• Women skiers, this is the place for you -- an online community without the male-orientation you'll find in conventional ski magazines and internet ski forums. At TheSkiDiva.com, you can connect with other women to talk about skiing in a way that you can relate to, about things that you find of interest. Be sure to join our community to participate (women only, please!). Registration is fast and simple. Just be sure to add [email protected] to your address book so your registration activation emails won't be routed as spam. And please give careful consideration to your user name -- it will not be changed once your registration is confirmed.

Pretty Faces only - NSFW

RX2SKI

Certified Ski Diva
I've only read about 5 pages of this thread, so I'm not sure if this is covered.

In the U.S., after an Olympic year, the general public thinks all Olympians are rich except for a few "close and personal" "living out of the car" moments shown during the broadcasts. The general public is not aware of where skiers get their funding from (or about the lack of funding athletes receive). Very few athletes get funding from the U.S. Ski Team, U.S. Free Skiing, and U.S. Snowboarding associations. If you are extremely lucky, you're on the A-Team where your travel, competitions, and training are covered by your governing body. Except for those elite few, most athletes are contributing funds to train at the OTC or COE and paying for their travel.

Only the top few athletes that stand on the podium actually receive money due to their actual skiing ability. Most of the money (~75%) goes to the top 3; however, generally first through tenth get something. Although, this varies by discipline. The alpine racers fare much better than other disciplines. Here are the prize money rankings Alpine for last season: (choose 2014) https://data.fis-ski.com/alpine-skiing/prize-money-ranking.html So, roughly a dozen male and female athletes are making over 100,000 CHF. Shiffrin earned 257K CHF; Cook, 12K; Mancuso, 8.5K; Vonn, 7K; Smith, 6K; Stiegler, .6K. Except Shiffrin, the rest are under the poverty level. Luckily, in Alpine skiing, the payouts for men and women are equal.

When you look at the FIS site, Cross-Country, Ski Jumping, Nordic Combined, Freestyle Skiing, and Snowboarding do not even have any information on prize money ranking. In Alpine, if you win an event, 42000 CHF. In Freestyle, Aerials, 10000; Moguls, 8500 CHF. (Note: There are a lot fewer aerial competitions than mogul competitions, thus the higher payout.) At least the prize money for men and women are the same. (I wish I had the time to look up the amounts for each discipline.) In Ski Jumping, the prize money for the top male is 20000 CHF and the top female is 3000 CHF. I find it appalling that there are still prize money discrepancies between genders.

I guess what I'm saying is that you're not going to get rich for skiing and winning alone. If you're lucky, you'll get out of your career without debt and in relatively good health.

So an athlete like Mancuso, making less than $10K USD, on the World Cup and maybe a few thousand at U.S. Nationals, has to decide for herself how she is going to support herself now and in the future. The only way to do this is through sponsorship money. Then, an athlete must make a decision of what types of sponsors to pursue based on which sponsors are making an offer.

We're the skiing community and we know these names. The general public only knows a handful of these names every four years--even fewer are recognized on non-Olympic years.

I have no answers, only wishes and dreams. I know I prefer my niece to see an ad with a clothed Shiffrin over someone else that is not wearing as much. I'd like to see the skiers in ski gear--or at least workout gear. However, I don't want to judge someone for making that decision to pursue one type of sponsorship over another path since she wants to follow her passion and do what she loves--to ski!

My dad always says that until someone will come out and buy a ticket to watch you compete, it's still an amateur sport. I never liked that saying, but I definitely see the truth in it.

The biggest irony for me is that when I saw that Lange photo, it really ticked me off--and Lange was my last boot sponsor. Prior to that, it was Nordica. And that was back in the 80s when all of their posters were with scantily clad women wearing not a whole lot with their ski boots. And my ski sponsors put out the same types of ads. But it didn't impact my decision back in my teens and twenties. All I wanted to do was ski bumps, ski ballet, compete, make the US team, and represent the best country in the world--I accepted whatever equipment sponsors I could get. It never crossed my mind that the women in those ads/posters had anything to do with me and my goals. From what I remember, most were models--probably not even skiers.
 
Last edited:

snow addict

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I think the prize money for winning the top events at FWT are 1.5k euros for men and 1.2k euros for women. These events are held in high-consequences terrain and avoiding big airs often result in point deduction. For the prize money alone a winner of one event may not even be able to travel to his next competition. Of course they need sponsorship money. Sport is generally expensive and rewards are often not great, and by not great I don't mean that athletes can't get rich, but that even keeping themselves on the circuit can be problematic.
 

ski diva

Administrator
Staff member
Thanks for the insight, @RX2SKI.

