By Tom Quiner

I have a question for women reading this blogpost:

Is posing nude going to make you more or less of a sex object?

I have a question for the men reading this blogpost:

Will you have more or less respect for a woman who poses nude?

I’ll give you a minute to think it over. While that minute passes, may I share with you what the women in charge of the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue are doing to support the #MeToo movement? They are photographing women in skimpy swimsuits, and even in no swimsuits at all.

Says the editor, MJ Day (a woman):

“I’m thrilled that this movement is going on because I feel like it’s going to change things for the better.”

Her remarks appeared in Vanity Fair magazine, complete with a pic of a nude SI swimsuit model, Sailor Brinkley Cook, daughter of Christie Brinkley. (Sorry, I’m not posting a sample pic.)

This year’s issue builds on the legacy of last year’s that showcased a model wearing a tank top that said:


This year, they’re not even bothering with swimsuits in some pics in order to support women who have been sexually harassed by men who treated them like sex objects.

I posed the question above to my wife. Her response was quick and succinct: “This is absurd!” We both agreed it is great fodder for a Saturday Night Live script, accept that SNL’s writers are probably beyond seeing the potential parody in all of this silliness.

My sympathies are with women who have been sexually harassed. I know victims. So do you. I loathe men who preyed upon them and wielded their power in such horrific … and unmanly … ways.

Sports Illustrated got Vanity Fair to write a slobbering piece on the upcoming SI softcore issue. It is as amazing as it is absurd. It reminds me of another slobbering piece written by another liberal, slick magazine, Vogue, which I covered a few years ago in a piece titled, “Asma al-Assad, a mass murderer’s enabler was enabled by our liberal press.”

Like Vogue, Vanity Fair has enabled Sports Illustrated to continue profiting at the expense of women. There’s money to be made in treating women as sex objects. Forbes Magazine reports that since the SI swimsuit issue became a stand alone issue, it has generated more than a billion dollars in profits for it’s parent company, Time, Inc.

Okay, back to you. Your minute is up. What do YOU think?

Are women less likely to be sexually harassed by posing nude?

Is immodesty really a path to respect?

Is Sports Illustrated really honoring the #MeToo movement?

Or is this just another sick con job at the expense of women?


  1. d. knapp on February 13, 2018 at 3:22 pm

    Apparently, sexual harassment and rape arent down for having freed women up to go almost as nude as they want. Every 2 yrs, we get an endless display of young women’s (girls really) “nether areas” as they perform either gymnastics or ice skating tricks. The men in the sports dont wear such scanty outfits and manage to do equally flexible and amazing feats. Why aren t the men wearing shorty shorts and an a tank top for figure skating and gymnastics? Because it would be obscene (as it is w/ the tiny little pantless outfits the girls wear for the same moves.) For all our semi nudity on Main St. and in the movies and sports (notice what lady runners wear), the rate of harassment and assault arent down. the myth that keeping women covered made it taboo (therefor more desired to grab them). All nonsense that was created by those who want to present all females for sex (wanted or otherwise) and again (like the rest of the sexual revolution) women fell for it. I swear. I think my fellow women must be beyond naive.

    • quinersdiner on February 13, 2018 at 3:28 pm

      You said it.

      • d. knapp on February 13, 2018 at 3:39 pm

        Tom, you know I usually have more than a mouth full to say. It’s just me.

        • quinersdiner on February 13, 2018 at 4:17 pm

          That’s why I like hearing from you.

Leave a Comment