Vuelta Podium Girls Change

inseine

Matthewfalle wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

I love how this thread goes from "podium girls are a sexist anachronism" to

THEY'RE GOING TO BAN MODELS!!!!!

Not everyone will be banning models, just inseine I think.

I think generally everyone else is ok with models.

Yes, ban attractive women from the world! I think you're slightly over reading my posts. I don't think you're a bad person for your point of view, I just don't share it. Please just don't make things up though.

blazing_saddles

No tA Doctor wrote:

And for the hard of thinking, this was dealt with explicitly in the article written by a professional bike racer whose opinion was summarily discounted because podium girls were around before she started cycling.

I posted this link here, a while back.
Former Williams F1 test driver, Susie Wolff.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/42903658

In my position as a female within motorsport for over 25 years, the use of 'grid girls' wasn't something that offended me.
Neither was it something I saw as one of Formula 1's priorities to change to allow the sport to evolve.
The owners of F1 are saying it is not what they want to see as an image representing the sport, and it is not what they want to portray the sport as.

Worth reading. Seems both balanced and points a way to the future.

More F1 reaction here:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/42925523

A mixed bag.

No_Ta_Doctor

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

I’ve mentioned this before but here it is again for the self righteous

These podium girls are not just there for the few minutes of handing out flowers and kisses to the winners. They work long days doing hosting work for the corporate side. The sponsors employ these people to entertain clients, hand out freebies etc etc. This is to bring in more custom. They do this to bring in more money essentially. Money that sponsors give as prize money. Now, if you do away with a part of that structure and your income from it is reduced, then guess what? So will be prize money if the sponsors didn’t see a financial gain out of it. Do you think they employ people to do all this for fun? So, If there is less money from sponsors, and therefore prize money. How the hell do these ‘offended’ women athletes ever expect to earn as much as the men? The men’s sport is hardly flush with cash. Many teams are on shoestring budgets. Forget about mega bucks Team Sky. They are very much the exception to the rule. A team can have a few decent paid individuals but the domestiques in road racing are not. And that’s in the Elite leagues. Drop down a few divisions and it’s a pittance.

These girls, who so offend people probably play a more valuable role than many givevthem credit for. If they’re spending close to 12 hours a day on their feet, a few minutes in the lime light of the winners podium is well earned in my opinion. And people want to deny them that yet demand better pay. Take your pick or find another sport

And for the hard of thinking, this was dealt with explicitly in the article written by a professional bike racer whose opinion was summarily discounted because podium girls were around before she started cycling.

Well then. Explain how women will be able to be better paid? You seem to have all the answers since your dismissive of anyone else’s. So come on. How? Give us all an answer as to where the money will come from.

I suggest you go and read the article. And the links to supporting evidence Amanda presents in it. Or would you just rather have it explained to you by a man?

Matthewfalle

Ah - the female pro bike racer who slags off podium/grid girls, is derogatory about them and their employment choices but still uses her sexuality as an above averagely (but not massively though) looking female in her marketing material?

Yeah that'll be the one.

And for every Amanda I'm sure there are at least the same who either don't care or would support employment choice.

Or is this the "oh they are a pro so they are sacred" argument?

Matthewfalle

inseine wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

I love how this thread goes from "podium girls are a sexist anachronism" to

THEY'RE GOING TO BAN MODELS!!!!!

Not everyone will be banning models, just inseine I think.

I think generally everyone else is ok with models.

Yes, ban attractive women from the world! I think you're slightly over reading my posts. I don't think you're a bad person for your point of view, I just don't share it. Please just don't make things up though.

The only opinion I have is that everyone regardless of sex, colour, creed, religion, gender or whatever should have freedom of choice, whether that be for employment, movement, etc.

I'm lucky to be in an organisation that is pretty gender transparent and you'll get promoted or whatever dependant on your ability to do the job regardless of sex.

It seems that those who are most vocal on here work in industries that are exactly as described by my friend.

No_Ta_Doctor

Matthewfalle wrote:

Ah - the female pro bike racer who slags off podium/grid girls, is derogatory about them and their employment choices but still uses her sexuality as an above averagely (but not massively though) looking female in her marketing material?

Yeah that'll be the one.

And for every Amanda I'm sure there are at least the same who either don't care or would support employment choice.

Or is this the "oh they are a pro so they are sacred" argument?

I'm not aware of her "slagging off" podium/grid girls, nor have I seen a lot of sexualised marketing from her (she generally seems to be pictured in the highly alluring MTB helmet/body-armour combo).

I point out her article because she makes a good argument, provides supporting evidence, and because she has a stake in the outcome.

inseine

The only opinion I have is that everyone regardless of sex, colour, creed, religion, gender or whatever should have freedom of choice, whether that be for employment, movement, etc.

I'm lucky to be in an organisation that is pretty gender transparent and you'll get promoted or whatever dependant on your ability to do the job regardless of sex.

It seems that those who are most vocal on here work in industries that are exactly as described by my friend.

[/quote]
Here right about working in male centric industries, but we are not all responsible for that, it's the age old problem that women are generally seen as less than men, they are underpaid and objectified (the whole pint of this thread).
It's cool that you work somewhere with more forward thinking views but sadly the world hasn't caught up yet. As a society women are judged much more than men purely on looks, if you think that's not the case or you think that's ok then there's no point me trying to tell you otherwise.

Matthewfalle

No tA Doctor wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

Ah - the female pro bike racer who slags off podium/grid girls, is derogatory about them and their employment choices but still uses her sexuality as an above averagely (but not massively though) looking female in her marketing material?

Yeah that'll be the one.

And for every Amanda I'm sure there are at least the same who either don't care or would support employment choice.

Or is this the "oh they are a pro so they are sacred" argument?

I'm not aware of her "slagging off" podium/grid girls, nor have I seen a lot of sexualised marketing from her (she generally seems to be pictured in the highly alluring MTB helmet/body-armour combo).

I point out her article because she makes a good argument, provides supporting evidence, and because she has a stake in the outcome.

Well, ir someone told you you were a "non contributing commodity", that you " don't actually add anything to the sport you've latched onto" , that you've done "real damage to industries and ports just by doing your job" and that bit about you having to go and get a proper job not one based on your looks - well, you'd have every right to feel aggrieved and maybe punch them on the nose.

Amanda just seems, well, extremely rude.

Calling herself a feminist and doing nothing to assist them just to put them down doesn't seem to be very feminist, just a tad bitter.

Not really a good argument in there tbh - nothing you could present at say, a MBA seminar and not be laughed at.

bobmcstuff

Ben6899 wrote:

But I'd expect that from certain individuals in Pro Race - most cliquey section of these fora by a long shot.

Have you been in BB recently?? It makes no sense - most threads seems to be conducted mainly using in-jokes...

Vino'sGhost

inseine wrote:

The only opinion I have is that everyone regardless of sex, colour, creed, religion, gender or whatever should have freedom of choice, whether that be for employment, movement, etc.

I'm lucky to be in an organisation that is pretty gender transparent and you'll get promoted or whatever dependant on your ability to do the job regardless of sex.

It seems that those who are most vocal on here work in industries that are exactly as described by my friend.

you described models as attractive people. Surely theres some irony in there. Shouldnt they just be flesh based clothes stands?

trivial_poursuivant

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

I’ve mentioned this before but here it is again for the self righteous

These podium girls are not just there for the few minutes of handing out flowers and kisses to the winners. They work long days doing hosting work for the corporate side. The sponsors employ these people to entertain clients, hand out freebies etc etc. This is to bring in more custom. They do this to bring in more money essentially. Money that sponsors give as prize money. Now, if you do away with a part of that structure and your income from it is reduced, then guess what? So will be prize money if the sponsors didn’t see a financial gain out of it. Do you think they employ people to do all this for fun? So, If there is less money from sponsors, and therefore prize money. How the hell do these ‘offended’ women athletes ever expect to earn as much as the men? The men’s sport is hardly flush with cash. Many teams are on shoestring budgets. Forget about mega bucks Team Sky. They are very much the exception to the rule. A team can have a few decent paid individuals but the domestiques in road racing are not. And that’s in the Elite leagues. Drop down a few divisions and it’s a pittance.

These girls, who so offend people probably play a more valuable role than many givevthem credit for. If they’re spending close to 12 hours a day on their feet, a few minutes in the lime light of the winners podium is well earned in my opinion. And people want to deny them that yet demand better pay. Take your pick or find another sport

And for the hard of thinking, this was dealt with explicitly in the article written by a professional bike racer whose opinion was summarily discounted because podium girls were around before she started cycling.

Well then. Explain how women will be able to be better paid? You seem to have all the answers since your dismissive of anyone else’s. So come on. How? Give us all an answer as to where the money will come from.

I suggest you go and read the article. And the links to supporting evidence Amanda presents in it. Or would you just rather have it explained to you by a man?

I have read the article. It’s a typically one sided. Which is all your tiny blinkered mind sees.

As for having it explained to me by a man. Do you know of any?

You still haven’t answered my question mind. So until you have a solution maybe you should learn the bigger picture about how sport and business work. Sh1t don’t happen for free. Someone has to pay for it, and sponsors ain’t in the business of giving money away for no return. Maybe go read up on that.

mamba80

Matthewfalle wrote:

As an aside, I'm still waiting for the North London massif plan for these ladies to pay their mortgage now their bi-monthly pay cheque has gone. Or doesn't this matter in your rented flat and Rapha in the cupboard? Didn't think so so long as you can sit there with a latte in your hand happy at your role in the emancipation of the modern lady.

