feminist criticism of Lindsey Vonn cover shot on SI

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Serious Business ▸ feminist criticism of Lindsey Vonn cover shot on SI
M

myron pater boswell

Member

96 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:41 PM
The comment beginning in the next paragraph is obviously from a feminist paramilitary organization, regarding a Sports Illustrated photo of Lindsey Vonn, in a posed tuck position on a ski slope. If there is no inclusion of women in SI, it is sexist; when women are included, it is sexist. Can't win with these feminazis:

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.
Feb 4, 2010 5:41pm
darbypitcher22's avatar

darbypitcher22

Senior Member

8,000 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:44 PM
Feb 4, 2010 5:44pm
gorocks99's avatar

gorocks99

Senior Member

10,760 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:44 PM
Need pic of said Lindsey Vonn to make an accurate judgement.
Feb 4, 2010 5:44pm
CinciX12's avatar

CinciX12

Senior Member

2,874 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:50 PM




Fits in pretty well with feminists hating attractive women.
Feb 4, 2010 5:50pm
Fab1b's avatar

Fab1b

The Bald A-Hole!!

12,949 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:50 PM
Vonn is hot!
Feb 4, 2010 5:50pm
UA5straightin2008's avatar

UA5straightin2008

WOMP WOMP WOMP

3,246 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:51 PM
i would
Feb 4, 2010 5:51pm
sleeper's avatar

sleeper

Legend

27,879 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:52 PM
I don't see how me viewing her(and all women really) as a sexual object is a bad thing.
Feb 4, 2010 5:52pm
CinciX12's avatar

CinciX12

Senior Member

2,874 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:53 PM
Feb 4, 2010 5:53pm
CinciX12's avatar

CinciX12

Senior Member

2,874 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:55 PM
Thats how guys ski too you feminist idiots.
Feb 4, 2010 5:55pm
Fab1b's avatar

Fab1b

The Bald A-Hole!!

12,949 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:55 PM
I hate feminists!!
Feb 4, 2010 5:55pm
M

myron pater boswell

Member

96 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:56 PM
Thanks for posting the picture, CinciX12
Feb 4, 2010 5:56pm
Sage's avatar

Sage

Senior Member

2,070 posts
Feb 4, 2010 5:57 PM
Yea, Lenin and I discussed this last night. It's definitely an innuendo-laden pose.

Here's my thing with a feminist stance on this issue....

Couldn't Lindsey Vonn have said, "I'm not demeaning myself with a pose like this?" Shouldn't their beef be with her?

It's like getting mad at rappers for having sluts in their videos. Nobody put a gun up to their heads and demanded they danced that way or allowed champaign to be poured on them.

Women can only objectify themselves in America. Not the other way around. This cover would never have existed had Ms. Vonn refused to pose that way.
Feb 4, 2010 5:57pm
SQ_Crazies's avatar

SQ_Crazies

The Godfather

7,977 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:00 PM
myron pater boswell wrote: 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.
When men are on the cover it's rarely a picture of the "action". They're usually posing too. I don't see how this cover is "no exception" to what they described though. Because she's bent over? She's at least in a normal position for her competition. I'd say shes more "in action" than most of the covers and if they consider that a sexual pose then will they say womens skiing forces women into sexual poses and it isn't about the competition? LMAO
Feb 4, 2010 6:00pm
darbypitcher22's avatar

darbypitcher22

Senior Member

8,000 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:00 PM
she's gorgeous
Feb 4, 2010 6:00pm
wes_mantooth's avatar

wes_mantooth

Tomfoolery & shenanigans

17,977 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:01 PM
Some of these groups just make me shake my head. I mean, the feminists with shit like this and PETA with that "Obama swatting a fly" incident.....if you want to be taken serious then pick your spots. And I agree completely with Sage....this girl posed for the pic, no one made her.
Feb 4, 2010 6:01pm
bcubed's avatar

bcubed

Senior Member

410 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:03 PM
Sage

How is this a demeaning pose? She is a skier! That is the tuck position she is always in. Now if they had had her in that pose and took the picture from behind OK. But to say that this is a seductive/provacative pose is idiocy.
Feb 4, 2010 6:03pm
I

I Wear Pants

Senior Member

16,223 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:04 PM
How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?
Spoiler
None, Feminists can't change anything.
Aww, there aren't spoiler tags on here. :(
Feb 4, 2010 6:04pm
september63's avatar

september63

Senior Member

5,789 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:05 PM
PETA wanted a mechanical groundhog this year to replace Punxatawney Phil. Apparently the ground hog contacted them about being treated improperly!
Feb 4, 2010 6:05pm
Sage's avatar

Sage

Senior Member

2,070 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:14 PM
bcubed wrote: Sage

How is this a demeaning pose? She is a skier! That is the tuck position she is always in. Now if they had had her in that pose and took the picture from behind OK. But to say that this is a seductive/provacative pose is idiocy.
Idiocy?

Hardly.

Look at it. How many times have you seen a chick skiing down the mountain with her head titled to the side and posing like that?

Do you REALLY think that pose would've been chosen had they selected a male skier?
Feb 4, 2010 6:14pm
F

fan_from_texas

Senior Member

2,693 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:16 PM
bcubed wrote: Sage

How is this a demeaning pose? She is a skier! That is the tuck position she is always in. Now if they had had her in that pose and took the picture from behind OK. But to say that this is a seductive/provacative pose is idiocy.
I agree with this.
Feb 4, 2010 6:16pm
U

Upper90

Senior Member

1,095 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:17 PM
The argument is that there was a male skier doing a similar pose for the SI cover in 1992 or so.

I'd have to find the pic, but I saw it earlier.
Feb 4, 2010 6:17pm
ohiotiger33's avatar

ohiotiger33

Senior Member

1,500 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:28 PM
Lol they would have a male do this pose. They did in 1992.
Feb 4, 2010 6:28pm
Sage's avatar

Sage

Senior Member

2,070 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:28 PM



Why not just go with something like this?


This is an action shot. They should've went with an action shot. Notice how they didn't.


This woman must not have been hot enough.


Also, I went to SIVault.com, typed in "skier" and these are all the covers with they've had that have a skier on the front. I don't see this alleged 1992 cover.

Take a look for yourself.....
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/result/cover/index.htm?query=skier&searchType=cover&allClause=&exactClause=&orClause=&notClause=&startDt=&endDt=&sortBy=date&shootId=&searchByShootId=&currentPage=1&start=1&npp=20

-------------------------------------------

I mean, come on guys, lets not be naive here. She's a moderately attractive woman. There's a reason why they went with that pose (including a face shot) and not one of the other choices they've gone with in the past.
Feb 4, 2010 6:28pm
gorocks99's avatar

gorocks99

Senior Member

10,760 posts
Feb 4, 2010 6:29 PM
This must be the '92 one they're referring to:

Feb 4, 2010 6:29pm