scotroutes has form:

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/do-you-think-your-children-are-attractive-serious-thread

Junkyard – you must remember what the judge said last time you were stalking her?

What’s the next target and where is the line? It seems to be that everything and every subject is under the microscope ….. and who’s making money out of all this?

But the opportunity is there for women to be F1 drivers……

You don’t understand the problem. There is one, you just don’t get it.

Grid girls won’t make me return to f1. But replacing the drivers with the grid girls might. Mmmm, boobies under g force.

Why is freely accessible porn acceptable to many posters, but grid girls on pay-to-view F1 not?

What’s the next target and where is the line? It seems to be that everything and every subject is under the microscope ….. and who’s making money out of all this?

Pregnant asthmatic fatties joining the Parachute Regiment, because….everyone should be given the right to kill brown people! 😀

Her majesties finest in 10 years time.

Pregnant asthmatic fatties joining the Parachute Regiment, because….everyone should be given the right to kill brown people!

Straw men can’t jump.

not even on a slippery slope?

😆

not even on a slippery slope?

Not even off the thin end of the wedge.

Why is freely accessible porn acceptable to many posters, but grid girls on pay-to-view F1 not?

In the analogy porn and F1 are the industries, that either is sexist isn’t good.

That porn is far from perfect doesn’t excuse F1. That would be whataboutism.

On a serious note Junkyard, this report

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/389575/20141218_WGCC_Findings_Paper_Final.pdf

was loaded with gems like

Stress fractures. The rate of hip and pelvic stress fractures in men during the Combat
Infantryman’s Course (CIC) is 25.3 per 1000 trainees. The risk of hip and pelvic stress fractures to
women should they undertake the CIC is estimated to be 250 per 1000 trainees (or 1 in 4 female
Infantry trainees); this is an extrapolation and needs to be tested using modelling, based on a
representative sample of the 4.5% of service women capable of passing GCC training.

and

On operations, British female military personnel have a higher
rate of Disease Non-Battle Injury (DNBI) (tri-Service data: 72 per 1000 vs 52 per 1000), than men.
US female soldiers present with more ‘all cause injuries’ on operations than men, in spite of
performing less physical roles. Aerobic fitness decreases more rapidly on operations in US female
soldiers than in men. Women also present post-operationally with more injuries. More women
present to the medical services with mental health conditions, and British female military personnel
are more likely to be admitted for in-patient psychiatric care than men, reflecting the severity of
illness. The graph presents the rate of surviving UK Service Personnel DNBI casualties on Op
HERRICK by gender between 15 April 2007 (the start of HERRICK 6) and 10 June 2014 (the end
of HERRICK 19). The average rate of DNBI casualties on Op HERRICK was 72 per 1,000 females
compared to 52 per 1,000 males. With the exception of HERRICK 10, the rate of DNBI casualties
is higher in females than males for all other roulemont

On recent operations, British female personnel have approximately a
15-20% higher rate of disease non battle injury (DNBI) than their male counterparts.
These higher DNBI rates will be further exacerbated by findings from work on
survivability, that women may sustain a higher combat casualty rate than males, due
the a lower ratio of explosive power in relation to the combat load carried.

I’d love to know how much the army actually really wanted women in front line combat roles and how much of it was politically motivated.

Some women are nice to look at, this is a perfectly natural feeling and important to the continuation of our species – struggling to see a problem if all parties are happy and the women are well treated and compensated.

Some women as nice too look at, this is a perfectly natural feeling and important to the continuation of our species – struggling to see a problem if all parties are happy and the women are well treated and compensated.

Its a matter of context though. The message it sends out to fans is boys can be racing car drivers, girls can wear bikinis and look good for them.

Two wrongs wouldn’t make it right but you don’t see a bloke in Speedo’s holding an sun umbrella and blowing kisses to the camera at female dominated sports do you?

edit – bin dun

I have no problem with it working the other way, I think it does now, male objectification seems to get a free pass these days.

It does not but it is starting to become more common

Some women are nice to look at, this is a perfectly natural feeling and important to the continuation of our species

NO one is denying this but does this feeling need to part of the spectacle of motor sports? It is needed then
Procreation and feeling lustful is necessary for the continuation of the species but we dont do it on the start line of race either as its not appropriate and its an argument that makes no sense

no one is against people being pretty or the genders being attracted to one another or each other or however you wish to express your sexuality The objection is to where you express it,how and what message you send out when doing so

boys can be racing car drivers, girls can wear bikinis and look good for them

It’s not a symmetrical situation. Congratulations on the self-awareness though:

No it probably doesn’t need to be in Motorsport, but it does make it more exciting / glamorous. I fear we are heading towards a very dull period of prudence

that word does not mean what you think it means.
I dont see how anyone thinks the ending of tacky exploitation at sports events will lead to anything other than the ending of tacky exploitation at sport events
Could you explain your reasons ?

It’s only tacky to you because you think it is. It’s like everything these days- people aren’t happy just to hold a different opinion to somebody else! They seek to dominate and destroy anything they’ve decided falls the wrong side of their fundamentalist belief system.

The people who spend money on products that bring the sponsors to F1 must not find it tacky. Business is ruthless and it would be long gone if these companies thought it was harming their sales.

F1 is a global brand. It needs to appeal to blokes in countries where they don’t yet have too many feremones in the water supply! 😆

And how is it exploitation? Can you explain your reasons?

Tacky? Exploitation? The grid girls want to be there because they want to cop off with a driver. That’s objectification. They’re objectifying the male drivers as being suitably attractive and wealthy to be seen with to further their own status. The young, fit, attractive and wealthy drivers should be banned too if the grid girls are; you can’t have one rule for girls and another for men (gross generalisation based on most brolly dollies being female and most drivers being male in F1)

It’s only tacky to you because you think it is

Or not tacky because of what you think – its not really much of a revelation to point out our opinions are our own

Business is ruthless and it would be long gone if these companies thought it was harming their sales

Indeed but that does not mean they think it is morally justifiable it just means that they will do anything to make money even tacky things. Hardly news.

And how is it exploitation? Can you explain your reasons?

exploitation may be a bit strong but its just tacky – its just a pretty girl there for titillation and to look pretty as a womans role is top be decorative etc. You dont have to agree but they are not middle aged fat women or chosen for anything other than their looks – they may need more but that is essential. There are worse things in life for sure but its part of the wider problem.

The grid girls want to be there because they want to cop off with a driver. That’s objectification

No one said that and the rest of your post was so equally wildly off the mark i can only assume you have been drinking or its rubbish humour.

Tacky? Exploitation? The grid girls want to be there because they want to cop off with a driver. That’s objectification. They’re objectifying the male drivers as being suitably attractive and wealthy to be seen with to further their own status. The young, fit, attractive and wealthy drivers should be banned too if the grid girls are; you can’t have one rule for girls and another for men (gross generalisation based on most brolly dollies being female and most drivers being male in F1)

Not to mention they are being exploited to risk their lives for our entertainment.. If I had a daughter I think I’d prefer she was a grid girl then a racing driver, given the perils associated with with each.

Tbh I think it’s more sexiest that people think the woman and getting exploited..it comes across that The poor darlings aren’t able to make their own decisions or protect their own best interests.

This is page 3 – Why is it that some claim only Neanderthal charmless **** wit men with no social skills and low intellect enjoy them

I don’t enjoy them, don’t even watch motorsports. I don’t care if they disappear but I think the girls involved should make the decision, not the self appointed guardians of public morality who seem to think they know what is best for everyone. I get the impression that you probably can’t look at a pretty girl without self flagelatting at the thought of knocking one out.. We aren’t all like that you realise?

I realise that not all of us have the restraint i have and clearly some posters on here are complete ****

DP

For women interested in and motivated by a career in modelling, these are dream tickets. What’s important is that they are treated fairly and not exploited.

I have nothing to hand to back it up but I’m pretty sure that advertisers have proved that pretty or sexy girls enhance a products image for both men and women.

It’s like the ‘real women’ ad campaigns on TV- they are done to play the virtue signalling trump card NOT because it makes women want to buy the product. Otherwise they wouldn’t have to spend the whole advert basically saying “yes, we know these models are fat and a bit ugly but our market research has suggested that some of you guys on twitter think fit-ass models are to blame for your low self esteem so we are cashing in on the latest trend of ramming down everyone’s throats how my beliefs make me a better person/company than yeow!”

