04/18/24
February 20, 2002
Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Exclusive
The Sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue hits the news stands today with Yamila Diaz-Rahi as the cover girl. The great annual debate now commences. Does this content belong in a sports magazine? My view: If curling is a sport, so is this.
Swimsuits are worn when swimming. Swimming is a sport. Therefore, swimsuits are appropriate for Sports Illustrated.
posted by gyc at 08:30 PM on February 20, 2002
Curling has winners and losers. Hence, sport. In the swimsuit issue, everyone is a winner. ;) Hence, not a sport.
posted by tieguy at 08:52 PM on February 20, 2002
Extreme Navel Gazing, Anna Kournikova, and now this thread . . . besides a coupla others i've forgotten. does anybody else worry this place is becoming too cheesecake oriented? are there any ladies out there? is all this guy shit intimidating? personally, i'd like an atmosphere that fosters input from all kinds of people. i can get my pron elsewhere.
posted by danostuporstar at 09:11 PM on February 20, 2002
Where's the debate?
posted by geoff at 09:58 PM on February 20, 2002
Danostuporstar, You're reading too much into the post. This is a legitimate debate that has been going on for years and I feel that it is worthy of inquiry. And since it relates to one of the great sports magazines, I feel that it is appropriate to discuss. For those that are wondering "what debate" Here are just a few of the links where the debate or those with opposing view points concerning the subject can be found. HERE .... HERE ... HERE ... HERE . Those that oppose feel that it is women's athletic achievements that should be glorified rather than reducing women to body parts. You can either agree or disagree, everyone is entitled to an opinion. But think first before you put your foot in your mouth.
posted by RGarraud at 11:07 PM on February 20, 2002
I'm sorry, I got over the need to be politically correct about the swimsuit issue years ago. Nobody's being forced to read every thread. And I think "all kinds of people" i.e. women are smart enough to avoid a thread where men's tongues are likely to be hanging out. And the swimsuit issue pron? Turn off the adult filters, dude.
posted by lakefxdan at 11:13 PM on February 20, 2002
The SI Swimsuit issue is pretty much useless as either sports or porn. Sports because there's a zillion other ways to get women into SI these days, porn because there's a zillion better ways to see half-naked chicks than that. I mean, I'll enjoy the issue if I see it, but this thing is obviously only surviving on accumulated cultural cache. Dan, where's Lake Effect?
posted by Justin Slotman at 12:12 AM on February 21, 2002
Is it me or do the women look more natural this issue? That's not the only example. On the other hand, many of the other photos look airbrushed. The Elsa Benitez photos seem pretty natural. I don't know. Looking at models does not cause me to think coherently, so I'm just going to stop now.
posted by insomnyuk at 12:56 AM on February 21, 2002
What's the big issue with curling? Of course it's a sport.
posted by salmacis at 04:04 AM on February 21, 2002
Just so you know, I would gladly kill any of you to be this car. Ladies are free to post sports-related male cheesecake if need be.
posted by owillis at 05:13 AM on February 21, 2002
it's not this post specifically, not the first time the thought has crossed my head reading sportsFi . . . this is just the thread i decided to bring it up in. i dunno, maybe i'm just taking the sensitive high-ground 'cause all thse chicks are too skinny for my tastes.
posted by danostuporstar at 07:07 AM on February 21, 2002
Let's leave the discussion about the discussion where it belongs.
posted by rcade at 07:26 AM on February 21, 2002
Swimsuits are worn when swimming. Swimming is a sport. Therefore, swimsuits are appropriate for Sports Illustrated. Brilliant. Absolutely, briliant.
posted by adampsyche at 08:26 AM on February 21, 2002
Ugh. SI has never gotten my $ because of the swimsuit issue. The only one I liked was the one in which the swimsuits were painted on (hey! that takes talent!), but still -- should this kind of stuff really belong in SI? Women are athletes. They're readers. Women are featured in every other issue, clothed, and admired for their strategy, skill, and athleticism. But once a year, SI still feels the need to remind them women are still just sex objects, and will never be entirely respected in sports. I'm not a prude. The pictures do not offend me. But the message does. These photographs belong elsewhere. Hello, Maxim?
posted by jennak at 10:13 AM on February 22, 2002
jennak - Every observation in your comment contradicts your judgement of the message communicated by the SI issue. There is some serious dissonance between your observation of the year-round content and the word "just."
posted by NortonDC at 11:53 AM on February 24, 2002
SI does less to exploit women than ANY women's magazine such as Vogue, Mme, Comos, etc, etc, etc AD NAUSEUM. SI also does MORE for women and sports than any of those magazines too.
posted by scully at 10:36 AM on August 14, 2002
I'll have to check out the issue.