Lindsey Vonn SI cover controversy

  • Thread starter Thread starter DanP
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Si
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the controversy surrounding Lindsey Vonn's cover shoot for Sports Illustrated, focusing on perceptions of sexuality and objectification in media representations of women. Participants explore the implications of using sexuality in promotional contexts, particularly in relation to female athletes.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the pose of Lindsey Vonn is highly sexual and contributes to the objectification of women in media.
  • Others suggest that perceptions of sexuality are subjective and may vary among viewers.
  • One participant asserts that there is nothing sexual about the image and finds the controversy laughable.
  • Another viewpoint emphasizes that magazines exploit sensuality for commercial gain, and this is a common practice in popular culture.
  • Some participants express that the focus on Vonn's appearance detracts from her accomplishments as an athlete.
  • There are references to historical comparisons, such as reactions to male athletes on magazine covers, questioning the consistency of the perceived sexism.
  • Several comments highlight that the discussion around the cover may be more about societal attitudes towards women's sexuality than the image itself.
  • Participants also mention the swimsuit issue as a separate point of contention regarding Vonn's portrayal.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of the cover and the implications of using sexuality in media. Some defend the cover as non-sexual, while others see it as problematic.

Contextual Notes

There are references to varying interpretations of the image and its context, including the commercial aspects of magazine publishing and societal standards of attractiveness. Some participants note that the discussion may be influenced by personal biases and cultural norms.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring themes of gender representation in media, the intersection of sports and sexuality, and societal attitudes towards female athletes.

DanP
Messages
114
Reaction score
1
Maybe some of you are familiar with Lindsey Vonn, a prodigy alpine skier, often considered the best skier US has. She was features in Sports Illustrated magazine and she made the cover.
The shoot for the cover can be seen here:

http://www.theskichannel.com/image/news/20100203_Lindsey_Vonn_SI_cover_456.jpg

This specific shoot stirred some controversy lately. There was a strong current saying that the Lindsey's pose is highly sexual, and that SI objectifies women with such shoots.

While I can understand that some dumbass man may feel threatened by the sexuality of highly successful women, I do not understand why some females feels that that using you sexuality in addition to other attributes contributes to "woman objectifying", "anti-feminist", "sexist" , and make such a big drama from it. I can only see envy. Women envious on successful women who also happen to look very hot. So if they can't make it there, they scream foul play and sexism.


IMO there is nothing wrong in using your body and looks to reap more benefits, gaining wider exposure and popularity. We are after all defined by a conglomerate of qualities, and certainly looks is one of those qualities . Vonn is exceptional , strong minded , made it to elite levels in sport, and hot. Why the hell not use *all* she got ?

What's your take ? Is the cover sexist ? Should women avoid using their sensuality and sexuality ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The photo on the cover has her in a tuck position, which is normally done to reduce drag while maintaining stability.

Perhaps the sexuality is in the mind of the beholder.
 
Astronuc said:
Perhaps the sexuality is in the mind of the beholder.

Perhaps, but why the drama in the mind of those who see it sensual ?
 
Astronuc said:
Perhaps the sexuality is in the mind of the beholder.

I think this time its in the beholder of the magazine
 
DanP said:
What's your take ?
:zzz:

Is the cover sexist ?
Some apparently think so. SI (and many other magazines) put attractive women on the cover. Popular magazines exploit sensuality and sexuality - because it sells.

IMO - it's silly - but that's me. I don't buy or read such magazines. I unfortunately have to pass by them in the racks at the checkout counters in grocery stores.

Should women avoid using their sensuality and sexuality ?
That's a personal decision. Human sexuality/sensuality is emphasized in popular culture. Apparently many accept it, and many don't, and some of the latter are vocal opponents.

Some/many men want an attractive mate/wife/gf, and some/many women want an attractive mater/husband/bf, and members of both genders struggle with feelings of inadequacy or insecurity when comparing themselves to elevated standards of what is portrayed or projected as being highly attractive.

And certainly a magazine wishing to maximize sales will select an attractive person, possibly in a sensual or sexually appealing position, and the bonus comes with the controversy.
 
There is nothing sexual in this picture. Seriously, one should be sick in their mind to imagine something else about this picture. This is quite laughable.
 
People will find anything to complain about. The only problem I have with that picture is her hair isn't being blown back when she is obviously traveling downhill at high velocities.
 
humanino said:
There is nothing sexual in this picture. Seriously, one should be sick in their mind to imagine something else about this picture.

oooohhh, my, I'm not feeling too well---



(or, what is that feeling?--hmmmm)
 
humanino said:
There is nothing sexual in this picture. Seriously, one should be sick in their mind to imagine something else about this picture. This is quite laughable.

I agree completely...move along, folks, nothing to see here.

It's somewhat reminiscent of the comments made by clerics about Marjan Kalhor, the first woman winter Olympian from Iran.

One mullah reportedly last year said that women should not ski because the movement of their knees looked "more like dancing than sport.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/SPORT/02/10/iran.olympic.skier/"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
lisab said:
I agree completely...move along, folks, nothing to see here.

you know that more than often saying things like that just brings more attention to something...


That Farrah Fawcet poster...


I wonder if they're still for sale?
 
  • #11
She's a beautiful young woman and one heck of a skier. I hope she can overcome her injury and race in all 5 events that she had been planning on. Her last training session was called off on account of fog (poor visibility), which her husband called "fantastic" because it gave her an additional day to rest and heal. Good luck!

BTW, when Mark Spitz was on the cover, bare-chested with all his medals, I remember women commenting on how handsome he was. I don't recall anybody up in arms because the cover was "sexist".
 
  • #12
DanP said:
Should women avoid using their sensuality and sexuality ?

:smile:
 
  • #13
humanino said:
There is nothing sexual in this picture. Seriously, one should be sick in their mind to imagine something else about this picture. This is quite laughable.

So am I the only one who thinks that she locks like she is about to take a dump on an inclined toilet?

The only problem with the pic is that it fails at being sexy.
 
  • #14
bp_psy said:
So am I the only one who thinks that she locks like she is about to take a dump on an inclined toilet?

The only problem with the pic is that it fails at being sexy.

that reminds me of the fox and the grapes parable
 
  • #15
rewebster said:
that reminds me of the fox and the grapes parable

Its not the case. I am not saying that she is not a very good looking woman. What I am saying is that the pic certainly doesn't do her justice
 
  • #16
I saw articles about her skiing picture and there was never any mention of the picture being sexual, so I don't know what DanP's beeen reading. The hubbub was about her getting what was seen as commercial coverage promotingn her right before the she competed in the Olympics as an amateur.

It's the SWIMSUIT issue she posed for that raised eyebrows.

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/va...-for-Sports-Illustrated-s-swim?urn=oly,218547
 
  • #17
http://www.violetvillevintage.com/ebay/flappered-1213923133-13647.jpg

and these were considered TOO SEXY at one time too!

hubba! HUBBA!


http://www.stylehive.com/bookmark/f...0253527763-end-time-jun2908-175257-pdt-393820


raised eyebrows are to let more light into the eyes, supposedly


______________________________________________
HERE'S A BETTER PHOTO THEN, bp_psy


http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/pr/subs/swimsuit/images/10_lindsey-vonn_01.jpg


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010_swimsuit/winter/lindsey-vonn/10_lindsey-vonn_1.html

(it does look photoshopped though)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #20
Evo said:
Did you see the swimsuit spread?

http://sports.yahoo.com/olympics/va...-for-Sports-Illustrated-s-swim?urn=oly,218547

Turbo was right, my source was Yahoo. Anyway, the details are irrelevant. Whatsoever it's a swimsuit spread, posing on SI cover, downright porn, or anything else ...

Why is she judged ?

