Sports Illustrated Cover Wasn't Intentional

If you happen to have an issue of the Sports Illustrated, or the time to even look up the latest swimsuit edition, you can either be totally petrified or could think that the model, Hannah Davis, is doing well for herself. (Or other things that cannot be said out-loud about your "arousal.")

In the cover, Davis is pulling down her bikini-bottom and showing a bit of her lady parts, giving off a red flag for some who think it is pornographic. People are freaking out and making this conversational about how the young children will see this on the streets in New York and say, "Gosh golly-gee mommy! Look at her!"

When I was around eleven years old, I began to find that I really liked Hannah Montana, or famously known now as Miley Cyrus. And in 2010, she started to become more different than I expected. Just like in her music video "Can't Be Tamed," she changed a lot and was more expressed. When in 2009, she pole danced at the KCA, it didn't really made me think all that much, just because I wasn't super judgmental, plus she was still the TV star that I admired. 

As herself now, she is more outgoing and wild. She even took a topless photo to support "Free The Nipple Campaign," which is a group of people who want to stop censorship on websites for females exposure, such as breasts. Although I was only eleven, I didn't judge her, and she was more likely a role-model, even if she did pole dance at a kid's choice awards show. And now I'm almost sixteen, and still admire her for supporting females and being body-positive. 

But, even if I liked her, lots of people didn't. On social media, her photos have been taken down due to her breasts being shown. Comments were left on her Insatgram, telling lots of things like, "Kill yourself whore!" Or even, "Die you stupid slut!" And the same exact thing is happening to Hannah Davis.

People are saying it's very risky and it is wrong to even post on the cover of a swimsuit magazine, even though there has been more of these covers just like Davis. If you Google search the covers for SI swimsuit magazines, you'll find a lot more. How come people are so angry about this one cover?

Apparently to lots, it is pornographic and not enjoyable, just because it shows a bit of lady parts. Even though men who are former Disney stars that wear Calvin Klein and are known as a "blessing" and "hot," this is pornographic. But it's not!

Guess what? There are many Playboy Magazines that are on stands that are much worse than this, and you're worried about your child to see THIS particular magazine that isn't even as explicit as porn magazines? Children who do even see it won't really think of anything. Although Hannah Davis isn't a Disney star or well-known to children, I doubt this would cause them to think about sex already or think, "Wow, today I'm going to go home and learn all about Hannah Davis! WOW!" I doubt this as much as I can.

Miley Cyrus, Hannah Davis, and many others who have been hated for doing something "risky," aren't exactly risky at all. They both took this matter respectfully or with full throttle, but either way, this shouldn't be a problem to those who think that it is making woman look like a sexual object. Females rock. A lot.