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

Feminism ruins everything: Underarmor edition

.... ban strip clubs altogether, like in Iceland.

That's for environmental reasons. Iceland is too cold and they are cutting back on heating indoor spaces.

In warmer climes, a new male outdoor strip club has opened in Namibia, but apparently it is not pulling in many punters, for some odd reason:

(warning: content may not be suitable for westerners)




Here are a group of women who regularly protest at the new club:


 

Attachments

  • papua-35.jpg
    papua-35.jpg
    417.4 KB · Views: 1
  • 1-98-700x517.jpg
    1-98-700x517.jpg
    59.2 KB · Views: 1
  • 6.pdf
    63.9 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:
Go to a strip club in your own fucking time, no one is stopping you.
But if you are so outraged by this Derec that you think this is a good hill to die on, well I wish I could say I'm surprised.
 
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.

:rolleyes: No Derec, my company does not allow us to take clients to strip clubs either, and it is far from a "regressive" company or "regressive" policy. It is unfortunate but unsurprising that an inclusive, non-discriminatory policy meant to avoid a hostile work environment for female, homosexual, &/or religious employees and/or men who don't like strip clubs is, to you, "regressive".

I think anyone who is having a temper-tantrum because a company chooses not to subsidize one's strip club excursions is the one who is "regressive".
 
I must live an uncommon (underprivileged?) life, because I can't think of any part of it that is ruined because there are social pressures that exist that insist I treat women with respect.
What does this have to do with "respect"? It's about showing clients a good time. And if a female employee wants to take a female athlete to Swinging Richard's or something, there is nothing wrong with that either. It is certainly not "disrespectful" toward male employees of the company.

Feminism is getting more prudish than the Christians lately. Probably why they get along with Islamists so well...

Does it even occur to you that Under Armour might employ women? Or that clients might be female? Or that any woman might find a strip club to be a hostile work environment? Including those who work in strip clubs? Does it occur to you at all that women exist for any reason than to service men?

Of course not.

Consider then if the world were different and women expected men to strip for them, provide erotic services—only the ones we consider attractive enough, of course. The rest of you can cook and clean and do grunt work—how would you feel?

For very short periods of time and only in carefully selected places, what you describe actually happens.

The club doors open for a "Ladies only" show. The drinks are discounted for an hour and then the show begins. There are usually 6 male dancers, all chosen more for their appearance than for dancing talent. What they wear at the beginning varies, depending on location, but it always ends with all the guys stripped down to their pouch. That's what it's called. Getting fully naked is rare, mostly because it's kind of anti-climatic. After the show, men are let in the bar.

If a company's management chose this kind of entertainment for socializing with customers and it was part of the social process which lead to success and promotion for employees, male employees would be at a great disadvantage. This is the real complaint.
 
It requires the person to receive some sort of income. You have not shown that this is a faulty metric here.
Of course I have. Your data includes people who are not earning income and you are using to compare to people who do earn 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!
I am not the one making an affirmative claim of fact - you are. Making horse apples to apples comparison is not a convincing argument. But that is what you have done.

It is obvious nothing is going to satisfy you.
Please stop comparing me to your sex partners. Using comparable numbers will satisfy me or anyone else.

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.

LMAO! You I can't even tell the difference between median and mean.
fify

Yes, it is the median. The link you posted says so.
The link says it is the average as well (see top left of the linked page).
 
Let me pause just for a moment to laugh at "underarmor" and "strip club" to be at odds with each other.

Then I will laugh for a moment about the denial of a company expense for a strip club visit "ruining everything."
 
Let me pause just for a moment to laugh at "underarmor" and "strip club" to be at odds with each other.

Then I will laugh for a moment about the denial of a company expense for a strip club visit "ruining everything."

Apparently men need to go to strip clubs to be entertained or else their whole day is ruined.
 
Let me pause just for a moment to laugh at "underarmor" and "strip club" to be at odds with each other.

Then I will laugh for a moment about the denial of a company expense for a strip club visit "ruining everything."

Apparently men need to go to strip clubs to be entertained or else their whole day is ruined.
That explains why I am not happy every day!
 
Just curious... what the fuck does a stripper's salary have to do with whether a private company allows strip clubs as an approved expense or not?
I responded to Genesis' claim that strip clubs are horrible establishments for women. Then laughing dog dug in claiming that $48k is not a good amount of money for an individual to earn.

Are all of the strippers going to be on unemployment because Underarmour decided to join modern society?

- No, but their earnings are going to go down somewhat. Easier to spend expense account money than your own.
- Strip clubs are a modern phenomenon. What does blackballing strip clubs have to do with "joining the modern society"? If anything it's the opposite. Conservative religion and radical feminism are both pulling us in a very regressive direction.


Women stripping to titillate men is not a modern phenomenon. So, stop making shit up.


https://www.medicalbag.com/grey-matter/the-history-of-stripping/article/472394/

called "exotic dancers." The establishments they work in are commonly called strip clubs but their proprietors prefer to call their businesses "gentlemen's clubs." Bottom line is that women in this industry get paid to sexually titillate men by dancing suggestively in as little clothing as possible without getting arrested, and in locations where laws allow, they dance totally nude. Regardless of the nomenclature, the field of stripping is dominated by women. Male strippers (think Chippendales) make up less than a third of the professional community.
But let's take a step back (way back) and look at the very beginnings of this sensual subculture. The earliest evidence of exotic dancing can be traced to Paleolithic cave paintings in the south of France, more than 20,000 years ago. Archeologists have uncovered miniature statuettes of exotic dancers near the Black Sea regions of Bulgaria and Romania that date back to the New Stone Age, or Neolithic Era, and are estimated to be over 9000 years old.
Dancing designed to sexually stimulate is thought to have begun as an ancient ritual to gain the favor of the goddesses of fertility and motherhood in hopes of successful reproduction as well as to increase the fertility of crops. Draped in animal fur, women who performed these dances would pose erotically as the furs were slowly removed to reveal the dancer's naked gyrating body.


And, please stop making this about feminists. I consider myself a strong feminist. I have no problem with women who choose to work as strippers or sex workers for that matter. As long as it's a choice and not something that the woman has been forced into doing, it's fine by me. I have a friend who worked as a stripper when she was young. Unfortunately, stripping doesn't give women a long career, as most men want to see a younger woman strip. But I digress.


You are making a big fuss over one company's policy to no longer pay their employees to take clients to strip shows. Who cares? It's so trivial. You're getting yourself so worked up over this that you felt the need to start a thread and actually use the phrase, "feminism ruins everything", says a lot about you. First of all you assume that feminists are behind this policy change. Then, you assume that all feminists want to ban stripping and other sex work. Well guess what Derec? Feminists don't always agree with each other. Some feminists do want to ban all sex work, ( like that's ever going to happen ) but lots of us only want sex work to be safer. We want women who choose this type of work to be respected, to be well compensated and to be sure that it's a choice. So for fuck sakes, stop blaming your personal problems on feminists. Stop stereotyping us. Look, I have a lot of respect for Gloria Steinem, as she was a strong influence on many things that improved the lives of women during the time I was a very young adult. But, I don't agree with her on everything, just because we both consider ourselves feminists.


One corporation's policy doesn't reflect how feminists feel. For all you know, the underlying motive for this policy change was to save money. It's absolutely nuts that this bothers you so much.
 
I responded to Genesis' claim that strip clubs are horrible establishments for women. Then laughing dog dug in claiming that $48k is not a good amount of money for an individual to earn.



- No, but their earnings are going to go down somewhat. Easier to spend expense account money than your own.
- Strip clubs are a modern phenomenon. What does blackballing strip clubs have to do with "joining the modern society"? If anything it's the opposite. Conservative religion and radical feminism are both pulling us in a very regressive direction.


