Friday, February 5, 2010

Let the Lindsey hype begin: Vonn is Sports Illustrated cover girl

Ok seriously....this needs to stop.  I was reading over a recent Yahoo article that talks about Lindsey Vonn, "America's great Winter Olympic hope" and her recent photo in Sports Illustrated.  Anyways, I got slightly frustrated after reading this excerpt from womentalksports.com: 

"Vonn is first a GREAT athlete, but she also represents norm of feminine attractiveness. The combination of athleticism and attractiveness make Vonn the likely poster girl of the US Olympic Team, and the media hasn't disappointed in constructed her as such.
Not to be left out, Sports Illustrated is featuring Vonn on their Feb. 8, 2010 cover. For those of you who follow SI Covers, know that female athletes are RARELY featured on the cover.
Over the last 60 years researchers have shown that about 4% of all SI covers have portrayed women.
When females are featured on the cover of SI, they are more likely than not to be in sexualized poses and not in action-and the most recent Vonn cover is no exception"

The image in question is this: 


Everyone these days is looking to find something to complain about and the people from womentalksports are seriously going slightly too far.  They mention that over the last 60 years research has shown that about 4% of all SI covers have portrayed women...well ok that makes sense...lets go back to 1950!  How many female athletes were there back then? and how could we even go back 60 years?  That's slightly ridiculous.  SI is a magazine tailored to men, so how much more obvious could it be that more of the covers would be of male sports stars?  Just to test something out I google imaged Sports Illustrated, and this is what I got: 

  
The first page is ALL WOMEN! Except for one photo of a guy.  Now are we going to e-mail Google and ask them kindly to stop featuring women in their search results? Haha no.  Anyways, I thought that would be a funny test.  Now given that most of these women are in "sexualized poses" let's take a look at the above image of Lindsey again.

1) She is a skier
2) Typically skiers need to crouch to go down a hill
3) When you ski you go down a hill
4) SHE IS A SKIER

Now the people at womentalksports are either just looking for something to complain about until Danica Patrick shows up in some sexy Super Bowl commercial, or they are just plain crazy.  The Yahoo article found an image of A.J. Kitt in a 1992 SI cover but I don't see any buzz going on about that, and hey A.J. is seriously bent over.


So I think I have rambled enough, but honestly I can't be the only one out there who thinks this a little too much right? haha.  People are way too sensitive these days.  Why don't we hear anyone complain about the health magazines with half naked women on those?  I could find some you some poses in those but worse!   Does that not count?

~Until Next Time~

WIM

3 comments:

  1. I enjoyed reading this article. Lively debate from WIM with sound reasoning and historical proof. At first I thought this was going to be chauvinistic but was seriously impressed. Nice post!

    Is there a sports magazine out there that's geared towards women and uses male athletes as front cover stallions?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was skeptical when reading an article about the "sexualized pose" that Lindsay Vonn was in, as it generally looks like she is sking. I would caution those using this A.J. Kitt cover as a comparison though..... the helmet, goggles and the absence of the turn to the camera and smile at how bent over i am look makes it a poor choice in support of the argument that Lindsay is not being exploited. But hey... exploitation is what advertising is all about.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was skeptical when reading an article about the "sexualized pose" that Lindsay Vonn was in, as it generally looks like she is sking. I would caution those using this A.J. Kitt cover as a comparison though..... the helmet, goggles and the absence of the turn to the camera and smile at how bent over i am look makes it a poor choice in support of the argument that Lindsay is not being exploited. But hey... exploitation is what advertising is all about.

    ReplyDelete