Thanks, Dave. Would never have guessed that provocative posing was an attempt to communicate to fans that an athlete's sport isn't gay.

I totally agree in principle. I've long thought that Patrick isn't doing her sport or women athletes in general any favors by posing this way but I'm also not sure if we're in a place to tell her how to manage her career. We (meaning men) can't have it both ways. We're very eager to admonish women who "sell themselves" and yet, often times ignore them when they don't (A sportspickle.com headline once read "Annika Sorenstam just a C-cup away from Superstardom," satire yes, but that far off, sadly no.) Even though it doesn't do women athletes or women motorists a solid, you'd be hard to argue that these pictures haven't helped "Danica Patrick; the Brand." She had been a household name for years before her first win and a large part of that has been those racy photos. Again, I agree with the study and I don't necissarily condone the pictures but who are we to say a woman can't use her body to get ahead in the sexist world she didn't create. Is it selling out? Perhaps. But I haven't seen any similar complaints about half naked David Beckham photos when those haven't increased soccer's fanbase in America.

great job dave. i hate how women's sports are covered. whenever trying to read about the women's national team (soccer) i inevitably come across crap like this:

"But enough about her athletic capabilities; let's tackle what really matters to the underworld inhabited by sports bloggers: is Natasha Kai a hottie?"

thanks for pointing out the real truth behind the bullshit. see you in chicago!!

her body is wonderful

her sport is pornographic

Danica has finished in the top 10 in all 4 of her Indy 500 appearances. Many drivers don't have that kind of record. She has shown that she belongs there...the win just solidifies it. She's whipping around the track at 200+, just like the guys. She doesn't have to be any less clothed to get respect from me. She handles her biz on the track. Sure, she's pretty but it's about being a good driver. Male athletes performance often overshadows their looks when it comes to sports commentary...why can't the women have it the same?

Dave, I appreciate your article and certainly agree that sexual objectification has no place in sports. However I disagree with one sentence in your article: "Without their leadership, Maxim and company would have to be content with whatever half-wit from the Hills strolled into their studios half-naked that week". I'm certainly not defending a show like the Hills, which is poison, but calling the women who pose for Maxim as half-wits is sexist. It isn't that women are too dumb or "half-witted" to know better than selling their bodies. They do not "stroll into studios half naked", rather they are lured by financial and career opportunities and often pressured to take more clothing off.
This grotesque exploitation and objectification of women fuels a multi-billion dollar advertising industry intent on selling sexist images of women to a young male demographic (a major sports demographic).
Any woman who is objectified in magazines like Maxim are victims(not half-wits) of the systematic degradation of women. Objectification not only does not sell sports, but it does sell dangerous propoganda about how women should be consumed by men in society. I know that you agree with all this, but I must say that as a woman I found this particular point of yours unnecessary and offensive.

Okay, so since when have professional sports not been driven by corporate sponsorship and homophobia? Like, the NFL, MLB, PGA, NBA, and yes, women's professional sports. So Danica is not exactly a ground-breaker on that front. And, like Nick, I wonder where the outrage is about Beckham's Emporio Armani ads; they're just about as provocative as any male photo could be short of the Full Monty. The research seems clear, and its outcomes match my own views of the sports/soft porn exposure issue; I don't believe Danica Patrick's pictures promote open-wheel racing any more than David Beckham's promote soccer. However, as a female, I do find it passing strange that men feel so comfortable wagging their fingers at professional female athletes for doing what professional male athletes have been doing forever (remember Michael Jordan and the "Wait'll I get my Hanes on you" ad campaign?), including buying into (or at least bowing to) corporate sponsorship and homophobia. Let's get the issues straight: One issue is that all big-name professional sports figures give in to the pressures of corporate sponsorship and homophobia, and by so doing they sell out. The second issue is that the minute big-name professional sports women start succeeding in doing what the professional sports men have been doing all along, men feel it their duty to tell them, "That's selling out." It's just one more double standard where women come out in the "wrong." And that's wrong.

As a male who has followed sports for over 5 decades, I found your latest column rather naive and at best filled with the common male double standard. Male sports figures have sold their bodies for years (recall Joe Namath's, pantyhose, Michael Jordan's underwear and David Beckham's no holds barred sexual appeal to women).

While the whole enterprise is problematic,(i.e capitalism destroys sports) we males should clean up our own acts before we start throwing stones at one of the very few immediately recognizable women is sports. Danica is a brave and strong soul to enter the macho field of auto racing.

To be fair, your next column should excoriate David Beckham for his highly sexual and public national ad campaign that prominently features his crotch.

Or even better, perhaps you should do a column that reveals all the sexist shit Danica has had to endure during her brief career in the racing world, which is brimming with sexist, macho, arrogant bigotry. Just ask AJ Foyt Jr what he thinks of women in HIS sport. That would be eye opening, indeed.

I admire Danica ... and her Challenge. I hope she becomes increasingly successful in the skill of IndyCar Racing. I also see her as an attractive Lady in her Racing Gear ... I have not seen SI.

Her behavior, I believe, is representative of the feminine world these days ... the balance between the masculine and the feminine, in each of us. I have often thought one of our tasks in coming into this World is the balance of our Creative Nature ... the Male to recognize his feminine/feeling side ... the Female to recognize her masculine side, that of strength, discipline, aggressiveness. And, for each to bring forth a balance of each into their LifeStyle/Expression.

Often when there is an imbalance, the correction is over-emphasized ... swinging too far in the opposite direction. I see that happening to Ladies these days ... from youth to the older , as they enter more and more into the workplace.

I see the issue of Sex and Sexual Behavior as being one of stretching the accepted norm ... and of Self Esteem. The outer expression of inner Being is frequently affected by what others think ... instead of recognizing the Strength WITHIN.

Sex sells sex ... not race car driving. Putting sex into perspective is a task and need for all of us. Unfortunately, in the media-world it is used to make money $$$ ... without much concern for Self-Esteem.

When you call double standard on Dave for criticizing women who sell their bodies to corporations, you are missing the point. You misinterpreted his article.
Firstly, Danika posed in a suggestive swimsuit for SI. That's sports illustrated, a magazine on sports.
The point Dave is making is whether it's good for the sport for women athletes to get recognized through their bodies. There are countless female athletes (google hottest athletes) who only get recognized for their looks. Such names as Kournikova, Allison Stokke (pole vaulter). Amanda Beard and Jennie Finch.
I could name 100. It's easy.
The fact is this is bad for sports. You don't see Sports shows and magazines showing good looking male athletes who are marginal athletes.
Only the few great athletes, who happen to look good, are used for corporate ads for their bodies.
And trust me, the male athletes aren't doing the ads for their sport. It's only for the dollar.
You can't make it on the front page of SI if you are not a great looking woman. If studies show that women athletes who sell their bodies is hurtin' sports, they should stop it if they want to help.
But, it's their choice.
And Jessica, give me a break. The objectifying of women is a horrible thing, but nobody is forcing women to pose for these international magazines. These women are only fueling the fire, to use a cliche. If they cared, they would protest.

So what? Who cares? Are you jealous?

Wow. It isn't every day that I read something on this issue, and think: Yes. EXACTLY. I'm linking to this post on my blog, and am posting here a link to a really interesting conversation that I've been having with some amateur women's soccer players in the US who have been presenting themselves as pin-up models, thereby winning all sorts of sponsorship & support (this is all in collaboration with a heinous men's team composed of guys like Frank LeBoeuf & Vinnie Jones - Hollywood United). I actively hate the idea, but have found the conversation with the women players in the middle of it really interesting. I'll be forwarding them info on that study. You'll see me sticking to my guns: It's sexist, it's homophobic, and it imports into US amateur soccer (normally relatively egalitarian in terms of attitudes about women athletes) the most retrograde aspects of English football culture.

To read this dialogue, go to http://fromaleftwing.blogspot.com/2007/12/hugs-on-sexism-hollywood-uniteds-sister.html

From A Left Wing

Add me to the small list of posters who wonder where the outrage is when male athletes such as Beckham pose in the near altogether, but women get trashed when they do it. Let Michael "Flea" Balzary (bassist for the Red Hot Chili Peppers) perform nude at Woodstock 99 (I have it on videotape), and there's not one peep. But when Britney Spears performs fully clothed but in a "revealing" outfit, one would think Western Civilization is about to collapse. Yes, the double standard is alive and well, among the self-styled "progressives" and well as among the Moral Majority.

Interesting that Mr Zirin found Mary Kane to interview, yet failed to ask Ms Patrick what SHE thought about posing for SI. Did anyone put a gun to her head? It may well be that she had a real blast posing in the bikini!

Too many people suffer of an abnormal sex paranoia in this country, the auther of this article included although he pretends defending women.
How bad is it? Well, think of Nipplegate!
Unfortunately sex paranoia and hate towards women go hand in hand.
And it's not only the Muslim countries.

Interesting article as usual. It's always interesting to read where Dave is coming from each week.
I would be interested in seeing Dave flip his perspective on this issue and discuss why "frat house" men and male readers of "yuppie porn" magazines prefer women as sex objects instead of athletes. Obviously Danica, right or wrong, helpful or hurtful, is simply cashing in on the demand for her sex appeal. There apparently is no corresponding demand for her driving expertise. Let's face it, most men I know (especially young men) would rather see women scantily clad than participating in a competitive sport and that's our issue, not theirs. If provacative photos don't increase our interest in women's sports, then what would? Maybe a change in male attitudes and the way we view women?

The problem I've had with such arguments of this type is that they both presume a reductive goal and they beg the question. To tackle the latter first, the question comes to mind, "are women's sexually/allure and athletic credibilty mutually exclusive?" That is to say, is the former be expressed by compromising the latter. I say no.

"Does it help your sport?" Who cares. This is where those of us on the left get it wrong and are paternalistic hypocrites. If Amanda Beard wants to be an exhibitionist, she must somehow be encumbered with keeping her clothes on for the "cause." We can't just say "it's OK if Ashley Harkelroad poses for Playboy, but if Sharapova doesn't, that's fine too."

The irony is those that are "offended" are the same conservative types who've effectively marginalized lesbians in youth and collegiate sports, especially basketball. The fact is(Crock, you and I have discussed this) here at Arizona, Joan Bonvincini lost many recruits because of the AAU grapevine which is now dominated by fathers who don't want their daughters turned to the "lesbian lifestyle"(rational or otherwise). See Pokey Chatman. Deal with it folks; women's sports is now mainstream, and a byproduct is that the full range of sexuality is represented.

The other irony is that by definition, athletes trade on their bodies. So this santimonious had wringing is fallacious to begin with

driving cars is not a sport.

Why is it that when women achieve remarkable feats, such as Danica Patrick winning an Indy, and thereby receives media attention, corporate sponsorships, and magazine covers it is considered objectification? A woman can't have her day in the sun as an athlete and a beautiful woman without it becoming a debate regarding sex and sexism? That in itself is a conundrum. Why are we not hyper-analyzing Tiger Woods and his new Gatorade product or men with washboard abs on the cover of GQ?

Let's not pretend to be shocked that sex sells and that magazines are capitalist machines out to sell a product. Their purpose is not to spread awareness of female athletes. This is not the 1970s. We know women can play sports. Title IX was passed in 1972 and girls have been enjoying the benefits of team sports and athleticism ever since. Magazine sales and women’s sports don’t correlate to begin with, so why make a fuss about it now?

Should we enforce a dress code for female athletes because their bodies are too provocative? Let's place more sanctions on women and their freedom of opportunity while male athletes can continue to do whatever they want and earn millions more in comparison. Could that be any more of a dead-on metaphor for the glass ceiling and women in the workplace still earning .70 to men's dollar all the while dealing with sexual harassment and double standards? As soon as a woman steps into the spotlight of success, marketing herself as a brand, she’s diminished for selling sex. Please! Do we ever read articles about adulterous, steroid-pumping, sex offender male athletes setting a poor example for little boys, Kobe? Chipper? A-Rod? Colton Brennan? The list is endless.

Why must women keep apologizing for simply having anatomical female bodies? Why was it such a controversy for Brandi Chastain to expose her sports bra when she won the World Cup in 1999. It was unladylike? Because of America’s skittishness with the female form her sports bra is her legacy, not her championship. I'm sure Beckham has ripped his shirt off on the soccer field, but that doesn't make headlines. Why is the media so concerned with how women choose to exhibit and embrace their femininity and prowess as athletes? It kicks ass that a woman won and Indy AND looks hot in a bikini. By the way, male athletes have posed for the SI Swimsuit Edition, as well. So what if a woman looks hot in a tennis skirt and serves up aces? We're women. We’re hot. We’re good at things.

Let’s turn the tables, why do you think women like watching sports? Because baseball player's butts look cute in those tight pants, basketball players huge biceps are exposed in their jerseys, and swimmers look hot in Speedos. Where's the opinion piece on that? There isn't one. When will woman be able to stop apologizing for being just as smart, capable, athletic, and attractive as men? And when will the media GET OVER IT.

first of all, when was the last time most people (I'm talking about general sports watching public - not racing geeks) talked about Indy Car racing before Danica Patrick came on the scene? I've watched a lot of Sportscenter, read a lot of SI, and read numerous other sports material and they weren't exactly teeming with Indy Car info until Ms. Patrick came around. Danica has been the best press machine for Indy Car racing since who knows when and I don't think its sexist to say that being a fresh faced, pretty young woman has something to with it.

Also in stark comparison to the research I contend: Olympic Beach Volleyball. I wonder if that sport took off after the 2004 olympics because a large amount of good looking men and women were jumping around half naked?

And for women, do you know how many women are in love with Derek Jeter? How many signs are being held up at every Yankee game asking to marry him. And I don't think it's because they really admire his OPS.

Look, women, like men, in professional sports have a limited shelf-life. They do magazine covers and market products because it's lucrative, not because it's "good for the sport." Perhaps it's not as bad for men, but being good-looking helps get those advertising dollars. I mean how many commercials and sponsors did MJ (a very handsome man) have versus Patick Ewing (not so much).

"Let’s turn the tables, why do you think women like watching sports? Because baseball player's butts look cute in those tight pants..."
Bravo, you're a sexist.
To generalize that women like sports because of the looks of male athletes is ridiculous. Give your head a shake.
First off Shayne, Dave isn't saying Danica Patrick shouldn't be receiving lots of attention. Women need leaders in sports where they traditionally lack them. It's the same as athletes from different countries or races (ie. Jackie Robinson and Steve Nash).
Danika has all the rights in the world to take corporate sponsorship and be on every magazine cover, but don't say Dave hasn't criticized men for being corporate whores. He has several times – check his archives.
However when female athletes are portrayed as sex symbols rather than sports symbols, that is where the problem arises.
Like I said in an earlier post, Men athletes are very rarely seen as sex symbols unless they are at the top of their sport. Women athletes are seen solely as sex symbols when they are marginal athletes.
When women athletes only get major coverage or recognition when they are good looking, the study shows, "It alienates the core of the fan base that’s already there." In other words, people who love snowboarding or basketball for the sport don't want their favourite players to be known as "that hot chick who, I think, plays a sport."
Last time I checked there are more women than men in America. If sport leagues want to attract a wider fanbase, women athletes can't be seen as solely sex symbols. And when women athletes pose in swimsuits, it only compounds the problem.
"Should we enforce a dress code for female athletes because their bodies are too provocative?"
Of course not.
"Do we ever read articles about adulterous, steroid-pumping, sex offender male athletes setting a poor example for little boys, Kobe? Chipper? A-Rod? Colton Brennan?"
Rarely, Zirin is one of the few examples. This is a major problem that also needs to be addressed.
Sports media is sexist. Uncontroversial. But when women athletes plays in the major media's hand, it only makes it worse.
Women need to stand up and fight for their rights as athletes. And more men need to recognize this as well.

That's all it is. Having a hot bod is money, regardless of gender. Kenny Chesney got big when he started doing situps and performing shirtless. Apparently rappers are roiding up now.

It shouldn't surprise Dave or anyone else that women's sports in general receive no benefit from Danica Patrick and others posing in magazines. But that's not the intent. $$$$$ is the intent. And since we all spend our careers selling ourselves, I don't think it's a big deal either...

Dave, I know you often post replies to comments on your columns, and I think Jessica Hansen-Weaver's comment merits a reply.

I winced at your use of "half-wit," too. It mars an otherwise excellent article. The slobbering neanderthals and lunatics can be ignored. Jessica's critique is a valuable and necessary contribution.

Although I agree w/ most of your reasoning on here Dave. I find it interesting that you would put such merit into a study held by the University of Minn (which i would assume would include a majority of people from Minn w/ midwestern values) to (from what i inferred from the article) interview 70+ people.... That doesn't sound too far reaching...

Just wanted to point out an observation that should be taken into consideration.

Sex sells. Fact of modern capitalist life. But its a fallacy to believe that male athletes are not increasingly objectified and sexualized as well. Fabio Cannavaro, David Beckham, Kevin Garnett are among the few that have appeared half naked in ads. Its not to say that the article is off base, just that the sexualization of athletes is increasing all round.

I think the linkages of hyper-sexualized female athletes and homophobia is interesting. Its a function of sexual imagery to dispel homo eroticism among female athletes. But this could very well be a result, and not a cause, of the hyper sexualization.

These images are not meant to attract people to the sport, as has been argued, so then why are we to assume that their aims are to dispel stereotypes of homosexuality among the athletes and as such de-stigmatize female sports.

In the end I think it has more to do with the dollar signs up for grabs in the world of celebrity. Female athletes are underpaid, and they are likely to make more as celebrities than as athletes, even if athletics are their claims to celebrity. And its celebrity culture that promotes hyper sexuality, not the sport itself.