Danica Patrick has appeared in Sports Illustrated’s highly touted Swimsuit Issue 2 years in a row. For some reason in 2008 Danica’s tattoo on her lower back was A-OK (see photo above), but in 2009 Sports Illustrated had it digitally removed (see photo below)…
When asked about this, a spokesman for Sports Illustrated told CNBC: “The Swimsuit Issue emphasizes natural beauty. The freckles are left on and, in this case, the tattoos came off.”
Um. Ok. Is this “natural beauty” policy newly instituted for 2009? Because I do not know of many freckles that are red, white blue, checkered and shaped like a flag. In other words, why was her tattoo acceptable last year and considered “unnatural” now? In all fairness, Danica has added to the tattoo – in 2008 it was a simple combo of an American flag and checkered racing flag, but now it includes stars and angel wings (see photo on right).
I guess Sports Illustrated either has a size restriction on tramp stamps, they detest angel wings or perhaps only like tattoos when they are strictly patriotic and/or racing related.
Related articles…
SI deletes flag tattoo from Patrick [The Score]
SI Photoshops Off Danica Patrick’s Tattoo [Auto Racing Daily]
Danica Patrick Responds To Having Sports Illustrated Photoshop Off Tattoo [Auto Racing Daily]
Sports Illustrated Responds To Taking Off Danica’s Tattoo [CNBC]
{ 2 comments }
That IS one butt ugly tattoo.
It has been….added to….a bit much. I think just the flags were nice, there was no need to dress it up with angel wings and stars. (Seriously tho – a flag with angel wings?) Maybe I was too harsh in criticizing SI’s removal of the tat, maybe they were just like “WTF IS THAT!?! Ugh. Shop it out!”
Comments on this entry are closed.