What I don't want is event organisers to hire women to make the place look pretty whilst not giving a shit about women's competition.My whole argument is against things that reinforce sexist attitudes. Because subtle passive sexism reduces women's options. I do not want to reduce women's options and I don't want anything banned.
That doesn't make sense. Organisers give a shit about what makes them cash. It's a business. Susie Wolff clearly hasn't felt disqualified from indulging her motor racing habit by the presence of grid girls any more than Hamilton would suddenly feel undermined by the Grid guy above.
Your whole argument is based on a smug opinion of what constitutes sexism. Paying a glamorous model a fair wage to enhance my brand is not inherently sexist. That's the flaw in your logic. If nobody has been excluded from holding that position based on their gender then it's not sexist.
By referring to it as 'subtle' or 'passive' you are just making excuses for the fact it's just your opinion. It's a business arrangement between the viewer, the sponsor, the team, the promoters and the model- beyond choosing not to watch, you have no grounds on which to object. You are simply being a bigot.
Given the amount of posters who said they don't even watch motorsport then I doubt it.Perhaps the others need to flash a bit more flesh then and we would all know about them
Take a look down here in Oz, Netball live on TV, Womens AFL - just launched and live on TV getting good viewing figures, Women's Ashes delivering a massive increase in attendance and viewing, you have many other sports getting great viewing and participation and wins fought for just as hard as the men do.
But who's watching? In Germany, 68% of the viewers of woman's football are men. [s]waiting for them to swap shirts at full time[/s]
It's the audience demographic that drives sponsorship.
But who's watching?
People, back to the old argument that you need x million viewers before you show it on TV. Who's watching whatever repeated drivel is on sky sports 11 at the moment, they have the bandwidth to show repeats of dull games why not showcase a lot more.
The main reason seems to be not to offend men.
[quote=outofbreath ]You think women shouldn't look at attractive women in Marie Claire, so you want to ban it.
[img] 
[/img]
and so is:
[quote=crosshair ]Susie Wolff clearly hasn't felt disqualified from indulging her motor racing habit by the presence of grid girls any more than Hamilton would suddenly feel undermined by the Grid guy above.
(as has been pointed out repeatedly - but you guys like arguing that irrelevant point because it's one where you feel on safe ground)
[quote=crosshair ]Your whole argument is based on a smug opinion of what constitutes sexism. Paying a glamorous model a fair wage to enhance my brand is not inherently sexist. That's the flaw in your logic. If nobody has been excluded from holding that position based on their gender then it's not sexist.
Hmm, so you're saying that if it is something people have been excluded from based on their gender then it is sexist...
By referring to it as 'subtle' or 'passive' you are just making excuses for the fact it's just your opinion.
Nope - it has also been explained repeatedly on this thread, I suggest you go and reread rather than make up your own interpretations of things to suit your agenda.
I wonder how the super feminists feel about fashion models, nude sculpture or paintings of the female form.
The idea that society can't celebrate beauty and also promote gender equality is nonsense.
g5604 - MemberI wonder how the super feminists feel about fashion models, nude sculpture or paintings of the female form.
I won't link them to my back catalogue of photographs then lol
Name all the famous female drivers who are role models for them then
that is so sexist - since when does a role model have to be the same sex as you are.
By referring to it as 'subtle' or 'passive' you are just making excuses for the fact it's just your opinion.
Do you think it's just me making this up? Do you think I just pulled this idea out of my arse one morning?
This discussion has been going on for quite a while...
In this context- yes. You seem to have adopted 'socially oppressed victims of sexism' as a family badge of honour.
Scantily clad grid girls are not stopping women from driving racing cars.
Removing grids girls won't promote female racers.
There are very good evolutionary reasons why society has eveolved in the way it has. Banning stuff a few snowflakes find offfensive will not undo this.
In a free society, the ratio of women to men in some things will be 80/20 and in another it may be 20/80.
There will never be a huge percentage of women motor racers- it just doesn't scratch their itch like it does for men. This is not sexist- it's genetic. As long as the ones that do endeavour to compete are encouraged equally and treated fairly then it's not sexist.
Scantily clad grid girls do not prove that aspiring female race drivers are having to overcome unnecessary hurdles.
Of course it bloody does!
In your opinion 😉There are very good evolutionary reasons why society has eveolved in the way it has.
We dont have pit girls for evolutionary reasons anymore than we have the internet and trolls* for evolutionary reasons. you seem to think every aspect of social life is for evolutionary reasons, its not. I have no idea why you would think this or think its a reasonable answer to every problem posed to you. Have you got an evolutionary reasons for why we evolved to side step questions by simply saying evolution innit ? 😉
apart form the hurdle where their only role in the sport is to be the scantily clad girl.Scantily clad grid girls do not prove that aspiring female race drivers are having to overcome unnecessary hurdles.
* I am not accusing you of trolling but we cannot fall back on hard to prove evolutionary reasons for any behaviour we currently observe in humanity
I think it's all too easy to blame "society", "the patriachy" etc etc. Start closer to home. Give your daughters a wide range of experiences, be proactive, tell her she can be whatever she wants to be whether it's a grid girl, a scientist, an air hostess,an engineer or whatever, then FOLLOW THROUGH. When she finds something she enjoys and is good at, go all in to help her achieve her dream. Stop looking to someone else to "permit" it.
Creating a constant negative narrative of "society stops you" etc is hardly an empowering and encouraging way to motivate someone is it?
apart form the hurdle where their only role in the sport is to be the scantily clad girl.
And yet the Woman In Motorsport ambassador who has actually driven at the top level of motorsport thinks otherwise.
You know you had to use both the singular and use the past tense for her driving dont you.
Junkyard- Of course we can- evolution hasn't stopped!
It's my own idea yes but it doesn't take much googling to back it up.
You honestly think there's no genetic pay off for a woman looking glamorous? The reason a predominantly male sport with a male fan base is enhanced by the presence of attractive women is the epitome of the evolution explanation! It's just designed to further enhance the testosterone boost you get as a male fan when your team wins by association. (See stuff I linked earlier)
Where does freedom of choice come into this? Have the grid girls been coerced or press-ganged into the role? Are they able to say 'yes' or 'no' to the job vacancy? Are they remunerated to a level which they individually find acceptable?
Are the Chippendales still going? Have any of you been to one of their shows? The objectification there makes the grid girl issue an interesting one.
The ladies are not scantily clad. They have a shirt and a top on. You see their arms and a bit above the knee. I see more skin on triathlete males
WTF are you talking about? Who said it had?evolution hasn't stopped!
Who said that - not you nor me again WTF are you talking about ?You honestly think there's no genetic pay off for a woman looking glamorous?
Have you got an evolutionary reason for why you never address the point made and simply deliver bucket loads of straw?
this was what you said and its not true.There are very good evolutionary reasons why society has eveolved in the way it has.
Are the Chippendales still going? Have any of you been to one of their shows? The objectification there makes the grid girl issue an interesting one.
[img] 
[/img]
The argument is not that modeling, stripping, porn or whatever is wrong (that's a different topic). The point is about grid girls.
Tits and ass (and willies if that's your thing too) are awesome. If people want to exchange money to see them that's fine.
The problem is when a TV spectacle seen by millions of kids is as polarised as it is. Then people grow up with attitudes like:
There are very good evolutionary reasons why society has eveolved in the way it has. Banning stuff a few snowflakes find offfensive will not undo this.
I'm pretty sure just paraphrased the Confederacy's justification for slavery.
[quote=g5604 ]I wonder how the super feminists feel about fashion models, nude sculpture or paintings of the female form.
The idea that society can't celebrate beauty and also promote gender equality is nonsense.
[quote=slackalice ]Are the Chippendales still going? Have any of you been to one of their shows? The objectification there makes the grid girl issue an interesting one.
I reckon I'm going to get a whole field full of strawmen out of this thread
In various states of undress, for your pleasure, for evolutionary reasons 😉
That's rubbish right there and shows up that you know nothing about what you are talking about. There are many women involved at every level of F1 from marshalling right up to team management, including team bosses.apart form the hurdle where their only role in the sport is to be the scantily clad girl.
We dont have pit girls for evolutionary reasons anymore than we have the internet and trolls* for evolutionary reasons. you seem to think every aspect of social life is for evolutionary reasons, its not. I have no idea why you would think this or think its a reasonable answer to every problem posed to you. Have you got an evolutionary reasons for why we evolved to side step questions by simply saying evolution innit ?
I think there are quite obvious evolutionary undertones to nearly everything we do. I've backed this up with some links that agree.
I don't think motorsport needs to change because for the reasons I've explained at length already, it's not ever going to be a level playing field. Women just don't care about participating in and following motorsport in the same way.
It's not sexist for a sport to be male dominated in participation and presentation if it's statistically done and followed mainly by men!!
You moral crusaders are only seeking to tidy it up to fit your own flawed assumptions.
[quote=crosshair ]I don't think motorsport needs to change because for the reasons I've explained at length already, it's not ever going to be a level playing field. Women just don't care about participating in and following motorsport in the same way.
Woo, another one for my field
It's not sexist for a sport to be male dominated in participation and presentation if it's statistically done and followed mainly by men!!
So if a sport is male dominated in participation and support, let's not bother to do anything at all to change that, because you might upset all those red blooded real men who follow it?
Women just don't care about participating in and following motorsport in the same way.
Some women do. This is the while problem right here. You think you know what all women want and are prepared to defend the decisions of men about women.
SOME women do want to compete. But they don't get a fair crack of the whip (thinking cycling mainly here) just because men like you think that they don't deserve one.
Men are in control here aren't they?
Are the Chippendales still going? Have any of you been to one of their shows? The objectification there makes the grid girl issue an interesting one.
Well no, because a strip show is purely for that purpose. You only go if you want to see scantily clad men.
F1 is supposed to be a sport, not a T&A show. If it wants to be that, it can GTFO the telly.
SOME women do want to compete. But they don't get a fair crack of the whip (thinking cycling mainly here) just because men like you think that they don't deserve one.Men are in control here aren't they?
Yes men ARE in charge here. The dads.
If my daughter wanted to do something where there was a perceived blocker, I could either cry about society, the patriachy and oppression, or step up and get the blocker out of the way.
You have indeed I have not disputed that but again you missed the point. I would repeat it but i know the outcome if i do.I think there are quite obvious evolutionary undertones to nearly everything we do. I've backed this up with some links that agree.
That assumption is deeply flawed as well. Much of what we do is socialisation, culture, history etc hence why we have such diversity in human beings, attitudes and culture, the world over, yet all are still evolving. Not everything is an ESS.
and you are only justifying it because you think every single thing we see today is the end product of evolution which is self evidently incorrect and a flawed assumption.You moral crusaders are only seeking to tidy it up to fit your own flawed assumptions.
there will now be joey essex's walking around the pits taking pout selfies of themselves, while wearing a pair of jeans that cuts the blood off to their testes
Right as fun as this has been, I'm going to knock down some of those strawmen in an attempt to move this debate on:
1) Nobody is suggesting that there will ever be a 50/50 split in drivers on the F1 grid - we all agree that women aren't naturally so predisposed to sport.
2) Nobody is suggesting that the grid girls are a direct impediment to women who are already racing cars getting a F1 drive.
