It helps.
People who object to this on the basis that it sends wrong signals to their kids should raise their children a bit better and leave everyone else alone.
Being a good parent goes like this:
"See how the women are just standing around looking pretty whilst the men are doing the exciting stuff? It doesn't have to be like that. Women can do exciting stuff too, they aren't just pretty things"
"But Dad, why do they only have women looking pretty and only men driving?"
"Because some people still think that racing is a men's thing and women are just pretty things"
"That's wrong, and it upsets me that people think that about me. I want to make things better when I grow up."
So then they grow up and campaign for change, and get criticised by people like you *because* they were brought up well. Can't win really, can we?
[quote=rene59 ]People who object to this on the basis that it sends wrong signals to their kids should raise their children a bit better and leave everyone else alone.
It will be quite difficult to argue societal norms dont affect children irrespective of the parents efforts. Still I am wiling to read your attempt.
Let's suppose a ban is implemented. If I were a driver and it was particularly sunny of wet I would want someone there keeping me in the shade or dry, couldn't give a toss if it's Mick the mechanic in his overalls or his Missus in a dress (or any other team member or friend) .... or maybe they are wearing team shirts or something else with advertising on it ...... and maybe especially if it's hot they choose to wear something like a vest and shorts.
So, like I said, where do you draw the line?
molgrips - MemberPeople who object to this on the basis that it sends wrong signals to their kids should raise their children a bit better and leave everyone else alone.
Being a good parent goes like this:
"See how the women are just standing around looking pretty whilst the men are doing the exciting stuff? It doesn't have to be like that. Women can do exciting stuff too, they aren't just pretty things"
"But Dad, why do they only have women looking pretty and only men driving?"
"Because some people still think that racing is a men's thing and women are just pretty things"
"That's wrong, and it upsets me that people think that about me. I want to make things better when I grow up."So then they grow up and campaign for change, and get criticised by people like you *because* they were brought up well. Can't win really, can we?
Best Molgrips post ever tbh
Balance is the answer but as with most aspects of 21st century life, society just seems to swing wildly from one extreme to the other.
Well it's only a small percentage who think like that, most people can get their heads around the fact that some women want to be drivers and some want to stand around looking pretty. No one is forcing anyone to do either, they could even do both if they wanted to."See how the women are just standing around looking pretty whilst the men are doing the exciting stuff? It doesn't have to be like that. Women can do exciting stuff too, they aren't just pretty things"
"But Dad, why do they only have women looking pretty and only men driving?"
"Because some people still think that racing is a men's thing and women are just pretty things"
"That's wrong, and it upsets me that people think that about me. I want to make things better when I grow up."
Women can be F1 drivers, nothing stopping them if they have the talent and resources to do so. Nothing stopping men standing around looking pretty either if there is a market for them to do so.
Still don't see the problem, I'm sure the women 'just standing around pretty' work hard in order to maintain their appearance, who's to say what they are doing isn't exicitng to them?
[quote=rene59 ]People who object to this on the basis that it sends wrong signals to their kids should raise their children a bit better and leave everyone else alone.
Good point - I'll not let my kids watch F1 or anything else with podium girls then. That appears to be the only obvious way to "raise my kids better" so that they don't get sent the wrong signals.
[url= https://www.ted.com/talks/christiane_amanpour_how_to_seek_truth_in_the_era_of_fake_news?utm_campaign=social&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_content=talk&utm_term=global-social%20issues ]This is relevant for this and many other subjects![/url]
17 minutes of your time, have a coffee.
Male-dominated forum in "not getting everyday casual sexism" shocker.
[quote=rene59 ]Well it's only a small percentage who think like that
Tyranny of the masses who are happy to accept casual sexism?
Women can be F1 drivers, nothing stopping them if they have the talent and resources to do so. Nothing stopping men standing around looking pretty either if there is a market for them to do so.
Yeah, that's definitely the impression a casual observer (or say a child - though it seems molgrips' kids understand better than you do) would get from seeing the grid at a Grand Prix.
Men deciding what women can and can't do with their lives isn't sexist at all. 🙄
We should probably remove all the displays of wealth from the sport as well then as it gives the impression only the wealthy can participate.Yeah, that's definitely the impression a casual observer (or say a child - though it seems molgrips' kids understand better than you do) would get from seeing the grid at a Grand Prix.
Page 5 and no grid girl ratings? 😯
Lucy Pinder from Alonso's days at Renault...
Out of ten, I'd definitely give her one, no questions asked. 😯 😈
Oh, not that type of review of grid girls. 😉
which men the men of F1 who hire them or the men on this forum who object?
The most backward looking people in this thread are those suggesting that women who've chosen modelling for a career are inferior to those who've chosen to drive a stupid car in circles.
Even male drivers aren't chosen purely for their ability in the car! Where are all the ugly ones??
In a big money sporting enterprise, you are a commercial asset and need to look good on TV whether you have a steering wheel or an umbrella in your hands.
Women can be F1 drivers, nothing stopping them if they have the talent and resources to do so.
Doesn't sound like you've really thought about society much.
Women are often dissuaded from doing certain things because from a very young age they are conditioned to think that some things are for girls and some.for boys. Just look around a toy shop. They have a boys section and a girls section, FFS.
Kids learn from the world around them. And when the world teaches them sexism things, it gets baked into everyone's minds, so they don't notice it any more. Like you rene59.
Same as how there are so few women snooker players. You think that's because women are inferior?
I think that's nonsense. Men and women are not intrinsically motivated in the same ways.
http://time.com/4322947/men-women-sports-evolution/
this is ****ing nutsEven male drivers aren't chosen purely for their ability in the car! Where are all the ugly ones??
Obvs a model is chosen for their appearance obviously a driver is chosen for their driving ability - and possibly ability to fund their drive/sponsorship.
Their looks are neither her nor there and anyway who thinks it is is either making a poor joke or has very poor understanding
Do you dress and have your hair styled in a gender neutral fashion? Do you wear dresses from time to time to set a good example?Kids learn from the world around them. And when the world teaches them sexism things, it gets baked into everyone's minds, so they don't notice it any more. Like you rene59.
I see and recognise plenty of sexism. I don't believe having a girls toys section and a boys toy section is sexist. Telling a girl she couldn't have a boys toy is. Nothing wrong in my opinion of having two separate genders with different likes and dislikes and individuals free to choose from either or both. Whether society created that or responded to natural lines I don't think you could say conclusively either way. I believe that people should be who or what they like and they should have the freedom to do so.
Did you read your own link?Men and women are not intrinsically motivated in the same ways.
None of this means that socialization, gender bias and all of the other cultural variables are not at work in the largely male world of sport. “An evolutionary approach is fully compatible with socialization playing a large role,” the researchers write, and so it is
At least quite the whole paragraph Junkyard 🙄
Play has always been a big part of the life of all humans, and sports can be a big part of play. But that doesn’t mean the genders don’t still do it in many different ways—and for many different reasons.
It doesn't change the fact that the motivation is different. Women just aren't interested in sport as much as men even when participation is largely equalised.
Similarly, the fact that there are far fewer women than men who earn their livelihoods playing sports can be viewed as an effect, rather than a cause, of lesser female sports interest. For example, the premier men’s basketball league in the U.S., the National Basketball Association (NBA), has sponsored a women’s professional league (WNBA) since 1997, and the attendance and viewership is a small fraction of the NBA’s and has not grown [114]. Similarly, in the late 1990s a magazine was launched called Sports Illustrated Women (SI Women). SI Women was targeted to appeal to girls and women who wanted follow high-level women’s sports in the way that Sports Illustrated caters to the interests of male sports fans. However, publication of SI Women ceased in 2002 because there was not a market to support it [115], [116]. Other magazines focusing on elite female athletes have also failed to gain large readerships [115].
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0049168
The exercise results indicate that both males and females are motivated to be physically active, but that males are generally more interested in pursuing this in a competitive way
Another reason perhaps why Darts, Snooker and Motorsports aren't intrinsically motivating for women- they don't provide the exercise fulfilment and only appeal to a males innate desire to prove their qualities over their rivals?
