The 'Great' WEC Grid Girl Debate

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by bella

the fact that you can't see it says it all, sir.

ladies and gentlemen, this is what's known as male privilege. it's the inability (or refusal) of menfolk to see, perceive or understand issues that women face, because they are men and not subject to those issues.

Madam. You have drunk far too much of the cool aid.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by bella

the fact that you can't see it says it all, sir.

ladies and gentlemen, this is what's known as male privilege. it's the inability (or refusal) of menfolk to see, perceive or understand issues that women face, because they are men and not subject to those issues.

correct

Originally Posted by Spyderman

I do agree however, that there is little interest in discussing this further, as there is a fundamental philosophical difference in how we see the world and what we want it to look look in the future.

Also correct, and yet it is my expectation that on page 35, "Spyderman" will still be arguing with someone.

[Spyderman]

I tend to resist all attempts to shut me up because you may not agree with me.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by CTD

That argumentation is flawed.
In stead of asking:

Originally Posted by CTD

• What percentage of Road & Track and Autoweeks readers is Male?
• How many woman post here?

You should instead ask:

• Why isn't there a higher percentage of female readers of Road & Track
• Why doesn't more female post here?

No. The people who make a Living publishing those magazines Know that it is not grid-girls ... it is the tendency of or men to be more interested in things automotive. Road & Track and Autoweek Know their audience. They know who buys their publications—they have been at it for decades. They Know more men by a huge margin are interested in cars than women are.

And that is fine. It is OKAY if more men like cars more than women do.

How many men buy Elle of Harper's Bazaar or any other fashion/beauty magazine? The audience for those publications is mostly women—BY THE CHOICE OF THOSE MEN AND WOMEN.

Should Harper's Bazaar start running more automotive ads and fewer make-up ads in an effort to attract male readers? Yeah ...

Sorry to tell people the actual facts, but there are general differences between genders. Go do the research. Some women and men cross those general classifications, but it is no accident that women are mostly marketed fashion and beauty and men, more often action and mechanics. There are general gender traits.

The idea that if there were no ads of pretty girls in Motortrend or Road & Track, suddenly women would find those magazines tremendously appealing is garbage.

And as for why more women don't post here ... it's the grid girls right? Really, think before you type.

In much the same way, while a very small minority of women do like racing, anyone who has ever been to a race, even races with No grid girls, knows that the crowd skews heavily male. Just like boxing, for that matter. That's all because of the ring girls, right? Women are dying to watch guys beat each other bloody, but the girl in spandex puts them off.

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

..and that is the bottom line. Both men and women should be known for their talents, and expertise, not for being decorations.

So, Fogelhund, you are absolutely opposed to the entire modeling industry? Fashion models, make-up models, spokesmodels ... and while we are at it, newscasters (you will never see an unattractive male or female on any major news broadcast .. the anchors are frankly replaced when they get too old.)

Actually, none of us cared about this issue at all until the grid-girl debate started.

But now, I assume everyone here will spend all their time telling every person, male or female, that if they are valued for their attractiveness, they are worthless.

As a race, humans value physical attractiveness. It is genetic—sexual selection for breeding purposes. We are not limited by this trait, but it is a real trait.

Pretending otherwise is pretty ignorant. How we deal with it is open, but the basic fact is there.

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Do you think that it may be a good idea to let each girl choose which role model they would like to emulate?

This is pretty much the core of the debate.

I wouldn't necessarily use the term "role model" because it is emotionally laden. I would say, Shouldn't each person have the option to choose any career path?

There are women who Want to be models. There are Men who want to be models. is this something we should oppose?

That's really what all this is about, isn't it? Not grid girls—but whether or not we should elevate people because of physical attractiveness. About whether it is demeaning to people we find attractive, to give them special status because we find them attractive.

Me, I take the middle course. I like seeing attractive women, but I also understand that it is just an accident of genetics and (often) make up and even surgery.

When it comes to deep human interaction, the only thing which matters is the contents, but when I am just out walking around, I also appreciate the packaging.

When you look how much money is spent on clothing and makeup, hair dye and perfume and hair styles and grooming (for men and women), it is quite obvious that the whole freaking human race cares about the packaging.

