuff for Esquire and GQ."
* STAGE 6: Silencing. Munn feels "afraid to speak up and yell at everyone because it would ruin the shoot," she writes. "I'm the one who sets the tone and energy on the shoot. If I show everyone I'm upset, the shoot will spiral downward faster than it already has."
* STAGE 7: Anger. Late in the shoot, the stylist throws a fit. "I am a great stylist," he announced. "And this is not all about Olivia okay? It iz about me, too! I have my own motivations with this shoot and I'm going to get what I want out of it! Zis iz Playboy!!! She haz to be naked!"
* STAGE 8: Condescension. The stylist indignantly informs Munn's publicist that she could pick out the panties, if she thinks she knows so much.
* STAGE 8: Abandonment.The stylist storms out.
Munn finishes the shoot, writing that she had "managed to bury my feelings deep, deep inside". After the shoot, she says, "I wanted to break down crying." When she woke up the next day, she got an email from the photographer telling her they didn't get an adequate cover shot, and they needed her to come in again the following week.
11:46 am
Manipulation is bad. But how old was she when this happened? That should probably be noted somewhere.
And just how many women have actually posed "clothed" on a Playboy cover?
This could have been easily researched on Munn's part.
12:11 pm
Of course. It doesn't matter that her contract was basically thrown out the window when she arrived on set, or that there were at least 5 grown men pressuring her to do things she repeatedly said she did. not. want. to. do.
Nope, all that matters is that she was old enough to know better.
12:14 pm
i'm with groggette. her age is irrelevant. these men disregarded a legal contract which stated what she would and would not do and pressured her to so something which the contract was supposed to protect against, and which she was uncomfortable doing.
12:14 pm
Julia, with all respect, what the fuck are you talking about? She had a signed contract that specified precisely what would and would not be shown, and you're saying she should have realized in advance that the whole negotiation was in bad faith and they intended to try to change the terms on the fly?
12:19 pm
Nothing described here is acceptable behavior and it's sad our society is such that Munn feels like she needs to get on Playboy's cover in order to advance her career.
But.
At what point are we allowed to throw up our hands and ask "so why did you stay?" Munn is a grown-up who has managed a career in media and "nerd reporting." She's not exactly the picture of a hard-hitting investigative reporter but she has spent enough time doing interviews that I'd expect her to have had enough experience with interpersonal conflict that she should have some sense of when to walk away.
I'm sure some of you will read this as pure "blame the victim" but there has to be some point, some level at which someone has achieved enough power and influence, when we decide they're not a victim, they're an enabling participant. Playboy wanted Munn for their own financials just like she wanted them for the exposure and career advantage. She chose not to walk away from this mistreatment, not to make a stink at the time, and instead it's just one more item in a book.
12:23 pm
Exactly, she had a contract, so when it became apparent that they were not following the terms she should have bolted. I don't see any reason why she was forced to stay when, one, she felt uncomfortable, and two, they were not following her contract.
Someone asked when this was. I believe it was less than a year ago.
12:24 pm
Why didn't she walk out? I'm not for the pressuring but I find her talk about "setting the tone" bizarre. She seems to have been legitimately put-off by all the people there. Why then be concerned with setting the right "tone".
I can believe the people were creeps. But something doesn't ring true about this account.
12:29 pm
Don, of course she wants something from them and they want something from her. They negotiated and came to an agreement. Then Playboy tried to pressure her to change the terms. That's what lawyers call bad faith. If she walks out, she loses what she bargained for. She stayed and got what they had agreed to, but they made it miserable. She's calling them on their bad, shitty behavior now, when she has a book of her own to give her a podium to do it. What's your problem with that again?
12:31 pm
@Don--
when you find yourself within the realm of systemic sexism and rape culture, and when that manifests into a situation in which someone with that systemic sexist power feels it is their right to coerce you, to control you, to manipulate you despite having previously stated that you were not comfortable with a certain thing, when someone exhibits an entitlement to your body and an entitlement to tell you what you can and can't do with your body, let's see how easy it is for you to "choose" to walk away.
your comment is spoken with a privileged sort of ignorance which indicates you've never been in a situation such as this. Munn's reaction is not an uncommon one, and considering she was walking into the shoot with a predetermined contract stating what she was not willing to do, and that went out the window; of course she doubted herself, of course she gave into pressure.
you know why she didn't have some sense of when to walk away? because people like you dismiss her concerns so easily with "well, you should have known better." had she walked away, she would have been demonized for that: "well, she knew it was playboy, what did she expect?"
12:52 pm
I think most of us have experienced l'espirit d'escalier to some extent: we find ourselves in a situation that's displeasing to us for one reason or another, and it's not until after the moment has passed that we realize what we should have done. Oftentimes when you're in a stressful moment it's hard to call up exactly the right reaction, whether it's a cuttingly witty remark or just getting up and leaving. Sure, Ms. Munn should have walked out of there, she should have known Playboy is about the naked ladies, etc. Also, those five guys should have not been such giant asses to her. Since that feeling of helplessness or uselessness in a stressful situation is so relatable, I don't think it's fair to say it's Ms. Munn's fault she chose to react one way or another, since we're mostly conditioned from childhood to be polite and accommodating (especially if we're women), and breaking out of that pattern, even when people are not polite and accommodating to us can be extremely difficult.
1:03 pm
Don's point is the point I was trying to make, Thomas, Filthy, Groggette. Once it was clear the contract was being broken, she could've walked away from it. That's where the age/maturity/experience comes in. Not saying she deserved to be put in that situation! It sucks, sure. But this isn't Marie Claire we're talking about.
1:05 pm
"Prior to the shoot, Munn requests her “normal glam team—makeup artist, hair stylist and wardrobe stylist,” but the Playboy photographer insisting on using his own stylist for the shoot. The photographer “was really pushing his stylist on me,” Munn writes."
This may be irrelevant for me to ask, but isn't it normal for a photographer and magazine to have a model dressed and styled as they see fit for a shoot?
1:09 pm
Also agree with PD:
"...We’re mostly conditioned from childhood to be polite and accommodating (especially if we’re women), and breaking out of that pattern, even when people are not polite and accommodating to us can be extremely difficult."
Even as an adult I struggle with this.
1:18 pm
It's not clear that what the photographer and stylist did would be considered a total breach of contract. Had Ms. Munn walked off sent, she might have been the one charged with breaching the contract. In other words, legally, it might not have been clear that the contract was being broken. However, Munn's leaving the shoot and refusing to participate further would definitely have been a breach, and even if she eventually one, there could have been some not-fun litigation. It sounds like Munn was trying to make the best of a bad situation, not to mention that hindsight is always 20/20 and it is much easier to say "she should have left" than to actually leave when you're in the middle of the situation.
1:30 pm
She couldn't have walked off the set she had a contract. She probably should have refused to put up with their bullshit but who knows maybe she young and didn't want to ruin a big break she was getting. But then again it is pretty easy to blame the victim...
1:51 pm
Sorry that this is so long, good Sexist family.
@Don, I understand the concept of personal responsibility. However, if you are modeling for certain clients with clout in the industry (or in her case, a magazine that would give her GREAT exposure), you don't just walk out. That could potentially spell disaster for any future work and, specifically with regard to Ms. Munn, you could be deemed difficult to work with. At the same time you want to be clear that the contract, that was so painstakingly put together, is followed. This is an awkward situation for any model, and I should know because I've modeled for a client that tried not to honor the contract that I had signed.
It was a hair modeling shoot for a major hair care line... nothing like a shoot for Playboy so I clearly stayed clothed... but my contract stated that they could not cut my hair. They tried every line in the book to get me to change my mind (including that I would not be recommended for any other shoots in the future), but nothing worked. After the shoot was over, I was told that they were not going to use my pictures because I wouldn't let them cut my hair. But what did I see when I strolled down the hair aisle at CVS? My face and UNCUT HAIR.
I had to contact them to get paid for the use of my face, but you know what else happened? I didn't get another gig with them. Thankfully, I would much rather get a steady paycheck and have benefits than do any modeling gigs they or anyone else could offer me, so I didn't care. But I completely understand Ms. Munn's position. Yes, there is exposure (no pun intended) that she can get from Playboy, and I'm sure she understood that. She also had a conscience: hence the reason why they didn't get any nude shots from her. But you have to understand the type of pressure and ultimately coersion that they put models under, and it really isn't as easy as just walking away.
1:54 pm
Ok, Kit-Kat and kza... how about that was what I was trying to say, but somehow it ended up being a whole lotta words...
2:03 pm
Ugh. These comments about what she should have done are making me nauseated.
You know what should have happened? The five -- five! -- men who were at the shoot SHOULD NOT HAVE PRESSURED THE MODEL TO CHANGE THE TERMS OF HER CONTRACT. There's *nothing* that Olivia Munn "should have done" as a reaction, other than to try to be as professional as possible. The blame here lies entirely with those five men.
Saying "it wasn't Marie Claire" is a nicely subtle way of saying "if she didn't want it, she shouldn't have dressed that way." A professional magazine -- which "Playboy" is, believe it or not, take a look at the interviews they've published over the years -- should never hire or keep on photographers who act like this.
So the next time you feel the need to leave a comment about what a victim should have done to not be a victim, try remembering that there's a perpetrator in the story, too. And that just *maybe*, that perpetrator is more to blame than the victim.
2:18 pm
No, no, no. I am absolutely not nor did I ever intend to "blame the victim." I think your anger is misplaced in that respect, Abe.
I apologize to the other posters for coming across flippant earlier. Hindsight is 20/20, it's true.
I've learned a lot reading through these comments, and I agree with a lot of the points. So I'm going to retract my previous comments, which were written mostly as a gut reaction to my low, low opinion of Playboy (still low).
Perhaps I will also revoke my extra X chromosome, too.
Sorry to have upset anyone.
2:24 pm
No need to hand in the extra x! My anger is more towards the general theme of the comments, rather than to any one poster -- you were the first, but my no means the only, person to make similar comments.
I think it's incredibly cool of you to read through the comments and come to a different conclusion, and then say so -- not many people would be able to do that! So props to you, and I'm sorry if my irritation made you feel singled out in any way.
2:27 pm
abe ftw!
3:21 pm
@ Don
You seem to be more bothered by Olivia Munn's behavior in this situation than the behavior of the people working for playboy. And that is really strange.
3:31 pm
Also, don't think that Playboy wouldn't have spun her walking out as "Olivia Munn is so hard to work with, what a bitch she is for just walking out on a perfectly great shoot that we had set up for her costing us thousands and thousands of dollars". Of course they would have -- it was lose/lose as soon as they started pressuring her to change what they had already agreed upon, which is almost certainly why they did it. Because they knew they would get away with it.
4:08 pm
I'm struck by the negative comments against Munn here. I mean, she did everything by the book. She had all the terms laid out plainly in the contract. On the day of the shoot, when they tried to push her to go beyond that, she stuck to her guns, remained professional, and toughed it out. In the end she got what she wanted and Playboy didn't get what they wanted (merely what they'd agreed to.)
In fact, I'd hold Munn up as a role model for women who find themselves in these kinds of crummy situations, because she handled it with relative aplomb and she won in the end. Seriously, it was like a movie ending, where the plucky hero defeats the conniving bad guy by using his own contract against him.
In light of this, I can only interpret the negative comments as a belief (conscious or subconscious) that Munn, and maybe women in general, just don't have the right to kvetch about crappy treatment.
(Julia's apostate chromosomes excepted, of course. Go Julia.)
4:41 pm
"In light of this, I can only interpret the negative comments as a belief (conscious or subconscious) that Munn, and maybe women in general, just don’t have the right to kvetch about crappy treatment.
I think it's more about she's stupid because she didn't handle it in a way that an internet commenter who has never been in a Playboy shoot would have handled it.
4:44 pm
Thank you, Abe!
5:37 pm
@kza: perfect.
5:42 pm
So when do we arrest these 5 men since there's a "victim"?
6:28 pm
kza, I agree, but I also think it can be both things at once.
There's this attitude of "unless you did A, B, and C, you don't have a right to complain" coming from these comments, as if certain criteria have to be fulfilled or you're just a whiner. But if Munn HAD walked out on the shoot, I bet dollars to donuts that the very same people would be saying she shouldn't complain because she could have just toughed it out. I get the palpable sense that these people are looking for any excuse (consciously or not) to deny women the right to be angry about mistreatment, and they do it by constantly moving the goalposts around.
7:36 pm
I find this particular post interesting in light of the recent discussions on pornography and coercion.
8:55 pm
I'm not surprised. I've been saying the porn industry is evil for almost a decade now.
12:52 am
@Adam -- your comment is harmful toward the cause of feminism and equal rights. You're implying that because there was no legal crime there must not have been any wrongdoing whatsoever.
Olivia Munn would most likely not characterize herself as a victim in this particular scenario, it's true. But she was subjected to emotional and verbal pressure to go further than she wanted to, further than her *contract* stated. The fact that their attempts to pressure her failed does not make them any less wrong.
When someone attempts to victimize a person and fails, we should not automatically dismiss those attempts as less worthy of our attention than successful attempts.
8:34 am
She should have just left. Playboy was in breach of contract.
11:00 am
cj - you are sooo late to this party.
11:55 am
Well I, for one, am not going to be doing any Playboy modeling after reading this! Not like it was on my calendar for next week or anything, just sayin' – good on her for making their smarmy tactics known.
4:54 pm
"After signing a comprehensive contract specifying which specific areas of Munn were on-limits and off for the photographer—side boob and underboob, yes; nipple, butt crack and vagina no [...|."
It´s vulva, not vagina - or did she show her clitoris or labia? I know that sounds pedantic, but if we dont use correct terms but take a part as the whole instead, things get unspeakable and we are silenced.
6:31 pm
Really guys? This is Playboy magazine. Y'know . . . Playboy. Here's Playboy photographer Steve Wyda, profiled in NY Daily News: "When it comes to getting girls to strip for his camera, photographer Steve Wayda says Kim Kardashian has the edge over Ashley Dupre." The timid girl at the Playboy photo shoot has been a cliche for decades: "C'mon, baby, I promise it'll be tasteful." Of course, Olivia Munn's allowed to complain, and of course she's allowed to talk about the bad taste left in her mouth by the whole experience. But when we start talking about "coercion" and "rape culture" we are seriously trivializing genuine problems.
9:41 pm
@JD
"But when we start talking about “coercion” and “rape culture” we are seriously trivializing genuine problems."
Trivializing situations like this IS reflective of rape "culture" - a woman said, up front, what she was willing to do/show and over the course of a day, five men repeatedly tried to coerce her into doing/showing more. Then people come here to comment about how she "should have known better."
The refusal of men to respect a woman's boundaries and then blame the victim is pretty obvious "rape culture" to me. This specific situation may be "trivial" to you... but others see it as reflective of an overall culture that doesn't respect women's sexual boundaries and then blames them when something goes wrong (e.g., rape culture).
2:34 am
A contract is a contract.
9:40 pm
I wish she'd had more people in her corner that day. What a horrible situation. Good for her for sticking firm to her instincts even when they made it next to impossible. I can't imagine what a less intelligent girl with fewer resources could have done in her shoes. Chilling.
10:15 pm
Her contract surely provided that she would be paid a substantial fee for the pictures that she agreed to pose for. When things went sideways she could certainly have walked out, but she would have lost her fee, and might even have been liable for breach of contract herself. She was right to stay and try to enforce the terms of her contract. The real problem is that she apparently showed up alone, and then had to call her publicist for help. If she had gone to the shoot with her own stylist, publicist etc. at her side, the Playboy crowd might have been less inclined to bully her. And she or her publicist should have called the Playboy rep, presumably a senior manager, who signed the contract and demanded that he tell his employees to comply with it. Or maybe she should have called her lawyer and him call Playboy. The sleazebag photographer will do whatever he can get away with; management would understand the consequences of breaching their contract. Short answer: Don't debate with staff, demand their boss.
10:29 pm
I *absolutely* think that the five guys and the stylist were asses and "the bad guys" here.
That said- if we women are so helpless that we can't stand up and say no, this is what our contract says, we are going by it; if we're so terrified at being called a bitch and unwilling to stand up for what we know is right because of that... Then really, aren't we saying we need a protector? We need a patriarchal society to take care of us, because we're too nice to do it ourselves?
I think Munn's complaints are fine. She *should* complain. How she was treated was BS. But- how about recognizing what she did that she could've handled better? She's not a second-class citizen: there's no reason she should accept that treatment. She has a right to expect to be respected, but she also has a responsibility as, ultimately, a role model to other women and girls, to demand that respect.
4:38 pm
@ Kelly
I DO appreciate the point you're trying to make - "That said- if we women are so helpless that we can’t stand up and say no, this is what our contract says, we are going by it; if we’re so terrified at being called a bitch and unwilling to stand up for what we know is right because of that… Then really, aren’t we saying we need a protector?"
But when the situation is 5:1 and the 5 are fully clothed and the 1 is in a persistent state of undress... well... I don't think this is a simple or clear cut situation of just "standing up for oneself." To be clear I'd have the same opinion if the 5 were women and the 1 was a man.
4:59 pm
This story reminds me why Playboy sucks and is irrelevant. During it's heyday an appearance in Playboy meant (at a minimum) you would see nipples, and more often then not also vagina. . . it's friggan Playboy after all! Not Maxim or Stuff magazine! The photographer has to honor the contract, but why is Playboy negotiating a "no nudity" photo shoot with a B list celebrity who is trying to elevate her career?!?!?
I bought the issue with Olivia Munn and was very disappointed. Not only was there no nudity but there was just one picture of Ms. Munn in the issue (excluding the cover), with a link to the Playboy website to see the other photos from the shoot. I will never buy Playboy again. Nor will I ever buy a magazine with an appearance of the self promoting, untalented hack > Ms. Munn
2:28 pm
By not agreeing to be nude for - for chrissakes - a Playboy shoot, Munn actively contributed to the rape culture.
6:34 pm
When She Says..."NO"...
I've not seen a copy of Playboy since they published a photoshoot of
Nancy Sinatra in 1995, but I hope they didn't give Ms. Sinatra as much grief
as they did Ms. Munn. It seems all parties involved went into the 'project' with unrealistic
expectations, wanting to expand their audiences. Ms. Munn gets wider exposure, Playboy gets to
sell more dead trees, and drive geek eyes to their gaudy, bloated, overpriced websites.
Suddenly it was the battle of wills between the over fifty year old institution-organization-
industry,(Playboy will insist that they are not 'porn'... they are "literature and photo-culture"),
vs. the young semi-buisnesswise woman half their age, by herself, yet! Bad choice by her to go
into that lion's den alone. What, she couldn't phone a friend. or recruit her publist, or agent?
Never the less I'm proud of her. She got the exposure, Playboy didn't get any nipple, or much else!
She won, she didn't cave in or compromise, despite all the
coersion, pressure, and being outnumbered at least five to one, by a bunch of oafs, or worse!
Contract indeed... I'm sure we all know by now what contracts, usually wielded
by men in suits, are worth! These guys live by bad faith. And these clowns had the nerve to call her back for a 'do over'!
Any one remember that great song from the Eighties, "Men Without Shame"?
Of course, we just hear Ms. Munn's side of the story, I'm sure Playboy says "No Comment"...
but one can see Playboys "comment" every month, if one cares, or dares to, witness the seemingly
endless line of attractive women whom appear in the print or web versions of their product, just
imagine the coersion they are subjected to, as they come away from what began as a simple photoshoot session with the
bad breast augmentation job and the bleached blonde hair that a bunch of oafs insisted was a great idea,
or, "the way we do it here".
In this internet-interconnected, Facebook, Twitter age, almost any thing, especially photos of women wearing
anything other than, or less than, "Sunday Go to Church" attire, can and will become fodder for, as Dean Wormer said
"your permanent record, which will follow you for ever". Whoops, there went that promotion, or
that security clearance, or that loan, or that insurance you applied for. Unless they are looking
for a career in "the Industry", or a career at Hooters, a few brief flings with Playboy hardly seems worth it.
This chapter in Ms. Munn's book should be required reading for any women considering dealing unclothed.
with Playboy.
2:52 pm
I would like to know how accurate her story is. I would not be surprised if she embellished the experience at Playboy so she would have a juicy tidbit for her book.
And believe me, the "rising star" Olivia Munn will be doing Playboy again in 5 - 10 years when her career stalls because she is not talented. This time she will reveal all of the "goods".... and more then likely will have had numerous breast augmentations by that time.