Another set of studies addressed historical convergence in a less direct fashion, focusing on sex differences in willingness to train competitively in distance running. Deaner [85], [107], [108] showed that, although the number females that participate in distance running in the U.S. has grown steadily since the 1970s, so that there is no longer a sex difference in participation, there are still roughly three times as many males that run fast relative to sex-specific world class standards. For example, in a typical local 5 K road race with equal male and female participation, for every female that finishes within 25% of the female world record, there are roughly three males that finish within 25% of the male world record. This pattern holds robustly for elite runners and non-elite (i.e., recreational) runners, and tests reveal no indication that the sex difference in the number of relatively fast performers has diminished over the past few decades. Because relative running performance is an equally strong predictor of training volume (e.g., kilometers/week) in men and women [109], these patterns indicate that the sex difference in willingness to train competitively is large and stable [85], [107], [108]. Apparently, the large increase in female runners has mainly involved those who run for non-competitive reasons; most competitive females were already competing by the 1980s or early 1990s.
More evidence that men are predisposed to race each other and women aren't.
It still does not prove what you claimed, being kind it partially proves itAt least quite the whole paragraph Junkyard
It really does not say that and the link is there for anyone who can comprehend to readIt doesn't change the fact that the motivation is different. Women just aren't interested in sport as much as men even when participation is largely equalised.
Obvs a model is chosen for their appearance obviously a driver is chosen for their driving ability - and possibly ability to fund their drive/sponsorship.
Their looks are neither her nor there and anyway who thinks it is is either making a poor joke or has very poor understanding
No it's not (**** nuts). Even Suzy Wolff admits it.
As a racing driver, you're representing a brand and your appearance is part of your job
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/18332772
The article:
the hard hand of evolution plays at least as much of a role in sports interest and participation as policy does—and quite possibly a greater one. And that, like it or not, tips the balance in favor of males.
Me:
It doesn't change the fact that the motivation is different. Women just aren't interested in sport as much as men even when participation is largely equalised.
Junkyard:
It really does not say that and the link is there for anyone who can comprehend to read
Hey? It clearly does say that ???
The most backward looking people in this thread are those suggesting that women who've chosen modelling for a career are inferior to those who've chosen to drive a stupid car in circles.
This.
I'm chuckling that people who admit they have been conditioned by society to regard driving in F1 as being more 'exciting' than posing in a skimpy outfit, want to ban people from posing because brainwashing makes them regard posing as less meritorious than driving fast.
In a world riddled with gender bias do the posters on here that are against grid girls let their children watch films where the male is the hero and the woman is the damsel in distress, as portrayed in so many films? Genuine question.. There are many more examples.
Another question slightly unrelated .. Is the lack of females in top motor sports due to perception, or other reasons. Guys are bigger risk takers than girls afterall (in general).. Couple that with the fact that I imagine most racers are introduced to it fairly early by their dads and it's no surprise that the pool of female talent is so small.
There are many more examples.
Yes, there are 1,000's of examples - that is the scale of the issue!
Yet in the study above, when participation is equalised, it still doesn't lead to more women competing?
Is the lack of females in top motor sports due to perception, or other reasons.
Zero men go to SWMBO's "Stitch and Bitch" sewing/knitting nights. The S+Bers are concerned that men have been conditioning into liking Mountain Biking and think it should be banned to allow Men to enjoy a more valid pass-time like knitting.
Yes, there are 1,000's of examples - that is the scale of the issue!
Is it really an issue though? I know one girl who has been a grid girl.. She loved it. But she is also a university educated, extremely intelligent lady with a very successful career.
Let's not think that girls, regardless of age, are limited by what some people see as cultural bias. I'm going to go out on a limb and give them slightly more credit than that.
For what it's worth I sent her a link to this thread. She sent me back a set of rolling eyes as a response..
I don't believe having a girls toys section and a boys toy section is sexist. Telling a girl she couldn't have a boys toy is.
But that's exactly what segregated toy stores do! They make it clear that this is boys stuff, and it dissuaded girls from wanting it. It makes (some) girls feel that they are being weird or unusual by wanting boy marketed toys. And this is negative. As I say, kids take their cues growing up from all around them. The comments you hear from parents and grandparents constantly reinforce this. I never noticed it til I had girls.
For what it's worth I sent her a link to this thread. She sent me back a set of rolling eyes as a response..
Not all women are feminists. Think about what this means...
Don't worry, Junkyard will soon tell you what she really meant. Afterall he knows what women think more than they do themselves.For what it's worth I sent her a link to this thread. She sent me back a set of rolling eyes as a response..
Just like clothes shops then?But that's exactly what segregated toy stores do! They make it clear that this is boys stuff, and it dissuaded girls from wanting it. It makes (some) girls feel that they are being weird or unusual by wanting boy marketed toys. And this is negative.
In a world riddled with gender bias do the posters on here that are against grid girls let their children watch films where the male is the hero and the woman is the damsel in distress, as portrayed in so many films?
Yes. But we censor the more egregiously sexist films and we go out of our way to find films with positive gender bias. And our kids are aware of sexism and feminism.
My daughter has often been told "but that's girls stuff" or "really? Not many girls like that" or had some other comment. It doesn't have to be a negative comment, even positive ones point out that it is abnormal behaviour and that is negative.
Do you really think that the profit driven toy trade would eliminate 50% of their potential market if they thought they could sell more plastic tat to the opposite sex!!??!!
Perhaps the answer is the market doesn't exist because the sexes ARE different!!
Just like clothes shops then?
Yes. Try finding superhero clothes for little girls that aren't pink or tokenistic.
Do you really think that the profit driven toy trade would eliminate 50% of their potential market if they thought they could sell more plastic tat to the opposite sex!!??!!
Segregation allows them to sell more crap. A boy doesn't want a girl bike hand me down, does he? Cos they've invented this boy/girl division. They've trained girls to want the pink crap version and the boy not to.
There might be differences between sexes (and you know, this has been studied a bit) but even if there you cannot assume that any given child will like this or that based on gender. Because even if there is a difference it is not 100% on either side.
Just like clothes shops then?Yes. Try finding superhero clothes for little girls that aren't pink or tokenistic.
Well you could get them from the boys section. Just like if I wanted to wear some hot pink nail varnish I'd go to the womens section of the shop. I don't see a problem with this. The segregation is there for convenience. I would have a problem if someone said I couldn't wear hot pink nail varnish as that's for women.
Like I asked before. Do you wear clothes for men? If so why do you expect other people to give up their ambitions and wants for the sake of setting an example to your kids whilst you don't?
[quote=crosshair ]As a racing driver, you're representing a brand and your appearance is part of your job
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/18332772
br />
appearance != looks - of course you're expected to look presentable rather than scruffy, but since you seem to be taking this "where are the ugly drivers" seriously, then I give you Alain Prost and Niki Lauda (just off the top of my head).
Though I'm curious whether you read the whole of that article, or just cherry picked. From further down:
One of the main issues is that young girls have no one to aspire to growing up, whereas a young boy can grow up wanting to be Sebastian Vettel
How do you think grid girls is helping this?
[quote=rene59 ]Do you wear clothes for men?
No - I'm currently wearing what I regularly see lots of women wearing.
It's giving the girls that want to be models something to aspire to. Removing them won't increase the number of female drivers!!!!
#strangestNo - I'm currently wearing what I regularly see lots of women wearing.
My little girl likes dresses, pink stuff dolls and other girly stuff. My boys liked that too. Sophie also beats the crap out of the two boys, shoots them with nerf guns and likes to ride her bike. If she wanted to be a brolly dolly that's up to her just like if she wanted to race cars. As for getting rid of brolly dollies is somthing I don't agree with. I don't care if they are there or not but it's not our place to say they can't do it. Men and woman are, on the most part, in stringently different. Our genes take care of the most primal ways. Ive met loads of promo girls / brolly dollies when I used to do photography and they loved it.
