Fire & Ice Girls: Sexist Anachronism? - Page 22 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

GirlySports · 10-31-2014, 02:08 PM

We're arguing necessity? It's entertainment.

What's the necessity of hockey? 10 guys chasing a puck.

undercoverbrother · 10-31-2014, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GirlySports

We're arguing necessity? It's entertainment.

What's the necessity of hockey? 10 guys chasing a puck.

Are you a fan of the LFL?

V · 10-31-2014, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

No we're questioning the necessity. Do I have to draw a flow chart or what?

Really? We're questioning the necessity? Is that the bar we're trying to clear now? What is the necessity of hockey?

I actually thought you were asking about if it was beneficial, although it's pretty tough to tell between all of your drive-byes.

I'm glad Ryz posted a picture of these girls. If that's a highly sexualized representation of women, than I don't know what planet I'm living on anymore. We have a similar crew up here in the chuck, and I never once considered that it wasn't family entertainment when my 7 year old son came to a game with me.

Barbecue · 10-31-2014, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

or, and this might be crazy, we could dress them like the rest of the ice maintenance crew.

because they want to dress the way they're dressed now

V · 10-31-2014, 02:30 PM

Well, that's just a stupid argument, and you know it. They dress the way they're told, not necessarily the way they want.

GirlySports · 10-31-2014, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Are you a fan of the LFL?

Sure, those girls are incredibly fit. That game is rougher than people think.

And there's no punting!

Barbecue · 10-31-2014, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V

Well, that's just a stupid argument, and you know it. They dress the way they're told, not necessarily the way they want.

Yep, i guess management pulled a fast one on them and changed their outfits while they're still employeed. Now they're trapped between working this job or join the masses in unemployment to scrape by

oh wait

ExiledFlamesFan · 10-31-2014, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V

Well, that's just a stupid argument, and you know it. They dress the way they're told, not necessarily the way they want.

You're right. These girls have no idea how they'll be dressing until right before they step on the ice and are forced to put on a PG rated outfit.

Please stop treating these women like idiots. They know exactly what they'll be wearing and have no problem wearing it. They have accepted a job knowing full well they'll be wearing PG rated outfits and are fine with this.

This whole "let's save women from themselves" argument is shamefully sexist. What right as a man do you have to tell women what to wear?

_Q_ · 10-31-2014, 02:42 PM

Men being up in arms over the oppression of women by objectification, then trying to fix it by telling them to cover up is some seriously tragic irony.

Chill Cosby · 10-31-2014, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barbecue

Yep, i guess management pulled a fast one on them and changed their outfits while they're still employeed. Now they're trapped between working this job or join the masses in unemployment to scrape by

oh wait

I can't even process what you're trying to say here.

Chill Cosby · 10-31-2014, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExiledFlamesFan

You're right. These girls have no idea how they'll be dressing until right before they step on the ice and are forced to put on a PG rated outfit.

Please stop treating these women like idiots. They know exactly what they'll be wearing and have no problem wearing it. They have accepted a job knowing full well they'll be wearing PG rated outfits and are fine with this.

You said it better than BBQ, but you're still grossly missing V's point.

They don't choose the uniform, nor do they (notice the qualifier here) necessarily wear what they want.

Being fine with wearing something, or finding it an acceptable condition of employment, is not the same as wanting to wear it.

To say they're wearing what they want to wear is silly.

V · 10-31-2014, 02:46 PM

Yeah, I really don't get it.

There's a difference between wanting to work in a position where a uniform is mandated, and wearing what you want to work. That doesn't make the girls exploited, nor does it make the organization sexist.

PsYcNeT · 10-31-2014, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GirlySports

We're arguing necessity? It's entertainment.

What's the necessity of hockey? 10 guys chasing a puck.

I like how you got caught up in the semantics of the term necessity, but neglected to address it in context.

ExiledFlamesFan · 10-31-2014, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chill Cosby

You said it better than BBQ, but you're still grossly missing V's point.

They don't choose the uniform, nor do they (notice the qualifier here) necessarily wear what they want.

Being fine with wearing something, or finding it an acceptable condition of employment, is not the same as wanting to wear it.

To say they're wearing what they want to wear is silly.

I'm not sure why this is so difficult to understand:

We've had numerous posters (myself included) who personally know f and I girls or stampedrs cheerleaders. these girls enjoy wearing the PG outfits! They enjoy their job!

In our society we have free will. If you do not like something about your job you can quit. If you would not enjoy wearing a PG rated outfit and skating around you do not apply to be a fire and ice girl

PsYcNeT · 10-31-2014, 02:57 PM

I'm also not sure where this idea came from that we're trying to save the girls from themselves.

It's not about the girls, its about whether or not it's necessary within the context of a hockey game. Most, if not all of the girls obviously enjoy their jobs.

Personally, I believe it is not necessary however, and adds something unneeded to seeing a game live. I'm there for the hockey. I'm not a huge fan of stupidly loud music during stoppages either, but that doesn't mean that I think the artists who make the music are being exploited (they are, but that's a whole other kettle of fish).

Chill Cosby · 10-31-2014, 02:57 PM

This is a good example of one side completely ignoring what the other side is saying. V says this (just the main points)

Quote:

Originally Posted by V

Really? We're questioning the necessity?
...
I'm glad Ryz posted a picture of these girls. If that's a highly sexualized representation of women, than I don't know what planet I'm living on anymore. We have a similar crew up here in the chuck, and I never once considered that it wasn't family entertainment when my 7 year old son came to a game with me.

He seems fine with it. Seems to think it's silly that we're even questioning their necessity.
But because he disagrees when someone illogically says these girls get to choose what their uniform is (which isn't true in any job with a uniform):

Quote:

Originally Posted by V

They dress the way they're told, not necessarily the way they want.

He gets these responses:

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExiledFlamesFan

Please stop treating these women like idiots.
...
This whole "let's save women from themselves" argument is shamefully sexist. What right as a man do you have to tell women what to wear?

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Q_

Men being up in arms over the oppression of women by objectification, then trying to fix it by telling them to cover up is some seriously tragic irony.

Can someone, anyone of Exiled, BBQ, or Q, point out where V suggested in any sense that these women were idiots, where he tried to oppress them, where he tried to save them from himself?

How did V, who (if I'm reading it right) said their outfits didn't seem overly sexual or remotely inappropriate, become an oppressor of women?

Come on.

EDIT: To add extra clarity, you're aware that not wanting something isn't the same as not being okay with it, right? The two aren't logically equivalent.

GirlySports · 10-31-2014, 02:57 PM

I think too many things are treated as sexual.

We've all been to Flames games.. some 12 year old kid wins a prize and is shown on the jumbotron sitting between two F&I girls smiling.

Is that sexual?

PsYcNeT · 10-31-2014, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think too many things are treated as sexual.

We've all been to Flames games.. some 12 year old kid wins a prize and is shown on the jumbotron sitting between two F&I girls smiling.

Is that sexual?

You're making up arguments that haven't been presented in this thread.

V · 10-31-2014, 03:00 PM

It's just such a weird conversation. I feel like I'm talking to an angry dog that's frothing at the mouth.

calgarygeologist · 10-31-2014, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

I'm also not sure where this idea came from that we're trying to save the girls from themselves.

It's not about the girls, its about whether or not it's necessary within the context of a hockey game. Most, if not all of the girls obviously enjoy their jobs.

Personally, I believe it is not necessary however, and adds something unneeded to seeing a game live. I'm there for the hockey. I'm not a huge fan of stupidly loud music during stoppages either, but that doesn't mean that I think the artists who make the music are being exploited (they are, but that's a whole other kettle of fish).

If it is all about the hockey action your best bet is to watch it at home on a good tv with the sound off. You'll have a controlled environment with no distractions.