Definitely not a glamour actress - edited by moderator, but a real woman flying Indoor aerobatics:

Edited by Brian Cullen on May 08, 2003 at 6:29AM

And a lovely one at that!

uh oh...
I know I'm gonna get in some hot water here.....but, what is so terrible at looking at a beautiful woman? Are we so far escaped from reality as to expect men to NOT want to look?
If a woman did NOT want to be looked at ,at all, by men, then whay do your hair, why put on make up, why wear low cut shirts? I'm not objectifying, I'm just saying , WHY IS IT SO BAD???? Women are beautiful, model airplanes can be beautiful..why not combine them?
Look at the F1 and Nascar podiums when the driver wins....who hands him the trophy and stands there for pics? Some hairy old combover financing dude, or a pretty girl? Sorry, but I see nothing wrong.
If women want hot guys on the cover on Cosmo or Womans Day or Redbook,,,, great for them, some guys have great physiques they might enjoy looking at....

Not PC Mark Rittinger

Oh, and yes, that blonde above is VERY cute, put her on the cover!

Mark, that Cosmopolitan deal is telling... beautiful women photographed expensively (Francesco Scavullo for decades) on the cover of a magazine sold almost exclusively to women. Though the guys I know who find a copy at home will at least look at the pictures.
This is blatant job discrimination and sexism... all of the magazines, men's and women's, have women on the covers. What about the starving male models who have to wait tables to buy medicine for their grandma? Huh?

I think the main issue here is not whether women or men should appear on the covers of Model Airplane magazines but rather how they are portrayed.
Many of my issues of Quiet Flyer (S&E modeller) feature attractive women holding or flying model planes, in all cases very tastefull and not something you would worry about leaving on the coffee table.

The problem comes about when instead of the person enhancing the overall image, they become the main focus, usually counting on the lack of clothing to distract the viewer.

In these cases I do have objections as I would rather my subscription fees be spent on real content than on glamour models.

Heather

It would be a terrible thing if this fine hobby were to mislead millions of women into thinking that they were objects of aesthetic evaluation. The harm done to the movement, if it once got out amongst the female population that model plane flyers were actually interested in sex, would be incalculable. The future of our sport depends upon attracting dozens of women into this aeromodelling activity, who can galvanise and invigorate it, as they have done in decades past.
Of course, to be completely fair, we must also encourage the interest of those who lie somewhere in between the opposing poles of gender. Buddy Boxes anyone?
Come on guys it's a hobby.

Chas

You hit the bullseye Heather.

Its all a matter of perspective...

Originally posted by Heather
snip ...the lack of clothing to distract the viewer. snip

Heather

Im sure the magazines marketing department is thinking attract the viewer...and the sale. Since I began lurking around rcgroups and e-zone, I no longer anticipate the arrival of BY Flyer. IMO the reviews, content, and opinions here are much more valuable than the somewhat "cookie cutter" although thorough reviews that would n'er dare to shame an advertiser. Besides they dont have the occasional flamings that add spice

TawmcaT

I've been reading model magazines for over 40 years. I never looked at the covers as being offensive. I have over the years learned that beauty in any form should be enjoyed and appreciated. That beauty could be in the form of a beautiful sunset,a newborn child or a beautiful girl posing with a model airplane. I see little difference in any thing beautiful.
Would I like to see the return of those covers? Yes I would and you can place them right next to the womens magazines with the pretty girls on the cover. You know the ones I mean. The ones that tell women how to look beautiful so they can complain when we men look at them.

Are you sur eit's a good diea to talk about this sorta stuff on Ezone?

What's on the cover is there to attract you to the magazine. What's IN the magazine is what counts.
Pretty girl on the cover.. nice, but so what?
No one really thinks the gal is anything but a device to get you to pick up the magazine.
You sure don't see those voluptuous babes infesting the flying sites...
Find one here....

Heather,

You seem to be so very alone in this thread, at least with respect to gender. I somehow find myself leaning towards the attitude you are conveying. I'm not sure why, but it just seems right at this moment.

There are definitely magazine covers with "pretty girls" on them. RCM has probly done more than anyone else. But the "pretty girls" have a "wholesome" quality to them. Maybe this is just a case of degree, but this is what separtates broadcast TV from "ADULT" TV. Edited by moderator RCM doesn't show any young ladies "straddling" some pattern plane.

My two cents.

Dale Case

Edited by Brian Cullen on May 08, 2003 at 6:33AM

If I see an R/C magazine featuring a female model who would obviously rather be in someones home movie, I instantly pass it by. If the magazine is desperate enough to try such techniques it gives me a bad feeling about what they have to offer. I'm interested enough in the hobby that I'll read a T/V Guide from front to back if I thought the word "airplane" might appear somewhere, the topic sells itself to those that are interested.

50% of the population is female. Females general don't fly model airplanes. If the magazines don't alienate them, there's a huge untapped potential for a new market. Heck, they might even get a larger increase in readship putting male models on the cover!

I just love these threads!
What I find funny is that these things always come down to how your intellect reflects on how you respond to pictures of pretty girls on a magazine cover. Two words: NERD ALERT! Guess what, if I didn't check out a pretty girl on the cover of a model magazine, I'd be checking out a pretty girl as I walked out to my car in the parking lot, and then 30 seconds later I'd be checking out another pretty girl in the car next to me at the light as I drove home from the hobby store....on and on. We are men, we are programed this way, we look and will always look even when risking the consequences if our girlfriends or wives catch us looking. A pretty girl doesn't make the sale for me but chances are I will probably look and even the biggest Ned Flanders out there might take a quick gander. And don't think this is a generational thing. Example: I fly at a park where female joggers are always passing by and some of the worst/outlandish comments are always coming from one of our older pilots.
I remember those old RCM covers from the late 80's and early 90's that always had somebody's wife or the farmer's daughter on them. Guess what, not all were that good looking and some were downright disturbing. One had somebody's young granddaughter in a bathing suit and that was really sick. If the girl is nice looking and she isn't being represented in a distasteful way, who the heck cares? Why don't we just make all of the magazines in black and white so the bright colored pictures don't attract people's attention as well?

PS:My fiance looked at that Frenchy picture and she said wasn't offended at all but remarked that it was a cool airplane. That's my girl!

The girl on the cover of RCM was used for the presentation of a new series of F3A models from www.plprod.com. Well, this kind of advertising is used quite often at the presentation of new cars, so why not do it for highly sophisticated patternships?
Jürgen