I was offended.

Now that you point it out... something about that cover bothered me and I couldn't put my finger on it.

I would have gone for the more "calm" cover. But not because I'm offended. The other picture just looks stupid. It doesn't exactly scream VOGUE. More like TESTOSTERONE MONTHLY.

Never in a million years would I have picked up on this. I thought it was a hideous cover to begin with, but not because of a racial issue.

It's offensive. Totally.

That being said...mmmm...Lebron. Stay in those b-ball shorts.

I don't know, I didn't find him scary. Maybe because she seems to be having fun? I'm more annoyed that some people have brains that automatically go "black man"="king kong". If it was say, Tom Brady with 'angry scream face' on the cover would the same comparison have been made?

I wasn't offended. I took it as contrast between a professional athlete doing his job and a professional model doing hers.

@MaeHemm: Actually, then people would've probably made some rape connection.

Ya know what's big and scary? Analyzing everything to death to find fault.

Can you guys tell how bored I am at work today by how fast I'm lunging into each comment thread? Lulz.

Anyhoodle, I kind of thought that the whole reason for the hunched-over dribbling pose on the cover was to show that, whoa, he's a professional sports player, and he's playing a sport! Look, a basketball! (Nevermind that he is clutching a moddle. Moddles are hard to dribble.)

With him being all hunched-over like that, he fits into the frame better with G-bund over there. He is doing sporty things and she is wearing a fancy smock. They are doing their respective things. I guess.

I like the second pic better. It's got a weird subversion of power or something. But it's so vertically-aligned that it looks like it would be tough to fit onto a cover without smooshing it down really tiny.

The King Kong imagery was blatant and strange, and the shoot itself seems oddly put together (and I say this as an absolute whore for Annie Leibowitz AND Vogue.)

Yep, I thought of King Kong immediately when I saw that cover. The pose would probably be appropriate on the cove of Sports Illustrated or something, but with all the other elements here, it's squicky.

maybe they can start by getting someone OTHER than annie leibowitz to shoot celebrities? why is she the go-to girl? a fresh perspective might benefit all, rather than opening a rolodex and calling the same people the editors always do.

Oh please. I didn't even give the cover a second glance. To me, it seems significant that the black man in the picture obviously had no problems here. Let's take his cue!

When I saw the cover, I didn't think it offensive. But of course, I don't see pictures of black people and IMMEDIATELY ASSOCIATE THEM WITH MONKEY IMAGERY. Goddam.

That being said, I do like the composition of the calm photo better.

@flynnchick is (redacted): Yeah. if that were Denzel Washington or Kanye West in that position, well then, maybe that's to be noted.

Is it the inclusion of Gisele that makes it King Kong-ish? If it were Chanel Iman, everything's cool? If this was on the cover of Sports Illustrated?

(@SinisterRouge on Notice!: oh hey! you got your star!)

@MaeHemm: Well, to be fair Tom Brady actually LOOKS like a chimp.

@PICKLES_IN_MY_TUNA: Yeah, seriously. I'm sure the photographer directed Lebron to "yell and pose like you are a big scary black orangutan! we really want to piss people off with this cover!!!"

@MaeHemm: I'm more annoyed that some people have brains that automatically go "black man"="king kong".

Yeah, exactly.

But he's not an actor or a business man. He's a big scary athlete. Who is totally hot because he's a big scary athlete.

I'm just not sure that the reason that the cover is racist is the pose. It's the history strategically alienating the African American audience by not offering beauty standards that apply to all audiences.

@MaeHemm: That's a super good point, but that's part of why it's offensive - because people's brains do do go to the king kong stuff.

Plus there's all that awful history of comparing African Americans to apes and shit. It's nasty. That sort of crap leaves a mark on the psyche of society, whether we like it or not.

@MaeHemm: I don't think they'd put Tom Brady on a magazine cover with a 'scream' face. They'd put him in a nice suit and he'd look handsome and calm. But they chose not to do that with a handsome black man.

Different issue: athletes and models? How about female athletes? How about male models?

Also: I'm over Gisele. Just completely tired of seeing her.

@SinisterRouge on Notice!: Omg, how do you get a star? What does it mean?

color me shocked but that's not what popped into my head the first time, i just saw the basketball dude and waify moddle.

The second picture just better.

@MaeHemm: True true; Being so afraid of offending anyone, we're projecting our our own fears/prejudices/over-sensitivity in the name of being anti-racist?

Conde Nasty, is not considered "Black Friendly". I dread getting that wasted call from someone in HR at Conde to come in for an "exploratory interview" that is a complete waste of time. It is an insult to see LeBron on the cover, those editors would visibly squirm, and call security if he was ever allowed on those hallowed halls where black rules only in your "clothing attire"..unless of course, he was a messenger!!

@brechtgirl: What does the star mean? How do people get stars? I see it on gawker.com commenters.

@CarrieMC: Mmmm....I'd love to see LeBron in an Armani suit! I would frame that pic.

@angryblackgurl: So your screenname is not just a clever name.

I definitely think this is a prime example where racism is kind of forced on a situation where that wasn't the initial meaning.

Lebron is an athlete and I believe that the cover would have been the same with a number of other athletes, white, black, asian, indian, whatever.

Sure the cover is pretty crap, but I'm just not feeling the racist undertones. Gisele is smiling and looks to be enjoying the embrace of Lebron (as if anyone WOULDN'T) and isn't looking as though she's a scared victim of the big bad black man. I would've liked it better had they dressed him up in a fine ass suit, but whatever. He's still attractive, talented, and is still only the third man to grace the cover of Vogue.

So this is where I say, give me a break.

That second one is lovely. I didn't think "racist" when I saw the first cover though, I thought "really bad cover."

weren't they like joking around or something? they look like they are having fun?

I thought the cover was weak. Way to shake up our culture's narrow-ass repertoire of race imagery, Wintour!

My mother saw this cover flash on the news and immediatle called me to rant about how racist it was. She immediately said King Kong. I couldn't put my finger on it either. I was really uncomfortable looking at the cover on friday. I hate it. But I hate vogue. So eh. Vogue and all other 'high fashion' (ack I hate that word!) will never be accepting of other minorities (not just black!) because that's not what's defined as beautiful to them.

@lola82: Hmmm. There needs to be a real fashion shoot with him.

@ineffable.me: HAHA!

@MaeHemm:
I have to say-I did find it offensive for a split second and that's because they never put black people on the cover and when they do, it's some black guy screaming and being 'animal like'...

And, also? Before I saw these pictures I had no idea how gorgeous he is. He is a very good looking guy, but I barely knew who he was before this.

@virginiawoolf: True. My first thought was "gee that's a shiteous cover. Next." But I'm not a fan of Vogue, so it blended in with my thoughts, "oh, there's a shiteous magazine."

Okay, before looking too closely at this article, I thought it was actually a photoshopped picture of his face on a King Kong body with him holding a tiny Giselle in his big monster hand. And I was really confused by the, 'That didn't offend me comments.'

Now that I've actually looked at the cover I still think the picture is bad, he would've looked very handsome in a suit, the other picture is better, etc. However, I just have a problem in general with portraying any man as a big old beast--like they are animals and can't control those "urges", and we are the weaker/fairer/saintly sex.

Short version: That cover is dumb, but not as dumb as I was picturing it in my head.

@brooklynchi:
That's really interesting point re your mum..

The part of me who's more inclined to give this the benefit of the doubt says that this was done unintentionally, although the idea is likely steeped in subconscious connotations perpetuated by society (I mean, if you really think about it, it does have a Mandingo-ish vibe).
I personally didn't really give it a second glance, but I'm also sure that if someone like Tom "boo hoo, I have a bum ankle" Brady were on the cover, the cover shot might've looked a lot more like the second photo.

I definitely think the pic is problematic. Arguments could be made to justify the imagery (he's playing basketball, she's modeling, etc), but given the rich history of characterizing black men as animalistic hulks out to steal America's white women we should probably refrain from making these kinds of images for some time.

Her smiling almost makes this worse. The king kong trope says that "unintelligent" white women will be swayed by the raw physicality of "uncivilized" black men before they realize that--oops--they're sleeping with a gorilla.

See, and when I said the exact same thing about those two looking like a new age Kong and Fay Ray on the MagHag thread, no one was trying to hear me.

@virginiawoolf: I agree. Plus how do you think Lebron feels now? He probably had a blast at the shoot and now the cover comes out and he keeps getting compared to king kong attacking a woman. Seriously.