By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Feminists outrage at walk on/Grid girls, F1 & Darts models ban. Your thoughts?

 

I am...

In support of Grid girls. 72 79.12%
 
I support banning grid gi... 6 6.59%
 
Indifferent or unsure. 12 13.19%
 
Comments... 1 1.10%
 
Total:91
John2290 said:
TallSilhouette said:

I'm not a woman, but if my favorite sport was full of guys whose primary purpose was to stand around and look pretty, maybe flaunt their bulge or asses or whatever, I'd probably be off put by it. Doesn't have to be sexist or anything to negatively affect a demographic's enjoyment.

I reckon my favourite sport is UFC but I don't ever think about the fighters sexually. The are very much in the same scenario you suggested, just not on the sidelines. Maybe I'm just comfortable with my sexuality but i find this to be an odd statement. 

UFC fighters' primary purpose is to stand around and look pretty?



Around the Network
TallSilhouette said:
o_O.Q said:

why would you be off put by it? i'm just curious because i personally wouldn't care, they don't have any impact on the sport itself, i'm just trying to understand the mindset

To me it would come off as vapid and shallow while adding nothing to the sport.

o_O.Q said:

personally i'd honestly say that preoccupation with these things over the sport itself kind of demonstrates to me that the focus is not really the sport itself

That goes both ways though if you have a bunch of guys making a big deal about their removal.

o_O.Q said:

am i really supposed to believe that people like that give a damn about F1?

Like I said earlier, who says it's about people like that and not the wider female audience that could become fans in a more neutral environment?

"To me it would come off as vapid and shallow while adding nothing to the sport."

that who is vapid and shallow? the models? or the intended audience for the models?

 

"That goes both ways though if you have a bunch of guys making a big deal about their removal."

well i think its mostly the women that have lost their jobs... the men just seem to be pointing out feminist hypocrisy for the most part

 

"Like I said earlier, who says it's about people like that and not the wider female audience that could become fans in a more neutral environment?"

because those are the people who have been agitating for the women to lose their jobs?



o_O.Q said:

that who is vapid and shallow? the models? or the intended audience for the models?

 The concept itself. Modeling adds nothing to the sport itself.

o_O.Q said:

because those are the people who have been agitating for the women to lose their jobs?

Perhaps it was because of them. Perhaps that's mistaking correlation for causation. I don't remember even hearing about any concise petition for the removal of racing models above the average, scattered din of political correctness or even any increased discussion of the occupation before this news came out. Now that it's happened everybody's pointing fingers. All I can say is that I don't recall any bad publicity that this would be in response to and that it's entirely natural for executives to want the product they're selling to appeal to a wider audience.

Last edited by TallSilhouette - on 14 February 2018

TallSilhouette said:
o_O.Q said:

 

that who is vapid and shallow? the models? or the intended audience for the models?

 The concept itself. Modeling adds nothing to the sport itself.

i could make this argument about 1000 other things off the top of my head

why is it only a serious issue that has to be dealt with when its related to male sexuality?

because i think that's the crux of the issue and this isn't a criticism but why would you and several several other men advance a delusional agenda that at its very core has a burning hatred for your sexuality

you can call that last line a reach... but i think its fairly obvious 



o_O.Q said:

why is it only a serious issue that has to be dealt with when its related to male sexuality?

Whoever said it's only a serious issue when it's related to male sexuality?

o_O.Q said:

because i think that's the crux of the issue and this isn't a criticism but why would you and several several other men advance a delusional agenda that at its very core has a burning hatred for your sexuality

you can call that last line a reach... but i think its fairly obvious

Yes, I will call that both a reach and a gross mischaracterization of a valid movement based on fringes.



Around the Network
TallSilhouette said:
o_O.Q said:

why is it only a serious issue that has to be dealt with when its related to male sexuality?

Whoever said it's only a serious issue when it's related to male sexuality?

o_O.Q said:

because i think that's the crux of the issue and this isn't a criticism but why would you and several several other men advance a delusional agenda that at its very core has a burning hatred for your sexuality

you can call that last line a reach... but i think its fairly obvious

Yes, I will call that both a reach and a gross mischaracterization of a valid movement based on outliers.

"Whoever said it's only a serious issue when it's related to male sexuality?"

because the people advocating for this have focused on this so acutely that they went as far as oppressing the very group they claim to be fighting for

that takes dedication, it takes focus on one thing above many many other things

and it takes resentment, lots and lots of resentment

 

"Yes, I will call that both a reach and a gross mischaracterization of a valid movement based on outliers."

what is the goal of the movement?




o_O.Q said:

"Whoever said it's only a serious issue when it's related to male sexuality?"

because the people advocating for this have focused on this so acutely that they went as far as oppressing the very group they claim to be fighting for

In what way does an ideological group talking about an issue relevant to their group declare that it's only a serious issue when it's related to male sexuality?

o_O.Q said:

"Yes, I will call that both a reach and a gross mischaracterization of a valid movement based on outliers."

what is the goal of the movement?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism



TallSilhouette said:
o_O.Q said:

"Whoever said it's only a serious issue when it's related to male sexuality?"

because the people advocating for this have focused on this so acutely that they went as far as oppressing the very group they claim to be fighting for

In what way does an ideological group talking about an issue relevant to their group declare that it's only a serious issue when it's related to male sexuality?

o_O.Q said:

"Yes, I will call that both a reach and a gross mischaracterization of a valid movement based on outliers."

what is the goal of the movement?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

"In what way does an ideological group talking about an issue relevant to their group declare that it's only a serious issue when it's related to male sexuality?"

there is no declaration but i think that its pretty obvious

they took away the rights of these women to work.... why? 

because they were perceived to be sexually gratifying to men... i mean you yourself alluded to it with your "shallow" and "vapid" comments

 

"Feminist movements have campaigned and continue to campaign for women's rights, including the right to vote, to hold public office, to work, to earn fair wages or equal pay, to own propertyto receive education, to enter contracts, to have equal rights within marriage, and to have maternity leave"

which of those rights do women of the present day lack? 



o_O.Q said:

"In what way does an ideological group talking about an issue relevant to their group declare that it's only a serious issue when it's related to male sexuality?"

there is no declaration but i think that its pretty obvious

they took away the rights of these women to work.... why? 

because they were perceived to be sexually gratifying to men... i mean you yourself alluded to it with your "shallow" and "vapid" comments

Whooole lot of assumptions happening here. They didn't take away anything; the organizations did. A company removing one of its gender exclusive occupations does not take away the gender's fundamental right to work. Not enjoying racing models in your racing doesn't mean it's because the opposite sex enjoys them.

o_O.Q said:

"Feminist movements have campaigned and continue to campaign for women's rights, including the right to vote, to hold public office, to work, to earn fair wages or equal pay, to own propertyto receive education, to enter contracts, to have equal rights within marriage, and to have maternity leave"

which of those rights do women of the present day lack?

Which fundamental rights do they lack after these specific ~layoffs? If anything, things are more egalitarian now that neither sex is getting paid to flaunt their goodies (opening it up to men would have had a similar effect, but as I've discussed that would still add nothing to the sport).

Last edited by TallSilhouette - on 14 February 2018

Wow, I actually agree with 00Q on something.