The new great grid girl debate

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I think the problem is that that my opinions on the world in general have changed as I have got older and, I hope, matured. And on this topic, I have a 17 year old rather attractive granddaughter, and I have to ask myself whether I would be proud to see her parading around the F1 scene, and other motorsport events, in the sorts of costumes that they have been wearing up to now? The answer is a big NO. I wouldn't want her displaying her charms for all to see for the benefit of a lot of old lechers.

Have you thought to ask your grand daughter about how she feels about the situation, or is this just an expression of your wishes to control her behavior?
You have now made the problem about you, and not her.


I know a young Muslim woman whose opinion of the burqa is unprintable, and yet she is forced to wear it by her male relatives, guess they are worried about old lechers too. She is unsurprisingly working hard to have it banned, an activity her nearest and dearest have no knowledge of.
Probably work out really badly for her if they did too!

I am sure she is delighted to know that they have her best interests at heart, NOT!

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

And Richard I was a bit rushed but if someone says something like "I've always disagreed with.. .." then they'd better prove it. Not a dig at you per se but as above its just a bunch of people jumping on a bandwagon.

I don’t want to pile on you more than I have because I fully believe in attack the post and not the poster, so I don’t want to continue to hammer you on this. I will try to make this my last comment on this...

But calling out people who come out and agree with a particular position for the first time and then say that because they didn’t speak out earlier is some sign of... I don’t know what... Guilt? Hypocrisy? Or as MGDavid says... jumping on a bandwagon so they can feel good that they are on the winning team?

I find it all personally insulting.

What is disheartening about this discussion is that those who want to keep the old status quo have moved beyond arguing points that are supportive of their position to now questioning the motives of those who opposed them. With the conclusion that they are somehow lesser individuals for not speaking up earlier and/or opportunistically jumping on at the last minute to partake in the glory won by others. Good grief!

Richard

[sizzle]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

I think the problem is that that my opinions on the world in general have changed as I have got older and, I hope, matured. And on this topic, I have a 17 year old rather attractive granddaughter, and I have to ask myself whether I would be proud to see her parading around the F1 scene, and other motorsport events, in the sorts of costumes that they have been wearing up to now? The answer is a big NO. I wouldn't want her displaying her charms for all to see for the benefit of a lot of old lechers.

Better not let her go out on a Saturday night then, they wear far less in a lot of instances than the grid girls ever wore.

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by sizzle

Better not let her go out on a Saturday night then, they wear far less in a lot of instances than the grid girls ever wore.

Yep. Also may as well ban her from going to the beach while you're at it.

Women in the 50's and 60's fought for their right to express themselves, whether that be wearing a mini skirt, or a two piece bikini at the beach. Almost 70 years later, we now have women and men complaining that a grid girl, who is wearing a dress that is far less revealing (if at all revealing) than what you would see on a Saturday night in town, or even at the beach, is exploitation of females?? Really?? Seriously??

[AndrewCherry]

Sigh...

I think we've veered off again. It's not about the amount of clothing (for many that object). I would feel the same if they were covered head to toe. It's also not about whether they're forced in to it or not. There are other jobs that society has moved away from because they just don't fit anymore. Nobody has made it illegal.

Whatever they're wearing, they're there because they are decorative. You can call that glamorous or whatever you want, but you're still using women as ornamentation. As soon as you are using women for a non-functional role, a lot of people are going to feel that this isn't a good thing for wider society. Incidentally, that's why they're different to models, who have a functional role in demonstrating the clothing they're wearing.

And yes, most of us who think these things and say them in public are used to being accused of all sorts of stuff. Much of it hilarious, but the one thing which is particularly annoying is being told that we only think it to fit in. For evidence that this isn't particularly true, look at the proportions in this thread...

[Peter Mallett]

Agreed. But in fairness all those who think it bad to use sex to sell would be those who complained to the Advertising Standards Authority for this
https://youtu.be/MpizkWEmg1g
No, didn't think so.

[bella]

Originally Posted by AndrewCherry

I think we've veered off again. It's not about the amount of clothing (for many that object). I would feel the same if they were covered head to toe. It's also not about whether they're forced in to it or not. There are other jobs that society has moved away from because they just don't fit anymore. Nobody has made it illegal.

Whatever they're wearing, they're there because they are decorative. You can call that glamorous or whatever you want, but you're still using women as ornamentation. As soon as you are using women for a non-functional role, a lot of people are going to feel that this isn't a good thing for wider society. Incidentally, that's why they're different to models, who have a functional role in demonstrating the clothing they're wearing.

YUP. i've run out of energy to keep saying it every time someone returns to the same old points - it is NOT about the individual women. it is about women as a whole, society as a whole, and making a small step towards changing it for the better.

and it isn't usually about what they're wearing either, but you have admit that many of the costumes these girls wear are hilariously bad.

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Agreed. But in fairness all those who think it bad to use sex to sell would be those who complained to the Advertising Standards Authority for this
https://youtu.be/MpizkWEmg1g
No, didn't think so.

sure, it's not really appropriate. but it's funny that you have to rummage that far back in advertising to find an example to illustrate your point enough

now, of course, what with reclaiming sexuality being a huge part of feminism for many women, they can use a semi naked woman to sell to us as well and kill two birds with one stone.

can't remember where the quote is from, but some wise person said if posing naked really was empowering, the rich men who run the world would be doing it

[Peter Mallett]

It's not that far back actually Bella. Stop using age as a shield it's boring.

Next you will be suggesting that we burn all the paintings by Reubens who celebrated the female form.

All Liberty has done is jump on a bandwagon and drawn in people who think it's no longer right to be human.

Whether grid girls are there or not should have been for the race organisers to decide not Liberty. As I said I didn't miss them last weekend but likewise I didnt notice the kids but then to use your terms of reference, if I had I'd be a paedophile which I certainly am not.

[bella]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

It's not that far back actually Bella. Stop using age as a shield it's boring.

Next you will be suggesting that we burn all the paintings by Reubens who celebrated the female form.

you've projected your own agenda there and leapt to a conclusion that wasn't even implied. and you've also projected what you think is MY agenda based on your own assumptions. but seeing as though i'm here, i may as well make a public statement - i have no beef with art.

i was referring to the *campaign* age and the fact that it's very rare to see flat-out marketing to women (and gay men) using men's bodies in that way. as a side note it amuses me that coca cola produces two low/no calorie versions of coke, one clearly marketed at women, and one at men. thankfully they don't play the same game as the razor and deodorant companies and price the women's product higher than the mens...

[LC2guy]

Confused i think ??

From the BBC Website;

Silverstone boss Stuart Pringle says his personal view is the practice is "outdated", adding "lycra can stay in the 1970s and 80s for me, I don't want any of that tarty nonsense".

Grid at Silverstone 24hrs;

https://www.google.se/search?rlz=1C1...2O7iKi8U4hu3M:

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by LC2guy

Confused i think ??

From the BBC Website;

Silverstone boss Stuart Pringle says his personal view is the practice is "outdated", adding "lycra can stay in the 1970s and 80s for me, I don't want any of that tarty nonsense".

Grid at Silverstone 24hrs;

https://www.google.se/search?rlz=1C1...2O7iKi8U4hu3M:

Not at all. Pringle has stated his own personal opinion, which you acknowledge in the quote, whilst the race is organised by an outside entity not Silverstone Circuit. They merely hire the track to a promoter, and it's up to them (the promoter) to decide on how the meeting is run.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by sizzle

Better not let her go out on a Saturday night then, they wear far less in a lot of instances than the grid girls ever wore.

Firstly, that's not my choice; that's the responsibility of her parents. However, I am relieved to say, though, that she has more sense than that, possibly due in large part to the way that her mother and father have brought her up.

[Mike Harte]

Just to add a little more to the debate.

I have just watched the unveilling of the BTCC grid. It was noticable that only, I think, 4 teams chose to add young ladies to the event, and, IMHO, they brought absolutely nothing to show. In fact, the young ladies spent most of their time primping their long locks as if it was themselves that they were promoting.

The glamour is supposed to be in the cars, not female bodies adorning them.

I will also touch on the fact that it is not only the young females that seem to lose the plot. One of the drivers actually filmed himself walking out of the garage alongside his pushed car, making sure that his mobile phone pictures included the crowd from the media. Somewhat narcasistic, in my opinion.

[midgetman]

I read people that voted for Brexit saying to those that didn't: "you lost, move on."

"Grid girls have been dropped. Nothing you can do about it. Move on."

It really doesn't matter. I'll not be able to watch F1 next year anyway so they may as well have naked mud wrestling for all the excitement it's going to generate in the Midgetman household.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Yep. Also may as well ban her from going to the beach while you're at it.

Women in the 50's and 60's fought for their right to express themselves, whether that be wearing a mini skirt, or a two piece bikini at the beach. Almost 70 years later, we now have women and men complaining that a grid girl, who is wearing a dress that is far less revealing (if at all revealing) than what you would see on a Saturday night in town, or even at the beach, is exploitation of females?? Really?? Seriously??

As Rush Limbaugh said years ago, feminism was created to give unattractive women access to the levers of power in society. As we saw decades ago when women expressed themselves in such a way with a miniskirt or bikini, it gave those ladies a lot of attention and those women who made themselves unattractive or who had hit the wall felt left out. It's no surprise the feminist movement really got going in the 1970's to respond to all these attractive women running about. If there is one undeniable truth about women and their social dynamics is that they never support other women and want to dominate whatever social circle they are in, especially if it's competing for men and their resources. As an example it's like a particular woman in this thread, it drives her batty that attractive women work at her company, get attention in Lycra and make more money, so the way to level the playing field is to ban them and cover them up.

You do have to give these unattractive feminists credit because they have also managed to manipulate a lot of eunuch men into buying into the covering up of attractive women while promoting the unattractive such as this "body positivity" BS. In the end what I believe is that the natural order always will reassert itself despite all this modern day attempt at rearranging it. Once men stop liking attractive women is the day your society dies, because no children, no society, no future.

The whole grid girl thing to me is just a part of the whole battlefield we are on. I see the bigger picture and what their totalitarian aims are. When the grid girls go they'll be squawking about the next attractive women and whatever they are doing.

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by bella

YUP. i've run out of energy to keep saying it every time someone returns to the same old points - it is NOT about the individual women. it is about women as a whole, society as a whole, and making a small step towards changing it for the better.

Like the great philosopher Sheriff Buford T Justice once said, that aint nothin but pure old fashioned communism. The individual must be suppressed for the supposed good of the group and lowering the standards to the gutter supposedly changes it for the better.

You've proved my point about feminism, thanks. It's not about individual women and their freedom and liberty, it's about banning and oppressing attractive women so the unattractive can advance.

[AndrewCherry]

...and with that, I'm out. There's just no point in arguing against such a starting position. Haven't been called a eunuch, even by implication, for a long time.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

Like the great philosopher Sheriff Buford T Justice once said, that aint nothin but pure old fashioned communism. The individual must be suppressed for the supposed good of the group and lowering the standards to the gutter supposedly changes it for the better.

seriously who takes the Sheriff's side over Smokey and the Bandit!

this is a motorsports thread...if you arent siding with the guy driving the trans am then you need to ask yourself some deep questions about your own masculinity and whether or not you truly support the rights of the individual over the authoritative powers of the state!

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

That.

And Richard I was a bit rushed but if someone says something like "I've always disagreed with.. .." then they'd better prove it. Not a dig at you per se but as above its just a bunch of people jumping on a bandwagon.

And Liberty knew it would be a good way to disguise the fact that they have no idea how to make the show better.

As I said, personally I didnt notice them when they were there but they were part of the DNA of the sport. Next theyll stop the champagne and I bet most folks don't know why champagne is sprayed on the podium anyway.

100% disagree. If I hold an opinion I shouldn't have to trot out documentation from my life to prove it. And what makes it so that you have to force one side to prove it but not the other? Can I demand proof that you aren't arguing for the sake of arguing and say you'd better prove you've never had anything against grid girls?

Also, we can change our minds. When I was 15 I had no issue with grid girls. However, my opinions on a lot of things have changed. I reserve the right to do that.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Also, we can change our minds. When I was 15 I had no issue with grid girls. However, my opinions on a lot of things have changed. I reserve the right to do that.

So as I was trading posts with Peter, I thought about posting something that I had posted years ago on my local car club forum. As I was tired of trying to convince Peter that I had thought about this before I abandoned this idea. But the post above about "changing minds" or having an evolving opinion resonated with me. So I decided to dig up that content and post here.

To set the stage this was during my local car clubs 50th anniversary celebration. We had someone who posts photos on Facebook of older events. A handful of photos showed podium celebrations in which we had hired some "trophy girls". Note: also something we had not done in recent history.

A number of people (generally younger members) felt the photos were inappropriate and the entire discussion got quite out of hand. Lots of name calling, hurt feelings, etc. What was particularly bad was that those moderating the discussion let their views drive what posts were removed. So there was some unbalanced censorship going on.

I can't point to a URL for this as the forum is "members only" and the posts are not publicly viewable. But this is a part of what I had to say in September 2014 in response to this entire mess...

Originally Posted by Richard Casto a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...

It is also unfortunate that we can’t discuss our history and a concept that continues to be common in motorsports today. It might be “grid girls” or “trophy girls” or whatever, but they are not uncommon. Regardless of your position on the appropriateness, our history should not be hidden and we should be able to discuss and even post photos that would not out of place in today’s media (point being to not put today’s media on a pedestal, but rather that the content is mainstream).

Lastly, let me step into the proverbial jaws of death. Are trophy girls generally inappropriate? I truly don’t think there is a single valid answer to that. And that if anything is a key point. I think that to some it is and so others it is not. Some find it misogynistic. And I have no doubt that there are people in this world who do nothing but treat women purely as sexual objects and nothing more. I also think there are people who have a different view on sexuality in that you can be strong, independent, well adjusted, healthy, caring and a sexually desirable being all at the same time. I am of the opinion that being desirable and/or desired does not make you less of a person. I absolutely do not think less of those women in the photos and support their choice to act as models. Call me crazy.

As to this wrecking our ability to be inclusive (and clearly I am talking about more women participating), I truly think what is happening now (censorship, pushing a single point of view) is not the healthy way to do that. I am 100% behind more participation by women, but I know that we can’t make everyone (male or female) happy. While apparently controversial, I don’t think those photos have crossed a line.

Clearly if you read the above, you would think that I would be very "pro grid girl". I still firmly believe today that sexuality can't be ignored. That it is fine to be masculine or feminine. That we can't gravitate to some type of gender neutral middle point.

Originally Posted by mountainstar

It's not about individual women and their freedom and liberty, it's about banning and oppressing attractive women so the unattractive can advance.

So for what mountainstar says above. I can't disagree with him more about what he thinks is going on (some grand communist conspiracy or something like that... Thanks Obama!) But he and I probably agree that you can't ignore sexuality.

I still broadly support what I say above, but I was (then) missing something very important. I would say that my perspective above is about individual women. What I was missing in 2014 is very well summed up here...

Originally Posted by bella

YUP. i've run out of energy to keep saying it every time someone returns to the same old points - it is NOT about the individual women. it is about women as a whole, society as a whole, and making a small step towards changing it for the better.

Which I understand now much more than I did previously. So yes, opinions evolve. Mine evolved sometime between 2014 and now.

Richard

[MGDavid]

thought you said it was a long time ago; 3 1/2 years? pah!
so it seems reasonable that you may change your mind several times back and forth in the remainder of your time on this planet?

[djinvicta]

And also the huge problem that this has become..even on here is that you can't actually comment without being "shot" by one side or the other..
Having a few daughters myself, I have no problem with "girls" or women or blokes, whatever, that want to get paid to do..whatever they are asked and agree to do..It's not F1 slavery..or is it? God only knows...
I still love a pretty girl...but I must admit, I used to wonder why 58 were draping the stairs after an F1 finish as the winner came up the stairs...Just goes to prove the TV motive..we didn't see the stairs after the Aussie Grand Prix..whitewashed walls aren't the same...are they?

[Paradise City]

The thing that interests me about this question is the capitulation to what is fashionable. Sometimes - just sometimes - you gotta defy the fashion.Maybe not in the area of grid girls maybe it be some other area.

And is the cause a women's interests the better for this decision? Eh, no. It's just the internet has made photogenic women more accessible so real life glamour girls is old hat and with this waning interest, feminism is given space to prevail.

[littleman]

In the Western World at least, I just struggle to understand what women want that they haven't already got.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by littleman

In the Western World at least, I just struggle to understand what women want that they haven't already got.

Perhaps all they want equality and and a level playing field.