I think the adjustment is not to pretend we don't care, but just to keep some perspective—not to confuse the value of the packaging with the value of the contents.

While we are on it ... recent developments in the NFL has made it clear that we value some men for their athletic ability no matter what kind of human beings they are in other respects.

I think what we need is for people in general to get a lot smarter and more self-aware. Instead we blame the NFL players or the grid girls.

I think (please correct me if I am wrong) what Spyderman and others protest, is that small and vocal groups are telling everyone how to think, or condemning how they think, when in fact, what is needed is not rules and standards, but a general increase in rational cogitation among human beings.

I have often been part of a vocal majority trying to make the masses change; I understand that side of it. But I also realize that as long as we let people be stupid (and spend exponentially more on war than education, and also view education as a prime tool for religious indoctrination rather than the bettering of individual humans and thereby the human race) then we are always going to be cutting the leaves and not the roots of the issues.

There is Nothing Wrong with people appreciating the beauty of the human form, any more than it is wrong to see beauty in a flower or a tree. There is nothing wrong with an attractive human being showing his or her beauty to others. (Look how much classical art is exactly that, the display of beautiful human forms—anyone think we should destroy Michelangelo's "David"?)

Grid girls are being used in this debate as a symbol of male domination of females—this was never really about grid girls, but about how some women feel about how most men have acted for the past several thousand (at least) years.

In a world where men and women were actually equal (whatever that means) no one would care about grid girls—if that's what they want to do, power to them.

But in This world, a lot of women cannot see this. Because men have basically owned and rules women for so long, they see everything through the lens of male domination/oppression.

That's fine—until they start trying to make the whole world conform to their limited view.

That, I think, is what Spyderman, et al, are protesting. Let us each decide how we see the world and how we react to it.

If grid girls aren't there, do you really think people's attitudes will change? Of course not. Grid girls are a Symbol—the reality was never at issue.

It is chopping at leaves and ignoring the root ... and maybe not even the leaves of the plant you find so obnoxious.

Train men that women can be models or mechanics. Train women to know they have a choice, any choice ... and if they choose to be models or mechanics, so be it. You don't increase freedom by limiting choices.

I think that is what Spyderman might be saying.

[cmk]

I confess I am more than a little shocked by the fervour that has greeted the disbandment of grid girls. I had no idea people were so passionate about their presence.

I have a partner who is a female in STEM and she and I both find a lot of value and a lot of hyperbole in the various arguments about how these fields can be sexist and discourage women. I expect the true situation with linking grid girls and female involvement in motorsport is similarly muddy, but that definitely doesn't mean it is entirely without merit either.

What it boils down to for me is this - motorsport is ultimately about drivers, engineers, cars and competition. Perhaps there is an argument that glamour should be associated with it, but I feel like said glamour should arise naturally rather than be forced anyway. When I turn on the telly to watch motorsport or attend a track, the aforementioned 4 things are my reasons for doing so. If the world is moving on from delivering an enforced side helping of boobs with that, does it harm the main product? No.

Yes, I do like to look at boobs, like most men (and a decent number of women too), and there are easy and ideally non-exploitative ways for us to accomplish that if we want to. Having them show up when trying to watch racing cars seems to provide no additional benefit. I have no idea what benefit removing them will bring, though I hope it helps bring more talented women into the sport. What I fail to see, however, is what serious drawbacks their removal imposes. When there is a clear potential for gain, without a clear cost, the best course of action is similarly obvious.

[bella]

Originally Posted by cmk

I have a partner who is a female in STEM and she and I both find a lot of value and a lot of hyperbole in the various arguments about how these fields can be sexist and discourage women. I expect the true situation with linking grid girls and female involvement in motorsport is similarly muddy, but that definitely doesn't mean it is entirely without merit either.

sensible post, ty.

i agree it's probably a piece in the jigsaw rather than a root cause. but when people are telling you the jigsaw does not exist and that the pieces are made of lies, you do rather have to break it apart into its pieces and build it back together in front of them. sometimes that can mean articulating things that are very difficult to quantify.

[Spyderman]

Thank you Maelochs!

