• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Feminism ruins everything: Underarmor edition

No one is "blackballing strip clubs" :rolleyes: You just have to go on your own time at your own expense.
If Underarmor says "you can take the client everywhere except a strip club" that is blackballing strip clubs.
:rolleyes: 1. Prove that Underarmour said "you can take the client everywhere except a strip club". More likely (as with most companies) certain expenses are approved and others are not. 2. Making a company decision not to allow strip clubs as a business expense is not "black balling" strip clubs
 
RavenSky said:
well that's on you; not on feminists or anyone else who would prefer not to be forced to conduct business in a strip club.

Nobody’s talking about forcing anyone to do anything. The question is why it would or would not be acceptable if everyone agrees to it.
The company does not agree to reimburse for it :shrug:

My company will not reimburse more than $75 per day per person for meals. Even if everyone in the group agrees it would be a fabulous idea to eat dinner at Naoe - and it would definitely be impressive for our potential clients - it is against company policy. :shrug:

Clearly my company is not being fair not letting us eat at Naoe on the company dime :mad:
 
RavenSky said:
well that's on you; not on feminists or anyone else who would prefer not to be forced to conduct business in a strip club.

Nobody’s talking about forcing anyone to do anything. The question is why it would or would not be acceptable if everyone agrees to it.
The company does not agree to reimburse for it :shrug:

My company will not reimburse more than $75 per day per person for meals. Even if everyone in the group agrees it would be a fabulous idea to eat dinner at Naoe - and it would definitely be impressive for our potential clients - it is against company policy. :shrug:

Clearly my company is not being fair not letting us eat at Naoe on the company dime :mad:

And it’s fine for companies to have those types of rules. I’m not arguing against it in any way. If they want to set limits that’s a perfectly fine corporate policy.

Similarly, it’s a perfectly fine policy for a company to say “Partying at strip clubs does not with our corporate values, so it’s not permitted to take clients there and the company will not reimburse you for any expenses at such establishments”. It’s also fine for a company to say “Supporting the genocide of our animal brothers does not align with our corporate values, so it’s not permitted to take clients to restaurants which serve meat dishes and the company will not reimburse expenses at such establishments”. They can set their own corporate culture and have their employees align their business activities to conform to that culture.

My point is simply that the first company there is not more moral or better than the second company, nor would it be superior to a company which had neither policy and allowed for expense accounts to be used at both types of establishments if that would help client engagement and nobody is forced or pressured to go somewhere that they’re not comfortable going.
 
As do other people in their age range. I posted income data broken down by age as well. Strippers make significantly more than the median 20-something for example.
First, you posted household income. When I showed how that was inappropriate, you posted personal income which I also showed was inappropriate.

Face it, you don't have the relevant data to show that strippers earn a lot more than other similarily situated people. To do so, you would need to have more detailed information about the distribution of stripper's earnings - which we do not have.

Your claim is the one that is incredibly stupid.
Nope. The data I showed indicated that strippers do not make "a lot of money" - which is your initial claim.
And instead of admitting you were wrong, you are digging in.
That is the 2nd time you have transferred your MO to me.
$48k is certainly good money. Especially for a young person and especially for a job that does not require a college degree.
I understand you feel that it is part of a woman's fantasy to dance naked in front of men whom disgust or repulse them. I understand that you seem to have no clue that an average income does not mean that this the usual earnings - most income distributions are skewed to the right (i.e. the high end is the skinny tail), so that the average is probably an over-estimate of median or usual earnings.
 
I just found out Stormy Daniels is going to be appearing at a local strip club. Anyone want to expense me? Don't forget, it's another fifty bucks to get to the back room.
 

As far as I'm concerned this should be implemented at the government level (by not allowing it as an expense). The thing is there are two big discriminatory issues here:

1) It puts saleswomen at a disadvantage compared to salesmen. Yeah, they can still take clients to a strip club but it's unlikely to be the same experience.

2) It puts female clients at a disadvantage compared to male clients.

(As for the person who mentioned the Olympic Garden--I wasn't aware of the male strippers so I looked it up. Yup, they had them--but they went bust a couple of years ago.)
 
Somebody needs to start a thread in 'Bugs and Technical Issues' - RayJ's latest update seems to have torn the fabric of spacetime, and started pushing out threads from the 1970s.

I know. We've been regressing as a society into a scary neo-puritanism for a while now. John Ashcroft covering up Spirit of Justice would not be out of place now from somebody on the feminist Left. Sadly.
 
As far as I'm concerned this should be implemented at the government level (by not allowing it as an expense).
Why should strip clubs be singled out like that? Especially by the government?

1) It puts saleswomen at a disadvantage compared to salesmen. Yeah, they can still take clients to a strip club but it's unlikely to be the same experience.
Well Underarmour is a big company with many clients so I do not see that being a disadvantage any more than clients being able to be entertained at a venue that women find more interesting then men.
I could see it being an issue at a smaller company because there are fewer clients at any given time.
Also, even without strip clubs, I would say male clients would be more relaxed hitting the town with a man than a woman. So that exists anyway.

2) It puts female clients at a disadvantage compared to male clients.
How so? Strip clubs would be one option among many. And the spending limit should be the same no matter where you go. Overpriced vegan restaurant or a strip club, it should be client's call.
Also, if any female client wants to go to a strip club (whether featuring nude men or women), she is at an disadvantage now. But if she (or he) wants to do something else, having the "strip club" option is not affecting them at all.