Pass the sick bucket, you just want oggle good looking girls... as for their mortgage etc this argument was similar to those that want to continue with child labour in the last century or who justify Nike using kids on a dollar a day to make their $200 shoes.

If these are women are so talented, sought after etc they ll surely be able to find work in many other areas of the corp world.

shortfall

mamba80 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

As an aside, I'm still waiting for the North London massif plan for these ladies to pay their mortgage now their bi-monthly pay cheque has gone. Or doesn't this matter in your rented flat and Rapha in the cupboard? Didn't think so so long as you can sit there with a latte in your hand happy at your role in the emancipation of the modern lady.

Pass the sick bucket, you just want oggle good looking girls... as for their mortgage etc this argument was similar to those that want to continue with child labour in the last century or who justify Nike using kids on a dollar a day to make their $200 shoes.

If these are women are so talented, sought after etc they ll surely be able to find work in many other areas of the corp world.

Actually that raises an interesting point. Call it whataboutery if you want, but how many of the people raising concerns here about the exploitation and demeaning of women is done by people who don't give a second thought about the conditions of the workers who produce their iPhone X, or their Nike trainers? How many of the people cheering at the end of Grid Girls are as vocal about the fact that many F1 races are hosted by dictatorships and despotisms, some with appalling human rights records and renowned for their medieval treatment of women? Great work lads, youve put a load of silicone enhanced Grid Girls out of work and now you can watch the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix with a clear conscience, well apart from the torture, stonings, floggings, and the right of men under Sharia Law to beat their wives on the proviso they don't leave marks.

No_Ta_Doctor

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

I’ve mentioned this before but here it is again for the self righteous

These podium girls are not just there for the few minutes of handing out flowers and kisses to the winners. They work long days doing hosting work for the corporate side. The sponsors employ these people to entertain clients, hand out freebies etc etc. This is to bring in more custom. They do this to bring in more money essentially. Money that sponsors give as prize money. Now, if you do away with a part of that structure and your income from it is reduced, then guess what? So will be prize money if the sponsors didn’t see a financial gain out of it. Do you think they employ people to do all this for fun? So, If there is less money from sponsors, and therefore prize money. How the hell do these ‘offended’ women athletes ever expect to earn as much as the men? The men’s sport is hardly flush with cash. Many teams are on shoestring budgets. Forget about mega bucks Team Sky. They are very much the exception to the rule. A team can have a few decent paid individuals but the domestiques in road racing are not. And that’s in the Elite leagues. Drop down a few divisions and it’s a pittance.

These girls, who so offend people probably play a more valuable role than many givevthem credit for. If they’re spending close to 12 hours a day on their feet, a few minutes in the lime light of the winners podium is well earned in my opinion. And people want to deny them that yet demand better pay. Take your pick or find another sport

And for the hard of thinking, this was dealt with explicitly in the article written by a professional bike racer whose opinion was summarily discounted because podium girls were around before she started cycling.

Well then. Explain how women will be able to be better paid? You seem to have all the answers since your dismissive of anyone else’s. So come on. How? Give us all an answer as to where the money will come from.

I suggest you go and read the article. And the links to supporting evidence Amanda presents in it. Or would you just rather have it explained to you by a man?

I have read the article. It’s a typically one sided. Which is all your tiny blinkered mind sees.

As for having it explained to me by a man. Do you know of any?

You still haven’t answered my question mind. So until you have a solution maybe you should learn the bigger picture about how sport and business work. Sh1t don’t happen for free. Someone has to pay for it, and sponsors ain’t in the business of giving money away for no return. Maybe go read up on that.

Ooooh, hark at Billy Big Brains. You read an article that explains that podium girls are actually bad marketing and fail to engage with the argument because "it's too one sided". I'm truly shocked that a passionate argument in favour of a particular position might be one-sided.... In case you missed it, F1 appear to think that "women as objects" is a bad marketing ploy as well. In explaining their decision they explicitly referenced their brand values. For some reason they seem to think that being seen as anachronistic sexists might prevent them from growing and capitalising on their sport. God only knows where the money will come from now, I'm sure they'll be racing in clapped out VW Passats within a couple of seasons....

As for whether I know any men, yes, lots. I'm not sure whether they're men according to your criteria though, as you seem to be insinuating I'm not one, merely because I don't think it's a good idea to use oggleable women as eye candy to market bike races. I'm not sure how that might make me less of a man, maybe the insinuation is that I'm gay, and therefore in your opinion not a real man? For the record, I'm comfortable in both my masculinity and my sexuality, which is more than appears to be the case for you. You sound like your masculinity is.....threatened.

No_Ta_Doctor

Shortfall wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

As an aside, I'm still waiting for the North London massif plan for these ladies to pay their mortgage now their bi-monthly pay cheque has gone. Or doesn't this matter in your rented flat and Rapha in the cupboard? Didn't think so so long as you can sit there with a latte in your hand happy at your role in the emancipation of the modern lady.

