I agree w/ the biathletes, what the hell is wrong w/showing the beauty of the female athletetic body?
And yeah, there probably are more "modest" ways they could've raised money. LESS money. I agree w/ a woman's right to choose to do whatever she wants. These aren't Russian immigrants being forced into prostitution for Christ's sake, they're Olympic Biathletes who chose, of their own free will, to do something for charity. Some folks need to get off their high horse, GEEEZE!

My thoughts are if these ladies want to advertise what god give them it's their option.I wish them well in their pursuit to fund their efforts.Nude women are a mute point in our world today.You can see more skin on the street during Mardi Gras i know we just finished with 14 days of fun and feasting.
Alabamaoutlaw

I'm not offended by pictures of girls in F&S. Whenever someone talks about what's good for children, they generally want to take away something that's fun for adults. I think Holly Heyser's central point is way off base. There are more revealing photos in ANY popular woman's magazine out there. Look at the cover of Cosmo! Has showing T&A really hurt MTV with female viewers?

After reading all the comments, I looked once more at the photo to see what the fuss was about. I came to the conclusion that there is nothing to see that is remotely obscene. You cannot see anything that you cannot see at the beaches IF the ladies there are wearing swim suits, even very skimpy swimsuits at that! And I am sure most of us would not run away covering our eye at the beach now, would we?

The girls do not look like lesbians either blackdawgs, shame on ya. But being both cross country skiers and probably very good shooters, you might not wanna say that to them. They would most likely open up a bigger can of whoopass than you could handle! ;)

Lighten up dudes.

Wait, so if this was a bunch of guys showing off their muscles/fit bodies would we have even looked at this picture twice? I don't know about you guys out there, but if I work my ass off to be in shape I want to show off. Hell yeah I am going to wear tailored shirts that show off my shape. You know what else? If I can sell my image to pay for something I love (which these women obviously do) then I will sell that image. I would sell a calendar of sexy men/women for pheasant habitat. I would buy a raffle ticket for a crappy shotgun from a cute lady/gentleman for ducks unlimited. To say this picture is pornographic is crazy, yeah I said it CRAZY. Have you been to the mall lately? Have you watched cable television in the last 15 years? Have you looked at a magazine? Everyone of these things has sexy people on/in them. I mean come on! The women on Fox news are former models or Ms. America contestants. This has me all fired up! The human body is beautiful! These women are healthy!!! I would be mad if they were anorexic with fake parts. I would be mad if they were strung out on drugs with their Hoo-hahs blowing in the breeze. That's not the case though. They are beautiful women, who want to continue doing their beloved sport. They cannot get sponsors because no one shoots those weapons or cross country skis. They are doing what they have to so that they can pursue their dreams to win a gold medal!!! Is it wrong for a cute girl to be a waitress so she can receive a college degree? Is it wrong for a good looking guy to bartend to get his degree? Only in America is it alright to show my buddy getting blown up on national news, but it is not alright for women to pose for a tasteful picture showing off what hard work can accomplish.

Are the classic sculptures and art in museums "porn" just because they are naked people?

Actually the first Olympics were competed in by nude athletes, so I guess the Olympics started off as porn?

Porn implies a sexual act of some form or another, simply being naked is not porn anymore than striping for a shower is pornographic.

Personally I would like to see Field and Stream set a higher standard than that of other gratuitous voyeuristic media. My father set a standard of dignity, propriety and respect as a true gentleman. He always said "Just because others do it doesn't make it right or appropriate." He lives the following creed written by John Walter Wayland years ago. It would serve all of us and Field and Stream as well to filter our actions by these words.
"The true gentleman is the man whose conduct proceeds from good will and an acute sense of propriety, and whose self control is equal to all emergencies; who does not make the poor man conscious of his poverty, the obscure man of his obscurity, or any man of his inferiority or deformity; who is himself humbled if necessity compels him to humble another; who does not flatter wealth; cringe before power, or boast of his own possessions or achievements; who speaks with frankness but always with sincerity and sympathy; whose deed follows his word; who thinks of the rights and feelings of others rather than his own; and who appears well in any company; a man with whom honor is sacred and virtue safe."
I believe it applies to this debate and every aspect of life.

rabbitpolice88,

No negatives from me here. I actually +1'd you on your first one. I didn't necessarily agree (maybe somewhat) but I have seen you take that stand before and I know it's from your heart.

