Political Correctness Gone Mad Again

Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,554
So we are clear that these grid girl models have literally lost 3 days of work of of the calendar year.

It's not a massive inconvenience is it?


Can we please stop with this ridiculous line of argument already!

I am sure quite a lot of people on this forum would find it a 'massive inconvenience' if they found out that were going to be losing three days paid work next year and for years to come... Especially when the realisation sinks in that the loss of work is unlikely to be an isolated one of as the whole field of work they are in is under ideological attack.

One day these ladies might work at the F1 circuit the next day they might work in a similiar fashion at a trade show or expo where there is also pressure to have them removed ....

You are supporting an attack on some people's livelihoods... And rationalising it in such craven ways.

There is eithere a good reason/ argument to prevent the choice of these women to undertake these roles or there isn't... The amount of hours/days they are employed for is irrelevant.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,554
As expected this is now spreading to other industries. It seems feminism is destroying women's jobs. Who'd a thunk it eh?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43036944

My favorite quote from that article...

'The new guide urges exhibitors to "Consider the mix of staff you have on the stand (gender, age, ethnicity etc). Do they represent the diversity of your company, and if not, be prepared to explain why not?'

Because thats totally what the companies/organistaions trying to sell themselves as' progressive' do now isn't it....

They don't at all use a sometimes rather unrepresentative amount of women or 'people of colour ' to promote themselves now do they.....?

I await the next article bemoaning the lack of any meaningful female participation at the construction show for an industry overwhelmingly staffed with men.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
29,509
Location
Surrey
Yes, quite awful, attractive young women in skimpy clothing now banned from clambering about on roofsi n high heels; what is the world coming to?
It's becoming one where women are restricted from doing roles they choose to do. That's a world I don't agree with or like.
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
14,662
That's a fair point. Your suggested format would have been clearer.

Part of the problem is that I didn't consider the totals in the analogy to be important. And still don't. I think it's a distraction from the main point.

Yes, apologies for dragging us off on a tangent.

all the womenz were going crazy about some tongan half naked oiled up guy taking part in the recent Olympics

wheres the outrage women? Oh wait, it's fine if its a guy completely sexualised. but women can't even wear fairly smart clothing at a grand prix

Don't forget, it's only racist if you're white as well.
 
Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
29,917
Location
Norrbotten, Sweden.
It's becoming one where women are restricted from doing roles they choose to do. That's a world I don't agree with or like.
This is complete bs. They can sell their bodies and looks anywhere they want. It's just 1 of ten thousand modeling jobs.

1 employer has closed their line of employment because of a shift in market needs.
Same as chocolate bars, biscuits or waterering cans. Things and needs change.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,554
Yes, quite awful, attractive young women in skimpy clothing now banned from clambering about on roofsi n high heels; what is the world coming to?

Monotonous dreary socialism?

Attractive people using their looks to get work is inherently the same as (naturally) athletic people using this for a career in sport or people born smarter capitalising on their inteligence to get ahead....

All have inhheritable characteristics but require extra work and dedication to hone and maintain
 
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
29,509
Location
Surrey
This is complete bs. They can sell their bodies and looks anywhere they want. It's just 1 of ten thousand modeling jobs.
Well that's OK then. It's only a small number of people's jobs so who cares about them eh? Even if it increases in the future then, meh, that's fine too because it will only be a small increase each year.

No. It's the principle of the issue which I object to, rather than the number of people involved.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,554
This is complete bs. They can sell their bodies and looks anywhere they want. It's just 1 of ten thousand modeling jobs.

1 employer has closed their line of employment because of a shift in market needs.
Same as chocolate bars, biscuits or waterering cans.

Do keep up.... its an attack on a whole line of work as shown by the links on the last page alone....

Manufacturers dont often change chocolate, biscuit or watering can manufacturing priorities due to ideological attack from people who who often aren't even the products consumers either...
 
Permabanned
Joined
12 Dec 2012
Posts
584
There was no campaign by feminists specifically against grid girls. It had more to do with F1 wanting to change its image away from being seen as a sport for middle aged/old men/playboys. Ever since Liberty Media took over they've done their best to distance themselves from the 'Bernie era'. They know a lot of their current fanbase are going to die out in the next couple of decades and need to start rebranding the sport to bring in new audiences etc, in particular making it more appealing to younger generations. This will have been one small step of many towards achieving that goal. Ultimately it's all about money and what they think is going to make the sport more profitable... Chase Carey and Sean Bratches aren't bleeding heart liberals caving to feminism, they are capitalists looking to make money.

Personally I think its great they've replaced the girls with kids (who will be from each countries junior series), it will give them a great experience and maybe inspire them to go as far as they can within the industry... it actually has some relevance to motorsport as opposed to birds standing around wearing nothing for no reason other than to give men the chance to think 'would bang'.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
29,509
Location
Surrey
They can and still will be employed but will just not wear bikinis to sell roof tiles. Not really that much of an issue is it?
It's not just about what they wear.

The new guide urges exhibitors to "Consider the mix of staff you have on the stand (gender, age, ethnicity etc). Do they represent the diversity of your company, and if not, be prepared to explain why not?"
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,554
There was no campaign by feminists specifically against grid girls.

Which isn't really true now is it...

Take for example this feminist outfit masquerading as a sports charity who called for F1 to follow the darts.. . (after the later caved in only when the Broadcasters started applying pressure in turn they themselves were under)

'Walk-On Girls' Should Be Banned Across All Sports, Says Women's Sport Trust

Women's Sport Trust

What do we do?

Founded in 2012, Women’s Sport Trust raises the visibility and increases the impact of women’s sport through the promotion of diverse athlete role models, increasing media coverage and improving the funding landscape. We are a leading UK charity focused on using the power of sport to accelerate gender equality and stimulate social change.

The underlined bits are my emphasis
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,554
What (if anything) is wrong with that?
Because then other people will moan that the staff at the show are not diverse enough?

And since when did in make sense to have a representative section of the workforce promoting a companies products or services?

Sure you need some people that know intimately about the product or service but otherwise you often want personable, presentable and often glamorous people to showcase a companies wares
 
Man of Honour
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
29,509
Location
Surrey
What (if anything) is wrong with that?
It's putting one section of society at a disadvantage in favour of another section of society and putting some people out of a job. For people who find equality of outcome to be the desirable result then nothing is wrong with it. But personally I believe very strongly in equality of opportunity.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2009
Posts
6,554
Outrageous!

A charity trying to increase diversity in sport - why don't they just stay in the kitchen?

What we do - Women's sports trust

'accelerate gender equality and stimulate social change'

Is this the newly defined Cathy Newman fallacy?

Caracus2k provides an example of a feminist organisation agitating to put women out of work to accelerate 'gender equality' and 'stimulate social change'

stockhausen replies.. So what your saying is..... women should stay in the kitchen?

How do these women reduce diversity in sports like F1 ?

Ironically some of the women losing work might now be spending more time in kitchens with their increased spare time
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom