"Ring girls" turfed and replaced by men: this week in feminist irony.

[repoman]

The world is changing and someone is unhappy. Big deal.

I'm surprised the OP was titled "Another week in the strange death of land down under where the women glow and the men thunder".

Men should catcall next to their wives like this again:

 

[Trausti]

Of course there's a market. They're called "athletes".

No. The purpose isn't to look hot, but to compete.

You don’t think that scantily clad young women parading around are competing????

I don’t believe that you are that naive or that ignorant.

And what is your problem if scantily clad young women are no longer featured at prize fights?

And what is your problem if scantily clad women are featured at prize fights? If the audience likes it, and the women like, why do interloping ninnies get to ruin other peoples' fun?

 

[laughing dog]

Remember ladies and gentlemen, men watching other men beat the shit out of each other doesn't model or encourage violence, but the attractive women wandering around between the actual violence is what encourages violence!

That is a straw man rendition of Ms Alden's position. Do you disagree that "being respectful of women is key to eliminating other forms of violence, especially violence towards women and children"?

 

[Metaphor]

You don’t think that scantily clad young women parading around are competing????

No. They are not being scored, they are not going head to head with other ring girls and they don't share a winner's purse.

I don't believe you are that naïve or that ignorant.

I don’t believe that you are that naive or that ignorant.

And what is your problem if scantily clad young women are no longer featured at prize fights?

My problem is that ceding ground to Puritans who have no moral case is bad. When the ring girls are turfed--and they will be because the precedent is now there-- the feminists will have succeeded in eroding value for the spectators and reducing employment for young women. Do you believe a single feminist who proselytizes her selective Puritanism actually goes to watch MMA tournaments?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Of course there's a market. They're called "athletes".

No. The purpose isn't to look hot, but to compete.

You don’t think that scantily clad young women parading around are competing????

I don’t believe that you are that naive or that ignorant.

And what is your problem if scantily clad young women are no longer featured at prize fights?

How will we know what round it is?! Answer that! What are they gonna do, strap the round number on a roomba?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You don’t think that scantily clad young women parading around are competing????

No. They are not being scored, they are not going head to head with other ring girls and they don't share a winner's purse.

I don't believe you are that naïve or that ignorant.

I don’t believe that you are that naive or that ignorant.

And what is your problem if scantily clad young women are no longer featured at prize fights?

My problem is that ceding ground to Puritans who have no moral case is bad. When the ring girls are turfed--and they will be because the precedent is now there-- the feminists will have succeeded in eroding value for the spectators and reducing employment for young women. Do you believe a single feminist who proselytizes her selective Puritanism actually goes to watch MMA tournaments?

Wouldn’t puritans be seeking to end MMA altogether?

 

[Metaphor]

Remember ladies and gentlemen, men watching other men beat the shit out of each other doesn't model or encourage violence, but the attractive women wandering around between the actual violence is what encourages violence!

That is a straw man rendition of Ms Alden's position. Do you disagree that "being respectful of women is key to eliminating other forms of violence, especially violence towards women and children"?

Alden was silent on the violence that MMA encourages (probably because she doesn't care when men are victims of it).

I disagree with her statement in more ways than one. I disagree with her implicit assumption that modelling work is disrespectful of women or any gender. I disagree that a reduction in ring girls will lead to a reduction in violence against women or children. Even if it did (and I don't believe it does)--even if it did--I would still disagree that you should interfere with what fully consenting adults do for entertainment.

For example, I think mixed martial arts is violent and vulgar. Following the feminist line, if it encourages a single man in the audience to be more violent to someone who doesn't consent to that violence, that's a good reason to ban it. (Of course, they don't care about violence inflicted on men which is why they aren't clamouring to get MMA banned). But I'm not clamouring to get MMA banned just because it doesn't appeal to me personally.

 

[laughing dog]

Remember ladies and gentlemen, men watching other men beat the shit out of each other doesn't model or encourage violence, but the attractive women wandering around between the actual violence is what encourages violence!

That is a straw man rendition of Ms Alden's position. Do you disagree that "being respectful of women is key to eliminating other forms of violence, especially violence towards women and children"?

Alden was silent on the violence that MMA encourages (probably because she doesn't care when men are victims of it).

I disagree with her statement in more ways than one. I disagree with her implicit assumption that modelling work is disrespectful of women or any gender. I disagree that a reduction in ring girls will lead to a reduction in violence against women or children. Even if it did (and I don't believe it does)--even if it did--I would still disagree that you should interfere with what fully consenting adults do for entertainment.

