Fox News

"Maxim, the bawdy men’s magazine, isn’t exactly known for the modesty of its cover subjects. But at least one observer says that the February issue featuring "Perfect Couples" star Olivia Munn wearing little more than a pair of verrrry transparent lace panties is going a bit too far.“It’s disgusting,” Dan Gainor, Vice President of Business & Culture at the Media Research Center, tells FOX411.“Maxim has moved their magazine from tawdry to full-on pornography.”

With America now privy to Munn’s personal grooming habits, Gainor predicts that retailers will race to put the offending issue under the counter.

“Any store could have children coming in. If I were a parent, and I walked into a store and saw that cover, I would make a scene until the manager hid it," Gainor said. Wal-Mart shoppers, for one, won’t see Munn in her unmentionables, but that's because the retailer hasn’t carried the magazine since 2003. The nation’s largest retailer permanently pulled Maxim from shelves after “listening to customers and associates.”

After being banned by Wal-Mart way back when, puzzled publisher Stephen Colvin told the New York Times, “I don't think that these decisions are often rational; they are subjective. For any men's magazine to put a woman on the cover seems a bit troubling to (Wal-Mart)."

I personally think she's ugly and if I was a man I couldn't stoke the goat to her, but big deal....yes or no?

Personally I feel its not a big deal, maybe if I was a parent. But still, you can barely see anything, so I'm going with a no on this one. I've seen way "worse" magazine covers on news stands before anyway. Also, I really don't find her that hot either, Siren, I mean she isn't ugly, but still, I wouldn't classify her as hot. I'm sure this cover will be made into a big deal regardless, as these things always are...

Photoshopped.

No S*** Photoshoped .. who and what isn't these days. Olivia Munn is my celebrity crush and yes I think she's really beautiful but I also think she's frickin hilarious. Funny women like her, Sarah Silverman, Jill Talley are more appealing to me.

I don't really see what the big deal is and honestly am not sure we are "...now privy to Munn’s personal grooming habits..."

Nothing is showing that constitutes this being "full-on pornography". What's the difference between this and the pin-up girls dating all the way back to the '10s and '20s?

EDIT: Sorry everyone, shouldn't have gone off like that. My apologies. Just a buildup of stupidity over the last few days I've been dealing with.

I don't really see what the big deal is and honestly am not sure we are "...now privy to Munn’s personal grooming habits..."

it's cause the magazine photoshopped out her pubeys. LoL

I agree it's not really a big deal. You see worse if not more on cable TV

I don't really see what the big deal is and honestly am not sure we are "...now privy to Munn’s personal grooming habits..."

I thought the same thing....she could still have an airstrip going on that we can't see or something funky. She even could have just waxed or shaved for the cover. I cannot believe I am talking about another woman's vag badge. Oh geez.....

I was curious to get a man's view on it, because I don't see it as a big deal. I figured you men wouldn't either

She's pretty and super funny .. of course I don't know her and never will, but I've met lots of women that were pretty and utter ****** to the point I couldn't careless what their vag looked like.

But yes .. this image is obviously Photoshoped to the point that might not even be her body and they just stuck her head on another persons torso. I think Playboy is know to clone out pubic hair or pubic hair stubble from their models too.

Munn got into a pretty huge argument with some feminist on Salon.com about her being on the Daily Show. It's an interesting read and will likely change your mind about her if you feel like tracking it down.

The thing that annoys me, is that DirecTV cancelled G4, so I can't see it anymore. I mean sure there were only two good shows on all day (X-Play and Attack of the Show), and the rest of the day it was cops, but those shows were pretty good (being pretty much the only gaming shows on TV, aside from maybe occasionally Spike), and it was nice to have a channel that showed most of the major events like E3, Comic Con, and the CES.

As for the cover, I don't see it as being any worse than other similar covers you'd see on the shelves. Young kids probably wouldn't even know to look there and notice anything funny about the transparency.

For some, Munn will look just like their Barbie at home.

I'm offended.

I'm offended that GG is offended.

oh and Kev, Munn off AOTS now .. they have a new host. Of course you likely know that by now

GG offends me.

meh. Sounds like someone making a fuss just to make the fuss.

meh. Sounds like someone making a fuss just to make the fuss.

This...

I see were they are going with it, but the media is making a bigger deal than necessary.

I like how having a 3-way is perfectly fine and natural but god forbid hinting at genitalia.

eh nothing special worth starting a fuss over. its eye candy and nothing more

Well, she's not my cup of tea, but as long as the magazine isn't where children can get, I have no problem with it. I am a firm believer in allowing parents to decide what their kids see and do. If they let them read it or stare at the cover it's their decision to make. That's why they got pulled from stores like walmart, because half their magazine inventory is right by the checkouts. There are more in the magazine area where the car/mortotcycle/ink mags are that have girls wearing even less than this, it's all in product placement.

I'm offended because she isn't naked.

I'm offended because she isn't naked.

i approve this post

GG offends me...

...because he isn't naked.

I'm offended because nobody's naked.

I'm offended because nobody's naked.

Who says I'm not?

We're all naked. It's the clothes that wear us, not the other way around.

We're all naked. It's the clothes that wear us, not the other way around.

In Soviet Russia, you don't wear clothes. Clothes wear YOU!