Newsweek cover sexist?

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Christa - posted on 11/24/2009

583

80

45

Quoting Sharon:

I think it's a great picture! I am definately NOT a Sarah Palin fan at all, but I do think she's an attractive woman. Sexist? No, not in my opinion. Appropropriate for Newsweek? No, not really. It would be more appropriate to see her curling up near a fire place with the new book she is promoting. But, remember, Newsweek is all about making a buck and apparently this picture is getting people to buy more mags. People need to just get over it and move on to a higher priority topic than analzying the cover of Newsweek.



well said....it is a great picture for the Runners mag.....why Newsweek would have it.....to make a buck.  It is a poor choice for them.....but that is pretty much where we are headed.  Media Journalism is no longer about reporting what is best for the people to hear.....they are much more interested in stirring up conflict to sell more.   

ME - posted on 11/19/2009

2,978

18

193

If anyone sexualized Sarah Palin, it was Sarah Palin...She talked about her lipstick helping to define her as a woman and mother, and WINKED a ridiculous # of times at the audience during the VP debates. She posed for this picture, not for Newsweek, but she did pose for it...and I don't think it's fair to say that public information cannot be used in the public domain...No, I don't like SP, but I would be the first person to come to her defense if I thought they were attacking her because she is a woman...She IS just another pretty face...she should learn to live with it.

Mary - posted on 11/19/2009

3,348

31

123

First of all, although I am by no means of fan of hers, this is great picture of her. She's an attractive, fit woman, and that is by no means something to hide or be ashamed of. Is it sexist to use this as the cover of Newsweek? I'm not sure I see it that way.

I do get why she would not want this used as a cover of a news magazine, but honestly?...it's her fault for posing for a photo shoot like this. If she is trying to cultivate an image as an intelligent, professional politician, than it was yet another unwise move on her part. We've all seen many public figures ambushed in the media with unflattering, controversial candid photos that have been taken out of context or twisted to portray a different message. This pic was something that she willingly posed for...and while there is nothing overtly bad or inflammatory about it, I can see where it does not convey the image she may be trying to promote. It just highlights another episode in her history of poor judgement. If you don't want the world to see you as yet another pretty face, or a MILF, well, then don't go posing for a photo shoot like this, regardless of the venue! The country doesn't view either Nancy Pelosi of Hillary Clinton like this because they were never naive or stupd enough to have professional photos like this taken of themselves! Sarah put this image out there...I think it's a bit childish to now cry over it's usage.

Dana - posted on 11/19/2009

11,264

35

495

Quoting Sara:

No, she posed for this picture for Runner's World Magazine. She said it was taken out of context.



And this is exactly why I have issue with it.

26 Comments

View replies by

~Jennifer - posted on 11/24/2009

4,164

61

369

If she posed for the picture, signed a release, and didn't read the fine print of "This image can / may / will be sold to our affiliates [sic]".....I have zero sympathy.

Maybe she shouldn't have posed like that in the first place, or read the fine print as to who could purchase / license the image and why.

Apparently, she didn't think far enough ahead, or seem to consider the possible 'scenarios' that could arise from choices she has made.

Marabeth - posted on 11/24/2009

394

7

39

i think she's just throwing a tizzy to drum up publicity. i mean, look at this.. would there have been some facebook forum focusing on her if she hadn't cried sexism sexism! probably not.. besides, the photo represents exactly the point newsweek is trying to make that she is a blemish on the face of the republican party in that she attracts all the wrong sort of attention.

Evelyn - posted on 11/21/2009

444

21

27

Oh please...no one put up this kind of fuss when Obama was shirtless in his swim trunks on the cover of the Washingtonian....so I'm not even on the bandwagon w/this one.

[deleted account]

I think it's a great picture! I am definately NOT a Sarah Palin fan at all, but I do think she's an attractive woman. Sexist? No, not in my opinion. Appropropriate for Newsweek? No, not really. It would be more appropriate to see her curling up near a fire place with the new book she is promoting. But, remember, Newsweek is all about making a buck and apparently this picture is getting people to buy more mags. People need to just get over it and move on to a higher priority topic than analzying the cover of Newsweek.

[deleted account]

Yep, I'm confused, too. Obama's children were always dressed smartly-and they are young children, so I'm not sure how or when they bared any skin or why it would be relevant to Palin.

I just don't see anything sexist on the cover. If she didn't want that photo out there then she shouldn't have posed for it. But I don't even see anything wrong with it. I also didn't see anything wrong with Michelle Obama's shorts back during that hullabaloo. I've seen skirts that are part of women's suits that show more than those shorts.

Dana - posted on 11/20/2009

11,264

35

495

I have to agree with Laura. I was confused by that statement. Not sure what you're implying there Traci.

