Join 3,433 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Look at the mekons on that one!
February 15, 2006 4:58 PM   Subscribe

Sports Illustrated's infamous swimsuit issue has taken to featuring naked models with the swimsuits painted directly on their shameful nakedness in recent years; for this year's entry they feature Heidi Klum in a tribute to the bathing suits of the 1940's. Full gallery online here.
posted by jonson (91 comments total)

 
Shocking! Shocking, I say! I may need to examine these photos extremely closely so as to understand these immoral enemies of America.
posted by brundlefly at 5:03 PM on February 15, 2006


I'd pepper her face with shot.
posted by mr_crash_davis at 5:07 PM on February 15, 2006


i'd verb her noun.
posted by keswick at 5:18 PM on February 15, 2006


It's neat because you can see her nipples.
posted by ColdChef at 5:23 PM on February 15, 2006


Looking at photographs of her makes my penis engorged with blood. Sexy blood.
posted by ColdChef at 5:24 PM on February 15, 2006


What's interesting is that in the old swimsuits and ye olde tyme hair, she looks scary thin, like sickly, because I'm used to seeing 1940s body types in 1940s swimwear. Klum looks like someone that fasted for 90 days in protest wearing an old bathing suit. Gross.
posted by mathowie at 5:28 PM on February 15, 2006


I'm about to Klum on myself.
posted by ColdChef at 5:29 PM on February 15, 2006


ColdChef has redeemed this thread with his tomfoolery. All hail! *hands CC a tissue, and a delicious ham sandwich as a reward*
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:35 PM on February 15, 2006


*gets hands mixed up. eats tissue. ruins perfectly good sandwich.*
posted by ColdChef at 5:37 PM on February 15, 2006


Gross.

I totally agree, looking at nude body painted Heidi Klum is gross. Say, how did you ever have that kid, anyway?
posted by jonson at 5:38 PM on February 15, 2006


CC has autoerotically asphyxiated his pickle.
posted by snsranch at 5:38 PM on February 15, 2006


a tribute to the bathing suits of the 1940's

The Wehrmacht must have been delighted.
posted by sgt.serenity at 5:44 PM on February 15, 2006


she looks scary thin, like sickly

And these have almost surely been airbrushed. I'd be surprised if her ribs weren't plainly visible in the original of this pic.
posted by longdaysjourney at 5:44 PM on February 15, 2006


I wonder if this was before or after her latest child?
posted by smackfu at 5:52 PM on February 15, 2006


These painted suits are so much easier than real suits that, you know, have to obey the laws of physics. I'm really hoping this concept catches on soon at beaches near me.
posted by Jawn at 5:56 PM on February 15, 2006


Also, whose leg do you have to hump to become a professional "bodypainter/photographer?"
posted by brundlefly at 5:57 PM on February 15, 2006


That's a hard job. The easy job is taking behind-the-scenes photos.
posted by smackfu at 6:05 PM on February 15, 2006


She dosn't look that thin to me.
posted by delmoi at 6:05 PM on February 15, 2006


I'm surprised SI did this, it seems so...arty.
posted by cali at 6:07 PM on February 15, 2006


Now this girl is skinny. Found googling for more body panting shots. totaly NSFW.
posted by delmoi at 6:08 PM on February 15, 2006


smackfu: true that. Oh, and I seem to remember reading somewhere that these were taken after her pregnancy (can't find the link at the moment). How recently was that?
posted by brundlefly at 6:09 PM on February 15, 2006


Eh, Delmoi? Klum looks thinner than that. That girl doesn't have a lot of fat on her body, but she's got healthy looking hips and thighs, different league than the emaciated skinny that models tend to be.
posted by Jawn at 6:11 PM on February 15, 2006


How recently was that?

Pretty recent. She's still pregnant on Project Runway which is airing now and was taped a few months ago.
posted by smackfu at 6:13 PM on February 15, 2006


So Heidi is now a porn model. Seal must be so proud!

Sports Illustrated makes me sick.

If you want this sort of thing go get Maxim or Playboy. Why does a magazine that the rest of the time is about SPORTS do this? (Rhetorical, I know it's all about the money.) How does it feel to be a woman who likes sports, who likes to read about sports, then has to face the fact that the magazine either doesn't care it may offend her or simply assume she's a lesbian....
posted by konolia at 6:22 PM on February 15, 2006


Porn? That seems kinda harsh. These photos are way too tasteful to be porn. Hell, I'm sure Klum has posed in much more revealing spreads than this.
posted by brundlefly at 6:27 PM on February 15, 2006


I wouldn't wanna go encouraging the objectification of women... but I'm sure glad Heidi's okay with it, 'cause damn!
posted by scaryblackdeath at 6:35 PM on February 15, 2006


"So Heidi is now a porn model."

Thanks for reminding us what passes for porn in the republic of Jesustan.
posted by 2sheets at 6:37 PM on February 15, 2006 [1 favorite]


If that's porn, then Two Moon Junction was snuff.

Now that I think about it, was that title a pun?
posted by Astro Zombie at 6:45 PM on February 15, 2006 [1 favorite]


It may not be porn, but it certainly ain't sports.
posted by Protocols of the Elders of Awesome at 6:45 PM on February 15, 2006


No we're never gonna survive unless we get a little crazy.
posted by billysumday at 6:45 PM on February 15, 2006


i like the fact that in all the behind the scenes shots, she's got the goods nice and covered up or neatly hidden behind an elbow or whatever. interesting line being drawn (no pun intended) between what is acceptable nipple visibility and what isn't.
posted by ab3 at 6:52 PM on February 15, 2006


and Astro Zombie - even IMDB was ahead of you on that one.
posted by ab3 at 6:56 PM on February 15, 2006


That's the only "trivia" they could come with for the film?
posted by brundlefly at 6:58 PM on February 15, 2006


republic of Jesustan.
posted by 2sheets at 6:37 PM PST on February 15 [!]


From now on it's Jesustanian instead of USian!!!! Yea!!!!
posted by snsranch at 7:16 PM on February 15, 2006


Sports Illustrated's infamous swimsuit issue has taken to featuring naked models with the swimsuits painted directly on their shameful nakedness in recent years

There is nothing to be ashamed of. The government doesn't want people to be naked otherwise we would be stimulating each other instead of stimulating the economy. Remember, sex is only supported by the elite when it sells.
posted by j-urb at 7:18 PM on February 15, 2006


So when magazines containing photos of incredibly beautiful women compeltely naked or wearing any imaginable kind of skimpy clothing are available every single week, why in the world do men rush out to get the Sports Illustrated issue?
posted by flarbuse at 7:21 PM on February 15, 2006


I wouldn't wanna go encouraging the objectification of women... but I'm sure glad Heidi's okay with it, 'cause damn!

That almost cost me a lung, SBD. Thank you.
posted by Bixby23 at 7:24 PM on February 15, 2006


flarbuse writes "So when magazines containing photos of incredibly beautiful women compeltely naked or wearing any imaginable kind of skimpy clothing are available every single week, why in the world do men rush out to get the Sports Illustrated issue?"

Because SI has better Photoshop artists. Seriously. Have you looked at a spread in Maxim? They look like they were worked over by an over-zealous airbrush salesman.
posted by brundlefly at 7:27 PM on February 15, 2006


I painted Sports Illustrated all over my naked body, but no one appreciated the effort. Philistines!
posted by Sparx at 7:28 PM on February 15, 2006


It ain't like they have a bunch of guys in Speedos in that issue either.

(actually I would find that nauseating, but give me a break, trying to make a POINT here.)
posted by konolia at 7:38 PM on February 15, 2006


Aye, mathowie - that look just does not not look right on a skinny lass.

And it does seem a bit strange that a sporting magazine would have one saucy issue per year like this, kind of like the FT having a special 'Investment Bankers In Their Knickers!' issue (or is it 'Sports' Illustrated in the sense of extensive coverage of beach volleyball and Anna Kournikova's soft parts?)
posted by jack_mo at 7:40 PM on February 15, 2006


Here's an image for you: body-painted nude men.
posted by smackfu at 8:00 PM on February 15, 2006


Here's an image for you: body-painted nude men (nsfw)
posted by Tenuki at 8:09 PM on February 15, 2006


Now that's attractive.
posted by schoolgirl report at 8:10 PM on February 15, 2006


Protocols of the Elders of Awesome saidIt may not be porn, but it certainly ain't sports.

