# Is this Newsweek cover of Palin sexist? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 17, 2009, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941 "2009-11-17T18:59:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/241 "2009-11-19T04:17:54Z")
> [@kidchameleon](#): > > Are you saying one must be a misogynist to be sexist? Or was this just a strawman? Yeah, pretty much. They are one and the same. You dispute that? Do you think that _Newsweek_ is run by people who think women are inherently inferior to men? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/242 "2009-11-19T04:19:05Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > I’m not sure I would quite characterize those as “hot pants.” That’s sensible running gear, in my opinion. That said, she posed in [a number of different](http://www.mofopolitics.com/2009/06/30/images-sarah-palin-runners-world-photos/) outfits during that shoot, obviously because photographically it would be boring to have her wear the same damn thing in every picture. I don’t necessarily think there’s any wrong in her choice of wardrobe for that particular shoot. If there’s nothing wrong with it, then she’s got no grounds to complain about them. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/243 "2009-11-19T04:20:07Z")
> [@cerberus](#): > > This. > > I’ve seen all of this stuff at running events - it’s standard gear, and I’ve seen it on women much less … svelte than Palin. The clothing is about functionality. The context for these photos is running. > > The problem with arguments about image is that it distracts from arguments about substance. So does manufacturing fake outrage about magazine covers. ---
**Author:** ![cerberus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/71e660/32.png) [@cerberus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cerberus)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/244 "2009-11-19T04:28:53Z")
Really? Anyone else would have gotten a skirt suit picture, given the context. Newsweek would not have made that choice if we had been dealing with an equally vapid person. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/245 "2009-11-19T04:29:05Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > If there’s nothing wrong with it, then she’s got no grounds to complain about them. I disagree. I think the context it is used in matters here. To illustrate a running article? Nothing to complain about. On the cover of a hard news magazine? I’m not comfortable with the context it’s used in and I, as a photojournalist (though not so much now), think it’s at best a questionable decision by the photo editors to use that picture to illustrate the story. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/246 "2009-11-19T04:32:50Z")
Quoting from the article (again) “Obama knows the long odds against a \*\*right-wing populist winning the presidency, \*\*no matter how good she looks in a skirt (or running clothes), brandishing a gun. He shouldn’t be too cocky, however, because the death of the center is ultimately a problem for him and the whole country. If the Palinistas seize the GOP, they probably cannot take the White House. But their brand of no-prisoners partisanship sure can tie up Congress.” IMHO the photo is a demonstration of how Palin is a populist and illustrates the point…how Palin looks in running shorts is part of her popularism - and she does play that up, after all - she posed for this photo didn’t she? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/247 "2009-11-19T04:34:08Z")
> [@cerberus](#): > > Really? > > Anyone else would have gotten a skirt suit picture, given the context. > > Newsweek would not have made that choice if we had been dealing with an equally vapid person. They would if that person had taken their pants off and posed for a skin pic. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/248 "2009-11-19T04:45:41Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > I disagree. I think the context it is used in matters here. To illustrate a running article? Nothing to complain about. On the cover of a hard news magazine? I’m not comfortable with the context it’s used in and I, as a photojournalist (though not so much now), think it’s at best a questionable decision by the photo editors to use that picture to illustrate the story. Her original intention in doing that cover was to sex up her image. It is newsworthy all by itself that someone who wants to be taken seriously as a contender for the White House was willing to do that. The “context” is specifically about Palin’s lowbrow, populist appeal to unwashed, white trash rabble. Using cheap, beauty pageant style flirting is part of how she does that. Nylons with running shorts = high heels with swimsuits. ---
**Author:** ![Dallas\_Jones](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dallas_jones/32/3277_2.png) [@Dallas\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dallas_Jones)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/249 "2009-11-19T04:55:01Z")
I would just like to point out something that I find a little funny. The members and charter members don’t see the ads here on the SDMB. But every time someone mentions Sarah Palin’s name in a thead, all the Google ads change to ads selling her book. The one after the first post on this page and the one at the bottom are both for the new Palin book. It’s just a little amusing, carry on. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/250 "2009-11-19T04:55:47Z")
Anyhow, Ken Irby, a very respected commentator on visual journalism ethics and the person I look up to most and whose opinion I respect most on these matters has [this to say](http://www.wftv.com/news/21657649/detail.html), which better verbalizes what makes me uncomfortable about the cover, although he does not say it’s sexist: > [@](#): > > The issue, Irby said, is one of context. The photo is accompanied by the headline: “How Do You Solve a Problem Like Sarah? She’s Bad News for the GOP – And For Everybody Else, Too.” And that leads to a whole different interpretation, Irby noted, than if you were looking at it in Runner’s World, where it originally ran in August. > “The image is not sexist,” said Irby, who specializes in visual journalism. “The words are more damaging and questionable. The powerful pairing is the issue. Why did they use this photo – where half the frame is her legs – when they had thousands to choose from?” In his own opinion, Irby said, “It’s a pretty underhanded shot at her credibility.” ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/251 "2009-11-19T04:57:23Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Nylons with running shorts = high heels with swimsuits. Are we sure we see nylons there? I’m not sure I do. They just look shaved and shiny. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/252 "2009-11-19T05:03:45Z")
Or perhaps they are nylons. I can’t tell for certain. I’m a guy and not too good with these things. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/253 "2009-11-19T05:05:04Z")
When I said they were oiled, I was told they were nylons. I don’t know either, but I know that shininess isn’t natural. ---
**Author:** ![BlankSlate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/blankslate/32/80_2.png) [@BlankSlate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlankSlate)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 6:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/254 "2009-11-19T06:56:31Z")
I would say that it’s sexist to the extent that it uses a “cheesecake” photo in an attempt to marginalize her, politically. But the “liberal media” can’t possibly marginalize her with any more effect than she’s done on her own. How can she run for _president of the Unites States_ in 2012 after having quit the governorship for no compelling reason? Wouldn’t her opponents harp on that obvious display of instability and easily defeat her? ---
**Author:** ![sjc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e5b9ba/32.png) [@sjc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sjc)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/255 "2009-11-19T07:13:43Z")
Does anyone really think that Palin would pose (in any fashion) for a Newsweek article entitled: “How Do You Solve a Problem Like Sarah?” I would think that that would be a clue that the photo wasn’t originally intended for that cover. ---
**Author:** ![Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8491ac/32.png) [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fake_Tales_of_San_Francisco)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 8:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/256 "2009-11-19T08:31:57Z")
> [@BlankSlate](#): > > I would say that it’s sexist to the extent that it uses a “cheesecake” photo in an attempt to marginalize her, politically. They’re not using the fact that she’s a woman against her. They’re using the fact that she posed for a bit of eye candy against her. The point they’re making is that she’s not even taking herself seriously as a politician. She posed for the photo, it’s a reputation thing, not a gender thing. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 9:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/257 "2009-11-19T09:31:55Z")
> [@Cat\_Fight](#): > > Wait, when you say ‘image,’ you mean projecting an image or the specific photo (that could project a certain image)? She posed dressed like that, in that context (which has nothing whatsoever to do with running). What sort of image did she imagine she was going to project? Unless you believe she was drugged, dressed and had a broom shoved up her ass to keep her upright that is the image she chose. And it’s perfectly fair of Newsweek to pictorially call her on it. This is just another example of ‘Scatch a right-tard, find a whining pussy.’ Ooh - they’re calling me/her on the lies in my book, wah - they’re using a picture I posed for. Her/the lot of you. Grow a friggin’ spine. ---
**Author:** ![Lobot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ce7236/32.png) [@Lobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobot)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/258 "2009-11-19T09:54:26Z")
> [@Fake\_Tales\_of\_San\_Francisco](#): > > They’re not using the fact that she’s a woman against her. They’re using the fact that she posed for a bit of eye candy against her. The point they’re making is that she’s not even taking herself seriously as a politician. She posed for the photo, it’s a reputation thing, not a gender thing. That’s my take, too. The re-contextualisation of the image is deliberate, highlighting the inanity of her media image. Her gender is accidental to the point being made, not essential. IOW, that her lack of substance manifests in Malibu Stacy-like bimbo-ness is a function of her gender, but were she a man, they’d use an equally silly photo to illustrate the same point. ---
**Author:** ![Mesquite-oh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a183cd/32.png) [@Mesquite-oh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mesquite-oh)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 10:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/259 "2009-11-19T10:02:39Z")
Why are people calling her a politician? She used to be one. She is now a celebrity. She goes on talk shows, gives speeches, and sells books. Magazines always have pictures of attractive celebrities, both male and female on their covers. What is the big deal? As far as celebrity photos go, this is nice- it is a posed shot in which she looks good. Yes, it was for another publication that has to do with fitness, but it is still a professional posed shot intended to be on a magazine cover. She is a celebrity now, she has to roll with it. If it was a paparazzi shot of her taking a dump in the woods while camping with her family, I would think that was uncool, even if she is just a celebrity. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [November 19, 2009, 10:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941/260 "2009-11-19T10:37:12Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > That said, she posed in [a number of different](http://www.mofopolitics.com/2009/06/30/images-sarah-palin-runners-world-photos/) outfits during that shoot Holy Cameltoe, Batman! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-newsweek-cover-of-palin-sexist/517941.md?page=14)