Originally Posted by cbwm

@wayfarer: Did it have the desired effect.. or were you drunk?

Actually, come to think of it, I WAS trying to piss her off... Though, later, I meekly tried to rationalize it to her by saying I was just messing with her... It wasn't obvious from the picture that it actually was a Hooter's girl, it just looked like some random hottie in a skirt.

Is it just me, or are there some posts missing here? Don't see the "Woodys" post, or Feydarkins response.

Edit: or WTD's "CAN WE PLEASE...." most recent post. Seems editorial would have left some reasons for editing...

Hmmm...let's talk about the Hooters girls, then, 'cause it sure beats the hell out of most of the trash threads that've been posted of late....

cbwm, I have to say that those lawsuits you referenced really make me want to vomit. Sometimes you have to have discrimination -- what, should a man be allowed to sue for not being allowed in an egg donor program? Should a **** in a frock be allowed in the Miss America pageant? Perhaps really butch d***s should sue Chippendales? Give me a fahrvergnuegen break.

Bring on the Hooters girls! To any repressed folks that object, get it in your heads that women and men do look at each other "that way" if they're healthy, but at the end of the day, they love the ones they're with. How was it put to me? "You can look at the menu all you want, long as you eat at home."

tim

Actually, come to think of it, I WAS trying to piss her off... Though, later, I meekly tried to rationalize it to her by saying I was just messing with her... It wasn't obvious from the picture that it actually was a Hooter's girl, it just looked like some random hottie in a skirt.

I think that's quite funny. As the weaker sex, sometimes men do need to try and make the woman a little jealous.

Seranda, I wonder how many women, if polled, would think that your view is "sleazy"?

Since I'm single, I tend to avoid doing things which only a wife would put up with!

" some harry guy named Gunther."


--- that's a stereotype and it's very rude! but don't let the fact that numerous gay people and europeans with names like Gunter (germans mostly?) would find this offensive, just leave the man's view out there to insult anyone like me, my woman, the various ones I intend to date, etc.

hairy man called gunter indeed.

I can point you to various x-rated resources where you'll find PLENTY of women who if you saw them in hooters you really wouldn't know they are men underneath

I think most woman would be glad to know it if someone cleverly put a gorgeous transsexual into hooters and 1000s of lecherous sleazy men were drooling over that transgendered man! It would be one of those news stories that have the bulk of women in stitches.

i cannot possibly stay on a forum where people can make such homophobic and chauvinistic comments so unashamedly. i flee from muslim sites where women often defend their "duty" to cook and clean - i flee for the SAME reason - it just makes me sick.

Originally Posted by witnesstheday

I wonder how many women, if polled, would think that your view is "sleazy"?

Who cares? The one I'm with doesn't. Now quit ducking the questions at hand.

Should a man be allowed to sue for being turned away from an egg donor program? Should a butch lesbian be allowed to sue for employment discrimination as a dancer at Chippendales? Should a Zionist be allowed to sue you if you turn him down for employment?

I guess that Oxford education never exposed you this quote from E.B. Hall, attributed to Voltaire:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

You've made it abundantly clear that you just don't get that. You deride the intelligence of any who disagree with you, but I have yet to see you actually form a logical argument against same. You certainly haven't answered any of the replies I've posted.

If you wish to leave instead, though, hey, go for it. The door swings both ways (get it?). But I would think that an Oxford man could come up with a better response than, "I'm going home to Mama! You're all a bunch of homophobic Zionist Neo-Nazis!" (inherent contradiction very much intended).

tim

Originally Posted by witnesstheday

Seranda, I wonder how many women, if polled, would think that your view is "sleazy"?

Since I'm single, I tend to avoid doing things which only a wife would put up with!

Has it occurred to you that some(most?) of the women who dress in a sexually provocative manner, do so specifically to get the looks you call sleazy?

Doesn't the idea of a transgendered "Hooters Girl" seem inherently dishonest to you? It seems fairly obvious that Hooters marketing is not targeting the BGLT crowd, and a "news story" featuring such a transgendered "Hooters Girl" would likely have a disastrous financial impact on the chain? Granted there are establishments that specifically target the BGLT crowd with their marketing, and if the owner of Hooters decided to go that route, more power to him. Your reasoning that it should be done so a few women can get a few laughs because straight men can be duped into going to a bar where the waitresses are actually men seems ridiculous. Personally, most women I know would be a lot more concerned about me frequenting a BGLT bar, than Hooters, or even a bar filled with strippers(Strippers are people too you know!).

So, even though I'm a married guy, I've decided to share the following tidbit to offer you an alternative viewpoint on the whole male-female relationship thing. Enjoy.

Leasing Vs. Buying

BUYING

The math on the Paul McCartney-Heather Mills divorce is as follows: After 5 years of marriage, he paid her $49 million.

Assuming he got sex every night during their 5 year relationship it ended up costing him $26,849 per time.



This is Heather.

LEASING

On the other hand, New York Governor Elliot Spitzer's hooker, Kristen, an absolute stunner with a body like no other, charges $4,000 an hour. For anything!


This is Kristen.

Had Paul McCartney "employed" Kristen for 5 years,
he would have paid $7.3 million for an hour of sex every

night for 5 years (a $41.7 million savings).

Value-added benefits are:

• a 22 year old hot babe
• no begging
• no coaxing
• never a headache
• plays all requests
• no b*tching and complaining
• no 'honey-do' lists.

Best of all, she leaves when you're done, and comes back when asked. All at 1/7th the cost, and NO LEGAL FEES!

Sometimes leasing just makes more sense.

While I don't think you can boil a whole relationship down to sex, you've got to admit that is funnier than the idea of a guy getting waited on by a tranny at Hooters.

I have a few friends at the upper end of the income scale and they have all recently gotten married.. We used this same argument with them, but they still bought rather than lease..

As for Hooters, they really do have good food.. I'm going there for lunch in a couple hours.. Taking my wife.. She had the choice of anywhere in the area that she wanted to eat.. It came down to Granite City micro brew or Hooters.. She wants wings so we are going to Hooters..

Boobs played absolutely no part in the decision of where to eat.. And even better, my wife is perfectly comfortable in who she is to not be threatened by some college aged girl using her physical talents to earn a living.. It's not like the Hooters girls are snatched up in some dark alley and forced to wait tables.. These girls volunteer and fight for that job..

Originally Posted by Feydakin

I have a few friends at the upper end of the income scale and they have all recently gotten married.. We used this same argument with them, but they still bought rather than lease..

Not to sound like WitnesstheDay, but I think its hard for people at the upper end of the income scale to hook up and get married like everyone else. When there is a lot of money at stake, its always hard to trust peoples motives, and Paul McCartney's divorce only serves to make those people MORE guarded. Sorry for the derail.

They all married women of near equal financial means, one actually married up which we found rather shocking.. We didn't think he was worthy of her

Canceled Hooters, first warm day in months and it was packed with motorcycles.. Ended up and Granite City and had a very nice lunch..

Wow, I had a feeling way back two weeks ago that I should delete this thread so it wouldn't lead to exactly where it did. A few things to add as a woman and a mod -

1) CBWM started a conversation on the topic the (his perceived if you prefer) difference between discrimination and being qualified for a particular position. There is a very substantial difference between "some hairy guy named Gunther" not being hired at Hooters and WTD not being hired with the same resume as a man with a more white sounding name. There was no need for this thread to be taken to the very low depths to which it was.

2) Human sexuality is a fact. There would be no humans today if not for human sexuality. I, like Feydakin's wife am secure enough in who I am and my relationship with my husband that I am not in the least threatened by Hooter's Girls, Miss America or Miss Howard Stern. My husband knows there are other men that I find attractive, he also knows that is where the process stops. Neither my husband nor I are lecherous or sleazy. Men like to gawk at women and women like to gawk at men. Which leads me to my next statement -

3) 99% of the women I know subscribe to the same opinion as Tim quoted. Before you respond to that let me tell you that I know literally thousands of women. I am on the regional board of directors for one of the world's largest women's organizations so I come into contact with women from every walk of life...well to do women, homeless women, middle class women, meek women, strong women, Christian women, Muslim women, Atheist women, etc.

4) Anyone calling names will be given an infraction. Just because one of the team does not see it right away does not mean that it will not be caught and dealt with. You are welcome to discuss differing points of view as long as there is no name calling or insulting (i.e. flaming). If you can not state your opinion with out resorting to name calling ----- DO NOT POST.

"some hairy guy named Gunther"

again. another person using a stereotype that would offend ANY GAY MAN and anyone with an understanding of what gay men go through

as for the "1000s of women" you know, Kandi - I'm afraid as a man I only know a few dozen women, and I do know that if I ever took any of them to a restaurant famed for waitresses with big ****, they'd not wanna go out with me again - but maybe I choose only women who are apparently very strange or something

i find it amusing how so many people who shudder at the thought of a man and another man having erotic steamy gay sex, or a man dressed as a woman perfectly serving a man who is fantasizing about that other man's female sex organs, can turn around and pretend that I AM THE PRUDE!!!

Listen, I'm the only one out of you lot who would not sneer at gay sex and if asked to try it out wouldn't merely write it off. I'm also the only one of the men here who could presumably last about 8 hours in my own bedroom - because the other type of man (I know "1000s of men" my dear"), the type who has to get turned on at hooters, just doesn't really have what it takes to please his woman. Me, if I'm into someone, I don't need 20 big-titted waitresses to get me in the mood - the woman I want is perfectly adequate.

Okay you homophobes, reading KML's remarks has made me realise I do NOT BELONG ON THIS FORUM at all - you guys have no values in common with me. I'll leave you with a photo I would have posted earlier. You're telling me that this man cannot work at hooters - I'm saying that's a breach of human rights, because he's 100% qualified:



here's many more transsexuals who I think deserve a shot at the job



This one seems a LITTLE ugly in the face, but I met a really nice woman who actually (was a real woman) was a bit ugly round the face in a similar way, so if we didn't know this one was a man, even this one would get past us...


Anyway, I'm tired of seeing what homophobes and racists write! I have better things to do with my life.

Chris, Wayfarer, Vicky, JV17, me other mateys on this site: live long and prosper. I'll pm you my private email address now in case any of u wanna stay in touch or have any questions/humour to share, but I think that until the world has dramatically removed the stench of prejudice and disgusting behaviour from most places I am 100% at war and have no more time for idle banter.

I have obviously not been prudish - I've spent a lot of time talking and sharing info about my own love life - which is sort of the opposite behaviour of a prude. I have raised the banner here, for homosexuals and transsexuals - that is not prudish. I have basically been a good guy on this matter. I know that a LOT of the british readers are 100% on my side, because in britain we take gay rights very seriously and don't pretend that it's okay to gay-bash up to the point where "the law permits". In britain we have one common word for gay-bashing racist chauvinist... "policeman" tends to suffice! The rest of us are okay. The capitalist scum who bring international hateful values to our city centre are taking a hike now. This city will be known as the Rainbow City, one day, and a big big statue of the Rainbow Warrior will be placed in parliament square one day.

KKK, you wrote

"
3) 99% of the women I know subscribe to the same opinion as Tim quoted."

tim wrote
"Should a man be allowed to sue for being turned away from an egg donor program? Should a butch lesbian be allowed to sue for employment discrimination as a dancer at Chippendales?"

i'm sorry KKK, but the truth really is that your figure is false. unless you live inside a right wing church/mosque and only meet gay-haters, you'll find that at least 60% of women and 40% of men consider tim's view to be outdated and riddled with prejudice.

BUTCH LESBIAN WOMEN???

so that's how you see the gay community, Tim, KKK, CBRN and your team...

gay men are hairy and called Gunther
lesbians are butch!

