Katarina Witt Nude Again
Caper201
is available on Ebay.
johns
johns
Isiafs5
>and
>is available on Ebay.
I'll pass.
Sling Skate
RJDiogenes
>Wonder what she looks like in German?
>
I'm more interested in what Surya Bonaly looks like in French. :)
But a little more Katarina will do in the meantime, nicht wahr?
Rick
>>
>>Wonder what she looks like in German?
Now *that's* funny! Download a picture of her and run it through Babelfish.
Maybe she'll turn into a blonde with freckles.
>I'm more interested in what Surya Bonaly looks like in French. :)
>
>But a little more Katarina will do in the meantime, nicht wahr?
Ja, auf dem Eis, fully clothed (as far as skating costumes go). There may be
countless women who are at least as qualified as her to appear in a men's
magazine, but how many of them have as gorgeous set of edges?
- Rick
Albert H. Dobyns
I thought she appeared in Playboy last year.
Al
johns
> I thought she appeared in Playboy last year.
She did. I read that one.
johns
Trudi Marrapodi
<ahdo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Actually, it was 1998. I remember it only because it was the year I went
back to Rochester to see the Cook's Champagne show and Brian Orser made
mention of it when introducing her.
--
Trudi
New bumper sticker for Michelle Kwan:
"Up YOUR Auntie!"
Albert H. Dobyns
>
> In article <3C00986F...@worldnet.att.net>, "Albert H. Dobyns"
> <ahdo...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> > Rick wrote:
> > >
> > > - Rick
> >
> > I thought she appeared in Playboy last year.
> > Al
>
> Actually, it was 1998. I remember it only because it was the year I went
> back to Rochester to see the Cook's Champagne show and Brian Orser made
> mention of it when introducing her.
> --
> Trudi
>
> New bumper sticker for Michelle Kwan:
> "Up YOUR Auntie!"
That far back??? Good grief time flies! I wonder
what Katarina's reaction was to Brian O's mention
of it. Who knows how many men stopped off at 7-Eleven
or similar store on the way home.
Al
michael farris
Caper201 wrote:
>
> Katarina has posed nude for German Playboy.It is the December 2001 edition and
> is available on Ebay.
I kind of wonder what the point of a German Playboy is anyway. From
everything I've ever heard/seen/encountered, German attitudes toward
nudity tend to the casual. Watch German TV and this becomes very
apparent (but then porn stars appear on regular talk shows there, so
go figure).
-michael farris
WIsil
didn't see the inside but the cover was a very pretty picture of her.
Robert Dister
tru...@clarityconnect.competent (Trudi Marrapodi) wrote:
I remember seeing that layout. This was around the time that people
thought she was gaining weight, but you wouldn't know it from the
photos. Assuming that it wasn't just good camera angles, it just
reinforced the idea that a weight that looks good for a competitive
skater is probably too thin for the real world (if you want to call
posing for Playboy the real world).
Ted Chihara
> > I thought she appeared in Playboy last year.
>
> She did. I read that one.
>
> johns
You *read* it?
Hattie54
>I saw the cover of the magazine in the Duesseldorf airport this weekend. I
>didn't see the inside but the cover was a very pretty picture of her.
Wonder if its the same the same pix of her I saw in Garmish - P, Germany last
week ? She was on the cover of it ( in a bookstore ) wearing a gold swim suit
.Had a great time in Germany, Austria , Switzerland .Also saw the Olympic rinks
in Garmish P and Innsbruck.
Harriet
Harriet
Paula
>Wonder what she looks like in German?
>
>johns
>
>
lol......I still have my 98' copy and am wondering if she looks as good now as
she did then. Any woman closing in on 40 and has the body for PB has
accomplished a major feat....and deserves a medal <grin>
Paula Slater
The Golden Skate
http://goldenskate.com/
sk...@goldenskate.com
Hattie54
>she did then. Any woman closing in on 40 and has the body for PB has
>accomplished a major feat....and deserves a medal <grin>
>
>
>Paula Slater
Yup ! Saw the PB addition in a train station in Garmish - P , Germany last week
. The store was closed tho . Katt's clock is ticking too . She did say she
wanted kids someday .
Harriet
WIsil
face. I think her overall happiness really comes through in the eyes and
smile.
Randy Simcox
It's not perfect but on ebay there is this page:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1489364114
You can get an idea if it's tastful or not.
Randy
TFBWWW
>
its not. she looks cheap.
TFBWWW
~August 1, 1999 - the day my prayers were answered!~
GPOsborne
I think she looks quite expensive.
GPOsborne
"TFBWWW" <tfb...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011201100156...@mb-cp.aol.com...
TFBWWW
yes. she looks trashy.
BitsyCup
>Cheap looking?
>I think she looks quite expensive.
>GPOsborne
I think it's very, very sad for this woman of such great accomplishment to
subject herself to such objectification. This is the second or third (fourth?)
time she's posed for one of these magazines. She apparently thinks only of
financial gain. Does Katarina do anything for charity (aside from posing for
Playboy, that is, if she's donating her fees)?
bitsy
Hattie54
>subject herself to such objectification. This is the second or third
>(fourth?)
>time she's posed for one of these magazines. She apparently thinks only of
>financial gain. Does Katarina do anything for charity (aside from posing
>for
>Playboy, that is, if she's donating her fees)?
>
>bitsy
>
her vacation home in Germany .Brian Boitano begged her not to pose for Playboy
( for some reason ).
Harriet
michael farris
Hattie54 wrote:
> >Remember , she (Witt: maf) is European and not a prude . (cut).Brian Boitano begged her not to pose for Playboy
> ( for some reason ).
He's American and a prude?