Women stripping to titillate men is not a modern phenomenon. So, stop making shit up.


https://www.medicalbag.com/grey-matter/the-history-of-stripping/article/472394/

called "exotic dancers." The establishments they work in are commonly called strip clubs but their proprietors prefer to call their businesses "gentlemen's clubs." Bottom line is that women in this industry get paid to sexually titillate men by dancing suggestively in as little clothing as possible without getting arrested, and in locations where laws allow, they dance totally nude. Regardless of the nomenclature, the field of stripping is dominated by women. Male strippers (think Chippendales) make up less than a third of the professional community.
But let's take a step back (way back) and look at the very beginnings of this sensual subculture. The earliest evidence of exotic dancing can be traced to Paleolithic cave paintings in the south of France, more than 20,000 years ago. Archeologists have uncovered miniature statuettes of exotic dancers near the Black Sea regions of Bulgaria and Romania that date back to the New Stone Age, or Neolithic Era, and are estimated to be over 9000 years old.
Dancing designed to sexually stimulate is thought to have begun as an ancient ritual to gain the favor of the goddesses of fertility and motherhood in hopes of successful reproduction as well as to increase the fertility of crops. Draped in animal fur, women who performed these dances would pose erotically as the furs were slowly removed to reveal the dancer's naked gyrating body.


And, please stop making this about feminists. I consider myself a strong feminist. I have no problem with women who choose to work as strippers or sex workers for that matter. As long as it's a choice and not something that the woman has been forced into doing, it's fine by me. I have a friend who worked as a stripper when she was young. Unfortunately, stripping doesn't give women a long career, as most men want to see a younger woman strip. But I digress.


You are making a big fuss over one company's policy to no longer pay their employees to take clients to strip shows. Who cares? It's so trivial. You're getting yourself so worked up over this that you felt the need to start a thread and actually use the phrase, "feminism ruins everything", says a lot about you. First of all you assume that feminists are behind this policy change. Then, you assume that all feminists want to ban stripping and other sex work. Well guess what Derec? Feminists don't always agree with each other. Some feminists do want to ban all sex work, ( like that's ever going to happen ) but lots of us only want sex work to be safer. We want women who choose this type of work to be respected, to be well compensated and to be sure that it's a choice. So for fuck sakes, stop blaming your personal problems on feminists. Stop stereotyping us. Look, I have a lot of respect for Gloria Steinem, as she was a strong influence on many things that improved the lives of women during the time I was a very young adult. But, I don't agree with her on everything, just because we both consider ourselves feminists.


One corporation's policy doesn't reflect how feminists feel. For all you know, the underlying motive for this policy change was to save money. It's absolutely nuts that this bothers you so much.

Actually, I’m astonished that these days, any business would allow trips to a strip club to be put on an expense account or to be any part of any entertainment for clients or staff, including executive staff.
 
"The treatment of women at Under Armour reportedly influenced the guest list at a party the company hosts the day before the Preakness Stakes. The party is held at (CEO) Plank's horse farm in Maryland.

"Though invitations were usually limited to executives, company event managers invited young female staffers based on attractiveness to appeal to male guests, according to former employees — a practice the event managers called 'stocking the pond,'" The (Wall Street) Journal reports."


http://uk.businessinsider.com/under...ted-strip-club-on-company-dime-report-2018-11
 
Slight variation on a theme:

Feminism ruins everything: M & S edition?

M & S (Marks and Spencers) have today been accused (most loudly by feminists it seems) of gross insensitivity and sexism for this window display (in London, I think). I heard about it on BBC radio:

DsT30q4XcAAfMFC.jpg

Sian ​Steans, who is a member of the Nottingham Feminist Action Network, told HuffPost UK: "As a feminist and a mother to a young daughter I felt embarrassed that I had to yet again explain why women are depicted with so little respect."

