• Motor racing-Endurance series calls time on 'Grid Girls'
    69 replies, posted
[b]Motor racing-Endurance series calls time on 'Grid Girls'[/b] Source: [url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/04/02/motor-racing-grid-idUKL3N0WZ4J620150402]Reuters[/url] _______________ [quote][img]http://i.imgur.com/9l8KpkD.jpg[/img] (Reuters) - The world endurance championship, whose annual highlight is the Le Mans 24 Hours sportscar classic, is getting rid of the 'grid girls'. In a move that will be applauded by many, and is sure to dismay those accustomed to seeing scantily-clad beauties posing next to cars before a race, the FIA-backed series is adopting a more progressive stance. "From Silverstone next week, you will see that for any race we will do -- no grid girls like in the past," WEC chief executive Gerard Neveu told Reuters after a presentation on Thursday for the opening Silverstone six-hour race. "For me that is the past. The condition of women is a little bit different now," he said. The use of models, also referred to as 'race queens' or 'umbrella girls', to stand by cars with flags or placards displaying drivers' numbers has long been a feature of Formula One. It has also been a bone of contention for those seeking more equality and less sexism in a male-dominated sport, although in some series where women racers have joined the grid the 'umbrella' role has been taken by a man.[/quote] Thank goodness they freed those poor enslaved women from the oppressive reach of Bernie and co, forced to be grid girls - oh wait. On a more serious note, as a long-time petrolhead, I wasn't entirely indifferent towards grid girls, but I never disliked them either. They're all models standing there for advertising purposes, because their image helps sell a product better, and none of them were there against their will. If anything, lots of models are losing their job. So I kinda have mixed feelings about this. [editline]3rd April 2015[/editline] Bernie also said, in an interview, that [url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/f1news/11502589/Bernie-Ecclestone-mulls-over-all-women-world-championship.html]he's interested in having more women in motorsports[/url] but they just don't show up, to the point that he'd encourage a special series, but not for sexist reasons. [quote]"I thought it would be a good idea to give them a showcase," Ecclestone said. "For some reason, women are not coming through - and not because we don't want them. Of course we do, because they would attract a lot of attention and publicity and probably a lot of sponsors." [/quote] A damn shame, honestly... because being into cars is not a "boys only" club, and it never was. If there are women flying fighter jets, then I'm sure they could handle the stresses of road racing... but only a very small minority is interested in motorsports.
This is okay. You can make all of the arguments you want, but I feel that hiring people to stand next to stuff and be hot is weird.
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;47448367]This is okay. You can make all of the arguments you want, but I feel that hiring people to stand next to stuff and be hot is weird.[/QUOTE] Well that's promotional modeling / exhibition staff. These girls make a living out of it, just like male models make a living out of posing in underwear, instead of standing next to a racecar. I see nothing wrong with that.
[QUOTE]"I thought it would be a good idea to give them a showcase," Ecclestone said. "For some reason, women are not coming through - and not because we don't want them. Of course we do, because they would attract a lot of attention and publicity and probably a lot of sponsors."[/QUOTE] Who would have thought that men and women have different interests. Dayum. So what are these beauties gonna do now for a living?
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;47448367]This is okay. You can make all of the arguments you want, but I feel that hiring people to stand next to stuff and be hot is weird.[/QUOTE] plenty of women in that industry got mega pissed when one gaming event had banned booth girls meaning they didn't get an extra side of cash because other women don't like it.
[QUOTE=codemaster85;47448512]plenty of women in that industry got mega pissed when one gaming event had banned booth girls meaning they didn't get an extra side of cash because other women don't like it.[/QUOTE] Nonononono, you've got it all wrong. It's not about women being able to do whatever they want to do or having choices as to what their careers are.
Now they're unemployed just because they're female. Way to go, Wonder Endurance Championship. [i]Misogynists.[/i]
[QUOTE=codemaster85;47448512]plenty of women in that industry got mega pissed when one gaming event had banned booth girls meaning they didn't get an extra side of cash because other women don't like it.[/QUOTE] It's always the fat, unattractive and insufferable legbeards who tell the hot girls what they should and shouldn't do with their bodies, because deep down, they're just fucking jealous of them, for not being as desirable as the models they so fiercely speak in behalf of. Hell, they don't even need them on their side, they are doing just fine without them. "-How *dare* you make a living off of your toned and well-kept physical image!! Can't you see your strict discipline of taking care of your body triggers my constant procrastination and lack of interest in looking good?!" It's PC bullshit.
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47448645]It's always the fat, unattractive and insufferable legbeards who tell the hot girls what they should and shouldn't do with their bodies, because deep down, they're just fucking jealous of them, for not being as desirable as the models they so fiercely speak in behalf of. Hell, they don't even need them on their side, they are doing just fine without them. "-How *dare* you make a living off of your toned and well-kept physical image!! Can't you see your strict discipline of taking care of your body triggers my constant procrastination and lack of interest in looking good?!" It's PC bullshit.[/QUOTE] It's PC bullshit but the rest of this post is fucking stupid.
[QUOTE=Banned?;47448672]It's PC bullshit but the rest of this post is fucking stupid.[/QUOTE] Please, do elaborate.
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47448735]Please, do elaborate.[/QUOTE] Maybe because the entire first paragraph is coarse generalisation based on nothing but your assumptions and second paragraph is a laughable strawman, but I can't be sure.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;47448757]Maybe because the entire first paragraph is coarse generalisation based on nothing but your assumptions and second paragraph is a laughable strawman, but I can't be sure.[/QUOTE] Pointing out fallacies is not a counter-argument, have you ever talked to a model before? You could learn a thing or two, they're not all braindead bimbos, you know.
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47448775]Pointing out fallacies is not a counter-argument, have you ever talked to a model before? You could learn a thing or two, they're not all braindead bimbos, you know.[/QUOTE] Pointing out fallacies [I]is[/I] a counter-argument when your original statement contains nothing but. Awesomecaek also said nothing about models being dumb and neither did your original statement, so mark off another.
I just think that pointing out fallacies is a cheap way to discredit an opinion (not as classy as calling an opinion "fucking stupid"), it means you don't have anything to say or add to the discussion, but you're just pointing out something. But this is all mental gymnastics and semantics. Back on topic, my previous comment stems from an interaction I had with someone who was in the modelling business, which helped me change some pre-conceived conceptions about the matter, and one of those things is that, despite what many people may think, the biggest enemies of women are other women, not men.
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47448863]I just think that pointing out fallacies is a cheap way to discredit an opinion (not as classy as calling an opinion "fucking stupid"), it means you don't have anything to say or add to the discussion, but you're just pointing out something. But this is all mental gymnastics and semantics. [/quote]But pointing out fallacies is the ONLY correct way to discredit an opinion that has them. Trying to argue against fallacies only gives them credibility they don't deserve. I have no ill will towards you but your original point was completely worthless and there was nothing one could use actual arguments against. [quote] Back on topic, my previous comment stems from an interaction I had with someone who was in the modelling business, which helped me change some pre-conceived conceptions about the matter, and one of those things is that, despite what many people may think, the biggest enemies of women are other women, not men.[/QUOTE] That's a far more useful observation but still not one to really topple the argument. In parallel, for instance with pretty much every uprising against slavery, there was many enslaved people who were against the uprising. Similarly during occupation of countries, the resistance was often faced with betrayal by their own nationals. Now I don't mean to imply that models are literally slaves or that they are betraying their kind, but the point is that in cases of oppression like this, there's always many subjects to it who find it acceptable or even desirable and the psychological workings behind that are quite difficult, so even if it seems counter intuitive, no one's personal experience is all that relevant to this.
If there is [I]a[/I] fallacy [I]in[/I] your argument, pointing it out doesn't discredit it. If your [I]entire argument is a fallacy[/I], pointing out your argument does.
Here, can we all agree that since they were hired, and actually paid to do the job, that presumably most of them took because they wanted to do it, it's pretty stupid to get rid of them? It's not like they were hired to sacrifice new born lambs to Rubber, the Lord of Motorsport or anything, they were there for the exact same reason why ads and billboards have gorgeous women on them, because they help sell a product.
I don't get it. Those girls were there because they wanted, now they have just lost a job, what's the progress here? Attractive people have always been used to sell products. This is a classic case of "you can do whatever you want except the jobs I don't like you doing".
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47448397]Well that's promotional modeling / exhibition staff. These girls make a living out of it, just like male models make a living out of posing in underwear, instead of standing next to a racecar. I see nothing wrong with that.[/QUOTE] underwear models are advertising underwear, which generally you have to 1. be mostly nude to wear scantily clad women strategically positioned beside exhibitions for things that bear no relation to human anatomy or the clothing the women are wearing are much, much more pointless than the example you try to prove [editline]3rd April 2015[/editline] if someone really wants to do this at a convention, they can. if a convention really wants to stop people from doing this at their convention, they can. dry up.