Frankly, she raised at a level where less than 0.5% of humans( yeah, man and women , its irrelevant) have the slightest chance to go. Her mental and physical attributes are a given, anyone who think that you can go elite level in sport without both of them is delusional. She *proved* superiority to most of human beings alive :devil:

Why her fellow "sisterhood" feel so intimidated, weak and pathetic to try to rob her of her success , both as a sportsman and as a very good looking and sexually appealing chick ?

What the hell is wrong with a women spreading on a cover ? I don't get it.
 
  • #21
It has to do with the supposed "pure" image people want of the Olympic athletes. Doesn't bother me at all, but IIRC, pre Olympic publicity has always been frowned upon. They're supposed to earn their lucrative advertising endorsements after the games.

I'm not into the Olympics, so I doubly don't care.
 
  • #22
Topher925 said:
People will find anything to complain about. The only problem I have with that picture is her hair isn't being blown back when she is obviously traveling downhill at high velocities.

She should be wearing a helmet, making her hair irrelevant.
 
  • #23
I hate two-plankers, but she is fine!
 
  • #24
One look at that SI cover and I decided to take up skiing. My wife supported me in this until she set eyes on it. Now I've decided to take up physical therapy.
 
  • #25
BobG said:
She should be wearing a helmet, making her hair irrelevant.

Why ?
 
  • #26
Evo said:
Doesn't bother me at all, but IIRC, pre Olympic publicity has always been frowned upon. They're supposed to earn their lucrative advertising endorsements after the games.

I'm not into the Olympics, so I doubly don't care.

Timing in such events is essential, and from multiple point of view. IOC and organizers will prohibit athletes to make advertising with images containing current, in progress, events. It's only natural, organizing such a event costs a lot.

On the other hand, to create an athlete who can successfully compete at Olympic levels is a multi-million dollar enterprise, especially in the western world, where there is very little state and political support. Those money must flow in from somewhere. Hence, advertising contracts, publicity , you name it.

Evo said:
It has to do with the supposed "pure" image people want of the Olympic athletes.

I wonder why ? So the mediocrity doesn't feel threatened by individuals who supersede them by leaps and bounds ?
 
  • #27
People probably think it's sexual because she's a sexy woman. Go figure, a toned, slender, athletic female just happens to be viewed as attractive by many people, just as a toned, beefed up, athletic male happens to be viewed as attractive and sexy by many people. It does not mean that SI has done something wrong that they happen to choose athletes for the cover of a magazine with SPORTS in the title. :rolleyes:
 
  • #28
Moonbear said:
People probably think it's sexual because she's a sexy woman. Go figure, a toned, slender, athletic female just happens to be viewed as attractive by many people, just as a toned, beefed up, athletic male happens to be viewed as attractive and sexy by many people. It does not mean that SI has done something wrong that they happen to choose athletes for the cover of a magazine with SPORTS in the title. :rolleyes:

I agree 100%. What bothers me is not perceived sexuality, rather perceiving it as "sexist". In my opinion, a top level athlete who can spread her/his body on a magazine cover it is nothing but a display of confidence and a healthy sense of self-worth from multiple points of view.

Why the blame cast on her ? (and others, I can give you many examples, as for example the scandal of our elite level gymnasts who posed naked ). Why perception of so many ppl as "sexist"
 
  • #29
If you're going to make suppositions about why people might think it's sexual, then at least use the photos from the photo spread instead of the cover:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010_swimsuit/winter/lindsey-vonn/10_lindsey-vonn_8.html

Oh, and just so we don't discriminate about the single plankers:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010_swimsuit/winter/clair-bidez/10_clair-bidez_12.html

And while there's nothing wrong, per se, with the Sports Illustrated cover, the layout could have been different, even with the exact same photo. The letters could have been in the foreground instead of the background. The photo could have been slightly smaller and shifted so neither Vonn's butt nor the lettering were cut off.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #30
Well all I have to comment on all of this is that:

This girl is very attractive and I don't mind at all that they took these pictures. :wink: