This page has been moved to http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/strut-zone
If your browser doesn’t redirect you to the new location, please visit The Strut Zone at its new location: www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/strut-zone.
Too Hot for OL
Looking at the photos from the Racks calendar, I was reminded of some of the back and forth discussion among the editors that takes place as we put together every issue of Outdoor Life. The truth is we don't always agree. Here's an item that was originally slated for the Snap Shots section of the magazine earlier this year, but was (probably wisely) cut out because of the "suggestive" nature of the product.
But because the Web, like television, is just one big morally bereft dumping ground of infotainment, I figured what the hey. Here's what OL readers missed:
From Hunt Club to Strip Club
Few products so aptly combine a typical guys two favorite things—hunting and women—like Camo Booty’s line of camouflage. Realtree or Mossy Oak it isn’t, as the pattern meant to leave game confused and fellow hunters amused is created by printed, overlapping silhouettes of naked ladies in various positions of repose. Finally, somebody has invented a product that will impress as much in camp as it will at the strip club, and you don't even have to change your outfit in between! Tramp stamp and arm tats are optional.
Now you tell me: Should this have run in the magazine or do you agree with the edit staff's final decision to leave it out of the mag?
Post a comment below. As a hunting mag, we realize this stuff rests at the far periphery of why sportsmen buy OL, but as a magazine read by a lot of men, maybe there is more interest in such, um products, than we realize. Regardless, pull a Camo Booty shirt out in camp and I promise it will get a good laugh.
If you're of that latter camp, check out the Camo Booty site for more photo galleries of their product in use, particularly Oleha's booty pose (that's the name of the jpg file, not my choosing)—a photo that I wasn't about to run, even on the Web. Oh, that would be Janine up top.
Nah, leave it out. It's difficult enough to be accepted in a so-called "man's world" without this stuff. Think whether you'd like to see the male version of the photo spread and judge from there. I'd say you'd prefer to pass on scantily clad hotties of the male persuasion.
Posted by: The obligatory chick | October 15, 2007 at 04:50 PM
I'm gonna be fifty-seven this month. I really enjoy looking at a pretty face! I'm old, not dead!
This stuff has no place in an "outdoor" magazine. The hunting world has enough problems with it's image at this point in time, we "hunters" apparently don't need much help "tarnishing" it.
Leave it to Playboy. That way, I'm not surprised when I open the pages to read my grandson a hunting/fishing story!
Bubba
Posted by: Bubba | October 16, 2007 at 07:12 AM
Hey Obligatory Chick and Bubba,
Thanks for the input, my wife and the women here in the office all feel the same way. And we do get letters concerned about that very reason Bubba pointed out, sharing the mag with children. No worries, you'll never see anything too crazy here. We're still the one tried-and-true outdoor magazine.
Posted by: Doug | October 16, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Leave it out. I think a hunting magazine is about hunting/fishing and kids do read these magazines.
Posted by: Dennis | October 16, 2007 at 07:29 PM
I am 65. When I was a kid, I darn near memorized everything in the outdoor magazines available to me, including the ads.
Posted by: Russ | October 18, 2007 at 12:43 PM
I started to write ODL about all the "flesh" that included in almost all of the Online editions lately. Enough is enough - let's get back to hunting and fishing! There are plenty of magazines out there that pander to those that like that stuff. I just as soon not have one of me grandchildren walk into my home-office while I'm checking out the latest in hunting stories/equipment and have that junk pop up.
Posted by: Dennis | October 18, 2007 at 05:41 PM
Ya know Doug Howlett,
I look at the picture at the top of this blog, then I think about those "Racks" calendars.
I have tried about four times to write this, so far no success, so....
Not only does this "camo-booty" stuff not belong in an outdoor mag, neither does "Racks". Ever go into a plumbing shop or supply house? Remember the "Rigid Tool" calendars?!
If I want to see lingerie and half naked women, I'll pick up a lingerie catalog! If I want pictures of naked women, there's magazines available for that too! I'm old, not dead.
The girls are very pretty.
They need to put some more clothes on!!!
Bubba
Posted by: Bubba | October 19, 2007 at 08:53 AM
If I wanted to see scantily clad women in a sports magazine, I'd buy Sports Illistrated.
Come on guys, you're better than this! There is no place for this in Outdoor Life.
I've been a subscriber for over 40 years and have seen plenty of changes, but I hope this doesn't become one of them.
Posted by: Ftt-pow | October 20, 2007 at 09:55 AM
Whether you run this stuff or not depends on if you want to position Outdoor Life as a magazine for men, or a magazine for outdoorsmen and outdoorswomen. When making those kinds of decisions, keep in mind that women are the fastest growing demographic in hunting and fishing. As an outdoorswoman, I would be disappointed to open the magazine and find something so clearly targeting outdoorsmen and excluding outdoorswomen.
I've found overwhelmingly that the attitude shift in hunting camp is toward bringing kids, wives, girlfriends. And based on the comments so far from men, I'm not sure Doug should even go so far as to "promise it will get a good laugh." News flash - there's some deer camps out there where women are welcome.
Posted by: Dana @ The Wild WoodsWoman | October 22, 2007 at 04:59 PM
This stuff has absolutely no business in outdoors mags. The ads in the back about male enhancement are bad enough and I would prefer to see them gone too. I am fed up with the exploitation of women and today's society accepting it as the norm. Guys learn what fidelity is either to your current spouse or your future spouse.
Posted by: Concerned male | October 23, 2007 at 02:18 PM
wow, I am shocked, (in a good way) at the mens remarks about this topic.
Just when I thought there was no more "gentlemen" out there. I'm impressed.
Posted by: Lisamarie | October 27, 2007 at 09:19 PM
Ya know,when I see all the different forms of camo available to the public,from pornoflage(recognizable women's faces and breasts),to pot leaf,to truck shapes,all the military patterns,I am reminded"it ain't just for huntin' anymore."Camobooty camo simply another take on the regular, somewhat boring military splotchy woodland shapes.They are doing nothing resembling mossy oak or any of the real tree varieties of camo out there.As one poster mentioned,pull out a camobooty shirt at camp and everyonw will get a good laugh,try wearing real tree to a nice bar and the same thing will happen,probably spook the "dear".Camobooty appears to be having fun with their camo shapes.Maybe it's time to lighten up a little ?
Posted by: camo-whamo | September 20, 2008 at 12:45 PM