My problem isn't that they are trying to supplement their income. That's fine. I understand the financial pressures and don't fault the athletes at all. My problem is mainly with the way these women are presented by sponsors. I realize they're beautiful and have great bodies. But I think the tendency of sponsors to focus on that, and that alone, is demeaning and unnecessary. I'd have a lot more respect for Lange (or whomever) if they treated these women as the world-class athletes they are, instead of having them pose like hookers.
 
Last edited:

bounceswoosh

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
So if we all stop buying Lange (I can't fit in them anyway) .... I'd that a plus for feminism, or does it just mean female skiers wring get sponsorship money?
 

altagirl

Moderator
Staff member
So if we all stop buying Lange (I can't fit in them anyway) .... I'd that a plus for feminism, or does it just mean female skiers wring get sponsorship money?

I can't fit in them either so it would be a pretty irrelevant boycott on my part. And I don't know that there would be that direct effect. I kind of suspect that the Lange girl ads sell more mens ski boots than women's anyway. I mean, I guess the company would have less $$ to spend on athlete sponsorship, but who knows how they would decide to do it.

That said, when there are alternatives, I do definitely agree with choosing to avoid buying a brand when you disapprove of their advertising or practices, etc. FWIW, I will often email the company as well to tell them why I chose not to buy their product. Just not buying it would take a lot of guesswork on their part to figure out what's going on. Writing them and telling them that you want to support the skiers that they sponsor, but want to see them presented in a respectful way can't hurt.
 

snow addict

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
I don't think that sponsors focus on that (great bodies) alone. They show bodies to draw attention to the picture. That's what matters. And it's not just anyone's body but that of a well-known athlete. And she is wearing a particular brand of boots. Like a showcase. Looks very effective as an add. I don't see in it anything derogatory towards the athletes. Why women in sexy pose are necessarily associated with hookers? How are world-class athletes supposed to be treated by sponsors?
 

altagirl

Moderator
Staff member
Well, IMHO, an ad should be selling me on the merits of your product. What's great about these boots? Sexy, naked women seem to dig wearing them. I'm not sure how that helps my skiing though.

I'm not offended by the nudity. I just would rather see ski racing women praised for their skiing rather than for their nice butt.
 

RX2SKI

Certified Ski Diva
Thanks for the insight, @RX2SKI.

My problem isn't that they are trying to supplement their income. That's fine. I understand the financial pressures and don't fault the athletes at all. My problem is mainly with the way these women are presented by sponsors. I realize they're beautiful and have great bodies. But I think the tendency of sponsors to focus on that, and that alone, is demeaning and unnecessary. I'd have a lot more respect for Lange (or whomever) if they treated these women as the world-class athletes they are, instead of having them pose like hookers.

I didn't mean to imply that I was for or against supplementing their income. I just don't think a lot of people know how little the majority of the athletes receive through prize winnings and their associations. In the US, the athletes are not government funded and personally I don't want to see that change--but that's a whole other discussion.

I wish the athletes were being portrayed for their athletic prowess, but I'm not going to fault them for making money to continue their career and reach for their dreams.
 

lynseyf

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
What do we think of this style of calendar, just saw it posted on Instagram by a MTB DHer I follow? While the images are still very sexualised the women are shown in workout gear as opposed to underwear and in the gym or with their bikes, the sexy pics are also matched with a pic of them racing. Looking at previous images from the company the images used to be more along the leather and lingerie line so this at least seems like a move in the right direction. I have to say I much prefer these images to the Lange, girl in her underwear style.

https://www.cyclepassion.com/Calend....html?XTCsid=d0006292f0d00b64899e641047fc3d7f

edited to say I also like the clear focus on their muscles, these women are athletes and it shows.
 

altagirl

Moderator
Staff member
My husband regularly buys calendars like that. He has one very similar hanging in his home office, but it's one racing photo and one in lingerie with their bike. So obviously it's not bothering me any.

The difference in my mind is that the calendars, like the mudbunnies one for instance, usually are fundraisers. (I didn't catch if this one is) And similar fireman calendars have been around for ages. If a woman wants to do that, go for it. I get annoyed though with companies who are trying to sell products based only on sex appeal (unless you're selling lingerie or something where it actually makes sense). If you are selling a product, sell me on the product, not that you paid a hot model (or athlete) to look sexy in photos with it.

Show me how it helped the athlete be more successful!
 

Jilly

Moderator
Staff member
I would have to say that a fundraising calendars and the Lange Girls are 2 different things. So I guess I'm agreeing with AG. Speaking of Calendars, there was one a few years ago with big mountain skier chicks. Did they do another one ever? Proceeds went to breast cancer if I remember right.
 

ski diva

Administrator
Staff member
I would have to say that a fundraising calendars and the Lange Girls are 2 different things. So I guess I'm agreeing with AG. Speaking of Calendars, there was one a few years ago with big mountain skier chicks. Did they do another one ever? Proceeds went to breast cancer if I remember right.