-michael farris
BitsyCup
I have spent much time in Europe and many of the women whom I know who live
there - not prudes - disapprove of females posing in Playboy (and similar
publications). I would have felt somewhat better if Katarina had donated her
fee to a charity - perhaps one that helped young women from poor countries -
instead of buying the vacation home for herself to which you refer. For
whatever reason Boitano may have "begged" her not to "pose," I think even more
highly of him.
bitsy
>
>
>
>
>
Jennifer Lyon
----------
In article <20011201125344...@mb-ca.aol.com>,
hatt...@aol.com (Hattie54) wrote:
It irks me how you can't object to a magazine like Playboy
without being tagged a prude or somehow less enlightened than
Europeans. There are other reasons why people dislike those
magazines that have nothing to do with sexual prudery.
Personally, I think posing for Playboy makes a celebrity look
desperate for money, attention, or affirmation that they're still
young and attractive. Katarina is a two-time Olympic gold
medalist and an accomplished professional skater. Why does she
find it necessary to lower herself to bimbo status?
Michsktr
>From: bits...@aol.com (BitsyCup)
>Date: 12/1/01 9:09 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <20011201120957...@mb-md.aol.com>
wishes with her body? If it is a woman's right to choose, then there can be no
gripe over what Kat chooses to do with her body and how she spends the rewards.
Randy Simcox
>
> >Cheap looking?
> >I think she looks quite expensive.
> >GPOsborne
>
> I think it's very, very sad for this woman of such great accomplishment to
> subject herself to such objectification. This is the second or third (fourth?)
> time she's posed for one of these magazines. She apparently thinks only of
> financial gain.
Give it a break, I think it's just fine... she's old enough to decide what to do
with her body. From the bit I could see it doesn't look as nicely done as 3
years ago, but it doesn't look cheap or trashy.
Does Katarina do anything for charity (aside from posing for
> Playboy, that is, if she's donating her fees)?
I'm sure she does, and I doubt she is.
Randy
Randy
> Personally, I think posing for Playboy makes a celebrity look
> desperate for money, attention, or affirmation that they're still
> young and attractive.
And complaining about it makes one look insecure about their own attractiveness,
their own money problems or their own denial that they are not young anymore.
> Why does she find it necessary to lower herself to bimbo status?
Bimbo status? You can win an Academy Award with your so-called "bimbo status." I
wonder what would happen if the world judged you for all the choices you've made
in your own life?
Randy
BitsyCup
>>subject herself to such objectification. This is the second or third
>(fourth?) time she's posed for one of these magazines. She apparently thinks
>only of financial gain. Does Katarina do anything for charity (aside from
>posing for Playboy, that is, if she's donating her fees)?
>>
>>bitsy
>>
>Is it not the politcally correrct view that a woman has a right to do what
>she
>wishes with her body? If it is a woman's right to choose, then there can be
>no
>gripe over what Kat chooses to do with her body and how she spends the
>rewards.
I imagine it is a "politically correct view that a woman has a right to do what
she wishes with her body" (provided it's legal, of course.) Like I care.
However, do let us know, michsktr, if your wife, girlfriend, sister, mother,
significant other, etc., should actually appear in such a publication. It might
be of some minimal interest to some of us. Oh, and please let us know if
you'll share in any of those profits. However, please spare us how you would
FEEL about such an occurrence. That we already know.
Thanks.
bitsy, rssif prude
>
>
>
>
>
>
TFBWWW
>find it necessary to lower herself to bimbo status?
cause she is a bimbo.
TFBWWW
it looks both cheap and trashy.
>I'm sure she does
if you dont have proof then please be quiett.
TFBWWW
>attractiveness,
>their own money problems or their own denial that they are not young
wrong. it makes one look like they have morrals and decent values and self
respect. witt has none of those. all she has are wrinkles.
TCAXEL
subject herself to such objectification. This is the second or third (fourth?)
time she's posed for one of these magazines.
She apparently thinks only of financial gain. Does Katarina do anything for
charity (aside from posing for Playboy, that is, if she's donating her fees)?
>>>
>>>bitsy
Hmmm.....you know, it's one thing to agree or disagree with Witt's decision to
pose for PB or any other publication. IMO it's a fruitless discussion here on
RSSIF.
But I think it's a stretch to say she only thinks of financial gain. I
honestly don't know if skaters who pose nude give more or less to charity than
other skaters/individuals/etc. :O)
If you have a specific list of what charities/organizations all skaters
contribute to, then provide it. Otherwise, while you may disagree with Witt's
personal choices I would prefer you don't project your antipathy to her PB
posing to cattily imply that she's somehow less generous / charitable to
causes.
She could have posed out of personal satisfaction of how good her body looks,
vanity,self-expression, exhibitonism,etc. I'm not saying it's right or wrong,
but I do think it's unfair to say that lucre would be the ONLY reason she would
to it. It *could* be, but we have no way of knowing.
OBskating: Philippe Candeloro appears to be the kind of person who would strip
at the drop of a hat, even if not paid.
THEO
-"No offense intended"
-"None comprehended"
-from the TV show "The Tick"
Paula
>>You can get an idea if it's tastful or not.
Half of these are the same from the American version......
lefty
> Is it not the politcally correrct view that a woman has a right to do what she
> wishes with her body? If it is a woman's right to choose, then there can be no
> gripe over what Kat chooses to do with her body and how she spends the rewards.
>
Hear, hear! It's a TWO-WAY street.
Besides, most of women who object to her posing nude only WISH they
looked that good, and had the *opportunity* to say "no" to a carload
of cash from Playboy.
TFBWWW
>strip
>at the drop of a hat
same holds true for okasanna - who is also a bimbo.
Isiafs5
anyone, I don't get.
Paraphasing Judge Judy "With a younger, different body I would be in
Penthouse."
A breast or two, some pubic hair or whatever, so?
If she wasn't famous, I sincerely doubt that she would receive the offer of
pages in a girlie magazine. It is something about completely invading the
privacy of the famous as enabled by the said famous people and not about seeing
nipples IMHO.
Sling Skate
BitsyCup
>looked that good, and had the *opportunity* to say "no" to a carload
>of cash from Playboy.
And how did you come to this piece of wisdom, Eagle, or is it "lefty"? Many
women, more beautiful and less affluent than the lovely Ms. Witt, *have*
refused to appear in magazines such as Playboy and I respect them for that.
bitsy
>
>
>
>
>
>
Althealeo
wishes with her body?>>
Not really. I can think of lots of things that people *could* do with their
bodies that are really stupid.
Like try to land quads without warming up. Sure, it's someone's free choice to
do that, but it's also my free choice to voice the reasonable opinion that it's
stupid.
-- Kate
Jennifer Lyon
----------
In article <20011201145135...@mb-mo.aol.com>,
mich...@aol.com (Michsktr) wrote:
> Is it not the politcally correrct view that a woman has a right to do
> what she
> wishes with her body? If it is a woman's right to choose, then there
can
> be no
> gripe over what Kat chooses to do with her body and how she spends the
> rewards.
Nobody has said that Katarina shouldn't be allowed to pose nude.
You're right-- she can choose what she wants to do with her body
and how she spends the money she earns doing it. But at the same
time, the people on this forum have the right to say that they
disagree with this decision and why they feel this way.
Trudi Marrapodi
"Jennifer Lyon" <Jennif...@prodigy.net> wrote:
[snip]
> It irks me how you can't object to a magazine like Playboy
> without being tagged a prude or somehow less enlightened than
> Europeans. There are other reasons why people dislike those
> magazines that have nothing to do with sexual prudery.
Hear, hear.
> Personally, I think posing for Playboy makes a celebrity look
> desperate for money, attention, or affirmation that they're still
> young and attractive. Katarina is a two-time Olympic gold
> medalist and an accomplished professional skater. Why does she
> find it necessary to lower herself to bimbo status?
Don't know. Wish I did. Unfortunately, the rest of the world seems to have
adopted the viewpoint that today, when women pose naked in a magazine,
it's some kind of assertive statement about their vitality, their
athleticism and their control of their own bodies. To me, it means the
same thing it did back in 1958...they're being used as bodies objectified
for men to drool over. Some things just don't change, no matter how much
people TELL themselves they have changed.
--
Trudi
"Cindy attacked life like O.J. Simpson going through an airport."
--an unfortunately dated simile from an old TV movie I just saw
Trudi Marrapodi
eagle...@hotmail.com (lefty) wrote:
> >mich...@aol.com (Michsktr) wrote in message
> >
> > Is it not the politcally correrct view that a woman has a right to do
what she
> > wishes with her body? If it is a woman's right to choose, then there
can be no
> > gripe over what Kat chooses to do with her body and how she spends the
rewards.
> >
>
> Hear, hear! It's a TWO-WAY street.
Hear me! When women pose for a men's magazine, it's a one-way street. The
woman is being exploited for the entertainment of men, no matter how she
tries to dress it up with new-age political correctness.
> Besides, most of women who object to her posing nude only WISH they
> looked that good, and had the *opportunity* to say "no" to a carload
> of cash from Playboy.
I don't think it's fair to bring up that particular straw man to knock
down. I, for one, would never entertain such an offer for a second--not if
I had a dozen of them.
TFBWWW
ROFLAMO!!!!!! they are never going to ask a 350 lb woman to pose. you should
no that.
Jennifer Lyon
----------
In article <trudee-0212...@vestal13.clarityconnect.com>,
tru...@clarityconnect.competent (Trudi Marrapodi) wrote:
>> Besides, most of women who object to her posing nude only WISH they
>> looked that good, and had the *opportunity* to say "no" to a carload
>> of cash from Playboy.
>
> I don't think it's fair to bring up that particular straw man to knock
> down. I, for one, would never entertain such an offer for a second--not
> if
> I had a dozen of them.
*Any* woman can make $$$ posing nude for somebody. It doesn't
mean that she looks good or has any special talent. All it means
is that she is willing to accept a paycheck for taking off her
clothes and posing for a camera. True, someone like Katarina can
make more money than a woman without her looks or celebrity
status. But I don't see how getting paid a million dollars to
pose nude for Playboy makes a woman more respectable or dignified
than some addict or desperate young runaway who does the same
thing for a hundred bucks.
TCAXEL
> But I don't see how getting paid a million dollars to pose nude for Playboy
makes a woman more respectable or dignified than some addict or desperate young
runaway who does the same
thing for a hundred bucks.
It doesn't.
However, IMO the celebrity may choose to do it because she *wants* to do it, as
opoosed to the *desperate young runaway* who has no choice in order to survive.
I'm not saying it jusifies it, just that your comparison seems to imply the
freedom of choice is the *same*, when it obviously is not.
michael farris
BitsyCup wrote:
Many
> women, more beautiful and less affluent than the lovely Ms. Witt, *have*
> refused to appear in magazines such as Playboy and I respect them for that.
Okay, I'll assume you're not Jason under a new code-name and treat
this seriously.
Witt is German, they care nothing about nudity (as a general rule).
Everybody knows what everybody's got (figuratively speaking) and
it's just no big deal.
I find this a healthy attitude, though seeing a TV report (in prime
time) about the pro's and cons of various nudist parks and beaches
in Germany (no black bars or fuzzy screens there) may seem odd to
some (as it does to me).
There's no way that Playboy in Germany has the same cultural meaning
as it does in the US.
For Germans, I suspect playboy is fairly demure (as these things
go). I wouldn't be surprised if it's considered about the equivalent
of a Vanity Fair layout in the US.
-michael farris
Lorrie Kim
Jennifer Lyon <Jennif...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>True, someone like Katarina can
>make more money than a woman without her looks or celebrity
>status. But I don't see how getting paid a million dollars to
>pose nude for Playboy makes a woman more respectable or dignified
>than some addict or desperate young runaway who does the same
>thing for a hundred bucks.
It's not about the paycheck. It's about how the model makes the
public feel. Personally, when it's Witt posing nude, I don't feel the
same anxiety and sorrow that I do for many anonymous nude models. It's
just because her personality makes her an exception -- well, that and
because I trust that the photos will be something obviously more special
than, say, the endless parade of artistically and pornographically
mediocre photos of Tanja Szewczenko in an earlier German Playboy. But for
me, it's one of those "only Katarina can do it" things. If any other
skater contemplated a similar layout, I'd want to rush over to stop them.
Lorrie Kim
lor...@plover.com
Hattie54
>time) about the pro's and cons of various nudist parks and beaches
>in Germany (no black bars or fuzzy screens there) may seem odd to
>some (as it does to me).
michael farris
I was in Germany last week and saw the mag in a train station book store .The
store was closed tho . In Denmark, they won't show boxing or Donald Duck
cartoons as they are considered violent but they show sex scenes on prime time
at night . Go figure ?!
Harriet
Trudi Marrapodi
(TCAXEL) wrote:
> Jennifer>
> > But I don't see how getting paid a million dollars to pose nude for Playboy
> makes a woman more respectable or dignified than some addict or
desperate young
> runaway who does the same
> thing for a hundred bucks.
> ****************
> It doesn't.
>
> However, IMO the celebrity may choose to do it because she *wants* to do
it, as
> opoosed to the *desperate young runaway* who has no choice in order to
survive.
> I'm not saying it jusifies it, just that your comparison seems to imply the
> freedom of choice is the *same*, when it obviously is not.
Disagree. I think even desperate young runaways have choices. Not many,
but they do have choices.
And I speak from some experience, because although I've never been a
desperate young runaway, I've been in some pretty tight situations in my
life. There are still other alternatives to taking off one's clothes for
money. And I'm not just talking about alternatives available to people
with college educations, either.
--
Trudi
"Orser let the skating speak and the judges awarded it."
--Dave Fraser
Trudi Marrapodi
> BitsyCup wrote:
>
> Many
> > women, more beautiful and less affluent than the lovely Ms. Witt, *have*
> > refused to appear in magazines such as Playboy and I respect them for that.
>
> Okay, I'll assume you're not Jason under a new code-name and treat
> this seriously.
>
> Witt is German, they care nothing about nudity (as a general rule).
> Everybody knows what everybody's got (figuratively speaking) and
> it's just no big deal.
So, if that's the case...why would she accept money for it? Why not say
"It's no big deal, I'd do it for free"? In fact, why did they offer her
any, if it was "no big deal"?
> I find this a healthy attitude, though seeing a TV report (in prime
> time) about the pro's and cons of various nudist parks and beaches
> in Germany (no black bars or fuzzy screens there) may seem odd to
> some (as it does to me).
I don't agree. Not because I think bodies are dirty or bad. But because I
see no point to showing them off in a magazine in a culture where people
objectify bodies rather than seeing them as "no big deal."
> There's no way that Playboy in Germany has the same cultural meaning
> as it does in the US.
Sorry, but the old "This is nothing in Europe" article doesn't hold water
for me. If naked bodies truly meant "nothing" in Germany, and everybody
really knew what everybody else had, they wouldn't be paying money for
pictures of it, now would they? Magazines wouldn't have to use them to
sell copies, would they?
> For Germans, I suspect playboy is fairly demure (as these things
> go). I wouldn't be surprised if it's considered about the equivalent
> of a Vanity Fair layout in the US.
And Vanity Fair has done some things of questionable taste too.
Randy
>
> >And complaining about it makes one look insecure about their own
> >attractiveness,
> >their own money problems or their own denial that they are not young
>
> wrong. it makes one look like they have morrals and decent values and self
> respect. witt has none of those. all she has are wrinkles.
I assume you aren't just Trolling the group with these "southern baptist" type
of statements. And if all she has are wrinkles, she sure wrinkles in the right
places.
Randy
Randy
> I imagine it is a "politically correct view that a woman has a right to do what
> she wishes with her body" (provided it's legal, of course.)
And the legal stuff bugs me too. If she's 18 she should be able to do what she
wants when it concerns her own body.
Randy
Randy
>
> Hear me! When women pose for a men's magazine, it's a one-way street. The
> woman is being exploited for the entertainment of men, no matter how she
> tries to dress it up with new-age political correctness.
Baloney. If that's the way you feel then the "exploitation" theory could be said
for any one in entertainment (be it sports, singing, acting, etc...). They are
being exploited for the entertainment of women, or men, or both... and that's
not true. In anyone of these professions some people are being exploited, that's
certain, but not all.
Randy
Randy
>
> >it doesn't look cheap or trashy.
>
> it looks both cheap and trashy.
In your own Amish type opinion.
>
> >I'm sure she does
>
> if you dont have proof then please be quiett.
If I had proof I would have said "she gives to charities" in my reply to
bitsycup. You can't even keep the original quote with your reply so no knows
what you are talking about. Just a posting of "I'm sure she does" and "if you
don't have proof then please be quiett" makes for a disjointed post. Yeah right,
"be quiet"... this is Usenet... those two things are pretty much the exact
opposites.
Randy
BitsyCup
>And the legal stuff bugs me too. If she's 18 she should be able to do what
>she
>wants when it concerns her own body.
>
>Randy
The legal stuff bugs you too?? Are you talking about prostitution? drugs? or
just everything?
bitsy
michael farris
Trudi Marrapodi wrote:
>
> In article <3C09CBC2...@amu.edu.pl>, m...@amu.edu.pl wrote:
> So, if that's the case...why would she accept money for it? Why not say
> "It's no big deal, I'd do it for free"? In fact, why did they offer her
> any, if it was "no big deal"?
Why doesn't she skate for free? If they offer her money, then why
shouldn't she take it?
> Not because I think bodies are dirty or bad. But because I
> see no point to showing them off in a magazine in a culture where people
> objectify bodies rather than seeing them as "no big deal."
Which culture? My impression from German culture is that prevailing
attitudes are a) nudity is no big deal and that b) some bodies are
more attractive than others. I can't disagree with either
proposition very heartily (and nudity in German magazines (family
magazines mind you) and TV is certainly not restricted to women or
the attractive.
My own hypothesis is that German Playboy is no big deal (a small
fish in a big pond) and that they pay models for re-sale into more
lucrative markets, where Playboy is still seen as daring/hip.
> > There's no way that Playboy in Germany has the same cultural meaning
> > as it does in the US.
>
> Sorry, but the old "This is nothing in Europe" article doesn't hold water
> for me. If naked bodies truly meant "nothing" in Germany, and everybody
> really knew what everybody else had, they wouldn't be paying money for
> pictures of it, now would they? Magazines wouldn't have to use them to
> sell copies, would they?
I didn't say 'nothing in Europe' I said that Playboy doesn't have
(couldn't possibly have) the same cultural value/importance in
Germany as it does (or did at least) in the US and that any
judgement about whether Witt was naive/wicked/smart to pose for them
should take that into account.
The closest (I think) to a Hugh Heffner (as a symbol of sexual
commerce posing as liberation) in Germany would be a woman, namely
Beata Uhse (recently deceased) who began a chain of sex-shops in
Germany not long after the end of WWII.
I don't even know if Playboy is especially popular in Germany. In a
country where porn stars appear on TV talk shows and there are
several sex/news shows on broadcast TV in any given week (usually
after 10:00 p.m., but frightfully more explicit than anything you'll
ever find on US, even pay cable TV).
> > For Germans, I suspect playboy is fairly demure (as these things
> > go). I wouldn't be surprised if it's considered about the equivalent
> > of a Vanity Fair layout in the US.
>
> And Vanity Fair has done some things of questionable taste too.
I have no argument whatsoever there.
-michael farris
Hattie54
>type
>of statements. And if all she has are wrinkles, she sure wrinkles in the
>right
>places.
>Randy
Gotta love the southern baptists jokes , esp the ones where they don't drink or
dance and we know they do in private .
Harriet
janet swan hill
>type
>of statements. And if all she has are wrinkles, she sure wrinkles in the
>right
>places.
Dear Randy. TFBWWW is a world famous troll. One must assume that she IS
trolling. You are to be commended, however, for your polite and humerous
reply.
janet
blondee
> > Give it a break, I think it's just fine... she's old enough to decide what to do
> with her body. From the bit I could see it doesn't look as nicely done as 3
> years ago, but it doesn't look cheap or trashy.
>
> Does Katarina do anything for charity (aside from posing for
> > Playboy, that is, if she's donating her fees)?
>
> I'm sure she does, and I doubt she is.
>
> Randy
Considering Katarina's obvious physical attributes (and beauty!), I'd
have thought her Playboy lay-out several years ago would have been
better. I was none too impressed with those photos, to say the least.
I thought they didn't do her justice, were of poor quality, and
rather blah.
It's Kat's choice, IMO, to pose nude or not to pose nude. I wouldn't
make that choice, but that doesn't mean I disagree with Kat for making
that choice. We're two different people, and I'd never expect anyone
to feel and do exactly as I feel and do.
I don't put any of this in the category of politically correct vs.
politically incorrect. It's a personal choice and I believe we all
should have the freedom to make the choice one way or the other.
blondee
Randy
>
> Dear Randy. TFBWWW is a world famous troll. One must assume that she IS
> trolling.
I wasn't sure and I always give the benefit of the doubt beofre filling up more
deadwood in a killfile.
Randy
Randy
I would not say "everything" without seeing the choices, plus this would be
getting a bit off topic for a skating newsgroup. Let's just say I'm not a big
fan of preventative laws... ones that "Someone Else" decides is "for my own
good." Those have to be weighed very carefully so as not to infringe on an
individual's own choices in life (good or bad). So long as a person who makes a
stupid choice(imho) doesn't affect me or my family and friends I can usually
live with it... though I may choose to distance myself from the nuttier ones.
Anyway, I see nothing wrong with Witt's Playboy excursions. If you want an
evaluation on the quality of Playboy's shoot I would say a "B" for '98 and a "C"
for '01 (from what I could tell from the tiny pictures on Ebay. I would have
chosen differnt poses myself.
Randy
Randy
Hattie54
>should have the freedom to make the choice one way or the other.
>
>blondee
Old Trudi doesn't see it that way .
Harriet
di...@canada.com
In case anyone wants to continue arguing that posing in the nude
"demeans" people, here's a partial list of some of the individuals
that have done so in the past (papparazzi shots taken of unwitting
sunbathers caught by long-lensed photographers have been excluded--if
they were added, the list would include most of today's
royalty...recent European actresses have also been excluded since
almost all of them qualify.)
Alice Pleasaunce Liddell (the original Alice in Wonderland,
photgraphed by Lewis Carroll)
Artist Georgia O'Keeffe
Feminist Germaine Greer
Clara Bow
Greta Garbo
Joan Crawford
Dame Elsa Lanchester
Dame Edith Evans
Dame Margaret Leighton
Deborah Kerr
Rita Hayworth
Ingrid Bergman
Elizabeth Taylor
Ellen Burstyn
Brooke Shields
Faye Dunaway
Jessica Lange
Sissy Spacek
Debra Winger
Shirley MacLaine
Jodie Foster
Kristen Scott-Thomas
Meryl Streep
Gwyneth Paltow
Arnold Schwarzenegger
Sean Connery
Sting
most of the 2000 female Aussie Olympic team and a half-dozen or so
Olympic gymasts, including Olga Korbut and Nadia Comanici
and of course, Pamela Anderson, recently found to be the No. 1 most
recognized name throughout the world, ahead of all political leaders
and rock musicians...
I'd certainly feel demeaned to be included in that list...
Cheers... ...dirk
Janice
>
>Cheers... ...dirk
What male skaters have posed nude? Is European openess to nudity male
inclusive? I don't remember seeing any nude males plastered anywhere while
visiting Europe ... but I don't live there, so I have a limited frame of
reference.
Katerina Witt is an adult, and certainly old enough to make her own choices,
but I agree with others on this list. This kind of stuff is demeaning to
women.
Janice
Kitty Math: Two kittens (aka Buffy and Jody) + one computer desk + bedroom
speedway = maimed humans
Tracy Johnson
The fact that there is a long list of people who've posed nude hardly
means it's less demeaning. The best you can say is that it means it's
more socially acceptable, just as many things that were once considered
immoral, inappropriate, or unacceptable are now considered acceptable,
rightly or wrongly. Social mores don't change basic truths; so while you
can certainly have your own opinion about whether posing nude is
demeaning or not, using social mores as an argument to back that position
up makes for a weak argument. IMO, of course.
Tracy
BaleofAKS
I hereby nominate John Zimmerman.
C'mon, you all were thinking the same thing.... <g>
LB
Bale...@AOL.com
Althealeo
Everybody knows what everybody's got (figuratively speaking) and it's just no
big deal.>>
>So, if that's the case...why would she accept money for it? Why not say "It's
no big deal, I'd do it for free"? In fact, why did they offer her any, if it
was "no big deal"??>>
Whether she gets paid, and whether it's a big deal are two different questions.
Certainly Playboy isn't going to give the copies out for free -- they're
selling a magazine. And, generally, people who pose for magazines, whether
clothed or not, get paid. Whether it's a big deal, on the other hand, is an
entirely separate issue.
>Sorry, but the old "This is nothing in Europe" article doesn't hold water for
me. If naked bodies truly meant "nothing" in Germany, and everybody really knew
what everybody else had, they wouldn't be paying money for pictures of it, now
would they? Magazines wouldn't have to use them to
sell copies, would they?>>
I think when people say 'no big deal', they mean 'not shocking'. It's sort of
on the same scale as some pictorials in the U.S. with clothed models -- say,
Sports Illustrated. People enjoy looking at them, so they do sell copies, but
it's not that much of a 'big deal' in a shocking moral sense.
Of course, for some people here, Sports Illustrated is controversial and
objectifies women -- but by and large it's considered pretty mainstream. There
aren't major chains that refuse to carry it, and I'm not aware of any boycotts
or anything like that...and it certainly doesn't seem to hurt anyone's career.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing or agreeing with Witt's choice -- but I do
think that in some (but not all) European countries, nudity *is* much less
controversial than it is in the U.S. Whether it should be is a different
question -- but at least in my experience, you don't really hear this sort of
debate in some European countries.
Now, what would be interesting is whether the repeated choice to pose for
Playboy has any affect on her marketing here in the U.S. I doubt it, though,
if only because the vast majority of people are going to be unaware of it...and
I'm not even sure how many U.S. endorsement deals Witt has.
-- Kate
Joanna Tsang Ramberg
Sandra Loosemore wrote:
>
> jani...@aol.comxxxzzy (Janice) writes:
>
> > What male skaters have posed nude?
>
> Brian Pockar and Lance Travis, at least. I've also heard rumors about
> Nivek Nosredna.... ;-)
Oooooh! Nivek Nosredna posed nude??? If you can find out where he
posed nude, please let me know! ;-) (I'm either gonna enjoy it or
get a good laugh...either way, I'll get my "entertainment.") ;-)
Cheers,
Joanna
andrewgaren
> What male skaters have posed nude? Is European openess to nudity male
> inclusive? I don't remember seeing any nude males plastered anywhere while
> visiting Europe ... but I don't live there, so I have a limited frame of
> reference.
>
This is a little disingenuous. Most male skaters don't have the right
body type for modeling. In fact, very few female skaters do either.
Not to say that they're not attractive, but there are plenty of very
attractive people who are never going to be models.
I don't recall seeing nude female pics "plastered" on my visits to
Europe. However, there is a lot more nudity, and yes, both women and
men are included. It was something of a joke: you could always tell
the Americans because they were the only ones who wore swimsuits at
the beach.
> Katerina Witt is an adult, and certainly old enough to make her own choices,
> but I agree with others on this list. This kind of stuff is demeaning to
> women.
I find such blanket statements interesting. I assume that you don't
feel it's demeaning for her to skate for money, or for people to pay
to see her in that context. And yet, by doing so, aren't we
objectifying her -- Katarina Witt, figure skater. She might have great
ideas on the environment, be a wonderful philanthropist, or make a
mean pot roast, but none of us would care about that. We would just
want to see the skating.
Janice
>feel it's demeaning for her to skate for money, or for people to pay
>to see her in that context. And yet, by doing so, aren't we
>objectifying her -- Katarina Witt, figure skater.
I don't think it has anything to do with objectifying her in the sexual sense.
Griff
> ----------
>Why does she find it necessary to lower herself to bimbo status?
Money.
Personally, I didn't see a bimbo in those pictures.
I suspect that Kat can use the cash, and the attention doesn't hurt.
(Though I grant that, at least in the jaded US, the image of a
celebrity in Playboy screams desperation.) I don't know what personal
business interests she may have outside skate shows, or how here
attempts at European showbiz may be progressing, but it's clear that
any desires to carve a niche in American showbiz have not panning out.
Randy
>
> >I find such blanket statements interesting. I assume that you don't
> >feel it's demeaning for her to skate for money, or for people to pay
> >to see her in that context. And yet, by doing so, aren't we
> >objectifying her -- Katarina Witt, figure skater.
>
> I don't think it has anything to do with objectifying her in the sexual sense.
>
> Janice
I think you're kidding yourself. Most of the men I know (who actually watch
skating) would drop whatever they are doing to watch Witt skate... and it isn't
because of her abilities on the ice. It's because her clothes fit so nicely. I
have two friends who have a standing order to call out their husbands when she
takes the ice on tv. More power to her for having that ability... she has used
it much to her advantage.
Randy
Shari
I don't know, but if Boitano ever does...I'm buying! Great body!
Shari
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will pee on your
computer." - Bruce Graham
Nearlyperfect
> in American showbiz have not panning out.
Back in the early 90's Kat was on American TV shows all the time
hinting that she wanted to be a serious Hollywood actress. At the
time, it was unclear which side of the fence she was sitting on
politically. If she was asked anything about E. Germany or how she
liked it here, she could get really rude. My daughter and I almost
fell off the couch laughing once when she said she didn't agree with
the capitalist system but was just over here to work (for big money).
Katarina really needed an image consultant in those days! Basically,
she was too rough around the edges and never got the big break she was
hoping for from Hollywood. Other than the Jerry Maguire cameo a few
years ago, she's mostly done ice shows and German projects.
Hattie54
>hoping for from Hollywood. Other than the Jerry Maguire cameo a few
>years ago, she's mostly done ice shows and German projects.
Snort ! She did have a Coke endorsement around the 1992 or 1994 games and I
found that annoying . They could have endorsed an American skater.
Harriet
Janice
>skating) would drop whatever they are doing to watch Witt skate... and it
>isn't
>because of her abilities on the ice. It's because her clothes fit so nicely.
I'm sure they do and Witt puts her sensuality to good use. But that doesn't
mean being a figure skater is equivalent to posing nude in girlie magazines.
Randy
>
> >I think you're kidding yourself. Most of the men I know (who actually watch
> >skating) would drop whatever they are doing to watch Witt skate... and it
> >isn't
> >because of her abilities on the ice. It's because her clothes fit so nicely.
>
> I'm sure they do and Witt puts her sensuality to good use. But that doesn't
> mean being a figure skater is equivalent to posing nude in girlie magazines.
Agreed. I was simply answering your sentence of: "I don't think it has anything
to do with objectifying her in the sexual sense."
Randy
Hattie54
>mean being a figure skater is equivalent to posing nude in girlie magazines.
>
>Janice
At least Witt isn't a prude and she can do any dang thing with her body that
she wants .
Harriet
WIsil
>
>
Interesting Ann. If you are so opposed to this, why are you reading the
magazine to know whether or not she looks trashy? Sounding a little
hypocritical there, aren't you?
TCAXEL
>hinting that she wanted to be a serious Hollywood actress.
As far back as the '88 Olympics Jim Mckay was saying how she wanted to become
an actress
At the time, it was unclear which side of the fence she was sitting on
>politically. If she was asked anything about E. Germany or how she
>liked it here, she could get really rude. **********************
And unfortunatley for Witt, it came back to bite her when the wall fell.
Because alot of East Germans associated her with the old *regime* with their
elite who had priveleges, luxuries, etc. I can't say I blame her actual
conduct, but it did put her in an awkward position when the old gov. was
overthrown and denounced. Because she never complained publicly, people felt
she gave the gov. her tacit approval. But to be honest, if she had protested,
the E. german gov. would have revoked her ice shows, freedom to travel in the
west.
>My daughter and I almost fell off the couch laughing once when she said she
didn't agree with >the capitalist system but was just over here to work (for
big money).
>Katarina really needed an image consultant in those days! Basically,
>she was too rough around the edges and never got the big break she was
>hoping for from Hollywood.
******************************
Someone mentioned she came out in some German TV show that was pretty bad, but
I never saw it. I do think the timing was bad for Witt in '88, though it's
hard to believe as one of the most famous athletes of the world someone
wouldn't have risked giving her at least ONE major acting role during that time
period. I mean, even a Bond film would have been something. Who knows? Maybe
she screentested pretty bad, but then again, Cindy Crawford got a star billing
in a pretty bad movie, with a terrible performance.
I wonder if Witt was all that "serious" to make the transition to be a bonafide
actress. She never, for example, tried to do small repertory theater, or accept
smaller roles in films, shows,etc, as so many established names do when trying
to get into acting. She seemed to figure out that skating was her
bread-and-butter and never really weaned herself from the security of the
skating world.
It seems Tara L. has had a larger body(relatively speaking) of acting work than
Witt ever built up. Her difficulites with getting roles, added to the new
skating boom post-whack, probably put to rest any real *ambitious* acting plans
she might have had. Now on SOI, she figures skating is still her main baby.
> Other than the Jerry Maguire cameo a few
>years ago, she's mostly done ice shows and German projects.
*********************
She had a *blink or you'll miss me* role in A De Niro film "Ronin".
THEO
-"No offense intended"
-"None comprehended"
-from the TV show "The Tick"
WIsil
>hard to believe as one of the most famous athletes of the world someone
>wouldn't have risked giving her at least ONE major acting role during that
>time
>period. I mean, even a Bond film would have been something.
Great idea! A Bond girl - that would be a fun role for her, plus she is just
mysterious and sexy enough to pull it off.
GPOsborne
GPOsborne
"TCAXEL" <tca...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011205123313...@mb-mp.aol.com...
Janice
>At least Witt isn't a prude and she can do any dang thing with her body that
>she wants .
>
>Harriet
I never said she couldn't and I don't see being a "prude" as a badge of
dishonor.
Virginia
<Jennif...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>. Katarina is a two-time Olympic gold
>medalist and an accomplished professional skater. Why does she
>find it necessary to lower herself to bimbo status?
Some folks don't think posing for nudie magazine(or otherwise exposing
the nude human body)=bimbo or appearance of bimbo. Also there is a
difference between posing for a mag just because you have no other way
to make money and other reasons. When Tonja S posed a few years back,
her photos looked like every other wannabe who was controled by the
photographer and her photos were a lot of the typical shots you see.
Katarina's in US Playboy a few years back IMO had more the appearance
of Katarina calling the shots(and I recall reading that she indeed
controlled how the photos looked, etc). There were no real typical
pics you would find if the sole purpose of the photos were to entice
men.
There are those who don't equate posing nude as something lowly. There
are a variety of reasons one would do this and I don't think Katarina
has lowered herself(speaking though as someone who has not seen the
German Playboy photos).
Althealeo
Because alot of East Germans associated her with the old *regime* with their
elite who had priveleges, luxuries, etc. I can't say I blame her actual
conduct, but it did put her in an awkward position when the old gov. was
gave the gov. her tacit approval. But to be honest, if she had protested, the
E. german gov. would have revoked her ice shows, freedom to travel in the
west.>>
Yes, athletes were in a difficult position. And Witt always struck me as
really apolitical...not really willing to buck the system at great cost, but
not really thrilled with the Stasi, either. And I got the impression that she
was frustrated that she, as a person who was pretty apolitical, would be
associated with a particular political regime, and would be essentially asked
to give political opinions.
I think for a lot of these skaters, the nationality is important rather than
the particular political system
.>I wonder if Witt was all that "serious" to make the transition to be a
bonafide
actress. She never, for example, tried to do small repertory theater, or accept
smaller roles in films, shows,etc, as so many established names do when trying
to get into acting.>>
Which raises an interesting question. A lot of skaters have expressed interest
in acting. But how many of them have actually taken it seriously, the way Theo
describes it above?
-- Kate
Jennifer Lyon
----------
In article <3c0e8776...@news4.sucknews.com>,
virg...@visionsnet.com (Virginia) wrote:
There is a difference between posing nude for a work of art and
posing nude for a cheap-thrills titty magazine like Playboy.
DG511
writes:
>There is a difference between posing nude for a work of art and
>posing nude for a cheap-thrills titty magazine like Playboy.
>
I have nothing to add, I just thought this was so on-target that it bore
repeating.
Daria
janet swan hill
Posing nude is not necessarily a virtue (nor is it necessarily a vice). Those
who are modest are not necessarily prudes. (interestingly, the word prude
derives from the old French for virtuous woman). A rush to embrace the mores
and values of some other society is not necessarily a sign of sophistication.
janet
Virginia
It isn't "embracing" mores.. simply realizing that people have
different sets of mores and standards of behavior and knowing that
those folks are not necessarily "bad" for having those different
standards.
Roxane Fenton
TCAXEL wrote:
>
> > Other than the Jerry Maguire cameo a few
> >years ago, she's mostly done ice shows and German projects.
> *********************
> She had a *blink or you'll miss me* role in A De Niro film "Ronin".
>
>
She was also in an episode of Pamela Anderson's syndicated show VIP.
She was the central villain. She played the organizer/head of a
supposed beauty contest that was secretely a way to kidnap the
contestants and train them to be...I want to say mercenaries, but they
didn't have any choice. Or something like that.
Roxane [who has just revealed that she will indeed watch anything on
late night television when she's procrastinating about writing a
paper].
Randy
And the difference is....?????
Art is so "in the eye of the beholder." Let's see, what would I appreciate
more... Witt nude in Playboy... or... "The Last Supper" remade out of elephant
excrement? You make the call. At least I can choose to pay for Witt's exposure
instead of having to pay.
Randy
andrewgaren
> >I find such blanket statements interesting. I assume that you don't
> >feel it's demeaning for her to skate for money, or for people to pay
> >to see her in that context. And yet, by doing so, aren't we
> >objectifying her -- Katarina Witt, figure skater.
>
> I don't think it has anything to do with objectifying her in the sexual sense.
>
Well, at one level, it does.
Katerina has always cultivated a sexy image. I don't see what the
amount of clothing has to do with it. If it's inappropriate to present
yourself in a sexual way in public, it's inappropriate no matter what
you're wearing.
Personally, I don't have a problem with people acknowledging that they
are sexually attractive, as long as the message isn't that everyone
(esp. women) HAS to be sexually attractive to be of any value. If this
is a turn-off for people, Playboy is probably a better venue than an
ice show. The people who want to see it can, and those who don't,
don't have to buy the magazine. With an ice show, an audience member
doesn't know what he/she is going to get until the skater is out
there. At that point, it's too late to avoid seeing a performance that
you find too provocative, sexy or in poor taste.
Fiona McQuarrie
: I didn't say "Pposing in the nude demeans people." I said "Posing in the
: nude in a girlie magazine for money demeans people." I have no doubt
: that most of the esteemed women on your list, which I have snipped, did
: not do that.
How about if she posed for free? Would that make it OK? ;)
(And, not to throw further irons in the fire, but if Playboy is a "girlie
magazine", what does that make all those other magazines that, unlike
PLayboy, are on the top shelf at the 7-11 with their covers obscured?
There are lots more graphic, and demeaning, "girlie" magazines than
PLayboy.)
Fiona
SIPAAMS
Alison
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Love one another as I have loved you. - J.C.
Trudi Marrapodi
<Randyre...@Snakebite.com> wrote:
> Trudi Marrapodi wrote:
> >
> > Hear me! When women pose for a men's magazine, it's a one-way street. The
> > woman is being exploited for the entertainment of men, no matter how she
> > tries to dress it up with new-age political correctness.
>
> Baloney. If that's the way you feel then the "exploitation" theory could
be said
> for any one in entertainment (be it sports, singing, acting, etc...). They are
> being exploited for the entertainment of women, or men, or both... and that's
> not true. In anyone of these professions some people are being
exploited, that's
> certain, but not all.
>
> Randy
To make money singing, acting, playing sports, etc., requires talent.
Exposing your body does not require talent.
--
Trudi
"Orser let the skating speak and the judges awarded it."
--Dave Fraser
Trudi Marrapodi
blo...@my-deja.com (blondee) wrote:
[snip]
> It's a personal choice and I believe we all
> should have the freedom to make the choice one way or the other.
I agree. But I also have the right to have a negative opinion about it.
Trudi Marrapodi
<mcqu...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> Trudi <marrapodw...@binghamton.edu> wrote:
>
> : I didn't say "Pposing in the nude demeans people." I said "Posing in the
> : nude in a girlie magazine for money demeans people." I have no doubt
> : that most of the esteemed women on your list, which I have snipped, did
> : not do that.
>
> How about if she posed for free? Would that make it OK? ;)
Well, at least she wouldn't be doing it for the money. ;-)
> (And, not to throw further irons in the fire, but if Playboy is a "girlie
> magazine", what does that make all those other magazines that, unlike
> PLayboy, are on the top shelf at the 7-11 with their covers obscured?
> There are lots more graphic, and demeaning, "girlie" magazines than
> PLayboy.)
I make little differentiation between them. Playboy is just a girlie
magazine with a few more intellectual articles than the rest to make it
more mainstream acceptable than the others.