[Victor_RO]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

Train men that women can be models or mechanics. Train women to know they have a choice, any choice ... and if they choose to be models or mechanics, so be it. You don't increase freedom by limiting choices.

I think that is what Spyderman might be saying.

I'm sorry, but a single championship deciding to no longer employ models for 8 weekends a year is hardly "limiting choice".

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by wnut

Plus 1, great work Mountainstar!

The "fun police" just ruin everything!

P.S. I see the grid girl thread seems to have disappeared from The "Australasian Touring Car" thread! Politically correct?

It has? If so that is a shame, great thread, although I think it has been a while since anyone contributed.

I do find it with great hilarity that people have their panties in a twist over women in lycra when for years the same people insisted that we should be "progressive" and "liberated" and let it all hang out and to do whatever we want. Now the sight of an attractive women brings out all sorts of offense to unattractive women and emasculated men living in extreme terror of a leg or boob.

I think one thing is clear is that "progressives" are actually negative regressive control freaks that focus on banning, regulating and taxing anything that is fun.

Personally myself involved with different sports, I'm in it for fun and a good time and an escape from everything else. I only follow motorsports now that are about having fun, doing some good racing and enjoying life. The boring spec series and other series with political agendas I do not follow as much or simply not at all anymore. It's the same with my other sports, it's all about having a good time and when the good time is shot it's time to move on.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by mountainstar

It has? If so that is a shame, great thread, although I think it has been a while since anyone contributed.

I do find it with great hilarity that people have their panties in a twist over women in lycra when for years the same people insisted that we should be "progressive" and "liberated" and let it all hang out and to do whatever we want. Now the sight of an attractive women brings out all sorts of offense to unattractive women and emasculated men living in extreme terror of a leg or boob.

I think one thing is clear is that "progressives" are actually negative regressive control freaks that focus on banning, regulating and taxing anything that is fun.

Personally myself involved with different sports, I'm in it for fun and a good time and an escape from everything else. I only follow motorsports now that are about having fun, doing some good racing and enjoying life. The boring spec series and other series with political agendas I do not follow as much or simply not at all anymore. It's the same with my other sports, it's all about having a good time and when the good time is shot it's time to move on.

I have enjoyed reading your posts. Thank you.

I remember "burn the bra"!

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by Peat

Motorsport as a whole is dying on it's arse. It needs all the friends it can get, so alienating women is not an option anymore.

Some segments of motorsport are dying, other parts are doing well. In the past 10 years there have been quite a few road racing tracks built in the USA, often oriented towards the country club or club scene.

There again when it comes to professional motorsport it's about entertainment and having a good time. When the good time is gone, the racing is boring and the drivers, remaining sponsors and organizing bodies are consumed with being politically correct and dull, then people like myself find other venues.

That women are seen as some sort of savior to motorsport is a fallacy. In my professional experience there are very few women passionate about motorsports in an all consuming fashion like men might have. Same with cars in general as well. Now there are some that have a casual interest but I just don't see the passion out there for it on the whole. Women are more interested in shopping and talking on the phone than sitting at a racetrack in the mud or rain watching cars go by or sitting in a garage rebuilding an engine.

Many series including Nascar have expended a great deal of time and money going after the women market to no avail while at the same time alienating their core market. I think the world is better off accepting that there are some things men want to do and some things that women would rather do. In order to make the world equal doesn't mean that women have to inhabit everything men do and smother it.

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Ever wondered why it is a male dominated environment? Ever wondered if the presence of barely clothed women standing around to get mens attention is somewhat uncomfortable for women?

And for the man here arguing that WEC will not gain one fan from the removal of grid girls - you're wrong. My wife was overjoyed at a move which will make it less uncomfortable for her to watch with this series. Fan gained.

Ladies in lycra and holding umbrellas made her uncomfortable? What does she do when she goes to the beach or other similar venues?

[mountainstar]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

When you go to a beach there are people in swimwear because it's appropriate for that situation. People in swimwear is not appropriate for a racing circuit.

You either live in the polar zone or have never been to many races around the world. When the weather is warm plenty of women wear bikini tops or something similar. You obviously have never been to an event like Sebring.

[Fogelhund]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

[FONT=&quot]

So, Fogelhund, you are absolutely opposed to the entire modeling industry? Fashion models, make-up models, spokesmodels ... and while we are at it, newscasters (you will never see an unattractive male or female on any major news broadcast .. the anchors are frankly replaced when they get too old.)

Actually, none of us cared about this issue at all until the grid-girl debate started.

This seems to be somewhere heading in a non-related to Motorsports derailment... but as someone whose wife was a model for many years, I cannot say it is a very healthy industry for women at all, mentally or physically, and she's paid the price for the rest of her life.

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by Fogelhund

This seems to be somewhere heading in a non-related to Motorsports derailment... but as someone whose wife was a model for many years, I cannot say it is a very healthy industry for women at all, mentally or physically, and she's paid the price for the rest of her life.

indeed ... but if the industry were run with great respect for the models, would it still be a bad thing?

Should we go to museums and destroy every picture and sculpture glorifying the human form?

I cannot say I approve of the modeling industry as it stands, having had only the briefest of interactions with it (I worked with one fashion show.) However, is it the whole idea of presenting beautiful women (or presenting women as beautiful) or the attitudes of some of the people who run the industry, which is the problem?

That's part of my point (one of many) here: it is attitudes of men towards women and women towards men, in general and not in specific, which is the issue here. Not models, not grid girls.

AS I stated way back in this thread, I don't care about the grid girls and I don't think the attendance at races will change at all because of them one way or the other. I also don't think this thread is about grid girls.

I am pretty sure that if you ran a modeling agency, you would do it in such a fashion that the women were cared for and treated with respect.

I am not sure but I would guess that if, when you met your wife, you told her "Modeling is degrading every woman everywhere and you are hurting society and you need to quit right now, or I will not date you," you would not be married to your wife, because she would have told you to leave.

In a better world, models would be accorded respect just like athletes, because after all, both offer nothing but accidents of genetics and dedicated training.

Some people can jump or run farther or faster--they are more physically able; some people are more physically attractive. To maximize either talent to make a career of it, both types have to train and practice and sacrifice.

If models were seen more like athletes, or vice versa ... but that would take an advancement in the general human outlook. People in general would need to be smart enough to see things differently than they are rpesented now--which is part of what people are trying to do using grid girls, in specific.

I don't think it is a particularly effective method, but I can see the need.

For me in a debate like this it isn't that one side or the other is worng; it is more about sorting through the various arguments and seeing which are most valid, most effective, and might lead human thought and awareness to the best possible place.

I have been trying not to Win (impossible) but to keep the arguments clear and fact based, and to clear up obvious misconceptions or misstatements so that we can have a productive discussion.

As I also said way back in this thread, if WEC really thinks it will gain any kind of good will or even one fan, this is a no-brain move--absolutely axe the sponsored grid girls. I don't think it will matter, but as a business move, it makes sense.

The larger underlying issues are what we have been discussing, not really at all whether grid girls are an important part of the WEC race presentation.

[CTD]

Originally Posted by Maelochs

[FONT=&quot] No. The people who make a Living publishing those magazines Know that it is not grid-girls ... it is the tendency of or men to be more interested in things automotive. Road & Track and Autoweek Know their audience. They know who buys their publications—they have been at it for decades. They Know more men by a huge margin are interested in cars than women are.

And that is fine. It is OKAY if more men like cars more than women do.

How many men buy Elle of Harper's Bazaar or any other fashion/beauty magazine? The audience for those publications is mostly women—BY THE CHOICE OF THOSE MEN AND WOMEN.

Should Harper's Bazaar start running more automotive ads and fewer make-up ads in an effort to attract male readers? Yeah ...

Sorry to tell people the actual facts, but there are general differences between genders. Go do the research. Some women and men cross those general classifications, but it is no accident that women are mostly marketed fashion and beauty and men, more often action and mechanics. There are general gender traits.

The idea that if there were no ads of pretty girls in Motortrend or Road & Track, suddenly women would find those magazines tremendously appealing is garbage.

And as for why more women don't post here ... it's the grid girls right? Really, think before you type.

In much the same way, while a very small minority of women do like racing, anyone who has ever been to a race, even races with No grid girls, knows that the crowd skews heavily male. Just like boxing, for that matter. That's all because of the ring girls, right? Women are dying to watch guys beat each other bloody, but the girl in spandex puts them off.

You are going way to specific in this whole thing.

The Grid Girls is the best example of Motorsport being a "mans" world. If you want to have more girls interested in motorsport, you need to make sure that they feel equally as welcome as a man.
Seeing Grid Girls, and how some fans respond to them, is something I would imagine scarring of most girls (and guys for that matter).
The women I know, and who I've spoke to about motorsport, actually thinks that objectifying female is a major part of the sport, because of grid girls!

Right now, the motorsport and car industry isn't very appealing to girls because of the image it got. I think this is in large parts because of most advertising and shows has an unnatural large showing of Grid Girls, something which, together with Cheerleaders has become a symbol of objectification of females.

Again, If you want to make our sport and industry more welcoming to females, we need to end all matters where a person is hired because of gender. To this, Grid Girls is the prime example of it, and therefor needs to be removed.


In general, this thread has become WAY to personal, and increasingly moving towards personal attacks. (the times the word "you" is used, is increasing)
Let us remember the good custom of "read-break-reply", which hopefully will take off some of the steam.
(I also hope that the admins is having a close watch in here to)

[Maelochs]

I disagree with a few of your points, CTD ... but that is okay. I understand your points. You stated them clearly. You don't distort others' arguments.

Sorry I used the word "You."

But as for Way too personal ... you called me out by name!

(I used three so there would be no confusion .... )

[Maelochs]

Originally Posted by bella

the fact that you can't see it says it all, sir.

ladies and gentlemen, this is what's known as male privilege. it's the inability (or refusal) of menfolk to see, perceive or understand issues that women face, because they are men and not subject to those issues.

See, this is the kind of post (and from a Mod) which doesn't help at all.

it paints men as the enemy, it calls all men ignorant sexists, and worst of all, it ignores the fact that a lot of people posting here, even those that enjoyed the grid girls, do understand what women have and continue to go through.

I have never been physically tortured. Does this mean that I cannot campaign against torture?

By the way, heirarchies exist in every faction of society. People other than women can know oppression.

I don't think anyone in this thread is for the subjugation of women. The differences lie between what different people see as degrading to women, and most of them seem not to be born of ignorance, but simply different outlook.

We need to stop attacking each other. We have different views; that doesn't mean one of us ids right and everyone else is wrong.

Of course, this is just my take on this post. I might have missed the poster's point entirely.

[Ephaeton]

actually, maelochs, the quoted portion described what male privilege meant, and your reaction showed why this "argument" in this thread is so toxic. You ignore what bella actually wrote and instead attack what you think was written. The quote does not paint men as enemy. The quote does not call all men ignorant sexist. It seems to be a poster child example of forum poster privilege -- can't and won't read the actual words written by the "enemy".

[cmk]

Perhaps Mssr. Neveu could consider replacing the grid girls with straw men? They would do a perfectly good job holding a number sign, and there seems to be a preponderance of them running around.

[joeb]

Originally Posted by Ephaeton

actually, maelochs, the quoted portion described what male privilege meant, and your reaction showed why this "argument" in this thread is so toxic. You ignore what bella actually wrote and instead attack what you think was written. The quote does not paint men as enemy. The quote does not call all men ignorant sexist. It seems to be a poster child example of forum poster privilege -- can't and won't read the actual words written by the "enemy".

Not trying to gang on you maelochs, but I agree with Ephaeton. What bella was saying is that men don't know what it's like to be a woman, and vice a versa for that matter.

[TzeiTzei]

I couldnt care less if they have grid girls or not. But it kind of irritates me that some people think they are standing on some moral high ground by saying that having women hold number signs is wrong, sexist or degrading in some other way.

[Maelochs]

Well, if I missed the point, I apologize. That's why I included the possibility in my post. And it isn't "ganging up" when the real and honest motive is "helping out." Thanks to both of you (except for Epahaeton, who imputed to me evil motives ... unless I missed the intent of his post.)

[MagnetON]

I can safely say that as someone that has a brain and a positive world view on feminism, gay marriage, and knows many, many, MANY women in motorsport at various levels;

This thread is stale.

Move on.