Yeah, that was the RadBoob calendar. I think the last one they did was in 2012, and it was a fundraiser for breast cancer.
 

mustski

Angel Diva
Thanks for the insight, @RX2SKI.

My problem isn't that they are trying to supplement their income. That's fine. I understand the financial pressures and don't fault the athletes at all. My problem is mainly with the way these women are presented by sponsors. I realize they're beautiful and have great bodies. But I think the tendency of sponsors to focus on that, and that alone, is demeaning and unnecessary. I'd have a lot more respect for Lange (or whomever) if they treated these women as the world-class athletes they are, instead of having them pose like hookers.
Now this is the crux of the problem. But the first rule of advertising is "who is your audience" and "what appeal will work best?" Sadly, in skiing ... the answers are still "men" and "sex appeal." I do not mean in any way to detract from the women on this forum. Heck, in my family, I do the shopping. They don't even demo. I pick their skis, clothes, and fit my son for ski boots because DH doesn't believe in the "art" of boot fitting. However, skiing is still 60/40 male to female. This also includes all the recreational skiers who buy boots without visiting a boot fitter. How many ladies are influenced by the more "knowledgeable" guy in their life? I would guess quite a few. I would bet that we, ladies on this forum, are a huge minority in the ski industry: knowledgeable females who don't give a hoot about anything but performance.
 

bounceswoosh

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
What do we think of this style of calendar, just saw it posted on Instagram by a MTB DHer I follow? While the images are still very sexualised the women are shown in workout gear as opposed to underwear and in the gym or with their bikes, the sexy pics are also matched with a pic of them racing. Looking at previous images from the company the images used to be more along the leather and lingerie line so this at least seems like a move in the right direction. I have to say I much prefer these images to the Lange, girl in her underwear style.

https://www.cyclepassion.com/Calend....html?XTCsid=d0006292f0d00b64899e641047fc3d7f

edited to say I also like the clear focus on their muscles, these women are athletes and it shows.

Hmm. I may have to recuse myself because I'm attracted to women? Or maybe that makes my perspective even more relevant; I dunno. I actually don't find the "sexy" pics as sexy as the action pics, except for April. I don't think it's just me who thinks this way - DH finds me sexy when I'm wearing my yoga clothes.
 

mustski

Angel Diva
I don't see any difference between those and the lange photos other than the fact that they include action photos as well.
 

lynseyf

Ski Diva Extraordinaire
@mustski that's what I was interested in, I don't think it's a clear difference but it feels different to me. I think, for me, the difference is that in the mtb ones you can see the girls are athletes, the ones of Anneke Beerton in particular show off her amazing six pack and all the rest of them show clear muscle definition in their legs and bums, there is also as muc space given to the action pics, it's like it's saying look at this sexy women, and look how she rips. The Lange ones to me could just be a lingerie model, there is absolutely no indication the model is an athlete at all. The poses used are more active as well, the women are much less passive than in the Lange ones.
 

mustski

Angel Diva
@lynseyf I completely get the different approach towards athletes. In the end, it's still showing skin because otherwise the calendar wouldn't sell. It doesn't bother me in either case. Although I don't buy calendars, I have always thoroughly enjoyed some of our local "firefighter" calendars!
 

abc

Banned
If you are selling a product, sell me on the product, not that you paid a hot model (or athlete) to look sexy in photos with it.
I worked a short period in the marketing industry. We had to sit through a bunch of crash course on marketing.

There're at least TWO aspect of marketing: awareness vs merit.

The first goal is just to get the consumer to be AWARE of a product being available!

The idea behind was most consumers don't actively make decision on what to purchase. They either buy what they've been buying all along, buy what their friend has, or what's available on the shelf at the point they needs it. People tend not to bother looking into a brand they never heard of. So the AWARENESS campaign is trying to achieve just that, screaming "LOOK AT ME!" Sexy picture does that excellently!

So not every ad is "selling" a product. Sometimes, they're just attention grabbers so people remember what BRAND that is when they go shopping (or researching what to buy). By the time people are looking at the merit of the product, they only have time to look at a few brand. The key for advertiser is their BRAND being included into the list to look at.

Personally, I found all celebrity endorsed product line ads silly. I think the celebrity always end up looking like clowns. But that's just me. Besides, if I'm offered half a million to look stupid on TV, I have no doubt I would say YES! :smile:
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
26,285
Messages
499,124
Members
8,563
Latest member
LaurieAnna
Top