Political Correctness Gone Mad Again

I came across the "FHRITP" thing the other day, somehow I missed this one. It spits in the face of P.Cness in the worst way possible, it's hilarious :D
 
String said:
Gambling firms defy calls to stamp out sexist behaviour at event

https://www.theguardian.com/society...ing-conference-fails-to-crack-down-on-sexism?



Where do you start with this? I think some of these companies are on a blatant PR campaign. As for the women who are paid to stand in a bikini and be propositioned for sex, why do they keep going back via numerous employers... And then complain about how demeaning it all is?
Click to expand...

I'm currently working at this event as a sound engineer for one of the stands, I can understand this article more than some of the other examples. Walking around it does feel very sleazy. I went around and chatted to a few of the 'bikini' girls, some of whom were really enjoying their work and this is what they do. However quite a few of them said that they weren't aware of the 'skimpyness' of the outfits they would be wearing and that they were told when they got here that they should be flirting with people in order for the stands to get business.

The pole dancing stand on in the video in that article is one stand, its the only stand I've seen with anything like that, and the whole hidden camera effect (no need, could just have stood and filmed it) makes it look a lot more 'private' than it actually is.
 
TallPaul1878 said:
Arguing the semantics here.
Their position has been made untenable due to pressure from social justice groups. It is effectively the same thing.
Click to expand...
Ah, I see... you mean they have been 'change managed'.... their department has been 'reprofiled'... the roles have been 'streamlined' and their positions have been redirected toward a more 'on message' stance...?
What an extremely value-able exercise in blue sky thinking, there, eh? I am sure F1 is progressing toward a more strong and stable future!
 
TallPaul1878 said:
Arguing the semantics here.

Their position has been made untenable due to pressure from social justice groups. It is effectively the same thing.
Click to expand...

How can they be banned from a job that no longer exists? Keep practicing your scarecrow building though, it's funny :D
 
krooton said:
How can they be banned from a job that no longer exists? Keep practicing your scarecrow building though, it's funny :D
Click to expand...

More semantics. Some women have had their choice to taken on a promotional job removed from them due to pressure placed on advertisers and broadcasters seemingly by people that are not even otherwise concerned with the events.

Some 'feminists' then applaud this as being a good thing and then wonder why a lot of other women wont call themselves feminists
 
Caracus2k said:
More semantics. Some women have had their choice to taken on a promotional job removed from them due to pressure placed on advertisers and broadcasters seemingly by people that are not even otherwise concerned with the events.

Some 'feminists' then applaud this as being a good thing and then wonder why a lot of other women wont call themselves feminists
Click to expand...

Top kek, a handful of females who work(ed) in these roles are suddenly 'a lot' of women.

Guess what, jobs get made redundant ALL THE TIME, capitalism gonna capitalism, if it doesn't make money, it will eventually get scrapped.
 
TallPaul1878 said:
Arguing the semantics here.

Their position has been made untenable due to pressure from social justice groups. It is effectively the same thing.
Click to expand...

What is your solution? Tell people they are not allowed to speak out on what they perceive to be wrong?
 
Fat feminists jealous of attractive young woman who choose to do this.

Colour me shocked..... they basically have put a bunch of woman out of a job.

Edit: For clarity too I don't actually care either way, grid girls or no grid girls can't say i'd ever notice. But I hope we soon ban half naked male calenders. I'm jealous of Tyrone and his washboard abs cut like diamonds.
 
CREATIVE!11 said:
Fat feminists jealous of attractive young woman who choose to do this.

Colour me shocked..... they basically have put a bunch of woman out of a job.

Edit: For clarity too I don't actually care either way, grid girls or no grid girls can't say i'd ever notice. But I hope we soon ban half naked male calenders. I'm jealous of Tyrone and his washboard abs cut like diamonds.
Click to expand...

Been watching Steve Hughes again? :D
 
krooton said:
Top kek, a handful of females who work(ed) in these roles are suddenly 'a lot' of women.

Guess what, jobs get made redundant ALL THE TIME, capitalism gonna capitalism, if it doesn't make money, it will eventually get scrapped.
Click to expand...

If you had read my comment properly you would have noted that the 'lots of women' was thoose women who don't identity as feminist not necessarily thoose working as a models/promotional staff....

Because shock horror some other women, not themselves involved in these lines of work can still see that its not 'empowering', for women, for one group to tell the others what they can do in the fashion we have seen recently....

Plenty of polls support my assetion that it's only a minority of women that subscribe to feminism

Companies giving into a bullying minority and putting people out of work as a result is not 'capitalism' it's approaching a form of totalitarianism.
 
TallPaul1878 said:
Nice strawman argument there.
Click to expand...

No answer then?

ttaskmaster said:
Remind everyone that people are free to speak out about whatever they think is wrong.... but that doesn't mean you have to actually listen to them!! :D
Click to expand...

That’s the thing though, people don’t have to listen to them, they chose to. No laws, rules or regulations have been changed. The companies involved listened to pressure groups and decided that following them would be better than ignoring them. The pressure groups made a more convincing argument. That is pretty much free speech in action.
 
RDM said:
What is your solution? Tell people they are not allowed to speak out on what they perceive to be wrong?
Click to expand...

So you would be OK with lets say a Christian group getting some homosexual people fired because they worked with children. Because they 'perceived' homosexuality and its exposure to children to be 'wrong'....

How about saying you actually have to make a coherent argument to show why an activity, done by another, is damaging, before lobbying to have people lose their jobs?
 
RDM said:
The companies involved listened to pressure groups and decided that following them would be better than ignoring them. The pressure groups made a more convincing argument. That is pretty much free speech in action.
Click to expand...
Sounds more like appeasement of the overly-vocal minority than anything else. I shout the loudest, so I get my way...
That, or the majority don't bother to voice back because they don't expect anyone would actually listen to the shouty ones.

It's right up there with banning Christmas in the workplace, just in case it offends someone who isn't Christian... even though every non-Christy in the office has already said they don't give a toss either way, so long as they get the time off too!
 
Caracus2k said:
So you would be OK with lets say a Christian group getting some homosexual people fired because they worked with children. Because they 'perceived' homosexuality and its exposure to children to be 'wrong'....

How about saying you actually have to make a coherent argument to show why an activity, done by another, is damaging, before lobbying to have people lose their jobs?
Click to expand...

You really seem to have an issue with homosexuality.... Anyway you can’t fire someone for being gay, it’s a protected characteristic.

Maybe they did make a coherent argument? We have no idea because no one has said who and why F1 have dropped grid girls. A commercial company made a commercial decision. Don’t like it? Lobby to bring grid girls back.
 
RDM said:
That’s the thing though, people don’t have to listen to them, they chose to. No laws, rules or regulations have been changed. The companies involved listened to pressure groups and decided that following them would be better than ignoring them. The pressure groups made a more convincing argument. That is pretty much free speech in action.
Click to expand...

Sorry thats plain nonsence....

If a minority group, who are often not otherwise concerned with an event, can force this sort of change on said event without even being able to provide a coherent argument as to why the event should change then thats not an exercise in 'free speech' but bullying on behalf of the agitators and moral corwardice on behalf of the events organisers/Broadcasters who cave in
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom