I have noted with some derision that uproar over Lindsey Vonn’s Sports Illustrated cover.
When I first heard that there was a controversy about Vonn’s cover, I did the normal thing – clicked through to see the cover.
I saw it and assumed I had made a mistake, since there was nothing overtly sexual about the cover in question.
So I looked around a bit and found out that, no, this WAS the cover that had people upset.
I couldn’t figure out why. Was it because she was wearing make-up and smiling? That would make every staged photo sexist. Apparently it was the pose.
The pose of her skiing. She is a skier.
It is a HUGE stretch to see anything sexual about this cover at all, other than the fact that she is fit and attractive. People are saying ‘they would never pose a male like that!’, and I say bull. If he was a skier, they would do that in an instant.
An aside here… I am not defending Sports Illustrated in general. Their track record about objectifying women is terrible. The entire swimsuit edition thing undercuts ANY thoughts that theirs is a serious magazine.
So then, sexism? Hardly. In fact, I think that the COMPLAINTS about the cover are ANTI-FEMINIST.
Basically the complaints are saying that the magazine should not spotlight female athletes on the cover if those women actually look good while doing it.
Hell, I would go so far as to say that the complaints are practically fundamentalist rantings. The woman is evil for displaying herself in such a way that brings temptation to the hearts of men! She should have to wear a full length mu-mu while skiing!
Save your complaints for where they really belong, like the NEW Sports Illustrated cover which includes a topless woman on it.
THAT deserves whatever it gets.