The SI cover debate
|
posted by Byline to Finish Line A chronicle of a sports reporter who ditched the sideline to discover her own power and strength by taking up endurance sports in her 30's. |
|
|
|
What does a picture say?
If it’s the Sports Illustrated cover of it’s Winter Olympics preview featuring Lindsey Vonn, quite a
bit. A brief post critiquing the choice of photo for the cover by Nicole M. LaVoi, a sports psychology and sports sociology professor at the University of Minnesota drew so many comments and such ire in the cyberworld that it crashed the distribution site Women Talk Sports.
LaVoi’s post discussed the traditional nature of Vonn’s cover shot — one which plays of up her femininity rather than her athleticism. Take this in the context that Sports Illustrated woefully under-represents women’s sports in it’s pages and on its cover and the message can be read that the only female athletes worthy of attention are those who are beautiful (in traditional ways).
The comments slammed Dr. LaVoi back, arguing that the pose was not “sexualized,” that it was a typical “pose” for a downhill skier, that Vonn is one of the best American skiers of either gender and that LaVoi was being too politically correct and too sensitive.
At the risk of not having an opinion, I find a mix of feelings about the selection for the cover shot.
First, I’m disappointed in the SI cover photo. Why? Because it sends a message that for women, beauty comes first. It’s a glam shot. I do not think that it’s sexualized or a case for pure objectification. The question for me is: Would a male athlete be posed to play up his good looks? Sometimes yes. Sometimes no. But the female athlete is almost always posed so that we can see her face and emphasize her looks in addition to her athletic skill. It’s an apologetic female athlete stereotype — I may be a really tough athlete, but I’m still a pretty girl so don’t be too intimidated. What critics like Dr. LaVoi point out is that Vonn could still be the cover girl, but with a shot of her actually competing in her event, rather than something that’s posed.
But there is a second point for me, too. One that says there is a fine balance between the apologetic female stereotype and a backlash against female athletes who embrace their femininity. My knowledge of Vonn is limited but she has been inserted into the “sexy or sexist” debate. To me, it’s a false choice because it says we need to make a choice — that you either enjoy playing with traditional feminine markers or you are a serious athlete making serious strides for women’s sports everywhere.
There are a thousand shades of gray in the world. And we each get to choose what is right for us. What feels authentic and real.
If Vonn is comfortable with the presentation, if this is her fun and authentic self then I can celebrate that with her even if I would rather Sports Illustrated show a more varied, more representational portrait of all female athletes.
View Original Post at amymoritz.wordpress.com
|
|
|
|
- Filed Under:
- Olympics, Ski, Sports, SportsPLUS, OpEd, Media/Marketing, Wintersports, Sexism
There are 8 comments on this post. Join the discussion!
robm
Well said!
Friday, February 5, 2010 at 9:07am PST
cris
Come on! The author%u2019s comments are totally off base and frankly, demeaning to women professional athletes. Lindsey Vonn, is currently the best female downhill speed skier in the Nation and perhaps the World. This is the form pose one assumes, if she intends on going as fast as possible down the slopes. Only an insecure, ignorant, novice in the arena of competitive sports, could possible be affected by this picture in way depicted in this piece.
Rather than, praising Ms. Vonn for the great sacrifice and dedication she has devoted to her sport (Which in practice is performed in the exact same position, in identical clothing) to reach this level of accomplishment, the author chooses to misdirect the proper attention due, away from Ms. Vonn, onto herself and her own lowly personal disposition. Shame on you!
Actually it is a bit fascinating. Obviously, you have never paid attention to Sports Illustrated or any other for profit sporting magazine. When Michael Jordan was on the cover, posing with a basketball in his grasp, did they dirty him up and instruct him not to smile? How about Michael Phelps? Putting your mindset in play, he should not have been allowed to pose in his bathing suit on Sports Illustrated, correct? You must admit, his swim suit is far more revealing than Ms. Vonn%u2019s winter snow attire. In addition, you obviously lack business sense and are oblivious to the fact that a magazine%u2019s top objective, is to sell copies. Sadly for you, depicting athletes in settings other than their sport is sometimes ok for product endorsements, put never for selling Sports Magazine.