[QUOTE=.Lain;47449822]underwear models are advertising underwear, which generally you have to 1. be mostly nude to wear scantily clad women strategically positioned beside exhibitions for things that bear no relation to human anatomy or the clothing the women are wearing are much, much more pointless than the example you try to prove [editline]3rd April 2015[/editline] if someone really wants to do this at a convention, they can. if a convention really wants to stop people from doing this at their convention, they can. dry up.[/QUOTE] Well, obviously private entities can do whatever they want, that doesn't mean the decision can't be argued and their reasoning criticized. How many companies made shitty decisions in the past and the community backfired?
[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;47448367]This is okay. You can make all of the arguments you want, but I feel that hiring people to stand next to stuff and be hot is weird.[/QUOTE] Plus, it can distract from the real roaring beauty by their sides. Never really understood it. Why add women to an exhibition? If the car looks nice and is nice, it basically "sells" by itself. No different ammount of goddesses are ever gonna make a Prius look good.
[QUOTE=bunguer;47449840]Well, obviously private entities can do whatever they want, that doesn't mean the decision can't be argued and their reasoning criticized. How many companies made shitty decisions in the past and the community backfired?[/QUOTE] Oy I'd sure like to see thier private entities, if ya know what I mean fellas. Phwoar.
[QUOTE=kweh;47449865]Plus, it can distract from the real roaring beauty by their sides. Never really understood it. Why add women to an exhibition? If the car looks nice and is nice, it basically "sells" by itself. No different ammount of goddesses are ever gonna make a Prius look good.[/QUOTE] It's a vestige from a bygone era, where they were supposed to bring in some sex appeal to the sport. Back in the '40s and '50s, there were no women to be seen anywhere in a racetrack. That all changed in the late '60s. [URL="http://selvedgeyard.com/2010/08/11/old-school-hurst-girls/"]Here's Linda Vaughn, Miss Hurst Golden Shifter[/URL], an icon in '60s American racing, you could see her in NASCAR, Indycar and NHRA events. But grid girls are supposed to stand for something more than just hot girls in skimpy outfits, [URL="http://www.theaustingrandprix.com/news/2012/11/9/the-history-of-the-grid-girl.html"]here's a good read on the significance of grid girls[/URL], and [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_queen"]some history about the practice[/URL]. I knew there were no pit girls prior to the '60s, but I didn't know it all started in Japan!
When I'm going to car shows or races, I actually didn't come to look at women. I came to look at sexy cars/bikes. [editline]3rd April 2015[/editline] Like, seriously, they just get in the way.
[QUOTE=Tmaxx;47450121]When I'm going to car shows or races, I actually didn't come to look at women. I came to look at sexy cars/bikes. [editline]3rd April 2015[/editline] Like, seriously, they just get in the way.[/QUOTE] We know you just want to hop on one and take her down town, and you know she wants it aswell... You'd have to pay for the gas though.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;47448919]trying to discredit an argument by pointing out fallacies is a fallacy in and of itself[/QUOTE] True, but if we look at the post. [QUOTE]It's always the fat, unattractive and insufferable legbeards who tell the hot girls what they should and shouldn't do with their bodies, because deep down, they're just fucking jealous of them, for not being as desirable as the models they so fiercely speak in behalf of. Hell, they don't even need them on their side, they are doing just fine without them.[/QUOTE] Blind guess at who is at play here, based on generalizations, assumptions and insults. Nothing is actually being said in this part. He doesn't talk about the issue at hand, he just slings mud as broadly as he can. [QUOTE]"-How *dare* you make a living off of your toned and well-kept physical image!! Can't you see your strict discipline of taking care of your body triggers my constant procrastination and lack of interest in looking good?!"[/QUOTE] A-class strawman arguing against a point nobody made, not in any post or the article. [QUOTE]It's PC bullshit.[/QUOTE] His argument. Or baseless claim, really, since when you look at what was said before, he actually haven't argued for it at all. I'm not saying he's wrong [sp]Though I am of the opinion that he is[/sp], I'm just saying that he has constructed a post made entirely of not-arguing, and then getting mad when people call out his argument.
TBH if I could be a grid girl I would.
The whole "they agreed to the job" still doesn't mean they show stay there, per se. The nature of hegemony is that it coerces people to agree with it through use of power and subtle influence. As an extreme example blacksploitation films fall under this.
Why not just add grid guys?
[QUOTE=spiritlol;47454001]Why not just add grid guys?[/QUOTE] Some female race drivers have male models as grid girls - well, grid guys.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.