So true^^

 

To Claud: It's her own experience about it and even if u don't like what she said -I understand that- you can't "judge"  her and her personality because of one thing she said about her pregnancy.  Prego women are weirdos!

 

Other than that she seems really cool & & down to earth girl. Elle McPherson style with more curves

Every @SI_Swimsuit cover from 1964 till now 51 Photos

http://thechive.com/2015/02/05/every-sports-illustrated-swimsuit-cover-from-1964-till-now-51-photos/

so far from the rookies I only like Erin & Solveig. the rest sucks. the worst rookie class ever.

o.o Hannah's cover isn't getting a very good reception from the public. These are a small example of comments (there's more then 370 of them atm and I'd say 80% of them are negative), and you don't even what to know what other sites are saying.. it's not pleasant towards SI or Hannah. I don't even recall Kate getting this much shit, but that could be because she was beloved at the time.

 

Never a good thing if your header is The Girlfriend of so and so.... Ouch
 

Derek Jeter's model girlfriend Hannah Davis is named Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition's cover girl of the year... in one of the magazine's most revealing shots yet

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2940598/Hannah-Davis-named-Sports-Illustrated-swimsuit-edition-s-cover-girl-year-one-magazine-s-revealing-shots-yet.html#reader-comments

los angeles, United States, 12 hours ago
What's next? A video diary of her next PAP smear?

Lily of the Valley, US of A, United States, 11 hours ago
She's beautiful and her body is off the charts, but the cover is too mucho. Tasteless.

Lydia, NYC, 12 hours ago
Geez... how much lower can they go at this point?
 
Steve, Red Arrow Display team, 11 hours ago
yeah great body - but posing with her undies nearly round her ankles? Rather tacky and tasteless.
 
Purplepawpaw, Sydney, Australia, 12 hours ago
Gross and vulgar
 
Colette, Toronto, Canada, 12 minutes ago
That picture is disgusting and degrading to women! Sports Illustrated has had the swim suit issue for years I know and I am fine with it showing women in swimsuits but for years now it has been women in smaller and small bikinis and now as if the bikinis aren't small enough they need to pull them down so we can see her pubic area which has obviously been waxed! I would think many young boys and girls might easily get to see this as a lot of parents will get this magazine!
 
WheneverTulip, manchester, United Kingdom, 13 minutes ago
I love bikini's but showing the start of the pelvic bone is just not sexy. It looks weird. What's the point of hiring a model, in a bikini, when she's behaving like she's at a strip club.

someone intelligent, London, 16 minutes ago
Shouldn't this be in Playboy, call me old-fashioned but what has being almost naked got to do with sporting activities.

EVITA98, hollyplace in CA, United States, 22 minutes ago
Last year they put barely dresses three models from the backside showing their asses!!!,,,So this year a pubic area was the only LOGIC......>>>>>>, CHOICE!!!

anjell1228, New York, United States, 30 minutes ago
That is really garrish and tasteless. Honestly what I'd expect to see in Playboy. They are just reaching for publicity and it worked so guess they are the smart ones
 
LovesUK, Bournemouth, United Kingdom, 31 minutes ago
I have no problem with SI or the beautiful women they put on the cover. However, she needs more cover, more left to the imagination, less ick factor and less of her privates put on show.
 
Mamabear23, Hampshire, United Kingdom, 54 minutes ago
This is acceptable?

hhh2, CLARKSTON, United States, 1 hour ago
disgustingly tasteless for SI

lovestosew, Denver, United States, 1 hour ago
We don't need to see 99.999999% of what your mamma gave you. Have some personal dignity and modestly it will stand you in good stead in your life.

Oregongirl, medford, United States, 1 hour ago
They crossed the line and short of full frontal nudity, reached their limit on tackiness and the ick factor.
 
dancing goat, sydney, 1 hour ago
Sorry but that is ridiculous, the cover has always featured gorgeous, healthy looking women wearing tiny bikinis or one-pieces looking incredibly sexy without the sleaze factor. There is absolutely no need for so much skin, don't Playboy et al reveal less on their covers? Gosh I feel old writing this but I am shocked at this level of tackiness.

whatacrush, Iowa, United States, 1 hour ago
There are a lot of SI covers but for some reason, this cover makes me feel very uncomfortable

pembleton, Westwood, United States, 1 hour ago
Tacky cover.

Sorry but that dont make it Hannah-specific hate. Its more like typical criticism aimed at SI. I'm sure these folks would have reacted towards Bar or Brooklyn the same.

 

 

Despite her healthy and unarguably gorgeous body, Lawley finds the "real women have curves" brigade patronising and unhelpful. "People use me as a figurehead, and to me that misses the point and is blatantly offensive to thin women – my sister, for one. Curves don't epitomise a woman. Saying, 'Skinny is ugly' should be no more acceptable than saying fat is. I find all this stuff a very controlling and effective way of making women obsess over their weight, instead of exploiting their more important attributes, such as intellect, strength and power. We could be getting angry about unequal pay and unequal opportunities, but we're too busy being told we're not thin enough or curvy enough. We're holding ourselves back."

 

This bit actually makes me like her more.

 

 

Personally I have a problem with this attitude and it's not about my personal preferences of what I find attractive or not.  Being fat is NOT healthy, the fat acceptance movement is NOT healthy.  As a country and as a culture we should embrace fitness and health, not fat and not overly skinny.  It greatly saddens me that culturally we accept extremely unhealthy lifestyle choices just so we don't hurt people's feelings.

^ Yeah I had to post that PAP smear one a few pages back because I found it hilarious I mean if you do look, the underwear pulling it is quite going overboard for something that is printed worldwide. You're practically entering into the land of the pubes. There were probably better shots too but eh. Now it's got people talking about it though because there are plenty of people who don't know Derek Jeter elsewhere where SI is sold. They're getting it hyped in a somewhat controversial manner. 

 

Robyn's pic looks really nice. I think she'll look quite good in the magazine.

 

o.o Hannah's cover isn't getting a very good reception from the public. These are a small example of comments (there's more then 370 of them atm and I'd say 80% of them are negative), and you don't even what to know what other sites are saying.. it's not pleasant towards SI or Hannah. I don't even recall Kate getting this much shit, but that could be because she was beloved at the time.

 

Never a good thing if your header is The Girlfriend of so and so.... Ouch

 

Derek Jeter's model girlfriend Hannah Davis is named Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition's cover girl of the year... in one of the magazine's most revealing shots yet

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2940598/Hannah-Davis-named-Sports-Illustrated-swimsuit-edition-s-cover-girl-year-one-magazine-s-revealing-shots-yet.html#reader-comments

los angeles, United States, 12 hours ago

What's next? A video diary of her next PAP smear?

Lily of the Valley, US of A, United States, 11 hours ago

She's beautiful and her body is off the charts, but the cover is too mucho. Tasteless.

Lydia, NYC, 12 hours ago

Geez... how much lower can they go at this point?

 

Steve, Red Arrow Display team, 11 hours ago

yeah great body - but posing with her undies nearly round her ankles? Rather tacky and tasteless.

 

Purplepawpaw, Sydney, Australia, 12 hours ago

Gross and vulgar

 

Colette, Toronto, Canada, 12 minutes ago

That picture is disgusting and degrading to women! Sports Illustrated has had the swim suit issue for years I know and I am fine with it showing women in swimsuits but for years now it has been women in smaller and small bikinis and now as if the bikinis aren't small enough they need to pull them down so we can see her pubic area which has obviously been waxed! I would think many young boys and girls might easily get to see this as a lot of parents will get this magazine!

 

WheneverTulip, manchester, United Kingdom, 13 minutes ago

I love bikini's but showing the start of the pelvic bone is just not sexy. It looks weird. What's the point of hiring a model, in a bikini, when she's behaving like she's at a strip club.

someone intelligent, London, 16 minutes ago

Shouldn't this be in Playboy, call me old-fashioned but what has being almost naked got to do with sporting activities.

EVITA98, hollyplace in CA, United States, 22 minutes ago

Last year they put barely dresses three models from the backside showing their asses!!!,,,So this year a pubic area was the only LOGIC......>>>>>>, CHOICE!!!

anjell1228, New York, United States, 30 minutes ago

That is really garrish and tasteless. Honestly what I'd expect to see in Playboy. They are just reaching for publicity and it worked so guess they are the smart ones

 

LovesUK, Bournemouth, United Kingdom, 31 minutes ago

I have no problem with SI or the beautiful women they put on the cover. However, she needs more cover, more left to the imagination, less ick factor and less of her privates put on show.

 

Mamabear23, Hampshire, United Kingdom, 54 minutes ago

This is acceptable?

hhh2, CLARKSTON, United States, 1 hour ago

disgustingly tasteless for SI

lovestosew, Denver, United States, 1 hour ago

We don't need to see 99.999999% of what your mamma gave you. Have some personal dignity and modestly it will stand you in good stead in your life.

Oregongirl, medford, United States, 1 hour ago

They crossed the line and short of full frontal nudity, reached their limit on tackiness and the ick factor.

 

dancing goat, sydney, 1 hour ago

Sorry but that is ridiculous, the cover has always featured gorgeous, healthy looking women wearing tiny bikinis or one-pieces looking incredibly sexy without the sleaze factor. There is absolutely no need for so much skin, don't Playboy et al reveal less on their covers? Gosh I feel old writing this but I am shocked at this level of tackiness.

whatacrush, Iowa, United States, 1 hour ago

There are a lot of SI covers but for some reason, this cover makes me feel very uncomfortable

pembleton, Westwood, United States, 1 hour ago

Tacky cover.

 

 

It's not the first time a model has been pulling her bottoms down.  I personally don't even pay attention to uptight responses like that.

Sorry but that dont make it Hannah-specific hate. Its more like typical criticism aimed at SI. I'm sure these folks would have reacted towards Bar or Brooklyn the same.

 

Bingo!

Hannah should of made better choices when it came to posing, so in that she's partially responsible for the flack she is getting. I like the cover but I'm also apathetic towards nudity, however I do see why the general public might dislike the cover as an overall.

 

You don't have go vulgar to look sexy, and pulling on her bottoms like that was too close to the line between something sexy and something unappealing.

Petra Nemcova did it best when it came to playing with her bikini, sexy, sweet, seductive without going playboy.

Yep, I remember similar comments about last year's cover. Every year, same shit, different morons. It's like every year people find a new way to be shocked that there are girls on the cover of SI not wearing much. The comments on Hannah's cover are almost identical and equal in volume to the ones I saw about last year's cover, and the year before that. 

 

My problem with the cover and the pose isn't that it's vulgar or trashy, it's just so generic and standard. That's why it's hilarious anyone would "react" to that kind of pose at all, considering it's so bloody average and overdone. 

 

On slightly less mouth-breathing, middle-aged outragey sites, the reception I've seen so far is that everyone thinks her boobs look fake (they do look ridiculously ps'd), or that people don't really know who she is. Most of the talk has been about the "plus sized model."  And on that note, could that commercial get any more patronising? "Look at this big girl strutting down the beach, let's make sure to show dudes LOSING THEIR MINDS over her! These cartoonish reactions from paid actors will finally prove that everyone in the world is attracted to larger body types despite it rarely being healthy!"

I'm a Hannah fan and I'm glad she got the cover because I like her but honestly the cover itself is pretty bad. Photoshop is over the top, bad pose, and a fence in the background. They shot at so many beautiful locations and this is the cover?

I'm glad Hailey is a rookie. She's the only new one I'm excited to see. At least there's still Gigi, Emily D, and hopefully much better pictures of Hannah Davis in the magazine.

^^^Then again there are tonne of shots each year (virtually every girl) that are even more risque, but the editorial team dont put anything like that on the cover. So it seems a lil harsh to even slightly blame Hannah in this case. Maybe I'm missing something cuz you guys obviously have more inside info how the cover is chosen and whether they obtain  consent from the cover girl

Hannah should of made better choices when it came to posing, so in that she's partially responsible for the flack she is getting. I like the cover but I'm also apathetic towards nudity, however I do see why the general public might dislike the cover as an overall.

 

You don't have go vulgar to look sexy, and pulling on her bottoms like that was too close to the line between something sexy and something unappealing.

Petra Nemcova did it best when it came to playing with her bikini, sexy, sweet, seductive without going playboy.

 

In her defense, Hannah didn't get to choose the cover picture; SI did so I think it's on them. I'm sure they could have gone with a better shot of her. You can't blame the model for doing her job, especially in a men's magazine where they have to show as much as possible but not reveal too much. Is it a bit too much? Depends on who you're asking, but it's SI we're talking about, not US Vogue.

 

Didn't Gigi's mom claim that SI 100% would give the cover to her daughter?

So either she pulled that out of her backside, or MJ didn't like her breaking her vow of secrecy?

 

 Maybe? IDK if Gigi's mom said that tho but it could be. I'm not 100% sure but I think I remember reading once that Bar was promised the 2008 cover but she opened her mouth about it and SI got mad and the cover ultimately went to Marisa Miller. I don't know how true this is tho but I can see SI being annoyed at that kind of attitude.

 

 

Nope, I meant 2009 because in 2009 models married/dating famous people started getting covers (Bar, Brooklyn, Irina, Chrissy, Lily) and since then only two people who are not related to famous people got the cover: Kate Upton

Kate's pedigree was enough to nab her the cover. Congressmen uncle, connections to the white house, a billionaire family and  one of the largest known manufacturing companies in the world standing behind her. Kate didn't need a man, she had money, and connections and those things win everything in America.

 

 

More importantly: SI knew she would sell. End of story.

 

It's a business and they want to sell as many magazines as possible while pleasing as many people as they can (swimsuit designers, staff, etc.). Time will tell if Hannah was a good or bad choice but I honestly don't see how this cover could be something too awfully wrong that will stop people from buying.

 

 

Not sure I agree with this.  Clearly, even by objective measures, Gigi and Emrata are more popular and well-known than Hannah. Going by the "sell as many copies as possible" logic, Hannah was indeed a poor choice, or at least an extremely risky one. The general public doesn't know who she is, or seem to care going by most people yapping about the "plus sized" model instead of the cover. 

 

However I don't necessarily agree that the biggest name should automatically get the cover, so I'm not mad at it.

 

Also, are we sure Gigi's mom just didn't pull that out of her ass because someone said "ROTY material!" or "gigi's leading in the ROTY polls right now!" That seems like a pretty standard mom mistake. One time I told my mom I was going to see the last Harry Potter film and because of that she still insists it's my favourite fantasy series ever, surmising that it's probably because of that nice Gandalf man. #momthings

Part of the job of being a model is know what looks best on you. Hannah is  not a HF girl and as such she doesn't need a myriad of different poses and expression in her reputare.

Hannah should of been able to objectively say "Hey if I'm wearing <blank> and I pose like this... It can come across as looking <blank>", that's part of being a good model. Hannah made a bad call on that pose in particular, and SI made a bad call using that shot. There's absolutely no reason to defend either parties. Both were clearly in the wrong according to the people who've spoken.

As a male I like SI swimsuit because  it is not playboy and worse: porn. I can look at the ladies without it being all out sex. This cover, and last years, is starting to cross a line.

Robyn looks great in her photos. I'm very excited to see her in the issue. She grew up in my area. Couldn't believe that when I read it. She has that laid back attitude that you have when your from western sydney. She just has no filter. It's not arrogance. It's just us aussies don't care and say anything. Here in Aus we don't make a big deal about stuff and we get away with heaps more cause no one cares. She just has that relaxed attitude.

Also the articles are now saying first plus size blah blah. Robyn just has a fuller figure she's not even plus size. Kate Upton has a similar body and she was never considered plus size.

^^^ So I take it the cover models have a say in what shot is chosen?

If that picture was on the inside pages, I don't anybody would have cared. It just a little inappropriate for a cover because that low bikini botton attracts all the attention.