An Open Letter to Jon Hamm's Penis
film / tv / lists / guides / news / love / celeb / video / think pieces / staff / podcasts / web culture / politics / dc / snl / netflix / marvel / cbr

An Open Letter to Jon Hamm's Penis

By Courtney Enlow | Celebrities Are Better than You | March 28, 2013 | Comments ()


Dear Jon Hamm's penis,

I 've heard you're upset about the amount of attention being lavished upon you, and I'm so sorry to hear that. On behalf of the internet, we're sorry. We all adore Jon Hamm, and would never want him to face the indignity of objectification.

I mean, how awful it must be for you both to feel as though the entire internet sees you as only a body part, ignoring the brain above and the soul within, diminishing you into a sexual object for our own giggles and lust. I can't imagine what that would be like. I'm sure very few people truly can.

So, to you, Jon Hamm and Jon Hamm's penis, I apologize for what you must have been going through. How dare we, the internet, focus only on these physical, private parts of your body. That must have been so embarrassing.


5 Shows After Dark 3/28/13 | On the Side of the Angels: "Sherlock," Sociopathy, and Evil

Comments Are Welcome, Bigots and Trolls Are Not

  • Judy Crews

    I loved the sarcasm in the letter ! I mean, who believes that Jon Hamm doesn't relish the attention, and in fact encourages it ? What happened to good taste? And why resent people wanting you to wear underwear, for heaven sake ? Most disappointing was his arrogance and defensiveness, and his poor choice of language in expressing himself. Who cares about his anatomy ? Obviously he does more than anyone. Just a tawdry situation not worthy of respect.

  • Buck Forty

    You're apologizing to the wrong person. Jon Hamm might be upset, but Jon Hamm’s penis is not. Jon Hamm’s penis is loving all the attention. Jon Hamm’s penis is all "Yoohoo! Look at me! I'm Jon Hamm’s penis!" Jon Hamm’s penis is cock o' the walk right now. I'm guessing Jon Hamm’s penis is seeking representation and the two will split soon, citing 'creative differences'.

  • Maguita NYC

    The gent doth protest too much methinks.
    Or what's good for the goose is good enough for the gander.

  • Grand Leaf

    Just put on some underwear, man. It's not that f'ing hard.

  • pageslave

    *slow clap*
    And THAT'S why I've been reading here since the beginnings...well played!

  • Slash

    I've always thought it's fucked up how we (humans, not just Americans) fetishize body parts. It's just fucked up. Boobs are mammaries. They're not ornamental, they're to feed infants. We turned them into "sexual" objects. Same with the reproductive organs. They're purely functional. We just impose our own fuck-up-ed-ness on them. There's no reason for them to be either objects of worship or fear or whatever other jacked up psychological baggage we heap onto them.

  • e jerry powell

    Well, I'd ignore it if only he'd PUT IT AWAY.

    Actually, that's a lie.

  • L.O.V.E.

    The thing is, a man KNOWS when his pecker is making its presence known. And a man of his stature KNOWS he is being photographed. And a man KNOWS that there is this thing called "underwear" that prevents the pecker from scaring small children away.

    And THIS is how the penis is different than breasts. If my wife and I go to our child's school for a parent-teacher conference, or perhaps go the beach, or maybe just head over to the gym, there may be a mix of reactions about her revealing cleavage, but if my twig and berries are sitting on my lap like a fruit bowl there is only one direction that presentation is going.

  • Kristen Mc

    So, can we go back to talking about his penis then? I for one am still wondering if he's a grow-er, or just a show-er. These things are important.

  • jollies

    Don't behead me for asking, but isn't there a difference between being oggled and objectified as a result of posing in a photoshoot wearing revealing clothing and being oggled and objectified while walking down the street? I agree, he could wear some underwear, but he's not wearing short shorts or doing a GQ photoshoot in chaps and speedos.

    I'm guessing CH gets oggled and objectified wherever she goes, but almost all the links show her voluntarily enhancing the areas of objectification. If Hamm used some form of waist corset and a push-up thong (things I just invented in my mind to make this point), I would have less sympathy if he complained about people taling notice of his junk.

  • kirbyjay

    But he's walking around without undies.....He knows he has a monster there so he should properly contain it and it won't be ogled.
    JEEZ LU EEZE that is one big dick.

  • Buck Forty

    I know, he's just asking for it, right? If you wanna dress so provocatively then don't get upset if you get what's coming.

  • St

    I wonder why he wasn’t arrested when he was walking like that in public. Where kids could see him.

    John Hamm has issues. It’s one thing when men don’t want to wear underwear. It’s another when John Hamm walks like that where everybody can see his penis. How is it even comfortable when it hangs out like sausage in one side of the pants, tied to a leg? When man walks, knowing that everybody can see his penis then he really has issues.

  • mairimba

    Just like camel-toes.

  • lowercase_ryan

    Not trying to stir, but legit question: has Christina Hendricks ever complained publicly about this type of thing? A quick google search didn't get me anything, but I think one of you would know.

  • brite

    Hendrick's pitched a small snit in Australia when the interviewer repeatedly asked her about being 'full figured' and walked out on the interview ...don't know if this qualifies as a legitimate complaint.

  • lowercase_ryan

    I remember that, I knew there was something. Thank you. I think it was a complaint actually.

  • If she has, I'd venture a guess it didn't pick up the steam Hamm's did. I also wonder if female celebrities who are widely known for their physical attributes don't feel some trepidation when it comes to speaking out, for fear (either theirs or their management's) of turning fans/attention away. It's part of a broader issue, similar to the whole telling women to smile thing--when men are objectified, they can admit it's insulting. Women in the public eye, particularly ones who pose for *certain* photo spreads, aren't always granted that same opportunity.

  • lowercase_ryan

    I agree with all of this.

  • The Pink Hulk

    Oh BOO FUCKING HOO, he's being objectified. News flash: that's the job you signed up for, dude. Now, if you're gonna get all butthurt about it, try buying a paid of briefs to wrangle that snake, shutting up, and collecting your million dollar paycheck. Since when did Pajiba start attracting so many effing PC followers? I feel like I'm in a feminist studies class.

  • ...or Jezebel. *shudders*

  • Sara_Tonin00

    Well, as he literally says: he didn't think it was the job he signed. Which makes him different from most women, who do know to some extent that fame signs them up for this.

  • I had a similar reaction to his protest. While I completely agree and think he was right to point out how stupid and inappropriate our prurient fixations are, you are correct that similar protests from women actors who would like to be less objectified tend to fall on deaf ears. Or, worse, garner the response: then you shouldn't put it out there, as if we could leave these things at home (or as if a female actress should set aside one of the things currently valued from an entertainment marketing standpoint rather than pointing out the problems inherent in the valuation). So, I guess what folks could have said was "well, John, perhaps you ought to put that away where people can't see it" but I didn't see any articles offering up that advice. Even though that was the first thing I thought, because I'm not fascinated by other people's genitalia unless there's direct contact happening. With me, that is.

  • brite

    and your point is.....? Really girl, get off your girrrrrrlpowered, neo-feminist high horse and get over yourself. Women and men have been 'objectified' for centuries. Michaelangelo's David ring any bells for you? How about Manet's Olympia? If we allow that television and movies are to be considered an art form, then we will have to allow that the very human cultures that create such art have an affinity for the human (and naked) form. If our modern culture is confused and conflicted over human sexuality, which it most assuredly is, it is not helpful to cry gender discrimination and wave the 'I'm a feminist flag' when a human male might feel 'objectified' or otherwise distressed by such attentions. Feminism is not about 'women's rights', it's about HUMAN rights.

    And I write all this as a woman who was a feminist long before you were even born.

  • ghisent

    YES! Play the "I'm a better feminist than you" card and then call her names! THAT'LL TEACH HER!

  • brite

    I never said I was a 'better' feminist, just that I've been at it a long time, before 'feminist' was even a common word in our lexicon.

  • ghisent

    Don't worry, between the "girrrrrrlpowered, neo-feminist" bit and the "long before you were even born," I'm pretty sure we all got your point.

  • brite

    Excellent! Wouldn't want to be misunderstood or have to back pedal on anything I posted.

  • $27019454

    Actually, I stopped reading after the horses and the name-calling started...

  • $27019454

    Not to say I agree or disagree here but Courtney is the last person who would be on a high horse. Or a sober horse for that matter. But seriously, if you read this site with any regularity, you'll know that CEH is not on a horse.

  • I am so embarrassed right now that this of any of my articles was written on the back of my steed, Windjammer.

  • $27019454

    Giddyap, Windjammah!

  • Sara_Tonin00

    No, this doesn't fly. For instance, I'm annoyed I clicked on a single one of those links, which I thought would show some sort of Hammian hypocrisy, and instead was some tumblr page of Hendricks boobs.

    He's speaking up. And the women who object to having tumblrs of their boobs made should also speak up.

    Maybe there's someone else this letter should've been addressed to?

  • Actually, the letter itself is full of understanding for his position
    and feelings about it. The links simply point out how often his co-star
    deals with that, perhaps so he could realize that she could sympathize
    with his plight. It's not blaming him for her objectification, merely making clear how rampant it is. Maybe it might make him consider
    becoming the champion of not treating Hendricks like a pair of boobs.
    You know, if that sort of thing actually bothers him. Also, she has spoken out. And, much like Hamm's request is likely to be, her protests have been ignored.

  • My point is not that he should not speak up. He did nothing wrong or hypocritical. My point is that this is not merely common with female celebrities--it's the expected norm. Have you seen a single article about Christina Hendricks or Kat Dennings or Salma Hayek where at least one comment didn't mention their breasts? His displeasure in no way rang hollow to me, but it *was* akin to every sitcom where a man goes to a gay bar or encounters a group of horny women and makes some statement about feeling like a piece of meat, and the joke is "that's how we feel all the time."

    My letter is not sarcastic. I was merely comparing two people's experiences. Because for one of them, it has been an embarrassing few weeks. For the other, it's at least 90% of her public discussion throughout the past six years or so.

  • Salieri2

    My hand to Jesus, I read "His displeasure in no way wang hollow to me." That is all.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    As a woman, I get that, I've had that discussion. But Hamm knows it too, and he says so. He says it's not high on the list of world problems, and he's certainly not the only victim.

    But you're writing for a website that *posted* his video complaint. And not one, that I've seen, for Hendricks or Dennings or Hayek, or any woman with an objectified ass, or legs. Tell me where Pajiba posted the video/plea from a woman celebrity complaining about her boobs being a point of focus and the site backing off from it. Show me even a single *post* about Hendricks or Dennings and Hayek where the Pajiban writer posting it didn't mention her "luscious pillows" or "cushy orbs" or some other terrible faux-ironic euphemism, or feature a photo where it wasn't prominent.

    I get that it's cutesy, and I'm not talking about comments - no site can really be responsible for its commenters. I get that it's a fine line to straddle. But we're stuck in this have-it-both-ways of contributing to the problem and then complaining about it.

    By the way - I also get the fine line women like Hendricks walk (again, as I am one, and do walk it) about attracting vs. complaining about attention. How little do we have to wear before we're encouraging it vs merely accepting it, and does tacit acceptance indicate approval?

    I'll also say: sometimes it does take a situation a little outside of the norm - like tumblrs devoted to the outline of a tv star's cock - to show how fucked up the status quo is.

  • I don't mean to paste my own response, but there's some crossover in another answer I just posted, and I didn't want you to think I'm writing you off with a stock response (and I totally agree with your last point):

    If she has [complained], I'd venture a guess it didn't pick up the steam Hamm's did. I also wonder if female celebrities who are widely known for their physical attributes don't feel some trepidation when it comes to speaking out, for fear (either theirs or their management's) of turning fans/attention away. It's part of a broader issue, similar to the whole telling women to smile thing--when men are objectified, they can admit it's insulting. Women in the public eye, particularly ones who pose for *certain* photo spreads, aren't always granted that same opportunity.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    Thanks, Courtney, and yes to your point about women speaking up (makes us bitches), which is something that was in my head when I started writing the last response.

    Maybe this letter should actually be to DR ;) I'm sure he's tired of objectifying Hendricks, too.

  • mairimba


  • the chaplain

    What, did Jon Hamm make all that bullshit or something?

  • SugarSmak

    I just listened to Jon Hamm on Pete Holmes' "You Made it Weird" podcast where he addressed the matter quite eloquently. I don't think anyone's body parts should be objectified either. Besides, with that face on him, my gaze would never have to move any further south. He continues to raise my expectations as to what a real man should be, so I apologize in advance to all of you gentlemen on OKCupid.

  • pxilated

    It's not as though Jon Hamm's penis posted all those boobs.

  • TherecanbeonlyoneAdmin

    Court, the penis doesn't understand even if you speak directly to him. Believe me, I've tried. Many times. He might perk up a bit and be all, "Wait! What? You talking to me?" but eventually he just goes back to sleep because it's tired from a long day of having to wake up really quickly only to be disappointed that nothing's really happening and dosing off after a minute or so.

    Then there are the times that it's woken up with a beating so severe that the poor bastard doesn't even know what's going on. The poor chump so thoroughly thrashed that he barfs up his innards in submission just so his abusers will finally leave him alone. It's a defence mechanism.

    There is the odd time that he'll wake up in a warm, moist environment (which is his preferred habitat) but it happens so rarely that it's really more of a surprise than anything. He really just can't believe that he's not being trounced within an inch of his life.

    In closing, the penis isn't sentient. Unless... is John Hamm's penis able to carry on a conversation and capable of understanding complex language? FUCK YOU JOHN HAMM!

  • Xochitl Herrera Villarreal

    THIS. forever and ever. let's close all the eloquent eloquence entries because this will win ALL THE TIME :P
    Also, what Ms. Enlow said.

  • Kballs

    This. All day.

  • $27019454

    The penis has no ears. He hears nothing. I've tried. It's better if you use him as a microphone. Just take my word for it and don't whack it on the head (teehee) and say, "Is this on? Check, 1, 2!"