Steans decided to take action and sent the image to the organisers of FiLia, which is dubbed the largest annual feminist conference in the UK and took place in October.

They concurred that the window displays were offensive, writing on Twitter: “To be clear: @marksandspencer believe that the 'MUST HAVES' are: For MEN: 'outfits to impress'. For WOMEN: 'fancy little knickers'. Imagine for a moment if those window displays were reversed. Go on M&S .... we are watching. PS Who signed this off? #sexist #marksandspencer.”


https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...nickers-and-men-in-suits/ar-BBPUDyu?li=AA59G2

M & S commented:

“We’ve highlighted one combination in our windows, which are part of a wider campaign that features a large variety of must-have Christmas moments, from David Gandy washing up in an M&S suit through to families snuggling up in our matching PJs.”

Here is their main christmas advert, with the tagline 'Must Haves' for Christmas.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_2dh3DeY0k[/YOUTUBE]
 
Get this. There are strip clubs which have both male and female strippers. Who knew?

Olympic Gardens in Las Vegas had female strippers on one floor and male strippers on another. Ditto The Hustler Club, apparently.

Mints and Peppermints in Niagara falls has that set up. Brass Rail (female dancers) is a stone's throw from Remington's (male dancers) in downtown Toronto.
 
If the average earnings for female strippers is $48k, that would seem to be well above average, all other things being equal, such as educational attainment and age.


It can be insanely high. I know somebody who earns over $800 Canadian on a single Saturday night, and doesn't work the rest of the week. She does just fine. Doesn't do extras (sex stuff) either. She just dances and gets her boobs groped and it is big money.

Is she oppressed? She would laugh in your face if you said so.
 
If the average earnings for female strippers is $48k, that would seem to be well above average, all other things being equal, such as educational attainment and age.


It can be insanely high. I know somebody who earns over $800 Canadian on a single Saturday night, and doesn't work the rest of the week. She does just fine. Doesn't do extras (sex stuff) either. She just dances and gets her boobs groped and it is big money.

Is she oppressed? She would laugh in your face if you said so.

Only SWERFs would say she's oppressed, everyone else knows better.
 
Underarmor is a business. Their decision to stop reimbursing for a particular expense is because the expense is too high / frequent and does not have an adequate return on investment. That they were able to then end that sentence with "..and women don't generally feel comfortable with the practice" is just a bonus for them... a way to take a money saving corporate policy and make it a PC one, for free.
 
Slight variation on a theme:

Feminism ruins everything: M & S edition?

M & S (Marks and Spencers) have today been accused (most loudly by feminists it seems) of gross insensitivity and sexism for this window display (in London, I think). I heard about it on BBC radio:

View attachment 18932

Sian ​Steans, who is a member of the Nottingham Feminist Action Network, told HuffPost UK: "As a feminist and a mother to a young daughter I felt embarrassed that I had to yet again explain why women are depicted with so little respect."

Steans decided to take action and sent the image to the organisers of FiLia, which is dubbed the largest annual feminist conference in the UK and took place in October.

They concurred that the window displays were offensive, writing on Twitter: “To be clear: @marksandspencer believe that the 'MUST HAVES' are: For MEN: 'outfits to impress'. For WOMEN: 'fancy little knickers'. Imagine for a moment if those window displays were reversed. Go on M&S .... we are watching. PS Who signed this off? #sexist #marksandspencer.”


https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle...nickers-and-men-in-suits/ar-BBPUDyu?li=AA59G2

M & S commented:

“We’ve highlighted one combination in our windows, which are part of a wider campaign that features a large variety of must-have Christmas moments, from David Gandy washing up in an M&S suit through to families snuggling up in our matching PJs.”

Here is their main christmas advert, with the tagline 'Must Haves' for Christmas.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_2dh3DeY0k[/YOUTUBE]

Well, their video didn't help their case at all. Not a single dude in his knickers there either. But the cross-dressing fairy was amusing.
 
Back
Top Bottom