Pretty Faces only - NSFW

[abc]

(Although it is interesting, actually - the focus on this picture is his upper body, )

Eh... no.

The "focus" is indeed his "middle" body. The photo is SUGGESTIVE of what's obscured by the snow.

If the real focus were his upper body, they would simply have had him in a pair of shorts.

 

[bounceswoosh]

Eh... no.

The "focus" is indeed his "middle" body. The photo is SUGGESTIVE of what's obscured by the snow.

If the real focus were his upper body, they would simply have had him in a pair of shorts.

Ah, I see. You're right, of course. I am not great at understanding why a photo is striking. But I guess what I meant is, his legs aren't highlighted at all.

 

[abc]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/skarlan/british-rowing-team-strips-down-to-fight-homophobia

https://www.buzzfeed.com/mattbellassai/the-naked-british-rowing-team-strips-down-again-for-a-whole

https://www.warwickrowers.org/

Wow! That's super-delicious!

Thanks!!!

 

[Skivt2]

Two things come to mind.

1) I think we have some Divas from Europe here. Europe reveres it ski athletes. Do the woman pose in skimpy stuff?

2) the picture with the Lange boots does not appear to be photoshopped. Yea! Athletes!

 

[2ski2moro]

For photos of Maria Höfl-Riesch and to answer your second question, just Google the "Hot Girls of Lange." It's been going on for a very long time.

 

[altagirl]

I suspect that one's opinion on this sorta plays out this way. ie, If I looked good enough, I would (a) definitely pose like that, or (b) definitely not pose like that.

I agree (and with part b of your post) but I also agree with Wendy that it's mostly disturbing to me that there are women who feel like they have to do this. Certainly not in a "gun to the head" sort of way, but I don't think most of us have ever been in the position where we could do the sport we love full time and perhaps improve significantly if we could make the extra money from semi-nude advertisements, or we could try to train while doing another job to make ends meet. THAT is honestly the main concept that disturbs me. And while I like to be optimistic and think that I'd hold my ground and not let that sway my decisions if I were in that position... it might feel different if I were.

I also agree that perhaps the MORE annoying thing is that advertisements such as that feel like the company is only concerned with advertising to men. Hah, now if they had a similar photo of a guy on the next page.... ;)

 

[Skivt2]

Hi thanks. I know about the hot girls of Lange but I was not sure if the European ski heroines also ham it up provocatively for the camera like Julie Macuso. Don't get me wrong. I'm a fan of all these woman. Not passing judgement. Just curious about customs here vs there.

 

[mustski]

First of all, I truly believe that a woman should be free to direct her own future in whatever manner she decides. It is irrelevant whether or not I approve of her choices. Secondly, I do believe that top athletes would be hired as spokespeople regardless of their appearance. Corporations like to hire winners. If the female athletes were not beautiful and sexy, the company would create a different style of advertisement. They want to sell their product. The sad truth is that, in the ski industry, male consumers outnumber female consumers 2 to 1. Those Lange boot ads are not selling to women; they are selling to men. It's about name brand recognition. If Julia weren't beautiful, Lange would have created a different style of ad for her. I'm not saying that Lange wouldn't have done the sexy female athlete ads as well ... they would have, but they wanted Julia because she is a winner, a top athlete, and would have created an ad that worked. I am not offended by her choice to pose in sexy ads. She is earning a living while she is still successful. I am way more offended by the bra tree at resorts - which we have discussed AD INFINITUM and I am not trying to start that discussion again!

 

[Perty]

on the question of European skiers - I can't help. Our one English half decent women's skier Chemmy Alcott (now just retired), undoubtedly used her good looks to her advantage

 

[Perty]

Oops...was typing and got cut off...
I love the Warwick uni photos.. They stand in a long line of fund raising calendars which includes the iconic Yorkshire Women's Institute calendar about 15 years ago (middle agreed ladies, in the buff but tastefully covered up and photos taken with great humour).
I do think it's a shame that female skiers feel the need to go to the soft porn end of the promotional pic. SSNO2 met a free skier and underwear model called Sierra Quitiquit last year. Her online ski movie cut her skiing with her flexing and stretching in her undies, and I confess I did find it unnecessary, as well as designed to send teenage boys to their bedrooms for 10mins armed with the aforementioned movie clip and a box of tissues!
There is a line between soft porn and fun stuff. Don't ask me to suggest where exactly it should be drawn though.
I would be a total hypocrite if I said I did not love an artistic naked photo-the Bodey Miller one (it was him wasn't it? Am not very good at recognising ski stars)...nice. And then we have our own David Beckham, who, as long as you don't want to talk to him about politics or philosophy uses his looks and body to huge advantage...
And finally, for some totally uncalled for titilation..
Rugby players do it for me...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...rugby-strip-stylishly-sexy-2013-calendar.html

 

[bounceswoosh]

Thank you for that link. Ooh la la.

 

[Pequenita]

I think that because the number of pro male athletes is so much greater than the number of pro female athletes that it's more noticeable when a female athlete does a somewhat provocative ad. Moreover, members of this forum are particularly attuned to female athletes, particularly skiing, to the point where if a male basketball player did a provocative cover or ad, few of us would even know about it. But, we all know when "one of our own" is getting publicity.

I'm sure there are dozens of deodorant, soap, razor, aftershave, etc. ads featuring pro MLB, NFL, NBA players either in the shower or locker room wearing only a towel. And sure, they're not using pouty lips, but you can't deny that part of the reason they are in the shower or locker room is to somehow attract women watching sports with boyfriends or husbands.

ETA: interesting results when you google male athletes and provocative ads

 

[pinto]

I think that because the number of pro male athletes is so much greater than the number of pro female athletes that it's more noticeable when a female athlete does a somewhat provocative ad. Moreover, members of this forum are particularly attuned to female athletes, particularly skiing, to the point where if a male basketball player did a provocative cover or ad, few of us would even know about it. But, we all know when "one of our own" is getting publicity.

I'm sure there are dozens of deodorant, soap, razor, aftershave, etc. ads featuring pro MLB, NFL, NBA players either in the shower or locker room wearing only a towel. And sure, they're not using pouty lips, but you can't deny that part of the reason they are in the shower or locker room is to somehow attract women watching sports with boyfriends or husbands.

ETA: interesting results when you google male athletes and provocative ads

Found this article by doing so; this was the part that stood out to me:

"...To investigate empirically whether sex truly sells women’s sports, I conducted a series of focus groups based on gender and age (18–34; 35–55) with a colleague at the University of Minnesota. Study participants were shown photographs of female athletes ranging from on-court athletic competence to wholesome “girls next door” to soft pornography and asked to indicate which images increased their interest in reading about, watching on TV and attending a women’s sporting event.

"Our findings revealed that in the vast majority of cases, a “sex sells” approach offended the core fan base of women’s sports—women and older men. .... The key takeaway? Sex sells sex, not women’s sports."

This is pretty much how I've always felt about it, that of course guys want to see beautiful athletes in sexy poses. And that's fine. I just don't like the pretension that it's somehow about empowering women and sport. It's just that guys like looking at that stuff (and of course girls like looking at handsome guys), and fit bodies are usually pretty good to look at....

 

[pinto]

For photos of Maria Höfl-Riesch and to answer your second question, just Google the "Hot Girls of Lange." It's been going on for a very long time.

And Tina Maze...

 

[mustski]

"Our findings revealed that in the vast majority of cases, a “sex sells” approach offended the core fan base of women’s sports—women and older men. .... The key takeaway? Sex sells sex, not women’s sports."

I don't think most of the layouts are intended to sell the sport. I think most of them are intended to sell a product of some sort. The "sex appeal" is a time proven, tried and true, successful approach in advertising.

@Perty My dad was a rugby player for one of the Northern Ireland clubs back in the day. He was the perennial "bad boy" until he married my mom. I always wondered why the perennial good girl married the bad boy. That photo layout explains everything!

 

[abc]

"Our findings revealed that in the vast majority of cases, a “sex sells” approach offended the core fan base of women’s sports—women and older men. .... The key takeaway? Sex sells sex, not women’s sports."[/QUOTE]

I don't think most of the layouts are intended to sell the sport. I think most of them are intended to sell a product of some sort. The "sex appeal" is a time proven, tried and true, successful approach in advertising.

I suspect it's LESS than that!

Those ad were not trying to sell the sport, not even trying to SELL a particular product. All they do is get some brand recognition!

An eye catching layout to catch the eyes of the guys, with the name of the brand in bold letters. Often times, you can't even easily see the model number! Everybody knows about the Lange girl. And everybody knows Lange makes ski boots! How many other brands can you say the same?

So, I'm under no illusion those sexy photos are in anyway help women sport prosper. It doesn't. I doubt they even actually sell products. But the more provocative the photo, the more famous the athlets, more people will remember the brand! That's all. In a crowded store shelf, that "name recognition" is alll gold!

 

[snow addict]

How about that women can actually enjoy posing and don't do it because they "feel they have to do it" but simply because they like it? And when it comes to athletes, they know that they are not just pretty faces, so why should they have reservations if on top of their achievements they also look good? It's natural that given a choice a person would rather rest their eyes on something that looks good, nothing new or shocking here. And sex sells and will continue to do so. Not a big deal. Do I find these photos "empowering"? Probably not (but I am not looking for empowerment in photos) but I equally don't feel let down by them in any way. Feminism is about equal rights and equal opportunities for women and IMHO these rights and opportunities include the one for women to be posing in whichever way they like without being back-stabbed and slut-shamed by other women.

 

[pinto]

I think maybe this discussion has strayed from the OP's question, which is (to remind us all), "Can women's sports thrive without the sexualization of its participants?"

She isn't asking about brands and products etc. She's asking about women's sports.

No one is saying that these athletes should lose their ability to choose whether or not to do it, that's a straw man. The question is, Is it a wise choice? Is it ultimately good for women's sports, or does it perpetuate our status as sex thing first, athlete second? And is it, in the end, futile to even think that women athletes will ever be respected more for their abilities than for their looks?

 

[abc]

I think maybe this discussion has strayed from the OP's question, which is (to remind us all), "Can women's sports thrive without the sexualization of its participants?"

She isn't asking about brands and products etc. She's asking about women's sports.

No one is saying that these athletes should lose their ability to choose whether or not to do it, that's a straw man. The question is, Is it a wise choice? Is it ultimately good for women's sports, or does it perpetuate our status as sex thing first, athlete second? And is it, in the end, futile to even think that women athletes will ever be respected more for their abilities than for their looks?

But those questions can't be seperated entirely. If we accept top women athlets have the freedom to choose what to do with their body, then we have to accept it even if it isn't good for women's sport in the long run.

Personally, I don't thing it's either good or bad for women's sport.

Just as a few male athlet deliberately portrate a "bad boy" image with excessive drinking and partying doesn't means man's sport is nothing more than drinking and partying. Top women athlets posing for sexy photo doesn't HAVE TO equal all women being sex objects.

I think we attach too much emphasis on sporting figures, male or female, as role models. It's a heavy cross for them to bear, on top of the stress of sporting competition.

 

[bounceswoosh]

I think maybe this discussion has strayed from the OP's question, which is (to remind us all), "Can women's sports thrive without the sexualization of its participants?"

The context of the OP was contextualized enough that I don't feel comfortable answering that question in this thread. Maybe there will be another thread in which that question is asked without the rant and the negative comments about Lynsey Dyer and other female athletes.