Have you never heard of that all-american sport... Beaver Hunting?
posted by crocos at 8:12 PM on February 15, 2006


Klum too thin? I was just thinking that it was nice to see a model with thighs and a butt. I think she looks great. Even her arms, which usually look scary-thin on models.
posted by onegreeneye at 8:14 PM on February 15, 2006


the magazine either doesn't care it may offend her or simply assume she's a lesbian....
posted by konolia at 6:22 PM PST on February 15 [!]


Women who enjoy looking at beautiful women are lesbians? Damn, that's inconvenient - up until this moment I found men really delicious. But hey! Apparently my subscription to Vogue = I'm lesbian.
posted by onegreeneye at 8:22 PM on February 15, 2006


She doesn't look thin to me but then I guess it's what you are used to. And what's wrong with celebrating the beauty of the female body through photography?
posted by cmacleod at 8:28 PM on February 15, 2006


I think the whole Sports Illustrated swimsuit thing is kind of strange. I'm all in favor of publishing beautiful pictures of scantily-clad models, but as others have said, what does this have to do with sports? I don't think this is the kind of thing a sports magazine should be publishing, though I don't hold shares of SI, so whatever...

If you're looking for slick photos of beautiful women, why not buy a Playboy? IMHO, they're just as attractive as the Sports Illustrated models. And they're nekkid!
posted by Loudmax at 9:42 PM on February 15, 2006


She's skinnier than most 40s models by a long shot, but she's not as skinny as a lot of actresses these days.
posted by dhartung at 9:48 PM on February 15, 2006


leave it to metafilter to fuck up a wet dream.
posted by Hat Maui at 10:44 PM on February 15, 2006


I'm all in favor of publishing beautiful pictures of scantily-clad models, but as others have said, what does this have to do with sports?

How about "because a teenage boy who can't convince his parents to get him a subscription to Playboy has a much easier time getting them to get a subscription to Sports Illustrated"?

I'm guessing the SI folks know what they are doing.
posted by robla at 10:47 PM on February 15, 2006


I wonder if this was before or after her latest child?

Heidi gave birth to her son on September 12, so going to presume that this was done after that.
posted by Dreama at 11:19 PM on February 15, 2006


man you guys are lame - this is as bad as discussions on fark. really, i'm disappointed to read mathowie et al decry heidi klum for her physical beauty, calling it 'sickly'. the girl is beautiful. it's time to grow up you bunch of adolescents.
posted by drgonzo at 12:34 AM on February 16, 2006


Pre-makeup! So wait, she looks like a regular person? *gasp*

I'm with drgonzo so far as saying Klum is beautiful does not detract from women with luscious hips and breasts. You are also beautiful.
posted by Eideteker at 5:31 AM on February 16, 2006


/gives konolia a valium.
posted by substrate at 5:51 AM on February 16, 2006


Um, drgonzo, no one said Klum isn't a pretty lady, just that she looks wrong in the context of a 1940s style shoot. And rushing to the aid of a supermodel isn't adolescent? Pfft.
posted by jack_mo at 6:10 AM on February 16, 2006


Konolia: the reason they continue to produce the swimsuit edition is simple. Tradition. They've been doing this for 40+ years now, and it's become an institution of Sports Illustrated. If you don't like it, throw that issue out. If we're going to go on about the "point" of having hot chicks in SI, we might as well start arguing about having cheerleaders for NFL teams. Just because a woman wants to watch an NFL game, does the team have to assume that she's a lesbian???!?!
posted by antifuse at 6:15 AM on February 16, 2006


This is great! You know, I've been wondering if there were any pictures of naked women on the internet, and MetaFilter came through!

Edgy.
posted by CrunchyGods at 6:33 AM on February 16, 2006


Konolia - Wow, you're completely overreacting.
posted by bshort at 6:46 AM on February 16, 2006


Pre-makeup! So wait, she looks like a regular person? *gasp*

Wow, she's so pretty like that! Previously I found her to be not so attractive, but without all the spackle & gyprock she's a real beauty. Still she's no 1940's hottie tho'.

Now this girl is skinny.

Huh? Nope, she's got a proper layer of subcutaneous fat on her, she's healthy looking.

SI should run 2 issues simultaneously, one with men, one with women. Or drop it altogether, since it's a dumb tradition in the first place.
posted by zarah at 6:53 AM on February 16, 2006


konolia writes "Why does a magazine that the rest of the time is about SPORTS do this?"

Because this used to be a dead zone in USA professional sports, they had to report on something to keep people buying the magazine when nothing else was happening.
posted by Mitheral at 6:56 AM on February 16, 2006


But Konolia's trying to make a point. What that is, I'm not quite sure...
posted by NationalKato at 7:10 AM on February 16, 2006


Slightly tangential, but I've noticed that the "Sports" subsection on CNN.com's home page often contains such sportstastic links as "Naughty NFL Cheerleaders" and "Top Ten Swimsuit Models" due to its affilitation with Sports Illustrated. Not just at swimsuit issue time, but year-round. That's pretty stupid.
posted by purplemonkie at 7:27 AM on February 16, 2006


With the advent of the internets, the ladies of the SI swimsuit issue might as well be wearing petticoats. Considering I could download an mpg of a naked hot Brazilian babe doing naughty things, pretty much whenever I want, the SI thing is a bit passe. Is it even possible to get aroused by over-photoshopped models? Maybe in 1985 but now, fuck who cares?
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 7:40 AM on February 16, 2006


Wait, you're saying there's *porn* on the internet?
posted by bshort at 7:49 AM on February 16, 2006


Well, SI has traditionally been a big Boyzone, part of the holy trinity of men's magazines along with Esquire and Playboy. I think they pretty much gave up on being women-friendly by spawning a Women's Sports magazine so they can stick to their regular format.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 9:11 AM on February 16, 2006


The women's magazine of course promptly folded.
posted by KirkJobSluder at 9:17 AM on February 16, 2006


I am aghast that konolia sees this only as sexual and not as a work of art with sexual undertones! It's not as if they grabbed random photographers off the street or random trampy women. These are professional models who keep to insane fitness and weight standards, spend hours posing in uncomfortable positions, and in recent years have to sit as someone paints, using their own body as the canvas! Even the model for the Mona Lisa could take a break occasionally.

I don't remember konolia complaining about the Yves Klein work recently mentioned -- and those women are seen completely naked in the film Mondo Cane! Is it only art when it's in a museum, and not when it's in Sports Illustrated? Was my arousal (and intellectual stimulation) more genuine and less dirty at the Walker Art Center than it would be reading this Sports Illustrated at a bookstore?

I can see where feminists can claim this is an unfair standard of beauty and would go so far as to request more body types be portrayed. I think konolia is just decrying this as smut though, and I say it carries artistic merit.
posted by mikeh at 9:23 AM on February 16, 2006


I don't think more than ten people actually read my Yves Klein FPP. There might have been more complaints otherwise.
posted by Astro Zombie at 9:32 AM on February 16, 2006


KevinSkomsvold : "Is it even possible to get aroused by over-photoshopped models?"

Judging from ColdChef above, yes it is.
posted by graventy at 9:33 AM on February 16, 2006


It's possible to get aroused by lots of things, thankfully it varies from person to person and from minute to minute so they can't censor or outlaw it all.
posted by mikeh at 9:35 AM on February 16, 2006


Well Cold-Chef would get aroused by a broken coke bottle but thats besides the point....

I kid, I kid CS!!
posted by KevinSkomsvold at 9:35 AM on February 16, 2006


dude...photoshopped or not... they're still pretty hot. i'd love to see this in real life. up close and personal. :) booyah.
posted by Doorstop at 9:35 AM on February 16, 2006


Most of the NFL teams' cheerleaders have calendars and DVDs of the cheerleaders in skimpy outfits.

this used to be a dead zone in USA professional sports
It's also winter in the US.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:09 AM on February 16, 2006


she looks scary thin

Thinness I can take, it's the bony He-Man jaw that's skeezing me out.

Here's all of um by the way (would of been a much better direct link for the FP). Yesica Toscanini wins.

To tell you the truth I think these women are mostly too old. Too much 30s and 40s; models should follow the Scarlett starlet formula.
posted by dgaicun at 11:16 AM on February 16, 2006


I dunno. I find the SI swimsuit issue, and Hooters, and other stuff of that nominally-family-friendly ilk to be particularly infantile and annoying. I'd rather see honest strip-bars and nudie-mags than sanitized, mock-prurient crap like that.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 11:45 AM on February 16, 2006


dgaicun, you just typed "would of" instead of "would have" or "would've". Now I must hate you forever...
posted by jonson at 1:08 PM on February 16, 2006


Man, with those grudges you're even worse than God.
posted by dgaicun at 1:46 PM on February 16, 2006


Speaking of skeez, I think my favorite pictures here follow the hot chicks and skeezy dudes motif. Mmm mmm.
posted by dgaicun at 1:51 PM on February 16, 2006


Broken Coke bottle?

Oh, yeeeeeaaaaahhhhh...
posted by ColdChef at 2:28 PM on February 16, 2006


don't get me started about God... that fucker's on my list in permanent marker!!
posted by jonson at 2:29 PM on February 16, 2006


dgaciun: Oh, man, how could I have known that what my pinups were lacking all along was plain ol' dirty ol' men!
posted by sonofsamiam at 2:30 PM on February 16, 2006


Oh, yeeeeeaaaaahhhhh...


Look out, the Kool-Aid man's fucking a Coke bottle!
posted by COBRA! at 2:43 PM on February 16, 2006


I think these women are mostly too old. Too much 30s and 40s

Yeah, somebody should tell the 6 old prunes over 30 they aren't sexy enough to be seen on the same pages as the 20 young hot things. I mean, really ... how dare they show off all that hideous old flesh.
posted by Orb at 3:24 PM on February 16, 2006


I'm gonna have to side with Orb on this one. There's a reason Fountains of Wayne employed Rachel Hunter for their "Stacey's Mom" video.

Two of 'em, even.

sigh
posted by quantumetric at 3:50 PM on February 16, 2006


I'm waiting for all magazines to convert over to MILF formats. But then, I'm always shocked when pr0n sites have a section called "mature," and the women there are all in their mid-30s.

Where are our sexy sexy 50-year-olds?
posted by Astro Zombie at 4:25 PM on February 16, 2006


Seriously though look at the age range of these models. Anthropologists and evolutionary psychologists have figured out that women hit their peak attractiveness right after puberty, so probably mid teens - the average age of these 26 models is 26! There are more models here 30 and over than there are ones under 22. We should hot or not these models, I bet the correlation between rated sexy and youth would exceed .6. If advertising is the point of this, SI should have hired me, I could have boosted revenue using common sense. Plus I would have included myself as the skeezy dude in more of these shots - preferably wearing shorts, with knee high dress socks and no shirt.



41 elle
36 rachel
35 daniela
33 rebecca
32 heidi
32 carolyn
30 elsa
29 yamila
29 molly
28 bridget
28 veronica
26 noemi
26 petra
25 marisa
24 fernanda
24 carla
24 aline
23 ana
23 oluchi
22 mallory
21 pania
20 yesica
20 daniella
19 anne
18 maria
18 brooklyn
posted by dgaicun at 11:06 PM on February 16, 2006


excellent study... if only they would of hired you. If only they would of.
posted by jonson at 12:18 AM on February 17, 2006


And what's wrong with celebrating the beauty of the female body through photography?

I have the feeling most "readers" of this issue are "celebrating" with one hand.
posted by pracowity at 12:36 AM on February 17, 2006


I have the feeling most "readers" of this issue are "celebrating" with one hand.

And the sound of one hand clapping is not "fwap fwap fwap"...
posted by antifuse at 6:24 AM on February 17, 2006


« Older Drag-Queen.com...  |  Lost Rhapsody... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments