"For many feminists, however, Playboy’s philanthropy could only go so far. Controversy erupted in 1971 when the foundation offered legal support to the National Organization for Women. Instead NOW asked for one night’s profit from all Playboy Clubs. The organization publicized their request I order to put pressure on “Playboy”, but Hefner refused to go along, calling it “crude extortion.” NOW went on to declare that “no amount of money ‘would compensate for the low rating of the source. . . [T]o accept money from the [Playboy Foundation] would only contaminate us.” The conflict caused Barbara A. Townley of New Orleans to write, “I’m wholeheartedly in factor of women’s rights, but I don’t think Hugh Hefner even remotely resembled the Antichrist. . . . thanks for you offer to help. Perhaps when the women’s movement. . . starts going after the real dragons, we can get together. If some feminists in the seventies reacted foundation money, others accepted it as reparations, or as a necessary evil in difficult economic times, or they simply accepted it. Noting that funding for women’s projects was sparse in the early seventies, Marjorie Fine Knowles, writing for the Women’s Studies Newsletter, promoted the Playboy Foundation among organizations that were willing to assist or work toward feminist goals. Likewise, when the foundation paid the printing costs of the Dayton Women’s Center’s service directory, scholar Judith Ezekiel notes that there was “surprisingly little debate.” An ACLU board member said o foundation money, “How much s hand wash and how much is real, I don’t know. . . . but I’ll put up with it.” At the height of the women’s movement, Playboy’s money inspired debate. There was no consensus among feminists."