Sports Illustrated Airbrushed Out Danica Patrick’s Tattoo
AND not just any model. The esteemed sports magazine, whose annual swimsuit issue just came out Stateside, has been rumbled for airbrushing out a skanky back tattoo belonging to foxy racing driver Danica Patrick (see before-and-after photo, right).
Why would SI do such a thing? What is so wrong with a skanky lower-back tattoo (or ‘tramp stamp’, if you like) that its editors felt the need to get busy with Photoshop?
Answers on a postcard please.
Posted: 21st, February 2009 | In: Key Posts, Sports Comments (8) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
Recent comments
- June on Fort Hood Shootings Latest News: US Soldiers Shoot 12 Dead
- June on Fort Hood Shootings Latest News: US Soldiers Shoot 12 Dead
- Cheryl on Fort Hood Shootings Latest News: US Soldiers Shoot 12 Dead
- Tom Jones on Fort Hood Shootings Latest News: US Soldiers Shoot 12 Dead
- anonyme on EastEnders Plot Found
Regular Features
February 26th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Have you seen any super models in real life? Try at the airport lol, most don’t look anything humpable without make-up……..
February 20th, 2009 at 5:08 am
Who cares? Danica is hot with or without the tattoo.
February 20th, 2009 at 2:21 am
Good god Dave get a life!!
February 19th, 2009 at 11:30 pm
I appreciate the “oops’ above for catching their (there) typo. However, I’d like to add that ‘to’ should be ‘too’ and the ‘worring’ should be ‘worrying’. No biggy. I just catch those things. I do the same thang.
February 19th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
You would think they would take more time airbrushing the awful stretch markes on her hips before worring about the tattoo. SI needs to pay closer attention to what looks hip and sexy rather than assume what they want to see is in.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
opps, it’s “their”. Posted to quick…my bad!
February 19th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Magazines like SI have been airbrushing women’s (and men’s) bodies for years - nothing seems surprising about this. I’m sure if she had some cellulite showing or veins or a mole, they’d cover that too. Whether or not it’s trashy seems beside the point. Women in magazines are supposed to be ‘perfect’ and SI is definitely mainstream middle-America …so be it. SI has there image and that’s there (and there subscriber’s) deal.
I believe glossing over everything detracts from natural beauty (should I mention this practice likely contributes to low self esteem for millions of young women who can’t live up to being this ‘perfect’?). Apparently I’m in the minority on this.
February 18th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Arse Antlers.