Jump to content

Can anyone help me understand?


turbo33
 Share

Recommended Posts

The cries of ‘exploitation’ from the extreme feminist movement have often had me wondering just who is exploiting who? Men have always been suckers for a pretty face and a few curves, and both sexes are well aware of this. If some punter thinks a few curvaceous girls in short skirts will attract the crowds, and then asks a few girls if they are willing to hold a brolly over a racing driver in Monaco and pay them well to do so, is ANYONE being exploited? They’re all there of their own free will, so who exactly is being exploited? 

These are not vulnerable young girls being pushed into something seedy and illegal.

You can argue that this strengthens the argument that men see women as mere sex objects, but again, if the women are there of their own free will then shouldn’t the choice to be there be that individuals, and not a group of militants in parliament, or elsewhere? 

I am heartily sick and tired of this growing trend of people from all walks of life taking it upon themselves to interfere in the life’s of others.

The curator in the Manchester Gallery stated she removed the Waterhouse painting from show ( and all postcards of that painting from the gift shop ) to stimulate a debate about how women were perceived in art. Fair enough, but I’d have been more convinced of her intentions if she hadn’t already dictated what we should be allowed to look at by already removing the painting. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I have learnt something; it seems that modelling is now a noble profession for highly qualified individuals rather than the photoshopped, body image damaging, drug riddled meat grinder it was last week. That’s progress.

The people being exploited are the punters. The paucity of ideas that comes up with the way to sell advanced riveting systems at a trade show is to use hot pants and lip gloss.

Need to interest people in the technological pinnacle of motorsport? Crop tops and Lycra - that’ll bring them in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TIGHTCHOKE said:

Once again, personal choice is to be limited because the liberal masses decide some particular "choice" is wrong, thankfully we are not all the same, but they will attempt to remove individuality and set us up for commonality and uniformity.

Her choice to follow that route and she should be commended for her academic abilities and for doing what she wants to.

As I have said before, 'nothing so illiberal than a liberal with an axe to grind'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In life someone once said "there is no such thing as a free lunch"....Weinstein's alleged victims, the hostesses at the presidents club, the walk on girls, the pit girls, glamour models et al.....they want/wanted something, and they all had a commodity to sell....so if they got the work/job/role/gig whatever? They must have been be prepared to do what was required in order to get that work......that's the deal!.......as indeed any employee in any walk of life sells their talent/expertise to an employer, this talent /expertise could be in the form of, inventiveness, skill, appearance, labour whatever!........But however you dress it up........whatever an individual has to offer.......that's what an individual is selling! And that's what an employer is buying!

Someone else once said "everyone has their price" a price which is determined by what an individual is prepared to do for the money/favours/advancement etc they are offered.....all jobs have got up sides and down sides, and in lawful employment, no one is forced do what they are asked to do to become a movie star, pop singer, hostess, walk on girl, factory worker, glamour model if that person is not prepared to do what they are offered payment/advancement to do.......they can always say no! For those that sold what they had to offer and then complain and pretend they didn't know what they were doing......is to insult people's intelegence!

Since time began women have had something men want, and women have used this commodity to their own advantage....to get what they want! Businesses have harnessed this commodity to promote their own interests such as using hostesses, glamour models, walk on girls, pit girls cheer leaders etc....they couldn't have done this if the women had said no!.....but had the women said no....they also wouldn't have got what they wanted!

Some may wring their hands in disapproval.....but that is the way of the world.......all these celebrity feminists (most of whom have sold what they have/had to offer in order to get up the greasy pole) and feminist activists are doing is poisoning the water for those females who in the future, wish to sell what they have, to achieve what they want!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im sure some of you have already seen the Jordan Petersen/ Cathy Newman interview ,if you havnt its here.

Hes an interesting bloke, and nobodies fool.
What the liberals dont like about him is, he is hard to put a label on, they want to give him a hard/alt right label , but he describes himself as a liberal and condemns the far right.

Ms Newman set about him like a crazed harpy, but he calmly deflects her attacks, with perfect reasoning.

She was really made to look a bit silly, even crazed, and afterward complained his 'army of internet trolls' had issued death threats against her, and the head of security at C4 being called :lol:
It amounted to one twitter user saying 'Cathy Newman RIP' which could easily have meant her career .

Mr Peterson replied hed had death threats too, more than her in fact, so equality was maintained !

Theres lots of stuff on him on youtube if you have time to browse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony is that this year is the centenary of women getting the vote, yet the voice of a few femi-nazis has removed that vote from the grid ladies who have now been made unemployed without being asked how THEY feel about it, what happens when they're removed from all sports and then the only work for them is things like hostesses at the presidents club, who'll cry foul then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, walshie said:

The Weinstein thing and the Presidents Club are different matters. In those cases, women have the right to go about their job without being manhandled. (IMO)

As for the grid girls, walk-on girls etc, if they want to earn a few quid flashing a bit of cleavage fair play to them. The feminists who are protesting about it are jumping on the perpetually-offended bandwagon where everyone is offended by something. I'm offended by having to listen to these crackpots day in, day out. I'm sure if I scoured the papers I could find many more things to be offended by.

As an aside, back in the day, a girlfriend's sister was a radical feminist (who incidentally wore flat shoes and didn't seem to like men much). One day when we were walking into a shop somewhere, I held the door open for her and she went off ranting about "not needing a man to hold the door for her." That's crazy as I have held the door for both sexes when appropriate. That isn't feminism, that's grabbing an  idea you don't properly understand and using it to further your own weird views. Suffice to say I loved letting doors smash her in the face after that. 

If someone wanted to offer me a job as a grid-boy, who's going to stop me doing it? I can supply my own umbrella, cycle shorts and string vest. (Job offers by p.m please )

Photos first please in the outfit as described.:good:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, walshie said:

The Weinstein thing and the Presidents Club are different matters. In those cases, women have the right to go about their job without being manhandled. (IMO)

As for the grid girls, walk-on girls etc, if they want to earn a few quid flashing a bit of cleavage fair play to them.

The absolutely fundamental point I believe.  Darts walk on girls or F1 grid girls are doing a job, yes it is about being eye candy glamour and objectification to some degree, but they are choosing to do that job and not being abused or exploited just because of the job they are doing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like a pretty woman as much as the next bloke, (and i can assure you i have had many of them) BUT what is the point of a pretty girl holding an umbrella over a racing driver... I don't get it, It's totally pointless as is any other similar role.

I also don't get strippers, glamour models, pole dancers. who in there right mind would pay to watch a woman swing around a pole or take there clothes off and have no interaction with said woman. I want to look at and interact with women, oh and I don't want to pay for the privilege either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Scully said:

I think the point of the umbrellas is to keep the sun directly off a contestant as he sits on a starting grid in his crash hat, leathers ( or highly insulated fireproof suit ) in high temperatures. 

Ah, that makes sense ?

they could of course have a high tec gizmo that the pit crew put over the driver....just a though ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...