Reply
Tue 17 Aug, 2004 10:02 am
The sports section of the new york times had a 1/4 page add for this month's issue of playboy, which features high jumper amy acuff and other wimmin olympic ath-a-letes.
now i know, in no uncertain terms, that the apocalypse is upon us...
i jazzed up the title in an effort to drum up some responses...
I read it. I thought it was really interesting points about fitness being seen as sexy in a new way, actually. I was a multi-sport athelete in H.S., very fit, and would now be called ripped, and I was actually somewhat embarassed about it at the time. I didn't mind being skinny, but I wished my leg muscles weren't quite so defined. And guys did say that they were intimidated by the muscles.
(Clarification -- these were just standard muscles, think a short women's pro b-ball type. Not, like, body-builder, which is icky IMO.)
Also points about passive doe-eyed Anna Kournikova (sp?) and more active portrayals of athletes in Playboy.
WAS, dearie, past tense... ;-)
(Starting to run again regularly and that's fun but Athena days are behind me...)
(Just realized I misread it -- there was an ARTICLE about playboy, didn't realize you were talking about the AD. Sorry.)
Here's the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/15/fashion/15NYAD.html
(Incidentally, could there be a better name for a champion swimmer than "Diana Nyad"?)
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace