0 votes
in Living by
Sports Illustrated has launched its 2012 Swimsuit model edition. SI continues to push the limits of decency and taste. Si had taste in 1991 with Ashley Montana on the cover with a one-piece swimsuit. Si must have listened to the raunchy critics who encouraged them to take it all off in 1992 with Kathy Ireland's two-piece bikini cover. Si accelerated its near-**** fetish leading up to this year's Swimsuit Model cover Kate Upton. Her dad must feel very proud of seeing his daughter reach the pinnacle of modeling -- a postage stamp covering her shaved private region for men (and young boys) to drool over.

Let's see if public opinion considers the 2012 Sports Illustrated cover appropriate or has Si gone too far with selling ***?

Your answer

Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

40 Answers

0 votes
by
Looks great to me. Anyone that goes to the beach or a public pool sees suits like that regularly. Pushing the limits of decency and taste? C,mon, man. Get real.
0 votes
by
If you don't like it, look away is all you need to do.
0 votes
by
ya the bulging should not be noticed while u go for shop
0 votes
by
Much ado about nothing. I think it's fine compared to some things we see.
0 votes
by
At least she has her top on.
I've never seen Sports Illustrated in our check out line here. It's with the rest of the magazines.
0 votes
by
Perfecto
0 votes
by
While think it's way too revealing, I think the average copy of National Enquirer, People or Self are by their cover stories worse.
0 votes
by
Interestingly, the models had more meat as well. Now it is skin and bones.
0 votes
by
This country needs to relax
0 votes
by
I don't worry about ******** seeing nudity, and once they're old enough to feel ****** urges, they'll see it one way or another. I do object to provocative poses though. Nudity is natural, whereas seduction in general public is not...typically.
0 votes
by
Clearly we're not seeing this the same. Enjoy.
0 votes
by
It looks fine to me and if you think it's too **** for the grocery store you'd better never think about going to the beach.
0 votes
by
Not much different then if you were at the beach. But then again skin has never bothered me... I guess if it bothers you, don't buy it, don't look at it and don't go to the beach or other public swimming areas :-)
0 votes
by
No more then
Demi Moore Vanity Fair Cover

or

Demi Moore Vanity Fair Cover

or

Demi Moore Vanity Fair Cover
0 votes
by
***** Pregnant or Ugly are ok, but beautiful - no way!!! )))
0 votes
by
Not saying the ***** Pregnant is ugly. My point is they are wearing less than the SI Swinsuit Covers.
0 votes
by
She's covered.....kinda. Don't like it don't look is my opinion.
0 votes
by
Fine by me, but I am a guy!
0 votes
by
Indeed. )
0 votes
by
So, GQ & Maxim are "soft ****"? And have to be "destroyed"?
I see. Do you have a problem with freedom & women in bikinis?
Maxim, etc. - placed in magazine section & women in bikinis, etc. are covered, if they are in check-out section. Actually It's surprised me in US.
I used to see topless magazines in Europe, but it's not only that, political correctness, TSA, gov. healthcare, gov. school system with propaganda, etc.
How free is your country if you have almost the same amount of freedom as people had in the USSR? And here we go... let's destroy more freedoms, to be more "spiritual" & secure?


“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
- Thomas Jefferson

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
- Abraham Lincoln
0 votes
by
I dont see talking about this when it seems that everybody goes to beach wearing les then what would cover his/her special parts. We seem outdated. Nudity is a fashion arround here
0 votes
by
There is still room for imagination. Albeit , not much.
0 votes
by
Why censor America?
0 votes
by
Same thing you see on Dancing W/the Stars, except they are giving several interesting poses as they whirl and twirl.
0 votes
by
Man, those funbags are really hangin out. Why even look inside??
0 votes
by
It is fine....not even a problem worth thinking about.
0 votes
by
Definitely should never have seen the light of day on ********, a site which many ******** visit.
0 votes
by
Seems like an everyday swimsuit that people wear at the beach or a pool. It would be ****** if it didn't reveal as much skin. Too indecent? I've seen much worse at Wal-Mart.
0 votes
by
I don't like the cover as much and it does show off more bare chest than I'd like. Because I think it would more **** if she didn't show so much. But overall I don't think it's that bad.

An overreaction to it because you're a dad of girls. There's just somethings people have no control over and the only thing we can do is adjust.
0 votes
by
there is no such thing as too ****
0 votes
by
The 'softer' side. Burqas? Maybe you'd prefer the ****** mags to be sold at the check-out counter of your local Safeway?
0 votes
by
I think the cover is ok but maybe a little too **** for the checkout at the grocery store. *** sells, my ******** get a magazine called Gameinformre, it's a videogame magazine but I have to be honest I threw a few of them in the garbage because I thought they were a little racey for boys.
0 votes
by
It's no worse then seeing a bunch of **** wearing leather and feathers walking thru down town in a parade... Or some nasty crap like that...
0 votes
by
I don't see how...or are you saying because a *** person would see that cover and be disgusted, just like you are for something as silly as....someone wearing leather and feathers? If you really are a marine, I'm disappointed in the armed forces as a whole.
0 votes
by
(And to finish that off...most *** people wouldn't really CARE either way. Or at least the *** people I know >.>)
0 votes
by
Like the rest of such mags (GQ, Maxim, etc), they'll put a "cover" over most of the mag, but leave about 2" from the top so folk can see the *****. **** is a HUGE Spiritual problem in this country, and needs to be destroyed.
0 votes
by
"**** is a HUGE Spiritual problem in this country, and needs to be destroyed."

GQ & Maxim considered ****? Yea, "destroy"/burn it, put women in burkas! )))
0 votes
by
sexy woman in burka
0 votes
by
0 votes
by
What inappropriate or offensive can be about woman in a swimsuit? ))) In Europe you can see even topless. )))

I prefer covering this BS:

inapropriate offensive woman swimsuit covering bs

inappropriate offensive woman swimsuit covering bs
...