3) The existence of scantily clad women (or men) in situations where the whole point is scantily clad women or men (ie burlesque shows, womens magazines etc.) is irrelevant.
anybody using one of those lazy arguments is going to get referred back to this post
I wish you the very best in overcoming the sexism inherent in society - let us know when you have defeated it all will you?I could either cry about society, the patriachy and oppression, or step up and get the blocker out of the way
Some women do
Yes and they are able to progress as far as they their ability takes them. The lack of F1 professional drivers is nothing more than a statistical fact.
F1 is not broken.
...and as a supplementary for those using such arguments, the actual point is as follows:
We're not expecting a 50/50 split, simply at not discouraging those smaller % of women who are interested in such things (the lower % of women interested in such things doesn't mean that none are)
Grid girls aren't a direct impediment, it's more subtle than that (way too subtle for some of you lot who just like to look at pretty girls). What they are is part of a theme which implies that women's role is to stand around and look pretty (yes I do follow motorsport, I know about Claire Williams*, but she is a rarity like Susie, most of the presented image of women in F1 is them standing around looking pretty).
* being a red blooded male with certain fairly normal tastes I appreciate the presence of Claire Williams - it's not about suppressing such feelings
[quote=crosshair ]Yes and they are able to progress as far as they their ability takes them. The lack of F1 professional drivers is nothing more than a statistical fact.
F1 is not broken.
Well that didn't take long http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/f1-grid-girls-under-review/page/9#post-8912297 point 2
I wish you the very best in overcoming the sexism inherent in society - let us know when you have defeated it all will you?
I'm not talking about changing society. I'm talking about proactive parenting and ensuring nothing holds my kids back from pursuing what they want.
If everyone got their head down and dealt with the micro level things like empowering their own children, rather than virtue signalling, we'd have a stronger society where people felt able to do what they wanted, if they found their niche and worked hard, supported by their parents.
The fact that this whole debate revolves round f1 is a bit bizarre really..
Molgrips house in ten years time when grid girls have been banned..
'daddy...can I be an f1 driver one day.. There's no reason that a woman couldn't be successful in this sport, and you have always tought me that about gender bias etc etc.. Can I give it a go?'
Molgrips.. 'don't be daft... It's ridiculously expensive and normal people can't afford it... .'
'but daddy.. You said I could do anything I wanted...'
Molgrips..'hang on a moment darling.. Let me quickly log in to stw and try to get rich people banned....'
Exactly.
Let's say I have a son and a daughter both interested in becoming an F1 driver. In what way would my daughter face greater obstacles than my son?
[quote=andyrm ]I'm not talking about changing society. I'm talking about proactive parenting and ensuring nothing holds my kids back from pursuing what they want.
Good luck with equal opportunities for your kids who didn't go to Eton and Oxbridge - you're right, no need to change society.
If everyone got their head down and dealt with the micro level things like empowering their own children, rather than virtue signalling, we'd have a stronger society where people felt able to do what they wanted, if they found their niche and worked hard, supported by their parents.
Are supporting your kids and wanting to change society mutually exclusive? Though you win a special prize for distilling the argument about casual sexism down to "virtue signalling".
[quote=crosshair ]Exactly.
Let's say I have a son and a daughter both interested in becoming an F1 driver. In what way would my daughter face greater obstacles than my son?
This thread would be two pages long if all the straw men posts were removed
Have you forgotten all the evolutionary reasons you cited - you are now in the novel position of not agreeing with yourself......I assume their is an evolutionary reason for this as well ?In what way would my daughter face greater obstacles than my son?
then this can never happenI'm not talking about changing society.
I could either cry about society, the patriachy and oppression, or step up and get the blocker out of the way
If a young girl looked at F1 and decided that due to seeing grid girls the only role for her was as a grid girl then she likely isn't going to be cut out for F1 racing anyway.
Oops forgot one:
4) Nobody is suggesting grid girls directly makes other girls think that is their only possible role, it's more subtle than that
[quote=Junkyard ]This thread would be two pages long if all the straw men posts were removed
How about if you also removed all [s]my[/s] the posts pointing out the straw men?
