Woman defends swimsuit issue

Ahh . . . it's that time of year again. A time when thin rays of sun pierce through the dreary winter clouds. A time when the snow slowly melts, and we can finally let our thoughts drift toward images of a bronze tan and warmer weather.

Yes, that's right. It's once again time for the annual Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue, which hit newsstands last Wednesday. Always a center of mid-winter controversy, the swimsuit issue, which features regulars such as Tyra Banks, serves as an early thaw for men and sends a collective chill up the spines of women.

Except for me.

As a subscriber to Sports Illustrated since September 1989, I have read letter after letter from angry mothers, concerned fathers, stuffy librarians, flaming feminists and holier-than-thou clergymen who see this once-a-year issue as the anti-Christ to our ever-so wholesome society. This insanity has been a source of confusion to me for eight years.

I just don't understand what the big deal is. Sports Illustrated just happens to be a sports magazine that contains one issue featuring models in provocative swimwear. If you ask me, the only thing outrageous about the swimsuit issue is the price women have to pay to for just a few feet of fabric.

Besides paying $120 for a bikini, those in opposition to the swimsuit issue have nothing to complain about. The most popular argument is that the swimsuit issue degrades women.

My answer: These models are paid thousands of dollars a day to stand around in a swimsuit and look beautiful. Doesn't sound like a bad job to me. But most importantly, these women chose to model for the swimsuit issue, just as they chose modeling as a career.

And to anyone who says the swimsuit issue sets the women's rights movement back a couple of decades, please put down your pen and look at who the senior editor of the issue was for 32 years. Her name is Jule Campbell. And in my opinion, she has done each issue with good taste, judgment and creativity. By the way, her successor (Elaine Farley) is also a woman.

In addition, the 1997 issue reaches middle ground with those who oppose it by featuring two separate layouts of pro tennis player Steffi Graf and volleyball diva Gabrielle Reece. These highly recognized and influential female professional athletes are finally being recognized for their beauty while maintaining their status as role models and the athletic aura surrounding them.

For those doting parents and junior high librarians who write each year to complain that the swimsuit issue corrupts the morals of children and sends them a bad message, guess what? It's as easy as calling Sports Illustrated's customer service number and requesting that this evil issue be omitted from your subscription!

And before you go bashing the swimsuit issue, have you heard what Victoria's Secret is doing? Yes, they too, will have their own swimsuit catalog this month, right around the same time the swimsuit issue makes its debut. Of course, this catalog was created specifically for women to order swimwear, but men receive the catalog, too.

I've spotted more than a few Victoria's Secret covers with that ridiculous million-dollar Miracle Bra in the apartments of a few college men. I also can recall when my roommate boarded the elevator with two Victoria's Secret catalogs in hand, while two anxious young men literally begged her to spare one (just in case you were wondering, one of the catalogs featured the new spring collection, so she stood her ground).

This is proof the swimsuit issue is not the only source for men who want to see half-naked women.

And what about Playboy, Hustler or Penthouse? And you think the swimsuit issue is bad? Compared to these magazines, which are directly targeted at men, I think the swimsuit issue is rather conservative.

So before you start to write hate mail to the editor of Sports Illustrated, burn this year's issue (which features Banks on its cover), or get into a raging fit because your boyfriend is looking at it, stop and think.

Aren't there worse things to worry about?