- - - Updated - - -

I just found out Stormy Daniels is going to be appearing at a local strip club.
She cancelled the appearance she had planned in Atlanta. :angryfist:
 
Starting wages at my job are significantly higher, and include a pretty good comprehensive set of benefits,
And what job would that be?
And I was not saying that it's the most well paid job in the world, but 155% of median personal income is rather good, especially for a young person without a college degree.

and a strict and rigorously enforced anti sexual harassment policy.
How strict? Are we talking Donglegate level of strict?
 
First, you posted household income. When I showed how that was inappropriate, you posted personal income which I also showed was inappropriate.
No, you have not showed that the personal income was inappropriate. In reality, you will never be satisfied, no matter what I provide. That's your shtick.

Face it, you don't have the relevant data to show that strippers earn a lot more than other similarily situated people.
I posted personal individual income, overall and by age. You have posted squat to show that $48k is not good money.

To do so, you would need to have more detailed information about the distribution of stripper's earnings - which we do not have.
Again, I have at least provided some data. In my book 155% of median income is good. I could post income broken down by percentiles, by education etc. but why bother? You'd still not find it sufficient.

Nope. The data I showed indicated that strippers do not make "a lot of money" - which is your initial claim.
It does no such thing. And I showed why.

That is the 2nd time you have transferred your MO to me.
No, but that is what you are attempting to do.

I understand you feel that it is part of a woman's fantasy to dance naked in front of men whom disgust or repulse them.
If it was their fantasy they'd be paying me. :)
I understand that you seem to have no clue that an average income does not mean that this the usual earnings - most income distributions are skewed to the right (i.e. the high end is the skinny tail), so that the average is probably an over-estimate of median or usual earnings.
And obviously you do not understand the difference between the median and the mean. You also do not understand the fact that many strippers work part time, making the $48k median look even better that if it was for full time employment.
 
Yeah but... do you get tips?
Tips would be included in the median.
And note that stripping allows you for a quite flexible work schedule. Strip clubs around here tend to be open from 11 or 12 to 2 or 3, six or seven days a week. Ladies can work flexible shifts, and many work part time. The job Toni mentions likely has set hours, 9-5 or similar, is full time, which may be tough for a single mother, and requires a college degree - something a 19 year old would not have.

- - - Updated - - -

My company will not reimburse more than $75 per day per person for meals.
I think the limit should be the same no matter where you take them.
And Underarmour decided to make this regressive change because of feminist pressure. Hence my OP title.
 
No, you have not showed that the personal income was inappropriate.
Of course I did. It includes people who do not labor for their income.
In reality, you will never be satisfied, no matter what I provide. That's your shtick.
Nope.

I posted personal individual income, overall and by age. You have posted squat to show that $48k is not good money.
Your income data is not appropriate as I have shown. That data includes people who do not work for their income. Comparing to people who do work for their income is inappropriate. I made no affirmative claim about 48K - you did. It is up to you to substantiate your claim, not me.
Again, I have at least provided some data.
I am the one who showed what strippers make on average in order to show they do not make "a lot of money".
In my book 155% of median income is good. I could post income broken down by percentiles, by education etc. but why bother? You'd still not find it sufficient.
At least you are consistent - you have no clue about economic statistics or what I would find sufficient.


And obviously you do not understand the difference between the median and the mean.
Keep telling yourself that whopper.
You also do not understand the fact that many strippers work part time, making the $48k median look even better that if it was for full time employment.
WTF? The 48K is the average not the median. As far as you know, the 48K is about the average FT income.
 
Of course I did. It includes people who do not labor for their income.
It requires the person to receive some sort of income. You have not shown that this is a faulty metric here.

Nope.

Your income data is not appropriate as I have shown. That data includes people who do not work for their income.
Yes, it includes people living off investments and social security, but so what? Sure, I could dig and find median wage or salary worker income, but you'd find something else to complain. Do some digging yourself for a change!

Comparing to people who do work for their income is inappropriate. I made no affirmative claim about 48K - you did. It is up to you to substantiate your claim, not me.
It is obvious nothing is going to satisfy you.

I am the one who showed what strippers make on average in order to show they do not make "a lot of money".
No, you have not.

At least you are consistent - you have no clue about economic statistics or what I would find sufficient.
LMAO! You can't even tell the difference between median and mean.


WTF? The 48K is the average not the median. As far as you know, the 48K is about the average FT income.
Yes, it is the median. The link you posted says so.
 
Starting wages at my job are significantly higher, and include a pretty good comprehensive set of benefits,
And what job would that be?
And I was not saying that it's the most well paid job in the world, but 155% of median personal income is rather good, especially for a young person without a college degree.

My particular job requires a 4 year degree in a technical field. But starting pay is north of what you quoted. And guess what? Nobody is allowed to grab anybody.


and a strict and rigorously enforced anti sexual harassment policy.
How strict? Are we talking Donglegate level of strict?

People have lost their jobs for inappropriate things on their work computers. At work.
 
My particular job requires a 4 year degree in a technical field.
Which is hardly comparable to stripping, which does not.
And guess what? Nobody is allowed to grab anybody.
And neither is anybody naked. Which would make for a really boring strip club. :)
I take it your feminist sensibilities lead you to think strip clubs are a bad idea. Perhaps you would like to ban them like Icelandic feminists did and Scotish feminists are trying to do. I could not disagree more!

People have lost their jobs for inappropriate things on their work computers. At work.
Define "inappropriate".
 
Back
Top Bottom