NationStates

Source
https://www.theglobeandmail.com///sport ... sf_globefb

Excerpt

There will be no more "grid girls" before Formula One races and no more "podium girls" celebrating with the drivers after them.

F1 said Wednesday it will end the long-standing practice of using women on the grid and on the podium with the top three drivers. The Formula One season starts on March 25 at the Australian Grand Prix.

"We feel this custom does not resonate with our brand values and clearly is at odds with modern day societal norms," said Sean Bratches, F1's managing director of commercial operations. "We don't believe the practice is appropriate or relevant to Formula One and its fans, old and new, across the world."

At previous F1 races, women dressed in uniform would walk out onto the grid shortly before the start and then stand in front of each driver's car, holding up the driver's number. Women would also stand alongside the winner on the podium after the race.

The changes also apply to other motorsports series – such as F2 – that take place on GP weekends.

Emphasis mine.

Personally I think this is a very good move to deconstruct gender roles: there were "heroes" - men - who drove the powerful cars, and then there were "grid girls", who were totally unrelated with actual racing, it was just only about giving to the male audience half-naked and silent women to the enjoyment of the male gaze, following and reinforcing the patriarchal relic of women as sexual rewards for the male "heroes" (not mentioning all the male audience staring at them).

The same is already happening in UK in darts (somewhat a sport, too): they did end the very similar, and similarly clearly patriarchal, practice of "walk girls".
I hope that it'll be extended even to the so called "podium girls" in motorbikes competition, I think that it's time for society to move forward.

What do you think, NSGs?

There goes the best part of the sport.

Washington Resistance Army wrote:There goes the best part of the sport.

They just did the same thing with darts. The girls were very pissed off at losing their living.

Disappointing tbh, but not more disappointing than other moves they've made in recent years to change things up like engines and various other issues. We can't have nice things in racing anymore.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:There goes the best part of the sport.

They just did the same thing with darts. The girls were very pissed off at losing their living.

Some of them, not all, not even most.

Even some Icelandic strippers were.
That doesn't mean that what they did was right.

What's funny is that I'm tired of people trying to deconstruct gender roles if we were meant to not have genders then why are their males and females. Plus some jobs are simply made for /better suited toward females then males plain and simple.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Washington Resistance Army wrote:There goes the best part of the sport.

They just did the same thing with darts. The girls were very pissed off at losing their living.

That was the first thing I thought of when I heard about this the other day.

Chessmistress wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
They just did the same thing with darts. The girls were very pissed off at losing their living.

Some of them, not all, not even most.

Even some Icelandic strippers were.
That doesn't mean that what they did was right.

You have any examples of darts girls who were happy to be unemployed?

Fartsniffage wrote:

Chessmistress wrote:
Some of them, not all, not even most.

Even some Icelandic strippers were.
That doesn't mean that what they did was right.

You have any examples of darts girls who were happy to be unemployed?

This

If your sport needs sex/beauty/models to sell it or spice it up i'm afraid to say its probably boring in the first place

Chessmistress wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
They just did the same thing with darts. The girls were very pissed off at losing their living.

Even some Icelandic strippers were.

Gonna go out on a limb here and say that there is nothing wrong with strippers, in that strippers can be either gender, it isn't a gender-specific role. I have been in places that have strippers of both genders, the whole sexist/misogynist/objectifying women argument didn't really apply there as much.

United Furry Alliance wrote:If your sport needs sex/beauty/models to sell it or spice it up i'm afraid to say its probably boring in the first place

Sexy ladies make everything better tho

The East Marches II wrote:Disappointing tbh, but not more disappointing than other moves they've made in recent years to change things up like engines and various other issues. We can't have nice things in racing anymore.

>implying you ever watched F1 and not NASCAR
Pls, TEM. :^)

Washington Resistance Army wrote:

United Furry Alliance wrote:If your sport needs sex/beauty/models to sell it or spice it up i'm afraid to say its probably boring in the first place

Sexy ladies make everything better tho

And? The sport hasn't changed. Were the women racing or fixing cars? Nope its just eye candy. Which i find boring. Most people find it aesthetically pleasing. All in all pointless trival bs

Gig em Aggies wrote:What's funny is that I'm tired of people trying to deconstruct gender roles if we were meant to not have genders then why are their males and females.

Sexual reproduction is a good way of mixing up genes. More possibility of useful traits showing up. Diversity is strength.

What, did you think that this was something special to humans? Males and females have been around longer than there has been anything even close to human.

Plus some jobs are simply made for /better suited toward females then males plain and simple.

There's plenty of jobs that were made for women on the basis of men generally rather liking looking at them. But that's not necessarily something sports organisations will want to be seen to be associated with.

Seems like an excuse to marginalise some women who don't buy into feminisms bullshit.

The New California Republic wrote:

Chessmistress wrote:
Even some Icelandic strippers were.

Gonna go out on a limb here and say that there is nothing wrong with strippers, in that strippers can be either gender, it isn't a gender-specific role. I have been in places that have strippers of both genders, the whole sexist/misogynist/objectifying women argument didn't really apply there as much.

Except it's overwhelmingly women who are strippers, due we live in a patriarchy.
That's why the world's most feminist country banned all strip clubs in 2010
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... st-country

All right, honestly, I get it. In this day and age of sexual harassment being reported and made intolerable at every turn (as it SHOULD be), portraying women in a sexually gratuitous manner or seeing them in general as sex objects, be it as a grid girl, dart girl, or probably sooner-than-later, cheerleader, is becoming more and more passe and frowned upon. Huge organizations such as F1 don't want to be on the wrong side of public opinion or seen as promoting a sexist agenda.

My only pause here is thus: is seeing women as beautiful or attractive now a bad thing? Are we not allowed to find each other attractive, and women who are considered "attractive" by society at large, are they now to be told not to "flaunt" what they have? Are we as a society to tell them, "No, sorry, you can't make a living off your God-given looks." Should modelling be banned now as well?

How can those, especially in the feminist community, stand face-to-face, with a grid girl, a cheerleader, etc., and look them in the eye and say, "Sorry, you're wrong, I'm going to tell you what you can or cannot do with your looks because clearly you don't know better." We're not talking about convincing people not to do heroin or something equally to improve their lives. We're talking about women who I'd like to think, freely chose to participate in this field(s) of work.

It's difficult.

Aellex wrote:

The East Marches II wrote:Disappointing tbh, but not more disappointing than other moves they've made in recent years to change things up like engines and various other issues. We can't have nice things in racing anymore.

>implying you ever watched F1 and not NASCAR
Pls, TEM. :^)

DELET THIS

Donut section wrote:Seems like an excuse to marginalise some women who don't buy into feminisms bullshit.

How's that?

Chessmistress wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Gonna go out on a limb here and say that there is nothing wrong with strippers, in that strippers can be either gender, it isn't a gender-specific role. I have been in places that have strippers of both genders, the whole sexist/misogynist/objectifying women argument didn't really apply there as much.

Except it's overwhelmingly women who are strippers, due we live in a patriarchy.
That's why the world's most feminist country banned all strip clubs in 2010
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... st-country

Can't let them decide to what they will, that'll never do

Chessmistress wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Gonna go out on a limb here and say that there is nothing wrong with strippers, in that strippers can be either gender, it isn't a gender-specific role. I have been in places that have strippers of both genders, the whole sexist/misogynist/objectifying women argument didn't really apply there as much.

Except it's overwhelmingly women who are strippers, due we live in a patriarchy.
That's why the world's most feminist country banned all strip clubs in 2010
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... st-country

Sounds like a shit country to live in.

Chessmistress wrote:

The New California Republic wrote:Gonna go out on a limb here and say that there is nothing wrong with strippers, in that strippers can be either gender, it isn't a gender-specific role. I have been in places that have strippers of both genders, the whole sexist/misogynist/objectifying women argument didn't really apply there as much.

Except it's overwhelmingly women who are strippers, due we live in a patriarchy.
That's why the world's most feminist country banned all strip clubs in 2010
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyl ... st-country

Meh. On that point, do you think that male strippers should be banned?

Lancaster of Wessex wrote:All right, honestly, I get it. In this day and age of sexual harassment being reported and made intolerable at every turn (as it SHOULD be), portraying women in a sexually gratuitous manner or seeing them in general as sex objects, be it as a grid girl, dart girl, or probably sooner-than-later, cheerleader, is becoming more and more passe and frowned upon. Huge organizations such as F1 don't want to be on the wrong side of public opinion or seen as promoting a sexist agenda.

Precisely.
This important change is happening even thanks to #metoo.

Lancaster of Wessex wrote:My only pause here is thus: is seeing women as beautiful or attractive now a bad thing? Are we not allowed to find each other attractive, and women who are considered "attractive" by society at large, are they now to be told not to "flaunt" what they have? Are we as a society to tell them, "No, sorry, you can't make a living off your God-given looks." Should modelling be banned now as well?

No, objectification is the issue, not seeing them as attractive.
Modelling is a mixed bag, there are male models too at the fashion shows so it isn't a problem. Very different issue is the models who are sexually objectified in adverts.

Lancaster of Wessex wrote:How can those, especially in the feminist community, stand face-to-face, with a grid girl, a cheerleader, etc., and look them in the eye and say, "Sorry, you're wrong, I'm going to tell you what you can or cannot do with your looks because clearly you don't know better." We're not talking about convincing people not to do heroin or something equally to improve their lives. We're talking about women who I'd like to think, freely chose to participate in this field(s) of work.

It's difficult.

I agree that it's difficult: such issue is very similar to prostitution, but prostitution was easier to deal - by letting women to sell their bodies while criminalizing just only those taking advantage of it.
However this attitude has to go away, I hope you agree about it (I guess you do since you seem quite sensible and able to understand the problem, given the first part of your message).

Lancaster of Wessex wrote:All right, honestly, I get it. In this day and age of sexual harassment being reported and made intolerable at every turn (as it SHOULD be), portraying women in a sexually gratuitous manner or seeing them in general as sex objects, be it as a grid girl, dart girl, or probably sooner-than-later, cheerleader, is becoming more and more passe and frowned upon. Huge organizations such as F1 don't want to be on the wrong side of public opinion or seen as promoting a sexist agenda.

My only pause here is thus: is seeing women as beautiful or attractive now a bad thing? Are we not allowed to find each other attractive, and women who are considered "attractive" by society at large, are they now to be told not to "flaunt" what they have? Are we as a society to tell them, "No, sorry, you can't make a living off your God-given looks." Should modelling be banned now as well?

How can those, especially in the feminist community, stand face-to-face, with a grid girl, a cheerleader, etc., and look them in the eye and say, "Sorry, you're wrong, I'm going to tell you what you can or cannot do with your looks because clearly you don't know better." We're not talking about convincing people not to do heroin or something equally to improve their lives. We're talking about women who I'd like to think, freely chose to participate in this field(s) of work.

It's difficult.

I don't keep the closest tabs on the feminist hive-mind, but I don't think they are going to tell women not to be models or strippers or cheerleaders or whatever. You'll note from most of the threads that Chessmistress starts that it tends to be her telling women how to live their lives, liberal feminist types telling her no, women can live their own lives, and sometimes the conservative types agreeing with her, hashtag horseshoe theory.