Pass the sick bucket, you just want oggle good looking girls... as for their mortgage etc this argument was similar to those that want to continue with child labour in the last century or who justify Nike using kids on a dollar a day to make their $200 shoes.

If these are women are so talented, sought after etc they ll surely be able to find work in many other areas of the corp world.

Actually that raises an interesting point. Call it whataboutery if you want, but how many of the people raising concerns here about the exploitation and demeaning of women is done by people who don't give a second thought about the conditions of the workers who produce their iPhone X, or their Nike trainers? How many of the people cheering at the end of Grid Girls are as vocal about the fact that many F1 races are hosted by dictatorships and despotisms, some with appalling human rights records and renowned for their medieval treatment of women? Great work lads, youve put a load of silicone enhanced Grid Girls out of work and now you can watch the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix with a clear conscience, well apart from the torture, stonings, floggings, and the right of men under Sharia Law to beat their wives on the proviso they don't leave marks.

Errr.... that really is whataboutery. For the record, I don't really watch F1, I've done voluntary work for a fairtrade labelling organisation, you can't find anything remotely resembling a fairtrade phone as far as I know, and I've consistently objected to sports events being held in dictatorships. Is that OK?

shortfall

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

I’ve mentioned this before but here it is again for the self righteous

These podium girls are not just there for the few minutes of handing out flowers and kisses to the winners. They work long days doing hosting work for the corporate side. The sponsors employ these people to entertain clients, hand out freebies etc etc. This is to bring in more custom. They do this to bring in more money essentially. Money that sponsors give as prize money. Now, if you do away with a part of that structure and your income from it is reduced, then guess what? So will be prize money if the sponsors didn’t see a financial gain out of it. Do you think they employ people to do all this for fun? So, If there is less money from sponsors, and therefore prize money. How the hell do these ‘offended’ women athletes ever expect to earn as much as the men? The men’s sport is hardly flush with cash. Many teams are on shoestring budgets. Forget about mega bucks Team Sky. They are very much the exception to the rule. A team can have a few decent paid individuals but the domestiques in road racing are not. And that’s in the Elite leagues. Drop down a few divisions and it’s a pittance.

These girls, who so offend people probably play a more valuable role than many givevthem credit for. If they’re spending close to 12 hours a day on their feet, a few minutes in the lime light of the winners podium is well earned in my opinion. And people want to deny them that yet demand better pay. Take your pick or find another sport

And for the hard of thinking, this was dealt with explicitly in the article written by a professional bike racer whose opinion was summarily discounted because podium girls were around before she started cycling.

Well then. Explain how women will be able to be better paid? You seem to have all the answers since your dismissive of anyone else’s. So come on. How? Give us all an answer as to where the money will come from.

I suggest you go and read the article. And the links to supporting evidence Amanda presents in it. Or would you just rather have it explained to you by a man?

I have read the article. It’s a typically one sided. Which is all your tiny blinkered mind sees.

As for having it explained to me by a man. Do you know of any?

You still haven’t answered my question mind. So until you have a solution maybe you should learn the bigger picture about how sport and business work. Sh1t don’t happen for free. Someone has to pay for it, and sponsors ain’t in the business of giving money away for no return. Maybe go read up on that.

Ooooh, hark at Billy Big Brains. You read an article that explains that podium girls are actually bad marketing and fail to engage with the argument because "it's too one sided". I'm truly shocked that a passionate argument in favour of a particular position might be one-sided.... In case you missed it, F1 appear to think that "women as objects" is a bad marketing ploy as well. In explaining their decision they explicitly referenced their brand values. For some reason they seem to think that being seen as anachronistic sexists might prevent them from growing and capitalising on their sport. God only knows where the money will come from now,..

Tell us about women's rights in places like the UAE that continue to host F1 races in 2018? Maybe F1 bosses don't actually give that much of a fvck?

trivial_poursuivant

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

I’ve mentioned this before but here it is again for the self righteous

These podium girls are not just there for the few minutes of handing out flowers and kisses to the winners. They work long days doing hosting work for the corporate side. The sponsors employ these people to entertain clients, hand out freebies etc etc. This is to bring in more custom. They do this to bring in more money essentially. Money that sponsors give as prize money. Now, if you do away with a part of that structure and your income from it is reduced, then guess what? So will be prize money if the sponsors didn’t see a financial gain out of it. Do you think they employ people to do all this for fun? So, If there is less money from sponsors, and therefore prize money. How the hell do these ‘offended’ women athletes ever expect to earn as much as the men? The men’s sport is hardly flush with cash. Many teams are on shoestring budgets. Forget about mega bucks Team Sky. They are very much the exception to the rule. A team can have a few decent paid individuals but the domestiques in road racing are not. And that’s in the Elite leagues. Drop down a few divisions and it’s a pittance.

These girls, who so offend people probably play a more valuable role than many givevthem credit for. If they’re spending close to 12 hours a day on their feet, a few minutes in the lime light of the winners podium is well earned in my opinion. And people want to deny them that yet demand better pay. Take your pick or find another sport

And for the hard of thinking, this was dealt with explicitly in the article written by a professional bike racer whose opinion was summarily discounted because podium girls were around before she started cycling.

Well then. Explain how women will be able to be better paid? You seem to have all the answers since your dismissive of anyone else’s. So come on. How? Give us all an answer as to where the money will come from.

I suggest you go and read the article. And the links to supporting evidence Amanda presents in it. Or would you just rather have it explained to you by a man?

I have read the article. It’s a typically one sided. Which is all your tiny blinkered mind sees.

As for having it explained to me by a man. Do you know of any?

You still haven’t answered my question mind. So until you have a solution maybe you should learn the bigger picture about how sport and business work. Sh1t don’t happen for free. Someone has to pay for it, and sponsors ain’t in the business of giving money away for no return. Maybe go read up on that.

As for whether I know any men, yes, lots. I'm not sure whether they're men according to your criteria though, as you seem to be insinuating I'm not one, merely because I don't think it's a good idea to use oggleable women as eye candy to market bike races. I'm not sure how that might make me less of a man, maybe the insinuation is that I'm gay, and therefore in your opinion not a real man? For the record, I'm comfortable in both my masculinity and my sexuality, which is more than appears to be the case for you. You sound like your masculinity is.....threatened.

Not sure where all that came from. I never said anything about gay. Where did that come from?

Sounds like you’re hiding something. You seem to hate attractive women then you start talking about being comfortable with your sexuality etc.

shortfall

No tA Doctor wrote:

Shortfall wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

As an aside, I'm still waiting for the North London massif plan for these ladies to pay their mortgage now their bi-monthly pay cheque has gone. Or doesn't this matter in your rented flat and Rapha in the cupboard? Didn't think so so long as you can sit there with a latte in your hand happy at your role in the emancipation of the modern lady.

Pass the sick bucket, you just want oggle good looking girls... as for their mortgage etc this argument was similar to those that want to continue with child labour in the last century or who justify Nike using kids on a dollar a day to make their $200 shoes.

If these are women are so talented, sought after etc they ll surely be able to find work in many other areas of the corp world.

Actually that raises an interesting point. Call it whataboutery if you want, but how many of the people raising concerns here about the exploitation and demeaning of women is done by people who don't give a second thought about the conditions of the workers who produce their iPhone X, or their Nike trainers? How many of the people cheering at the end of Grid Girls are as vocal about the fact that many F1 races are hosted by dictatorships and despotisms, some with appalling human rights records and renowned for their medieval treatment of women? Great work lads, youve put a load of silicone enhanced Grid Girls out of work and now you can watch the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix with a clear conscience, well apart from the torture, stonings, floggings, and the right of men under Sharia Law to beat their wives on the proviso they don't leave marks.

Errr.... that really is whataboutery. For the record, I don't really watch F1, I've done voluntary work for a fairtrade labelling organisation, you can't find anything remotely resembling a fairtrade phone as far as I know, and I've consistently objected to sports events being held in dictatorships. Is that OK?

Fair play to you. I suspect you're in a minority.

trivial_poursuivant

Shortfall wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Shortfall wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

As an aside, I'm still waiting for the North London massif plan for these ladies to pay their mortgage now their bi-monthly pay cheque has gone. Or doesn't this matter in your rented flat and Rapha in the cupboard? Didn't think so so long as you can sit there with a latte in your hand happy at your role in the emancipation of the modern lady.

Pass the sick bucket, you just want oggle good looking girls... as for their mortgage etc this argument was similar to those that want to continue with child labour in the last century or who justify Nike using kids on a dollar a day to make their $200 shoes.

If these are women are so talented, sought after etc they ll surely be able to find work in many other areas of the corp world.

Actually that raises an interesting point. Call it whataboutery if you want, but how many of the people raising concerns here about the exploitation and demeaning of women is done by people who don't give a second thought about the conditions of the workers who produce their iPhone X, or their Nike trainers? How many of the people cheering at the end of Grid Girls are as vocal about the fact that many F1 races are hosted by dictatorships and despotisms, some with appalling human rights records and renowned for their medieval treatment of women? Great work lads, youve put a load of silicone enhanced Grid Girls out of work and now you can watch the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix with a clear conscience, well apart from the torture, stonings, floggings, and the right of men under Sharia Law to beat their wives on the proviso they don't leave marks.

Errr.... that really is whataboutery. For the record, I don't really watch F1, I've done voluntary work for a fairtrade labelling organisation, you can't find anything remotely resembling a fairtrade phone as far as I know, and I've consistently objected to sports events being held in dictatorships. Is that OK?

Fair play to you. I suspect you're in a minority.

He also walks on water and regularly feeds large crowds of people with bread and fish. Or maybe he just spouts any old sh1t to make him sound above others when in reality he probably indulges in the same vices as the rest.

No_Ta_Doctor

Shortfall wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Shortfall wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

As an aside, I'm still waiting for the North London massif plan for these ladies to pay their mortgage now their bi-monthly pay cheque has gone. Or doesn't this matter in your rented flat and Rapha in the cupboard? Didn't think so so long as you can sit there with a latte in your hand happy at your role in the emancipation of the modern lady.

Pass the sick bucket, you just want oggle good looking girls... as for their mortgage etc this argument was similar to those that want to continue with child labour in the last century or who justify Nike using kids on a dollar a day to make their $200 shoes.

If these are women are so talented, sought after etc they ll surely be able to find work in many other areas of the corp world.

Actually that raises an interesting point. Call it whataboutery if you want, but how many of the people raising concerns here about the exploitation and demeaning of women is done by people who don't give a second thought about the conditions of the workers who produce their iPhone X, or their Nike trainers? How many of the people cheering at the end of Grid Girls are as vocal about the fact that many F1 races are hosted by dictatorships and despotisms, some with appalling human rights records and renowned for their medieval treatment of women? Great work lads, youve put a load of silicone enhanced Grid Girls out of work and now you can watch the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix with a clear conscience, well apart from the torture, stonings, floggings, and the right of men under Sharia Law to beat their wives on the proviso they don't leave marks.

Errr.... that really is whataboutery. For the record, I don't really watch F1, I've done voluntary work for a fairtrade labelling organisation, you can't find anything remotely resembling a fairtrade phone as far as I know, and I've consistently objected to sports events being held in dictatorships. Is that OK?

Fair play to you. I suspect you're in a minority.

I suspect I'm actually not.

No_Ta_Doctor

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

I’ve mentioned this before but here it is again for the self righteous

These podium girls are not just there for the few minutes of handing out flowers and kisses to the winners. They work long days doing hosting work for the corporate side. The sponsors employ these people to entertain clients, hand out freebies etc etc. This is to bring in more custom. They do this to bring in more money essentially. Money that sponsors give as prize money. Now, if you do away with a part of that structure and your income from it is reduced, then guess what? So will be prize money if the sponsors didn’t see a financial gain out of it. Do you think they employ people to do all this for fun? So, If there is less money from sponsors, and therefore prize money. How the hell do these ‘offended’ women athletes ever expect to earn as much as the men? The men’s sport is hardly flush with cash. Many teams are on shoestring budgets. Forget about mega bucks Team Sky. They are very much the exception to the rule. A team can have a few decent paid individuals but the domestiques in road racing are not. And that’s in the Elite leagues. Drop down a few divisions and it’s a pittance.

These girls, who so offend people probably play a more valuable role than many givevthem credit for. If they’re spending close to 12 hours a day on their feet, a few minutes in the lime light of the winners podium is well earned in my opinion. And people want to deny them that yet demand better pay. Take your pick or find another sport

And for the hard of thinking, this was dealt with explicitly in the article written by a professional bike racer whose opinion was summarily discounted because podium girls were around before she started cycling.

Well then. Explain how women will be able to be better paid? You seem to have all the answers since your dismissive of anyone else’s. So come on. How? Give us all an answer as to where the money will come from.

I suggest you go and read the article. And the links to supporting evidence Amanda presents in it. Or would you just rather have it explained to you by a man?

I have read the article. It’s a typically one sided. Which is all your tiny blinkered mind sees.

As for having it explained to me by a man. Do you know of any?

You still haven’t answered my question mind. So until you have a solution maybe you should learn the bigger picture about how sport and business work. Sh1t don’t happen for free. Someone has to pay for it, and sponsors ain’t in the business of giving money away for no return. Maybe go read up on that.

As for whether I know any men, yes, lots. I'm not sure whether they're men according to your criteria though, as you seem to be insinuating I'm not one, merely because I don't think it's a good idea to use oggleable women as eye candy to market bike races. I'm not sure how that might make me less of a man, maybe the insinuation is that I'm gay, and therefore in your opinion not a real man? For the record, I'm comfortable in both my masculinity and my sexuality, which is more than appears to be the case for you. You sound like your masculinity is.....threatened.

Not sure where all that came from. I never said anything about gay. Where did that come from?

Sounds like you’re hiding something. You seem to hate attractive women then you start talking about being comfortable with your sexuality etc.

Yes, that must be it. I must hate attractive women. And I must be hiding something.

What's a real man then? You're the one who brought up the subject.

trivial_poursuivant

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Trivial poursuivant wrote:

I’ve mentioned this before but here it is again for the self righteous

These podium girls are not just there for the few minutes of handing out flowers and kisses to the winners. They work long days doing hosting work for the corporate side. The sponsors employ these people to entertain clients, hand out freebies etc etc. This is to bring in more custom. They do this to bring in more money essentially. Money that sponsors give as prize money. Now, if you do away with a part of that structure and your income from it is reduced, then guess what? So will be prize money if the sponsors didn’t see a financial gain out of it. Do you think they employ people to do all this for fun? So, If there is less money from sponsors, and therefore prize money. How the hell do these ‘offended’ women athletes ever expect to earn as much as the men? The men’s sport is hardly flush with cash. Many teams are on shoestring budgets. Forget about mega bucks Team Sky. They are very much the exception to the rule. A team can have a few decent paid individuals but the domestiques in road racing are not. And that’s in the Elite leagues. Drop down a few divisions and it’s a pittance.

These girls, who so offend people probably play a more valuable role than many givevthem credit for. If they’re spending close to 12 hours a day on their feet, a few minutes in the lime light of the winners podium is well earned in my opinion. And people want to deny them that yet demand better pay. Take your pick or find another sport

And for the hard of thinking, this was dealt with explicitly in the article written by a professional bike racer whose opinion was summarily discounted because podium girls were around before she started cycling.

Well then. Explain how women will be able to be better paid? You seem to have all the answers since your dismissive of anyone else’s. So come on. How? Give us all an answer as to where the money will come from.

I suggest you go and read the article. And the links to supporting evidence Amanda presents in it. Or would you just rather have it explained to you by a man?

I have read the article. It’s a typically one sided. Which is all your tiny blinkered mind sees.

As for having it explained to me by a man. Do you know of any?

You still haven’t answered my question mind. So until you have a solution maybe you should learn the bigger picture about how sport and business work. Sh1t don’t happen for free. Someone has to pay for it, and sponsors ain’t in the business of giving money away for no return. Maybe go read up on that.

As for whether I know any men, yes, lots. I'm not sure whether they're men according to your criteria though, as you seem to be insinuating I'm not one, merely because I don't think it's a good idea to use oggleable women as eye candy to market bike races. I'm not sure how that might make me less of a man, maybe the insinuation is that I'm gay, and therefore in your opinion not a real man? For the record, I'm comfortable in both my masculinity and my sexuality, which is more than appears to be the case for you. You sound like your masculinity is.....threatened.

Not sure where all that came from. I never said anything about gay. Where did that come from?

Sounds like you’re hiding something. You seem to hate attractive women then you start talking about being comfortable with your sexuality etc.

Yes, that must be it. I must hate attractive women. And I must be hiding something.

What's a real man then? You're the one who brought up the subject.

Actually, no I didn’t. YOU did. Is your memory that short? It’s written up there. You said “Or would you just rather have it explained to you by a man“

mamba80

Shortfall wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

As an aside, I'm still waiting for the North London massif plan for these ladies to pay their mortgage now their bi-monthly pay cheque has gone. Or doesn't this matter in your rented flat and Rapha in the cupboard? Didn't think so so long as you can sit there with a latte in your hand happy at your role in the emancipation of the modern lady.

Pass the sick bucket, you just want oggle good looking girls... as for their mortgage etc this argument was similar to those that want to continue with child labour in the last century or who justify Nike using kids on a dollar a day to make their $200 shoes.

If these are women are so talented, sought after etc they ll surely be able to find work in many other areas of the corp world.

Actually that raises an interesting point. Call it whataboutery if you want, but how many of the people raising concerns here about the exploitation and demeaning of women is done by people who don't give a second thought about the conditions of the workers who produce their iPhone X, or their Nike trainers? How many of the people cheering at the end of Grid Girls are as vocal about the fact that many F1 races are hosted by dictatorships and despotisms, some with appalling human rights records and renowned for their medieval treatment of women? Great work lads, youve put a load of silicone enhanced Grid Girls out of work and now you can watch the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix with a clear conscience, well apart from the torture, stonings, floggings, and the right of men under Sharia Law to beat their wives on the proviso they don't leave marks.

i 'm not a F1 fan and though its an arguable point you raise, its also true that the UK sells weapons to Saudi that are being used against civies in the Yemen, where do you stop? yeah its whataboutery.....

shortfall

mamba80 wrote:

Shortfall wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

As an aside, I'm still waiting for the North London massif plan for these ladies to pay their mortgage now their bi-monthly pay cheque has gone. Or doesn't this matter in your rented flat and Rapha in the cupboard? Didn't think so so long as you can sit there with a latte in your hand happy at your role in the emancipation of the modern lady.

Pass the sick bucket, you just want oggle good looking girls... as for their mortgage etc this argument was similar to those that want to continue with child labour in the last century or who justify Nike using kids on a dollar a day to make their $200 shoes.

If these are women are so talented, sought after etc they ll surely be able to find work in many other areas of the corp world.

Actually that raises an interesting point. Call it whataboutery if you want, but how many of the people raising concerns here about the exploitation and demeaning of women is done by people who don't give a second thought about the conditions of the workers who produce their iPhone X, or their Nike trainers? How many of the people cheering at the end of Grid Girls are as vocal about the fact that many F1 races are hosted by dictatorships and despotisms, some with appalling human rights records and renowned for their medieval treatment of women? Great work lads, youve put a load of silicone enhanced Grid Girls out of work and now you can watch the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix with a clear conscience, well apart from the torture, stonings, floggings, and the right of men under Sharia Law to beat their wives on the proviso they don't leave marks.

i 'm not a F1 fan and though its an arguable point you raise, its also true that the UK sells weapons to Saudi that are being used against civies in the Yemen, where do you stop? yeah its whataboutery.....

Yeah but it's not me raising the issue of the emancipation of women. It's encumbent upon those doing so to prove they are consistent in their beliefs. It strikes me as somewhat of a hollow.victory for them to have denied Western women in free law governed democracies the ability to earn a living whilst at the same time the F1 circus who previously employed them earns millions by going racing in despotisms that deny women basic human rights and equality.

mamba80

I agree with you, its hypocrisy.

I just think women should aspire to be the very best they can, if the proponents of grid girls would be happy their own daughters being one, then fair enough but the msg sent to all the girls that arent particularly good looking is that they are not "up to standard"

iainf72

mamba80 wrote:

I agree with you, its hypocrisy.

I just think women should aspire to be the very best they can, if the proponents of grid girls would be happy their own daughters being one, then fair enough but the msg sent to all the girls that arent particularly good looking is that they are not "up to standard"

But then if someone can do a job because of brain power, then it sends a message to those who can't that they're "not up to standard"

But I guess at the end of the day, everyone is different. Thinking that people will think a certain way because of race or sex or sexuality etc is just not helpful.

RichN95.

mamba80 wrote:

I agree with you, its hypocrisy.

I just think women should aspire to be the very best they can, if the proponents of grid girls would be happy their own daughters being one, then fair enough but the msg sent to all the girls that arent particularly good looking is that they are not "up to standard"

Yeah, whenever I watch F1 and see Claire Williams I see someone who had to make do with running a team because wasn't 'up to standard' like a Pit Girl. And Fran Millar had to be the business director of Sky because she couldn't hack it as a podium girl.

mamba80

RichN95 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

I agree with you, its hypocrisy.

I just think women should aspire to be the very best they can, if the proponents of grid girls would be happy their own daughters being one, then fair enough but the msg sent to all the girls that arent particularly good looking is that they are not "up to standard"

Yeah, whenever I watch F1 and see Claire Williams I see someone who had to make do with running a team because wasn't 'up to standard' like a Pit Girl. And Fran Millar had to be the business director of Sky because she couldn't hack it as a podium girl.

..and your point is? or is it just another argumentative post from you again.

ballysmate

No tA Doctor wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Matthewfalle wrote:

But what if they want to do it? After all, no one is forcing them to do it.

.

What if I want to sell heroin for a living? It's not about protecting the podium girls it's about the good of the wider society, I'll happily admit the women doing the job get a net benefit, it's a collective action problem innit.

You do know that that activity is illegal don't you? Whereas standing on a podium or holding a sponsor's bill board...

The good of the wider society? Taking away the freedom of choice of profession or job from people is not the way to benefit the 'wider society' is it?

Errr.... Are you aware that you're arguing that taking away the freedom of choice of profession from people is wrong while dismissing an example (heroin dealer) where freedom of choice is literally, explicitly and legally removed from people because "it's illegal"?

I'm not equating heroin dealers with podium girls (and neither was DeVlaeminck) but surely you can see that you're not making any sense?

Well for the particularly hard of thinking, I will insert the word 'legal' in my post.

The good of the wider society? Taking away the freedom of choice of legal profession/job from people is not the way to benefit the 'wider society' is it?

And DeVlaeminck appeared to be comparing the rights to deal H and the right to make a honest living in a manner he didn't approve of.

You're still not making any sense at all. Heroin hasn't always been illegal. At one point it was criminalised. Before that, selling heroin was a legal choice of profession.

The point that was being made was that the good of wider society can be taken into account in judging whether a particular profession is a good or bad thing. In some cases it's blindingly obvious, like the heroin dealer. In other cases there might be more subtle effects of the profession you'd have to look for.

Legality is largely irrelevant anyway, this was a moral discussion. For legal employment with adverse societal effects, how about advertising tobacco?

Note I said legal profession/job. So the fact that it was legal in the distant past to sell heroin is moot. It is not legal now.
As regards tobacco advertising, are you really equating it to podium girls and would like legislation to outlaw women being employed by the sponsors as podium girls?

Lookyhere

Must be really really tough to make it in a male dominated industry when the only advantage you have is Daddy owns the team and my darling brother (a top flight pro) is mates with Dave Brailsford.

Does make you wonder why there are not more girls from Doncaster at the top of F1 and SKY.