Just how watered down were the Royals halter tops given out today? 
Extremely, says former New Times photographer Dale Monaghen. He should know, as a working photojournalist Monaghen covered the very first Halter Top Day in the 1970s. And he’s got the photos to prove it.
“It’s kind of matronly looking,” Monaghen says of today’s tops at The Kougar. “Let’s just say, it’s not very revealing compared to the ones in my photos. The new one looks like a T-shirt without sleeves. It does have a V neck but it goes up in the armpit area a lot higher.”
Therein lies the problem.
The original Royals halter tops may have been cleavage-free, but the open backs encouraged bra-less-ness and midriffs were exposed. More to the R-rated point, the halter tops of yesteryear’s sagging sides made formajor peekaboo action, Monaghen notes. Uh, see photo.
So on a scale of one to ten – with 10 being the raciest – how does the 2009 model compare with the original?
Monaghen rates this year’s a 4 and the original an 8.
Translation: after disavowing for years a return to the politically incorrect days of halter top promotions past, the Royals acceded to overwhelming fan fervor and brought them back for 40th anniversary. But they chickened out with a conservative design, watering the promotion down, and even gave T-shirts to the dudes.
That said, as unsexy as they are, this year’s halter tops aren’t a complete loss, Monaghen ventures.
“Well, on the right person, wouldn’t
Gavin
I’m going to need to see more photographs of the 1970s era tops if I’m going to make a truly informed judgment.
craig glazer
agreed
Joe Lewellen
The design (silk screen logo) on the give away today is ugly! Fire that graphic artist…
c
Hey, go to a Royals game. There are a lot of midriffs you DO NOT want to see.
CM
Of course, they went with a conservative design – this baseballl team is run by the former CEO of Wal-Mart. This is also the same team that just had a “Faith and Family Day” at the ballpark. The Royals have worked incredibly hard to court fans with uber-patriotic conservative-values, so of course they aren’t going to offend their deeply religious fan base by appearing to condone the showing of sinful female flesh.
jojo
1. If you look at the women at the k you know
they are “heavy” k…as in kilos. I don’t think
there’s more than a dozen women I would like
to see in a skimpy halter top. Kansas City has
the most out of shape/overweight women in the
world and to have one of them come out wearing
one of those tops would clear out the stadium.
2. You old guys on here need to get some
action. You’re fantasizing about halter top day
has me wondering if you’re gettin’ any…from
your comments probably not.
3. The 70’s were a different era. We didn’t
supersize/down fast food like now/eat to
be obese like nowadays. Having been to many
royals games I’d seriously doubt manyof those
women could fit into a halter top. It might
cover about half their gut in 2009.
4. Thank god noone has a heart attack at
the k. I hear they’re going to have to charge
extra for obese people to be “hauled” to a
hospital by ambulance. If there was ever a way
to reduce the deficit this is it because all those people at the k will have to pay doubleto
get carried out.
ChiefsFan2000
Hearne Says:
“But they chickened out with a conservative design, watering the promotion down, and even gave T-shirts to the dudes.”
Wait a second, in the 70’s did they give halter tops to guys? Is that what this article is really about? Hey, I’m sure if you really want one all you’d have to do is ask.
Jojo and C are right. It is really better this way. What you would be forced to see is not worth the eye candy which would be few and far between.
By the way in your next article I think you should answer JoJo’s second question.
Dave Stewart
My wife and I went to the game on Sunday when she passed along the observation she’d probably seen 7 of the new Halter Tops being worn the day after the giveaway. “Really, honey? I haven’t noticed any.” I think she bought it…
Bill
Face it. The fans wanted and voted for one thing and the Royals gave them something different. Bait & switch.