That is some cognitive dissonance - I think. It seems so obvious to me that I can't quite work out whether her:
I have to imagine it would have been possible for Hefner to go about his activities at Playboy without surrounding himself with a cohort of “girlfriends”. The fact that he chose to do those things when he didn’t have to should have been – was – a massive red flag we collectively ignored because Hefner told us it was cool.
is just a bit of schtick to keep the pro-porn reading so they get to the bit where she says:
Perhaps because it’s not completely crazy to want to live in a world where men could surround themselves with women without seeking to exploit them. But this isn’t the world we live in, as Secrets of Playboy reminds us relentlessly, one testimony after the other.
But she has that bit at the start about second wave feminists being wrong about porn being inherently exploitative (and uses HRC's argument on sex work to counter it which doesn't address the issue of exploitation at all).
It really is a mess.