And this is the same thing. F1 will review and investigate and ultimately a few years down the line ban grid girls because virtue signalling is now slowly becoming big business. But the only losers will be another closed door to the aspiring models who choose this career.
And the frumpy hand wringers will look elsewhere for something to ban and probably never watch F1 again 😆

steady on

What’s important is that they are treated fairly and not exploited.

Nope.

I have nothing to hand to back it up but I’m pretty sure that advertisers have proved that pretty or sexy girls enhance a products image for both men and women.

Ok – but why?

I will be banning stupidity, crap arguments and lazy insults and force people to explain their views without just insulting those who disagree

threads will be considerably shorter and some folk will be unable to post when all they can use is reason

F1 Grid Girls under review

Are they trying to ban the Grid Girls? Why?

Have they seen all the music videos on youtube with female models? Ban them too? I mean some of them really look like they have been exploited.

molgrips- At a guess, because men think the product will help them secure a mate that looks equally attractive and the women think they will magically become more attractive to a potential mate by associating themselves with the product?

I’m guessing your going to say that’s not good because it means they are sub-consciously devaluing their self worth in order to do so?

Junkyard – lazarus
I will be banning …… lazy insults

Mote. Beam. Eye.

I’ve posted something similar to this before, but I’ll say it again…

It’s far from certain that the grid girls as individuals are being exploited. Likely most have chosen to be there, and are paid.

That’s not justification for the wider context: young pretty girls have been chosen to be there, as decoration. They don’t add to the actual sporting endeavour,

As a viewer, you see that the men (and a tiny minority of female drivers, in lower formulae) are there to drive, the young, pretty, often minimally dressed girls are there to look pretty.

Any girls watching see that. Boys watching see that. It contributes to their understanding of cultural norms. It may dissuade the girls from watching again. It certainly framed how the boys see the role of females in the sport, and the world.

I’d rather kids didn’t grow up watching this sort of differentiation.

As far as where to go from here…

I don’t think grid girls should be ‘banned’. But I do think that organisations like Liberty should chose not to continue with having then there.

That’s a small but very important difference.

And the change sends a good signal to the next generation, and might take 20 years. Think how far things have come in the last 20 years with equality of all sorts, and the change is to everyone’s advantage.
That change comes about because people make changes

The exploitation thing and ‘women losing jobs’, ‘they want to be there’, all seem to be distractions from the issue that are raised by supporters of the status quo, often quite successfully. But they block changes towards a more fair and equitable society.

I’d rather Liberty moved on, and set a fine example while doing it.

mine are not lazy 😉
TBH in this thread they were only replies to insult [its a fair point in general]

I lack the skill to express it like the poster above who says what I mean

Any girls watching see that. Boys watching see that. It contributes to their understanding of cultural norms. It may dissuade the girls from watching again. It certainly framed how the boys see the role of females in the sport, and the world.

I get that arguement, but then kids are exposed to things that influence their understanding of cultural norms in every walk of life, pretty much every time they stick on the tv or open a magazine, or browse the internet. I dont think in today’s society girls grow up without role models or lack opportunity.

Kids see all sorts of things, and many of them include poor examples. Some include good examples.

Why, when you have the opportunity, choose to make things worse when you could choose to make a positive contribution?

Would it really make the experience of watching the race worse if that change was made?

Sport is about being the best, and in doing so is about inspiring the next generation. It is both inspirational and should be aspirational. It should be aspirational for sporting excellence reasons only. Adding glamour as a side product doesn’t fit imo. Kids take a lot away from watching sport. I don’t see how glamour or modelling fits into this.

Would it really make the experience of watching the race worse if that change was made?

Well not for me as I don’t watch the sport. But I imagine that they serve a purpose, i’m sure the glamour and spectacle they provide doesn’t do any harm to viewing figures or revenue.

They are selling a product after all, no different than any other form of advertising in my book.

I do get the point however..what I don’t agree with is the exploitation arguement that others have made.

I’ve posted something similar to this before, but I’ll say it again…

Good post. If people don’t understand that as the reason then they never will. It is all about the wider implications.