Kendra Wilkinson, 29, is not exactly being kind to her ex-boyfriend, Hugh Hefner, who is now 88 years old. A new report is claiming that Kendra has revealed having sex with Hugh was not enjoyable and also felt like a job. Yikes.
Kendra Wilkinson: Sex With Hugh Hefner ‘Felt Like A Job’
Wow, this is pretty unpleasant.
In a new interview, Kendra has opened up about having sex with her former boss and boyfriend, Hugh, and she has absolutely nothing nice to say about the experience.
“I was usually very drunk doing those evenings, I tended not to care about much until the next day. I had to be very drunk or smoke lots of weed to survive those nights,” Kendra reportedly said, according to the Daily Mirror.
Ouch. It sure seems like Kendra is biting the hand that once fed her, doesn’t it?
After all, Kendra’s celebrity peaked while she was appearing on The Girls Next Door as one of Hugh’s three girlfriends in 2005.
Kendra Claims Hugh Was A ‘Minute’ Man
Making matters worse, Kendra described in uncomplimentary detail how quickly sex with Hugh would take.
“At about the minute mark, I pulled away and it was done. It was like a job. Clock in, clock out. It’s not like I enjoyed having sex with him,” she reportedly said.
Kendra also claims that Hugh did not feel like she was “there for him,” and that he often came to her bed in the middle of the night “crying.”
Sounds like life inside the Playboy mansion isn’t all it was once cracked up to be.
Waht do YOU think, HollywoodLifers — Is Kendra being too mean to Hugh in this new interview? Should she have said these things about their sex life?
It’s safe to say that Kendra Wilkinson, 29, was not a fan of sex with Hugh Hefner, 88. Despite living under Hugh’s roof for five years in the Playboy mansion,HollywoodLife.com has found out EXCLUSIVELY that Kendra is still harboring disappointment that Hugh hasn’t supported her during tough times like he has with his other exes.
Kendra Wilkinson Disses Hugh Hefner — Why She Spoke About Their Sex Life
Kendra reportedly told the Daily Mirror that she had to be drunk or smoke a lot of weed to get through nights with Hugh. The reason why Kendra decided to open up about her personal life with Hugh is because he abandoned her financially and she didn’t have anything to lose.
“She still feels bitter that Hugh, in her eyes, left her high and dry after Girls Next Door,” a source told HollywoodLife.com EXCLUSIVELY. “She thought Hugh was going to fund her lifestyle forever. He didn’t, and she thinks that shaming him about sex will hurt him.”
Fortunately, Hugh is so experienced in life that the cruel diss doesn’t bother him at all.
“He doesn’t care about it. He is too old for needless drama,” our source continued.
According to Kendra, sex with Hugh never took very long.
“At about the minute mark, I pulled away and it was done,” she continued. “It was like a job. Clock in, clock out. It’s not like I enjoyed having sex with him.”
Ouch. If this is Kendra’s way of trying to hurt Hugh, it’s probably not the most mature idea.
HollywoodLifers, do you think Kendra should have spoken out about her sex life with Hugh? Let us know.
Hugh Hefner’s Dirty Little Secret
He’s also sexually dysfunctional.
In her emotionally mauling book Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality, researcher Gail Dines writes how the infamous TV show “The Girls Next Door,” which started in 2005, “provides a sanitized version of life at the Playboy mansion, never showing the reality of the experiences for the young women who live and sleep with eighty-three-year-old Hefner.”
Perhaps most revealingly, she points out how Izabella St James, one of Hefner’s ‘ex-girlfriends,’ has written that while Hefner would often often have unprotected sex with multiple women, he could not reach sexual completion without using pornography and stimulating himself.
That’s right. Porn, the most viral manifestation of the Sexual Revolution, is reducing millions of men to pathetic dependents desperately scrolling through thousands of pictures and videos—and causing many of them to become impotent. Even a man with a non-stop stream of beautiful women sleeping with him, one of the most easily recognizable sex icons of our time, cannot get off without porn.
But it is us, supposedly, who are “anti-sex.”
Those of us who hold to a Judeo-Christian view of sexual ethics are invariably accused of being “prudes” or “anti-sex.” Rejecting the Sexual Revolution and the host of new sexually transmitted diseases, incalculable amount of psychological physical pain, broken marriages, porn addictions, and aborted and dismembered “love” children that it brought with it, it seems, is the primary way to loudly declare yourself a cultural heretic.
Let me break it down. We, apparently, are the ones who are “anti-sex” because we elevate sex as an action of such significance that it should take place in a loving, committed context – marriage – one that is, incidentally, also the best context in which to raise children. We recognize that sex is an extraordinarily powerful human experience, one that we toy with or abuse at our peril. But the Sexual Revolutionaries insist that this is archaic and foolish. “More sex,” they say, “more sex, all the time and with whomever you’d like.”
Someone should make these people take economics. Basic rule: If you commodify something, you cheapen it. We’ve put cash prices on intimate human experiences, and we’ve created an industry that amounts to nothing more than a trade in human flesh. I’m no anti-capitalist, but some things should not be bought and sold. But now that millions have been pimped out by the Sexual Revolution, we do just that. We treat sex like a game or a toy. And, like over-enthusiastic children, we’ve broken it.
Here are just a very brief sampling of a few recent headlines:
– “Porn causing erectile dysfunction in young men”—Global News
– “Internet pornography destroying men’s ability to perform with real women”—Daily Mail
– “Does porn contribute to erectile dysfunction?”—Psychology Today
I often wonder why more people don’t see the sad irony in this. Like thirsty men and women guzzling salt water, we simply inflame our lusts with pornography, dehydrating ourselves of the true human intimacy we crave. Rather than recognizing it for the poison that it is, we claim that porn is a sex aid, or carefree recreation, or even a tool for helping a flagging marriage. Clinging to this cultural delusion is doing precisely the opposite of what the Sexual Revolutionaries promised us it would do: It’s killing sex.
Yet when people try to point this out—from self-described radical feminist Gail Dines to the Christian scholars who warned that this would happen before we even pried open Pandora’s Box—it is they who get called “anti-sex.”
Hugh Hefner built an empire selling the bodies of young, attractive women and men to millions, but his cash has not stopped him from becoming enslaved by his own product. When I consider that the very man who is envied by millions for the sexual lifestyle he leads can himself only find pleasure in the pale substitute for human intimacy he markets to the masses, it brings to mind something Christopher Hitchens once said, when responding to a Marxist in his audience. The quotation perfectly fits this circumstance as well.
“Well, there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. There you have it,” Hitchens said. “You see how far the termites have spread, and how long and well they’ve dined.”
And so they have.