Here are some scans of Marge Simpson “naked” in Playboy magazine, you weirdo perverts. Seriously, this is such a weird thing that exists. 2009, everybody.

Comments (36)
  1. THIS IS NOT OK

  2. Rule 34, people. Rule 34…

    • etho  |   Posted on Oct 19th, 2009 0

      You mean there is porn based on Marge Simsons appearance in Playboy?

      • Ahh! Don’t say that!
        Now there’s porn based on Videogum users being unsure about whether there’s porn of Marge Simpson being in Playboy!
        Shit just got META!

  3. There’s no way to describe this event. As a huge cultural icon, Playboy’s kinda jumped the shark. But it’s a huge terrible cultural icon which has spawned a brand devoted to female nudity, which wasn’t good before it encountered the shark. So it’s more like it’s lazily passing the shark with every issue, but this time it stopped to say hi to the shark.
    Hi.

  4. I hope Matt Groening chokes on his lobster-stuffed-with-tacos tonight.

  5. I have one question that is still unanswered and that is does Marge have blue pubic hair?

  6. Get out, Bart, I’m piss!

  7. It’s like walking in on your parents having sex. Ugh!

  8. She’s totally had work done.

  9. I could have done without the see through nightie.

    • I could have done without this actual comment below the photos on that page (is there a “nsfw” acronym for “you can’t un-read what you are about to read”?): “ok, she’s yellow. why does she havenormal colored nipples? and marge nipples are awkward”

  10. You know, I always thought it was kind of weird and arbitrary the way that female nipples, in and of themselves, definted “nudity.” You can show the whole entire breast with the exception of two tiny circular regions, and the subject is still considered “decent”? How does that make sense?

    That is to say, I always thought it was kind of weird and arbitrary. Then I saw Marge Simpson’s aureoles through her top.

    INDECENT.

  11. I’m not sure why I’m pointing this out but…this is especially disappointing (aside from the obvious reasons) because this means that The Simpsons is stooping to Family Guy level. That show has creepily sexualized Lois from the beginning, showing her in her skivvies and sexualizing her in a way cartoons shouldn’t be sexualized, and now The Simpsons can’t be like, “Well, at least we don’t do THAT.” YOU DO DO THAT. And it can’t be undone.

  12. Does anyone know if the Stephen King and Tracy Morgan spreads are more tasteful?

  13. My question is, is there someone getting off on this somewhere? Because I think someone is getting off on this somewhere, and I find that highly unsettling.

  14. I can sum up my nausea about this in one word: NIPPLES.

  15. Clark  |   Posted on Oct 19th, 2009 0

    So is it safe to assume that none of you guys are fans of hentai then?

  16. That makes my eyes want to retreat into my skull.

  17. No! That is not okay! Marge Simpson does not have breasts and she is not showing them in Playboy!

  18. noahpoah  |   Posted on Oct 19th, 2009 +5

    Those are far and away the most realistic nipples Playboy has shown in quite some time.

  19. “Where’s the Lisa spread?”
    -Roman Polanski

  20. They showed Bart’s junk in the Simpson’s movie, but that was clever and funny and a comment on censorship and all that. This is just creepy and lecherous and ewww.

  21. Tina  |   Posted on Oct 20th, 2009 0

    _ClassyMingle.com__ is the best and largest online personals site dedicated to men and women seeking a higher caliber online dating experience.
    Our clients include CEOs, Professional Athletes, Doctors, Lawyers, Investors, Entrepreneurs, Beauty Queens, Fitness Models, and Hollywood Celebrities,
    just to name a few .Everyone is welcome here. You don’t have to be wealthy or famous.

  22. Yay! Print media has finally caught up to 1991′s alt.binaries.erotica.cartoons.simpsons.tasteful.moderated usenet group
    Ain’t no stopping us now, print media

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post, reply to, or rate a comment.