Can female athletes just be athletes?

Over the last 60 years, Sports Illustrated has featured many popular, successful athletes. Every issue of Sports Illustrated features an athlete on the cover. However, in the last 60 years, only four percent of those featured athletes have been females.

Their latest issue included an Olympic preview, featuring U.S. Olympic downhill skier, Lindsey Vonn. Many would view this as a step in the right direction for female athletes, right?

Looking at the cover, that may not be the case. Lindsey Vonn, considered to be one of the best female downhill skiers in the world, is bent over on her skies, smiling at the camera while her long, blond hair flows beautifully along her face. I highly doubt this is how she looks when she is actually skiing.

In fact, I know that it isn't. Inside the magazine is a great action shot of Vonn skiing downhill.

Why do female athletes have to be portrayed as "sex symbols"? Is their talent not good enough to admire?

I know that Sports Illustrated wants to create the best marketable cover on their magazine, and I don't really blame them because it sells and gets attention.

Females are more often than not judged on their physical beauty instead of anything else, even in sports.

Maybe female athletes can be both admire for their athletic abilities and physical attractiveness. But I don't really think that's what is happening.

Females, including athletes, will always be judged on their physical features. Maybe females can start being appreciated for their intelligence, athletic ability, humor, etc., instead of looks. I am not going to hold my breath waiting for this to happen, but I would accept at least being appreciated or admired for many qualities instead of just one that isn't under anyone's control.

Maybe featuring females on the cover is somewhat of a step in the right direction. I hope in the future female athletes can just be looked at fore their talents and not constantly portrayed as a pop icon or model in the sports industry.