Case in point, statistical analysis, concluded that using Beyonce for Sports Illustrated%u2019s swim suit edition (its top selling magazine of each year), was a mistake. In fact, the team fervently advised the head honchos at SI, not to do it; regardless of how popular Beyonce was, regardless of how many albums she sold or how many Essence or Vibe Magazine issues were sold when she was on the cover. Nevertheless, just as predicted, the annual SI Swim Suit Edition, with Beyonce on its cover was by far the worse selling Swim Suit Edition since the program%u2019s inception. Beyonce was more popular than ever, but not as an athlete or high fashion swim suit model, the reader segment targeted by Sports Illustrated.
Ms. Author, personally you are an empty vessel. The mind of a true sports fan would never have veered so far away from highlighting Lindsey and her accomplishments, in her once in a life time moment. You are one of those people within our society who loves to be offended, because this is how you derive your power. Without actively taking offense to something or someone, you are uninteresting and go through life unnoticed.
Please find yourself a livelihood other than women%u2019s sports. Your comments are an unwelcome distraction and demean the integrity and brilliance of women athletes who are lucky and gifted enough to reach pinnacles, the rest of us can only dream about..
Saturday, February 6, 2010 at 1:56am PST
cris
%u2019 is an apostrophe "s " for reasons unknown the site posted my comment in this way and I can find no way to edit my post.
Thank you
Saturday, February 6, 2010 at 2:00am PST
NEsurfer
Dissapointed? Is that how Lindsey Vonn leaves you? once again, no matter how much women who are invloved in athletics pretend to support each other, they have to find something to tear another one of their gender down with under the guise of advancement / equality. Its funny how the only ones who defended Dr Nicole's ridiculous argument also have an presence in this forum. Way to go ladies, keep pushing each other down to advance your own agenda / coverage. The only althletes whose back you have are those that have the power to promote you it seems. Can't wait to see that amazing American athlete Vonn on the cover adorned in gold medals. Bet you can't either so you can all find something to pick apart to make up for your own shortcomings.
Saturday, February 6, 2010 at 10:25am PST
Amy Moritz
I am not disappointed in Lindsey Vonn. I am a fan of Lindsey Vonn. I'm disappointed in SI for its choice of cover given the underrepresentation of the full spectrum of female athletes offered by the magazine.
Saturday, February 6, 2010 at 10:44am PST
NEsurfer
Underrepresentation?! She has the COVER shot to preview the OLYMPIC GAMES! you realize that's the international competition where hundreds of men and women athletes from around the world will be doing their thing, right? Sidney Crosby didn't get the cover, Apollo Ono didn't, Shaun White didn't, Shani Davis didn't. VONN DID! So, how about a little props for SI for that? Oh wait, she happens to be pretty, so slap a helmet on her to make her a-sexual, god forbid she has any appeal. Wait - that doesn't draw attention to your blog or Dr. Nicole's or anyone else on this website who are the only "athletes" you seem to be supporting. You are so transparent and the opposite of what women in sports need.
Saturday, February 6, 2010 at 11:08am PST
robm
I find no fault in the SI cover, and have made that clear in the comment thread attendant to Dr. LaVoi's article (i.e., the one that started all the clamor). On the other hand, this post, by Amy, presents a nuanced viewpoint, one at least amiable to tolerance and common sense.
My view of the cover doesn't comport with Amy's, for to my mind there is simply nothing graceless about it. Nonetheless, I do appreciate her well-articulated attempt to find a middle way. Consequently, the somewhat harsh rebuffs seem a bit overmuch, and the ad hominem wholly gratuitous.
Saturday, February 6, 2010 at 7:06pm PST
phenomeron
i would like to thank all of you for promoting the cover of SI no matter if you like it or not. way to go!!
Sunday, February 7, 2010 at 7:26am PST