As for the -1's I left for you, Blackdawgz, I just flat disagreed with you there. No hate, just good ol' disagreement. I was amused, but I had to go -.

As for Clay, I didn't -1 you at first(yes later I did). After I watched a -3 on my post rack up in about 2 minutes(yes I was watching clay) I will just say it like this:

To ALL:
Clay is still running multiple accounts. What he's doing is running firefox and having multiple tabs open on the same page at the same time. This allows him to have 3 or so accounts(identities) open, and makes possible his being able vote up or down like he does and manipulate points on peoples' posts. To the ed's at F&S, please check the IP addresses from now on. I think you will find what I'm talking about. Please check me FIRST so that you know I'm not the pot calling the kettle black.

Clay,

-1 me all you want. The points don't matter to me. The content of the comments does. Your credibility is rapidly going down the $#!++er.

And this from the F&S Staff who pissed on my shoe for stating facts about a situation on the Answers page and did little to eliminate the root of the problem?

I am not personally offended by those photos, I just think it is inappropriate here. Send them to Penthouse or wherever.

This basis for my complaint is about a lack of standards that seems to be endemic these days.

The only redeeming part of this month's issue was the wolf hunt article by McCafferty. Petzal's article was a scrawny one page. My current 3 year subscriptions to F&S and OL must be running out soon since I am getting some renewal notices. I am not going to be so pious as to threaten to cancel my subscription and whine like a four year old, but will thoughtfully evaluate the content of both magazines and this blog before I decide to hand over any more cash to Bonnier Corp AND YOUR SPONSORS. With Petzal in semi-retirement and Carmicheal gone, what's really left but male enhancement adds and product reviews?

If I were looking for skin, there are probably other websites and magazine more appropriate. Give us a break, get back to the outdoors. Who cares about the Olympics anyway?

Got gumption?

I'm for it, I say. I am for it.

blackawgz - I dated a couple of women that were exceptionally athletic. Brings back some memories. Am I smiling? Yes, I am definitely smiling. I'll just say you have really missed out.

Phil

way to your numbers up!

"difference between booth babes and naked biathletes?"

Booth babes - the girls achievements are incidental to their looks, their looks are used to promote a different product every week - its a job.

Buff Biathletes - their looks are incidental and being used to draw attention to their achievements, and promote their efforts in amateur sport

PS If you call those girls 'Babes' you need to get out more.
PPS Bella LOL

F&S is really not that much fun to read anymore. I usually skip to the Heavey column in the back and then maybe look over the gear reviews. I haven't seen much in terms of substantive hunting or fishing discourse in the mag since I started subscribing two years ago... so I did not renew my subscription this year and frequent the blogs here less.

Maybe a few good articles on reloading, bullet performance, lure performance, etc. might get me back but I wanna see proof that F&S is getting serious about putting on a serious show.

As for booth babes, the nudity doesn't bother me, I'm not a puritan. But you know, this whole issue has an interesting parallel - I stopped going to the Eastern Sports & Outdoor show because of the same problem, it lost its outdoor substance and most of what was there was sooo suburban ($10K outfitter trips, wildlife art, and vehicles). Has the urge to appeal to all demographics regardless of interest in serious shooting and fishing sports finally superseded the need to appeal to those specifically interested in said sports? Booth babes or naked biathletes, I'd rather speak with someone who knows what they're talking about and is not just good at highlighting the gun/product regardless of sex.

Rabbit would have all us girls in long sleeves and petticoats to the floor! Bunnyrabbit doesn't it anger you that they show all those NAKED BABIES on tv just to sell diapers and pablum! Child Pornography! Jail 'em all!
Remember Islam supposedly prohibits any representation of the human form, I'm beginning to think that Bunnyrabbit is a closet Muslim...he seems to want women in burkas. But Rabbitpolice is only a false god, as I determined in a previous thread, and should not be considered any sort of moral guide...But he said he was going to go enlist if called...so he might have at least a crumb of moral fiber! Hey bunny, you weren't posting from Basic, were you? What you haven't gone to see the recruiter yet Bunny?

Mayhap I've missed something, is that the only pic that has been posted? The subject of an article? One pic and it's called porn? Do you not watch TV? Prime time shows more than that. Some comments here are funnier'n some comics I've seen.
Fred...

Saying that booth babes or naked biatheletes influence a persons direction in life is like claiming if my mother leaves her cosmospolitain magazines laying around the house that I will grow up gay.

For both I feel they are only used for immediate short term attention grabbers leading into a much more important subject.

I have to say that I prefer the biathlete's outfits over what the both babes were wearing. I don't understand what's so offensive about the human body. And--Mrs. Seadog has a pair of pajamas just like that (and, no, I won't post a picture).

do you think there’s a difference between booth babes and naked biathletes?

No. Not much.

reading through the comments, it seems to me that all of the arguments in favor of posting this photo boil down to the proposition that "society is much more vulgar today than it used to be and this photo is no more vulgar than everything else" - that's just not an argument that I find convincing.

I am offended by the photo - no; but it does make me think less of F&S

The best analogy I can think of is a comedian who has to resort to profanity to get a laugh - am I offended by this? no, but I'm not impressed either.

OK I see two questions/issues here.
1. Is the calendar offensive racy, distastefully Ad Nausea. I don't think so, my opinion. The human form has been drawn, chiseled carved, painted and paraded about since homo sapiens picked up a pencil (no not a homo sexual comment blackdawgz, learn to spell by the way) and I think it’s silly to say otherwise, you'll pay more than 20 bucks a head to go see the same art in a museum. Or about 10 bucks a head to get it from the book store in some cases. So no I don't have a problem with it at all.
2. Is it appropriate for F&S this is where the subscriber really sets what he or she wants to see in the magazine. Personally I find it a lot less offensive than the male enhancement ads in the back BUT I do not think it is appropriate for F&S. Esquire, GQ, SI, some of the other mags yes, F&S no. Reason, nothing to do with field sports or hunting; that simple. Shooting or a sport, skiing is a sport, Combining them (for me would be close to suicidal) does not make them hunting.

Now with both being answered I can answer my own question do I like it? Yes I do.

CPT B

I see the real and present danger of these post-apocalyptic, female artic warriors from the North. No doubt their passing can be determined by the trail of male victims sporting goofy grins.

rabbitpolice88

I applaud your convictions and in general hanging in there when folks are rattling your cage. Take no crap off the wacko's in life.

WMH

Naked women with guns reminds me of something Don Meredith once said on Monday Night Football when the camera was scanning the cheerleaders: "Sex and violence. That will sell it every time!"

I think it's great that women compete in the biathlon and especially so because it involves shooting. I think the pictures are counter productive.
IMHO they (and their fundraising efforts) would be better served wearing their biathlon clothes. Same cause, less controversy.

Grow up - we are all naked sometime, these ladies just have the courage to use their talents to further other talents.

+1 for you Quiet Loner. I guess I set myself up for that.

Phil or Dave: How about an in depth post on the biathlon rifle?

Ah Jeez ... why don't we drop back 45 years or so and discuss the misuse of a beauty on a box of soap ---> http://www.snopes.com/risque/porn/chambers.asp . Political-Correctness is old, boring corn which I'd rather ol'Bourjaily not bring to the forum. Bring gun stuff or take a nap.

Right or wrong, they could do it, they wanted to do it and they did it. Why machinate over it?

Offended? Who, me? On the contrary, I find it to be most pleasing. Anyone who can find anything obscene about these photos is suffering from a severe case of moral constipation. The young ladies appear to be having a good time with their project and are laughing at the old farts (like me) who are buying their calendar and that's just fine with me.

The photographer did an excellent job of using black and white to emphasize the use of light, form and line.

I doubt that F&S is going to make a regular feature out of subjects like this, but I wouldn't cancel my subscription if they did. There's just enough outdoor/firearm subject to make it legitimate. Vive la difference!

And as a matter for a future article, whens the 2010 come out??

Kenton,
I have never seen any part of any woman I'd call "offensive".

And I've seen lots of parts in 48 years. ;-)

Um err anyone ready for spring fishing or know what hunts they are putting in for.

Considering the nature of the post itself, and the links provided, I'd say this is either a joke or a blatant plea for website traffic statistics.

Either way, too sad.

I think we all need to lighten up a bit. Like the Swimsuit Edition of Sports Illustrated, this is much ado about nothing.

Not to cause a ruckus, but on the whole, I have come to think of the term "booth babe" to be derogatory in general.

I've been to lots of trade shows for computers, like Comdex, Networld-Interop, Usenix, etc. Like SHOT shows, a lot of people have very specific, technical issues they want to see addressed. If they know what they're talking about, they are a representative. If you get the "deer-in-the-headlights" look, they're just there for eye candy.

An attractive representative (of a business, or sport, or anything else) is nice, but pretty or not, sometimes I just want to know why the Dell 1450 wireless card doesn't load in Windows 7!

Maybe with the calendar sales they will purchase less skimpy outfits for next year?

Why don't all you people who hide behind your little negative ones come out and be men and tell me how and why you think I am wrong. What is so difficult about explaining yourself?

Thanks sgaredneck, I have no problems with you disagreeing with me whatsoever. I don't mind the negative ones either as long as I know the reasons for them. I seldom if ever agree with blackdawgz so no disagreement there. That is interesting what you say about Clay, I'm not sure what to think about the accusations, I am by no means computer literate so you obviously know better than me but if what you say is true that is disturbing to say the least.

Rabbit , I disagree on several counts.

1. This does not meet the legal requirements of pornography, if it did it would not be either in the magazine or blog.

2. Nowhere can you see a. Nipples or even part of a breast,b pubic area at all,c. for lack of a better word the backside, as a matter of fact you saw more of all of those items in coverage of the women skaters in the olympics this week and last week.

3. You want to censor the blog, there are Lawyer's highly paid to keep them out of trouble they and WE do not need your help in making a decision of what to look at or not.

4. Your rant has gone on long enough.

went nearly blind trying to read all the comments.probably would have went blind if the women had shown more of the good stuff.is this appropriate in an outdoors mag? why not? we see much more in many other non-skin mags. by the way, i like the athletes much better than the booth babes.

I have to amend my earlier post. I checked out the gallery of photos and I discovered there were some of the biathletes wearing their competition outfits. I thought the one of the woman on her skates on the sidewalk with her rifle slung over her shoulder was in good taste.

that should be: Am I offended by the photo?- No.

If the legal beagles considered what these athletes were doing as porn, many a museum would be shut down for that reason. The female body is a work of art especially in the fit condition of these gals. I think folks who object to the calender and/or booth babes have personal issues.

Wouldn't be awesome to have Mr. Phil Bourjally, Mr. Dave Petzel and a few women from AMERICAN biathlon team square off in rifle match?

I have nothing else appropriate to add.

These women beat the hell out of the booth babes. "Both groups are using god provided assets" - I disagree - the booth babes are using surgeon provided assets to sell something for someone else to make a buck, and these women are using assets provided by their own hard work, determination, abilities. All they get is some hardware, glory, and the pride of their country. Nothing was given to them. It was all earned. They don't have the luxury of corporate sponsors and media hype to raise money. The funds for their team are hard to come by. They make these calenders under their own volition to make the extra money they need so badly to train and compete. It's actually somewhat common for female winter Olympians and Olympic teams (especially the Northern European ones) to do these shoots. There are plenty of these calenders out there from other sports.

As much as a lot of the Booth Babe Haters' criticisms are valid, they would likely disapprove of this too. According to some of them, these women are too in shape and attractive. These women send the wrong message -

"The point is that when you shove images like these in girls' faces, it affects them deeply. Some become anorexics and subject themselves to mutilation at the hands of surgeons so they can have the "right" measurements. Most just spend the rest of their lives thinking they're not good enough. These images matter a LOT."

There seems to be a war against any media presentation of women in shape, being waged by certain feminists that aren't in shape or in the media...interesting. If you're trim and toned, you're not a "real woman" anymore. Is there a minimum BMI to qualify as a "real woman"? If you ask me, these women are THE real women. God forbid America lost a few collective pounds and got some more exercise...

I could do without the booth babes, they aren't doing much of anything with their lives. But, whether they posed nude or not, Olympians ARE the kind of women girls should look up to. They work their butts off and have no big money to show for it. They are some of America's finest, in talent and in spirit. It also helps that our teams tend to kick more butt than anyone else in the world...

to keep things fair and balanced, i think someone should get five nude, very over-weight men to pose in the exact same position and send a message to Canada saying,"this is how we do it in America!"

Booth babes are a feature of trade shows whenever the vendors perceive that such "special representatives" add value to exhibits. Doubtlessly a large majority of F&S readers appreciate the booth babe pictures. But a feature article isn't necessary to give them more than ample coverage. Holly “Why I hate the booth babe story” Heyser has a valid point.

The naked biathletes are another matter entirely. Whether or not you consider the pictures to be pornographic, the appeal is undeniably sexual. The claim that:

“Our goal is to empower and inspire women and girls by expressing the beauty of a healthy, athletic body.”

amounts to saying that a healthy, athletic woman can make money easily if she's willing to take her clothes off. Duh, don't you think girls learn that at a very early age?

Granted, aspiring athletes who aren't independently wealthy need to market themselves to prospective sponsors. It's part of the game. But by introducing sexual attraction as a fund raising strategy, the naked biathlete calendar starts down a slippery slope. Personally, I don't consider the picture at the beginning of this blog to be offensive. But a few small changes would turn it into "soft" porn. Where do you draw the line? You can't, and it's really unfair to women who only want to compete on basis of athletic ability. It's better not to go there at all.

Rabbit I think you are a little bit wrong on several counts.
1. This can't meet the legal definition of porn, there are no nipple or even much b

No, there are better things to do with your time than watch television. I don't have cable or satalite and the dtv isn't worth messing with. Instead I sharpen knives, shoot, work, play guitar etc.

while I can see both sides of the discussion my feels fall in line with rabbit on this one. there has to be other more modest ways to raise monet so that they can compete.

Considering the nature of the post itself, and the links provided, I'd say this is either a joke or a blatant plea for website traffic statistics.

Either way, too sad.

As much as a lot of the Booth Babe Haters' criticisms are valid, they would likely disapprove of this too. According to some of them, these women are too in shape and attractive. These women send the wrong news

Typical of you bella.

I never thought I would get so many negative votes for being against porn, what is wrong with everybody?

Kenton GOD cares!

If a man is honest with himself and asks "why am I really buying this photo"? it's because the women are naked holding guns, not because you want to help a noble sport. Would a man have bought the same photo if the women had been completely dressed in their uniforms? The answer is that far fewer men would have bought this photo if the women had been dressed. So it is porn, designed to arouse a man's senses that should only be aroused by his wife.

No, both are in bad taste but I am more concerned as to how much choice the members of the Canadian team had in the matter. If one objected were they allowed to opt out or where they forced or preasured into participation?