Olsen Twins to appear in Playboy upon turning 18 -- *really?*

My spidey sense is going off like a Gatling gun about this one.

I just heard (to my dismay) the UL that the Olsen Twins are to appear in Playboy upon turning 18 (which, according to my reluctant research, happens on June 13, 2004).

[sup]Thanks…thanks for your sympathy.[/sup]

Has anyone else heard such a thing? Under normal circumstances, I would just refer to Snopes and leave the poor SDMB out of this, but Snopes isn’t talking. This is such a puzzling matter that I am wondering, of course, how far this line o’ bull got. Anyone else hear this?

Or :eek: could it actually be true?

The same UL was going around with Britney Spears at 18. It’s all fake. We won’t be seeing them naked until they hit their 30’s and are broke and desperate.

That’s good to hear, honestly. Thanks.

Good god, man! Dont’ scare us like that!

Just imagine the possibilites if they ever moved past cheesecake.

On second thought, don’t. I wish I hadn’t.

Ew.

[homer]Mmmmm…cheesecake…[/homer]

Now, if we can just get them on stage with Tatu…

Hey, it worked for Tiffany.

Now where’s Debbie Gibson? Or the Bangles?

No way. Those girls are far too wealthy to pose nude. They’ve managed their money very well up to this point, so I’m sorry, but I just don’t see it happening.

Also, their entire market for clothing, TV, videos, etc. is made up of children (I won’t get into why fully grown men might purchase “Switching Goals” or “You’re invited to Mary Kate and Ashley’s Sleepover Party”) and I doubt they’d want to sacrifice their wholseome image (images? No, iage. They even appear together on their imdb.com listing) and future millions for a paltry one or two for posing.

Both KrustyKlown and Cat Fight raise points that agree with my stance; the very stance I had upon hearing this UL. Even upon hearing this, I knew that there was a (approximately) 99.99999% chance* it was false. Despite this stance, my OP had a “say it isn’t so” vein to it, which has (gladly) evoled into “How many people have heard this (ludicrous) rumor?”.

*Allowing for the mere chance it was (gasp) true – taking into context the phenomenon that Jonathan’s cite proves.

Aside from what’s been previously mentioned, there’s the whole legal problem of enforcing some sort of contract against children. In most states, kids are given the option of repudiating contracts they’ve entered (except for contracts for necessities like food and water) once they reach the age of majority (usually 18). So even if Britney, the Olsen twins, and TaTu all agreed to do a joint layout for Playboy when they turned 18, and they accepted the money when they were all 16, they would most likely have the option of giving back the money and not doing the layout when they turned 18.

(Caveat: in the real world, it’s a little more complicated than I’ve just described, but the principle still applies).

Let’s face it- it’s been a loooong time since posing for Playboy was a positive career move. Today, posing for Playboy is like appearing on “I’m a Celebrity- Get Me Out of Here.” That is, it’s a sign of desperation (“I can’t even get on Hollywood Squares any more!”).

In the 1970s, when every guy my age WANTED to see Farrah Fawcett naked, she wouldn’t do it. Today, she gets naked at the drop of a hat, but nobody wants to see it any more! So will it be with the Olsen Twins. Today, they’re extremely rich and popular. Why would they WANT to appear in Playboy?

Moreover, nowadays, the readership for Playboy is my age (42) and older. Those are BAD demographics, folks! Stars want to appeal to much YOUNGER audiences. Which means that, even IF Mary Kate or Ashley wanted to show off a sexier side one day, she wouldn’t do a nude spread in Playboy. She’d do a bikini or lingerie layout in one of the “laddie” magazines like Maxim. That way, she could please younger males while still staying PG-13.

Yeah, but every straight man in America would buy the issue of Playboy if the Olsen twins appeared in it on their 18th birthday.

[Kid Rock]If there’s grass on the field, “Play ball!”[/KR]

I just keep getting depressed whenever I hear that the Olson twin’s birthdays are the same as mine… ::sigh::

Why the hell are the Olsen twins the new standard for jailbait?

I mean, they aren’t hideous, but, unlike younger Britney of Tatu, they aren’t selling themselves on a sexy image. Why do we act as if they are when they’ve portrayed themselves as nothing but wholesome?

You kidding? Most of the straight guys would buy it if all they did was the interview!

Unlikely but possible. The question is going to be whether the Olsens are able to develop an adult acting career or remain stuck with a diminishing role as former child stars. If it’s the latter, then they may decide that it would be a good career move to show they’re “all gron up” with a Playboy shoot.

Personally, I’d rather hope that the similar rumors about Jennifer Love Hewitt that were circulating a couple of years back end up bearing fruit.

Would they have to wait to take the actual photos untill they turned 18? If the magazine came out on their birthday then the photos would be of underage girls. (and therefore kiddie porn and you will have to put a sign in your yard and on your car and register with the local authorities) But if the pictures were taken a few days later you would be a normal red blodded american male.