I've always been curious about something. We're all familiar with the yearly Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue. Over the years, I've always been surprised about how "risque" some of the photos are. Most yearly issues inevitably have a few see-through shots (with the model wearing either a mesh top or a wet-shirt). The tits/nipples of the models can obviously be seen. Here are a few examples (there are other ones):
goo.gl (Anastasia Ashley)
goo.gl (Anastasia Ashley)
goo.gl (Stephanie Seymour)
I'm not complaining of course. I just find it interesting that a little bit of mesh suddenly changes a topless shot into a non-topless shot that can go in a mainstream publication like Sports Illustrated (even when the nipples are so obviously still visible). There's likely no good answer to this, but I'm bored today so decided to see what the board thinks.
Comments
last commentSome people like to keep pushing at the boundaries of what is acceptable.
I believe in the 1800's, it was not acceptable at one time to wear shorts in public and it was like wearing underwear in public, totally unacceptable. If people didn't keep pushing boundaries, we'd be stuck living as prudes. Over in Europe and in south Florida, topless beaches are not unusual. Go topless in public in other places in the US and someone might arrest the girl.
Log in to vote
Seems not fair to women that they can't go topless in public like men can. So what if a few old prude guys get excited? Women have been denied equal rights to go shirtless.
It is really screwed up here in South Carolina in Greenville. At two strip clubs, dancers must cover their nipples with pasties but less than an hour away in Asheville, women can protest in public topless. It just isn't fair.
Log in to vote
I'm loving those 2 pics of anastasia! But I agree I'm kind of shocked they are in SI.
Log in to vote
More wet t shirts
Log in to vote
I remember as a teenager loving those see through shots in the SI swimsuit issue. I rubbed a couple out to those pics.
Log in to vote
Sex sells!
Log in to vote
I'll buy any of those ladies several drinks.
Log in to vote
Maxim and FHM exist only because they are allowed in prison mail. Perhaps SI is also a safe-for-prison porn mag, but the rare once a year see-through is to slip by the prison guards because they think SI is no-nudity like Maxim and FHM.
Log in to vote
I'm confused. ? I thought SI always allowed fishnet or wet T-shirts over nipples and areolas since the beginning, no?
From a Slate article --> "Campbell's 1978 issue proved a watershed moment for cheesecake. In Brazil, Campbell had persuaded model Cheryl Tiegs to pose for a throwaway shot in a white fishnet top, her nipples fully exposed. Somehow the shot made its way into the magazine. According to The Franchise,Michael MacCambridge's excellent history of the magazine, nasty letters poured into Time-Life headquarters—more than 340 subscriptions were cancelled—and the swimsuit issue reached new heights of ignominy. But in some ways, the Tiegs fiasco was also a logical endpoint. Barring nudity, the Sports Illustrated model had nothing left to reveal. Thus for the next few decades the editors had to maintain a careful balance: They had to make the issue seem much racier than it actually was, while still maintaining its wholesome aesthetic." --> end quote from Slate
reference: slate.com
Log in to vote