For example, I think mixed martial arts is violent and vulgar. Following the feminist line, if it encourages a single man in the audience to be more violent to someone who doesn't consent to that violence, that's a good reason to ban it. (Of course, they don't care about violence inflicted on men which is why they aren't clamouring to get MMA banned). But I'm not clamouring to get MMA banned just because it doesn't appeal to me personally.

Interesting story, but totally non-responsive to the question "
Do you disagree that "being respectful of women is key to eliminating other forms of violence, especially violence towards women and children"?"

 

[Metaphor]

No. They are not being scored, they are not going head to head with other ring girls and they don't share a winner's purse.

I don't believe you are that naïve or that ignorant.



My problem is that ceding ground to Puritans who have no moral case is bad. When the ring girls are turfed--and they will be because the precedent is now there-- the feminists will have succeeded in eroding value for the spectators and reducing employment for young women. Do you believe a single feminist who proselytizes her selective Puritanism actually goes to watch MMA tournaments?

Wouldn’t puritans be seeking to end MMA altogether?

No. The new Puritans don't object to violence against men. They do object to men enjoying looking at scantily clad women, and they do object to women being employed in ways that offends them personally but harms nobody.

 

[Metaphor]

Alden was silent on the violence that MMA encourages (probably because she doesn't care when men are victims of it).

I disagree with her statement in more ways than one. I disagree with her implicit assumption that modelling work is disrespectful of women or any gender. I disagree that a reduction in ring girls will lead to a reduction in violence against women or children. Even if it did (and I don't believe it does)--even if it did--I would still disagree that you should interfere with what fully consenting adults do for entertainment.

For example, I think mixed martial arts is violent and vulgar. Following the feminist line, if it encourages a single man in the audience to be more violent to someone who doesn't consent to that violence, that's a good reason to ban it. (Of course, they don't care about violence inflicted on men which is why they aren't clamouring to get MMA banned). But I'm not clamouring to get MMA banned just because it doesn't appeal to me personally.

Interesting story, but totally non-responsive to the question "
Do you disagree that "being respectful of women is key to eliminating other forms of violence, especially violence towards women and children"?"

I don't know how I could have made it clearer. Yes, I disagree with the statement as a whole. I also disagree with the implicit premises.

 

[Toni]

You don’t think that scantily clad young women parading around are competing????

I don’t believe that you are that naive or that ignorant.

And what is your problem if scantily clad young women are no longer featured at prize fights?

And what is your problem if scantily clad women are featured at prize fights? If the audience likes it, and the women like, why do interloping ninnies get to ruin other peoples' fun?

Isn’t it kinda pathetic that a bunch of old men need to see other scantily clad men pound the shit out of each other and a bunch of scantily clad young women prancing around half dressed just so their cocks can feel some slight sensation and they can pretend? What kind of sick fuck requires that mix of violence and sex just to feel...something?

Seriously I’m not sure what is worse: that some men are convinced their only shot in life is beating the crap out of other men, with all the resultant brain damage? Or that some young women are convinced that their only shot is to prance around scantily clad in front of pathetic old men?

 

[Metaphor]

Where's the irony?

Feminists espouse the belief that women should be free to pursue whatever employment they want without discrimination, yet they work directly against women being employed in any kind of employment that feminists don't want them to be employed in.

The other way to achieve equality would be having equal numbers of Ring Girls and Ring Boys wearing hot pants and showing off their abs flouncing around between rounds, smiling and looking available. But we can't have that, now can we?

Why is equality desirable? Do you think that the 90%+ cis het men who watch MMA want ring boys wearing hot pants?

 

[Metaphor]

You don’t think that scantily clad young women parading around are competing????

I don’t believe that you are that naive or that ignorant.

And what is your problem if scantily clad young women are no longer featured at prize fights?

And what is your problem if scantily clad women are featured at prize fights? If the audience likes it, and the women like, why do interloping ninnies get to ruin other peoples' fun?

Isn’t it kinda pathetic that a bunch of old men need to see other scantily clad men pound the shit out of each other and a bunch of scantily clad young women prancing around half dressed just so their cocks can feel some slight sensation and they can pretend? What kind of sick fuck requires that mix of violence and sex just to feel...something?

Seriously I’m not sure what is worse: that some men are convinced their only shot in life is beating the crap out of other men, with all the resultant brain damage? Or that some young women are convinced that their only shot is to prance around scantily clad in front of pathetic old men?

What makes you think they think it's their 'only shot'? Who made you the dictator of their lives and their choices?

EDIT: Also, what's with the sudden ageism? If anything MMA audiences seem to be more tilted to younger men, but even if they were not, so what?

 

[Metaphor]

The world is changing and someone is unhappy. Big deal.

I'm surprised the OP was titled "Another week in the strange death of land down under where the women glow and the men thunder".

By the way, your northern hemisphere chauvinism is showing. You know, we don't even walk on our hands in the antipodes.

 

[barbos]

No, generally models get paid to make clothing look good, not to look good in clothing.

Ummmm, it's the same thing, just ask any woman, well, 95% ow women.

 

[Arctish]

Where's the irony?

Feminists espouse the belief that women should be free to pursue whatever employment they want without discrimination, yet they work directly against women being employed in any kind of employment that feminists don't want them to be employed in.

Feminists espouse the belief that women and men should be free to pursue whatever employment they want without discrimination, yet they many work directly against women and men being employed in any kind of employment that feminists they don't want them to be employed in for whatever reasons they have for not wanting it.

Some feminists don't have a problem with people wanting to see, or to be, scantily clad eye candy at sporting events. Others think the job is inherently degrading and think it should be eliminated. But they generally agree that if there's going to be half naked cuties showing off a little bit of asscheek to the fans, it's very sexist to not have both males as females doing it.

The other way to achieve equality would be having equal numbers of Ring Girls and Ring Boys wearing hot pants and showing off their abs flouncing around between rounds, smiling and looking available. But we can't have that, now can we?

Why is equality desirable? Do you think that the 90%+ cis het men who watch MMA want ring boys wearing hot pants?

No, I don't.

I think the cis het men would be very abusive toward guys in hot pants doing what the girls do. That alone should tell you what a Ring Girl's job really is and that it's inherently sexist, which is why a lot of feminists want to drop kick it into the dustbin of sports history.

I'm sure the women will be just as good at being 'fight progress managers' as the men. In fact, I think the former Ring Girls will be even better than the new hires considering their prior experience doing the exact same job in less comfortable clothes.

 

[Metaphor]

Some feminists don't have a problem with people wanting to see, or to be, scantily clad eye candy at sporting events. Others think the job is inherently degrading and think it should be eliminated. But they generally agree that if there's going to be half naked cuties showing off a little bit of asscheek to the fans, it's very sexist to not have both males as females doing it.

That's a braindead reason to want it eliminated.

There are biological women now who get tizzed up and call themselves drag queens, as if it were not inherent part of gay drag culture that you have to be a biological male to be a drag queen. The day is coming when feminists will demand that biological women be given equal access to drag competitions. As if gay men haven't gone through enough without intersectional feminists appropriating our causes and our culture.

 

[Arctish]

Some feminists don't have a problem with people wanting to see, or to be, scantily clad eye candy at sporting events. Others think the job is inherently degrading and think it should be eliminated. But they generally agree that if there's going to be half naked cuties showing off a little bit of asscheek to the fans, it's very sexist to not have both males as females doing it.

That's a braindead reason to want it eliminated.

Thinking the job is inherently degrading is a braindead reason to want it eliminated?

Or thinking it should be open to men and women is braindead because some men would have conniptions if they saw a guy doing the exact same thing the girls are doing?

There are biological women now who get tizzed up and call themselves drag queens, as if it were not inherent part of gay drag culture that you have to be a biological male to be a drag queen. The day is coming when feminists will demand that biological women be given equal access to drag competitions. As if gay men haven't gone through enough without intersectional feminists appropriating our causes and our culture.

Things change. Better get used to it because it's not going to stop.

 

[Trausti]

You don’t think that scantily clad young women parading around are competing????

I don’t believe that you are that naive or that ignorant.

And what is your problem if scantily clad young women are no longer featured at prize fights?

And what is your problem if scantily clad women are featured at prize fights? If the audience likes it, and the women like, why do interloping ninnies get to ruin other peoples' fun?

Isn’t it kinda pathetic that a bunch of old men need to see other scantily clad men pound the shit out of each other and a bunch of scantily clad young women prancing around half dressed just so their cocks can feel some slight sensation and they can pretend? What kind of sick fuck requires that mix of violence and sex just to feel...something?

Thanks for the sermon, Pat Robertson!

 

[Metaphor]

Thinking the job is inherently degrading is a braindead reason to want it eliminated?

Yes. First, it isn't inherently degrading. Being paid money to look good for other people is not inherently degrading and it's madness to think it is.

Second, even jobs that might be conceived of more reasonably as 'degrading' (such as diving through raw sewage to dislodge blockages) is still a legitimate job and there's no reason to 'eliminate' it on that basis alone.

Or thinking it should be open to men and women is braindead because some men would have conniptions if they saw a guy doing the exact same thing the girls are doing?

Looking good for money is open to both men and women. In certain contexts though it is gender segregated, and the market demand is uneven.

Things change. Better get used to it because it's not going to stop.

That's true. It might even be hoped that the current social discourse, dominated as it is by the dogmatic premises of the feminist faithful, may one day too change.