Isobel - posted on 11/20/2009

9,849

0

286

well Traci, I don't know about the Obama girls...I think they were pretty classy CHILDREN and never flirty or sexualized in any way! (I'm sure that's not what you meant but it's how it reads)

I will give you that I saw WAY vmore of Obama's skin.

Sarah - posted on 11/20/2009

5,465

31

344

Ok, so you all know i'm totally un-political so i'll admit i know VERY little about Sarah Palin!!
However, i really can't see how that photo is sexist?!?!?!
She posed for it (albeit for a different magazine) and it's just a picture of her in shorts and a top! What's sexist about that?!?!?!?
Really not understanding it to be honest :)

[deleted account]

So the main question that comes to my mind is: Why is she complaining about this picture? I do not think it is sexist at all. In fact, if I had to point to a picture of her that was sexist it would be the one that SHE PUT OUT HERSELF of her in a bikini with a hunting rifle during the campaining.



Bottom line is: she posed for the picture, so she shouldnot complain about it. I think her main grip would be the caption underneath her picture, not the picture itself...

?? - posted on 11/19/2009

4,974

0

172

Okay well I get a completely different idea from looking at this picture... I've only ever seen Sarah Palin in a suit or dressed to the nines. It's nice to see her in a more universal way - she looks like she's ready for anything, she can use her blackberry to get her work done while she jogs at central park. I don't think it's a sexist picture, I think it's pretty empowering to be shown in a light that says "I'm not just a pretty face, I take care of myself and I am smart too."



The context... context is always important when it comes to media... I don't think it's OUT of context but I'm sure there might have been much more appropriate photos they could have used. This one though... it just adds a lil more to her, for me. Even though I don't think she's overly smart, she probably pays well for a trainer to keep her in shape and she has how many people working with/around/for her to make sure that she does get things done... so in the end.. for me......... it's just another picture of some woman who will use her looks when she sees fit and call it sexism when someone else uses her looks as they see fit.

Jenny - posted on 11/19/2009

4,426

16

129

I think Palin was partly chosen for her looks. It certainly doesn't turn people off of her. Some pundits I've seen are practically slobbering over the woman. I think the picture helps to illustrate that point of the cutesy Palin image. It is a HUGE part of how the woman was presented to the world, look how world leader's reacted to her with hugs and such. I'm just surprised she doesn't have an apple pie in her hand in the pic.

Isobel - posted on 11/19/2009

9,849

0

286

But what, then, do we call the Washingtonian cover with Obama in his trunks? Surely this was not "necessary", he did not "pose" for it. It had nothing to do with politics.

JL - posted on 11/19/2009

3,635

48

107

It is not a tacky photo and it is not sexist in the manner that it is some shot of her in a bikini while she was on vacation or of her when she was a beauty pagent contestant. She did pose for the picture for another magazine so it was going to be published anyways and seen by people.



However, the context in which it was used I do have an issue with, because it does lead to the idea that it is sexist..why out of all the photos out there of her choose this one which promotes the idea that with women it all boils down to looks.



I do not care for Palin because I don't agree with her ideology and think she is politically inept. I do think she used the I am a pretty lady image to her full liking and perpetuated it with all the winking crap, but I don't think that a journalistic magazine should also stoop to that same level she has.



I do find it sexist because it was not neccessary to use that photo but I woud not call it sexist because it is tasteless since that photo is not tacky in a sexual exploitive way just inappropriate and misleading for the context of the article. It bothers me and I would be just as bothered if they used a photo of Michelle Obama in her short hiking shorts as the cover for a story on her. It is just not neccessary and it is disrespectful.

Esther - posted on 11/19/2009

3,513

32

144

As sick as this makes me feel to say it - I'm with Sarah Palin on this one. I think it was inappropriate for them to use this picture. And I do think it's sexist. Ugh - gonna have to go get some fresh air now and get rid of the nausea.

Sara - posted on 11/19/2009

9,313

50

586

No, she posed for this picture for Runner's World Magazine. She said it was taken out of context.

Esther - posted on 11/19/2009

3,513

32

144

Hmmmm - it's not the picture I would have chosen if I was the editor of Newsweek. I have to agree with Dana - I think it's a little sexist too. On the other hand - she did pose for the picture right? They didn't photoshop it did they?

Sara - posted on 11/19/2009

9,313

50

586

This sure didn’t show much journalistic enterprise on the magazine’s part, but no one cried sexism when New York magazine took a photo of Eliot Spitzer and added the word “brain” with an arrow to his crotch. I don't know if I'm ready to call it sexism. Doesn't she kind of promote her own stereotyping?

Dana - posted on 11/19/2009

11,264

35

495

Although I can't stand her, yes I think it's sexist. I thought it was pretty lame of Newsweek to stoop so low.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms