I completely disagree, it seems clear to me (based on the position of her hand and the text of the headline) that she is not being compared to the jaguar, the headline is asking if the bestiality being portrayed is possible or normal

Ok, this is a far stretch. The text is asking if we can make love to animals. There's no comparison to non-white women to animals. Also, it is reasonable to have a non-white woman pose with the animal considering the magazine was published in a country where most likely the majority of the population is not white.

What I find interesting is that the woman is still viewed as a desirable sexual object while participating in a very taboo act. If a male were in a similar pose, there would be a completely different interpretation, and I highly doubt it would be on the cover of a magazine even if it is supposed to be "very interesting."

Of course it's possible to have sex with an animal. But the magazine asks if it's possible to fall in love with an animal. Here's one answer (ten minutes long, but worth it):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-7kXnfXyXc&feature=related

The magazine is from Spain. I assure you, most people there are "White".

Gwen for the win!

why is this "not safe for work"?

Ole--I think for at least some people, this wouldn't be ok for work, since she's naked (even though you can't see anything), so just to be safe, I put that in there--a number of readers have asked us to be a little more cautious after they've pulled up something at work that could have caused problems for them.

Couldn't it just be a metaphor and not referring to actual bestiality? If someone were to say "(S)He's an animal in bed", no one would think that person means they actually wish he were a real animal- it means he's aggressive in bed. Maybe he scratches or bites. Could the question really mean "Can we fall in love with someone who is animal-like in bed?" Isn't there often the idea that you don't settle down with the person who is the best in bed- you settle down with the virgin or bread-winner? Because people who are crazy in bed can't lead normal lives? Some people think that.

I agree with the comments that the woman is in a stereotypical pose often used with non-white women. She looks very cat-like. And she is very exposed- even the jaguar has fur to cover him up.

The woman in the cover is clearly a "latina", meaning from Latinamerica, which makes it all the worse considering the overt racism towards latinos in Spain. I doubt they would have had the nerve to put a traditionally "spanish" read: white woman in a similar position.

What I think people are missing is that the woman is in all fours, the jaguar is in all fours, and the pelvis of the latter appears "too close for comfort" to the bum of the former. I don't need to spell it out, the intentions of the producers of this cover are very clear, especially when you consider the headline of the cover's story.

heatherleila, the question does indeed refer to falling in love with actual animals, not with "animal like" people.

Note that in Spain it is legal and socially acceptable to expose women's breasts in the covers of magazines.

Sorry, I didn't see where the magazine was originally published before I made my previous post.

In light of this I did some research and Muy Interesante was first published in Spain in 1981, but is now published in Mexico, Argentina, and Columbia. Unless there is a different publication for each country, 2 of the 3 countries are in Latin America. If 2/3 of the readers are Latino (which in itself is a debatable term), then I still see nothing wrong with posting a Latina woman on the cover.

Also, I've lived in both Spain and Mexico, and I think it's interesting that this image is considered NSFW. We really need to lighten up in the U.S. and be more comfortable with nudity.

Wow, I butchered that last post. I wish I could edit it. I meant 3/4, not 2/3. Also, here is the link explaining the magazine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muy_Interesante

"be more comfortable with nudity"

What you call nudity, some of us would consider pornography.

Yeah, I agree with Mary Tracy. It's not just that she's naked, she's in a very sexual position, if not actually simulating sex with the jaguar. If you work in an office with a sexual harassment code, this could put you at risk for offending someone enough to report it. And I don't disagree with that; if someone were looking at porn every day in the cubicle next to me, that would really bother me.

Thanks to the people who run this site for putting up the disclaimer. I often look at the site at school and I wouldn't want anyone mistakenly thinking I was looking at porn for recreation instead of the recreation being the analysis of it!

I like how there's also an article on power drills. This magazine really covers all the bases.

Steve might not feel so lightly about "nudity" if the cover featured full frontal nudity of a man, instead of a woman. I have a feeling that kind of nudity would make Steve uncomfortable.

"Also, it is reasonable to have a non-white woman pose with the animal considering the magazine was published in a country where most likely the majority of the population is not white."

How dumb can one be, Lord???

It is OBVIOUS that they chose to put a woman of African descent over a non-African one (which is what is usually used on magazines in countries where most of the population isn't of African descent) because of the bestiality of the whole thing! As if it would be something more likely to happen because "Africans already live alongside with animals, after all!!!"
And ANYONE, when thinking about the subject, would picture a man doing the act, since bestiality is something that is more common among men! This is terrible!

wow this is disgusting and racist

Lol we see majority of white women fucking animals. Why? Are they that hard up for money and they are not happy with white men fucking them