Rant #2,094: I'm a Girl Watcher

OK, today's column is going to be more for the guys than the girls, although ladies, don't leave so soon, I think you might get something worthwhile out of this too.

Men love women, and men love beautiful women.

All I have to say is that there are some really, really good looking women making news today.

First we start with Hope Hicks, President Trump's top communications aide, who resigned the other day amid a storm of controversy.

Hicks is a former fashion model, which doesn't surprise me in the least. I have to say that I never heard of her before this week's travails, but let me tell you, in today's parlance, she is at the top of the current "hottie" list, for sure.

Then we have National Rifle Association spokesman Dana Loesch, who is trying to justify the association's aims and goals in the midst of the continued gun controversy which was reignited by the tragedy in Florida.

Loesch is so good looking that I truly want to believe every word she says, but I simply cannot. Yes, she is another hottie in the news, right up there with Hicks, even though both of them kind of double talk their way through everything.

With these two ladies' ascendence into the news stratosphere, these previously unknown women were thrust into the Internet galaxy, which for women like this, means that photos starting popping up of them not only doing their duty, but also having fun in bikinis and in more leisure wear.

Both had been "public" figures prior to their current careers--as I said, Hicks was a model, and Loesch had been a fixture on talk radio and other news venues--but all of a sudden, numerous pictures popped up of them in non-business attire, to feed the frenzy they had recently created to know more--and to see more--of these "new" political celebrities.

It almost reminds me of the Vanessa Williams controversy of years ago, when Penthouse put out nude photos of Williams to capitalize on her new-found stardom, photos that no one had cared about--or even knew existed--before Williams won the beauty contest.

Sure, she had to give up her crown, but it also served to push her career, and she overcame whatever negatives were associated with "posing nude" and became a name that most of us know from her successful acting and singing career.

Anyway, in the old days, you just know that Playboy would be knocking at the doors of Hicks and Loesch to pose for them, but these are different times, when some women think they are being objectified simply by taking a glance at them.

So we probably won't see more of the duo than we have seen.

But again, with the Internet, we have already seen plenty.

Look, I am not a letch, but like most guys, sure, I know what's going on, and I don't mind saying that I find these women very attractive.

Mix that with the talent that they have, and you have the complete package, so to speak.

If I am objectifying them, fine, I admit it, hit me with a wet noodle for doing so.

But that is how the world goes around, or at least went around in the "old" days.

You can't even glance at an attractive woman nowadays without being called for it, and I think that is just plain wrong.

Guys are attracted to girls, girls are attracted to guys, and other lifestyles notwithstanding, that is how it is, and how it will be for the ages.

The rule is clear: look but never touch.

Yes, evidently some people don't know that, but I certainly do.

That's really what made a magazine like Playboy so successful in its time, and while we are talking about it, what about Jane Seymour, who will be having a spread in the magazine at the ripe young age of 67, the oldest woman ever to pose in the pages of that magazine.

Heck, if she can do it, fine. She has been in the pages of the magazine before, so if she still looks good, why not now?

Is she being objectified by us looking at her?

Do you think she really cares?

Have a good weekend. I will speak to you again on Monday.