  • Joe Grunenwald

    When it's on, it's pretty obvious.

  • gdobbs

    THANK YOU! This is exactly what I've been thinking the whole time!

  • Deidra

    Neither of them should be treated like inanimate objects. So he should just shut up and not say anything?

  • ghisent

    Pretty sure that's not her point at all. The point isn't that he should shut up and not say anything. The point is to metaphorically show men, and society at large, what it is that women suffer through on a routine basis. Hamm's gripe is perfectly legitimate, yet it's because he's a man that it garners the attention that it does. Women like Hendricks get objectified literally 24/7, and no one says boo. Hamm suffers through a couple of awkward photgraphs of his package, and his single plea for help is broadcast across the universe.

  • Deidra

    So why is he the object of the facetious letter? His "single plea for help" was reasonably calling it kind of rude in one Rolling Stone Interview, and the Internet being what is and loving to talk about his dick, amplified it to a deafening roar (also there's the immediacy of the story, so it seems like the BIGGEST THING EVER right now). Hendricks has come out saying that she doesn't like being referred to as full-figured, and people do say boo about it.

    P.S. the site we are on and love so much objectifies women and men all the time. Equal objectification is not better than equally NOT objectifying.

  • chanohack

    Let's not confuse our terms here. Looking at a hot person and thinking "He/she is hot! That gives me tingles in my tingle parts!" is not objectifying. Looking at a hot person and thinking, "He/she has a really great chest! I love looking at him/her!" is not objectifying. Objectifying is thinking of a person as an object instead of a human being. Objectifying is looking at a hot person and thinking, "I want those abs near me," or "Christina IS boobies," or "I want to own him," or "I want to have my way with her."

    Saying things like, "I want to put him in my pocket" is objectification, even if it isn't sexual objectification.

    This site does objectify people (Allison Brie boobie post), but not all the time. And I don't necessarily think that doing so is always harmful. It is the constant objectification of women that harms our society and gives people dangerous ideas about life and "the way things are," that women aren't human beings who act for themselves, they're just bodies.

    I'm going out on a limb here, but yes, it IS less bad that we are ogling Hamm, because there isn't a rampant problem with the way men are perceived as property. Men are not considered to be only as good as their bodies. For most people, John Hamm is still John Hamm, he's not a walking penis. Christina Hendricks isn't so lucky. She can't get away from people who only want to talk about her body.

  • Sara_Tonin00

    Those are great points. And also tap into the fact the point this particular group objectifiies Hamm's dong is because it's attached to Hamm. Not because of its tremendous wang factor.

  • chanohack

    That is a good point and I don't understand those downvotes.

  • ghisent

    He's the object of the letter because he's in the spotlight right now, and is the one calling for help, and the internet is responding. And as a result, he's being used to deliver the message because he's who people are paying attention to at the moment. Hendricks has certainly called out for similar help, and there's some modicum of positive response but overall? Her pleas are forgotten and now there's a billion websites dedicated to her chest, dignity be damned. Hamm's crotch will be forgotten about soon, and Hendricks will never have that luxury, no matter how much she pleads for a little decency.

    There's a line -- and I'll concede that it's a very fine line, that this site sometimes blurs -- between objectification and simply noting that someone is attractive. I'd posit that Pajiba's obsessions are more with general attractiveness and aren't nearly as crass and objectifying as the majority of other outlets. It's a small but crucial difference. I'm not saying the line is never crossed here, but it's certainly not as routine.

  • Deidra

    "Hamm's crotch will be forgotten about soon"

    I don't agree with that assertion at all. Have you ever been to Tumblr? I'm saying that make the point that you've made without making a drippingly sarcastic letter that makes it seem like Hamm has done anything wrong.

    Re: Pajiba:

    Those four articles took me less than a minute to find.

  • ghisent

    Like I said, they cross the line at times. I admit that, and I'm not thrilled when it happens. But overall, I think we can agree that the standard is higher here than it is most other places with similar content.

    That said, you have a point re: the tone. While I think it was well done, I also see how it's getting mistaken for something that's accusatory or condemning of Hamm. FWIW, that wasn't her intent as she noted elsewhere in the comments, but I agree that some people might misconstrue the purpose of the article.

  • Also, three of those articles are by Joanna who is an admitted smut peddler.

  • Rochelle

    I was about to say that, but I wouldn't have said it so well.

  • Samantha Klein

    BAM. Awesome.

  • Kballs

    Hee hee! You said "penis."

  • e jerry powell

    Don't make her say it again.

  • Joe Broggio

    Best article I'll read today.

  • Superasente

    I love you, Courtney. You distribute delicious justice like a six year old at a lemonaid stand.

  • Mrs. Julien

    Thank you, merci beaucoup, danke schon, kamsahumnida, arigato, mille grazie.

blog comments powered by Disqus