I'd LOVE to get Jo Brand onto your case, but if I ever did have the privelege to meet her I'd probably just spend my time getting stoned with her or something - I'm sure she'd badly influence me in that way. And we'd say "homophobes? screw em. pass me another joint, that was potent".

america really needs to be educated! i already knew it was bad - but today i've seen it's 10000 times worse thanm i ever believed. you guys have no shame.

GAY PRIDE FOREVER!

Okay, this is your LAST WARNING - DO NOT FLAME MEMBERS

I said absolutely nothing about the gay community, did not even insinuate any opinion, nor have I ever posted anything remotely racist. If you refer to me as KKK one more time you will be banned.

It is a fact that there are hairy men named Gunther in the world. There are hairy men named Tim in the world. Perhaps we will change our stereotype to a hair man named Tim. I seriously doubt that serandfae will be offended just because his name happens to be Tim. Neither will the owner of this forum whose name is Tim. You are the only one who referred to "Gunther's" supposed sexuality. Referring to anonymous man who would want to work at Hooters as a hair man named Gunther was just that, a stereotype. It was not a reference to the gay community or any other community.

What I said if you had actually read my post is that men look at women, women look at men. The opinion of Tim's that I was referring to is that 99% of women are not offended that men look at women. You looked back over Tim's posts and found what most offended you and assumed that was what I was referring to. To assume that any man that goes to Hooters needs to look at the waitresses to get turned on is shallow minded and absurd. You do a lot of assuming and that is a very dangerous habit.

Just because a man enjoys looking at pretty women does not mean that he needs to look at pretty women to be turned on. You have never appreciated a woman's beauty or a particular attribute of one woman over another?

Personally, I find your statement that lesbians are butch to be very offensive. Very close members of my family are homosexual and would not be considered butch by any definition.

The only gay bashing that has gone on in this thread has been in your head. No one has demeaned the gay community or lessened gay rights.

However, this thread was not started about sexuality, it was started about basic qualifications for a job and the right of an employer to choose who they employ. A man is no more qualified to work at Hooters than a man is qualified to model maternity clothing.

Originally Posted by KML9870

Okay, this is your LAST WARNING - DO NOT FLAME MEMBERS

This is why he is the first person I have ever added to my ignore list anywhere for comments made.. I'm sick of the abuse and the tirades..

I know plenty of women that are not gay that appreciate the beauty of a woman, and I know plenty of men who are not gay that can appreciate the handsomeness of a man.. And like you, I have family members who are gay, friends who are gay, and business associates who are gay.. And guess what, its not, and never has been, an issue for me..

The only people that it seems to be an issue for are the ones that simply can't stop talking about it or protesting too much..

Back on topic, selective discrimination has a place in the world.. Locker rooms for example.. Or what about fitness clubs like Curves?? These are women only clubs created to give women a place to exercise without the worry of men seeing them at less than their best.. Or maybe the Black Caucus which is created of nothing but black members from congress and the senate.. Or the Mexican American Legal Protection Association??

Hooters has an image and a business model.. The ladies working there are very happy to work there (I have friends that work at Hooters).. And I don't see any level of discrimination that is actionable because of it.. As business owners they should be free to hire anyone they choose.. Just as patrons are free to eat anywhere they choose.. Don't like Hooters because it objectifies women, go tot IHOP.. But I know for a fact that the women working there don't feel like objects.. The ones I know love the control and the money they have while working there..

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Hooters has an image and a business model..

Exactly. Whether or not you agree with their business model Hooters is a corporation. They have a right to hire the employee that fits their business model. There are plenty of law firms that will not hire you as a legal secretary if you do not have the correct wardrobe, regardless of your skills. This has nothing to do with discrimination, it is their image that they present to their clients. That doesn't mean that the same qualifications won't get you a comparable salary with another employer but it is within the firms right to project their desired image.

Originally Posted by KML9870

They have a right to hire the employee that fits their business model.
...
it is within the firms right to project their desired image.

Hmmm. I'm wondering if you could build an image and business model around this product:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...orist%20burger

Originally Posted by cbwm

Hmmm. I'm wondering if you could build an image and business model around this product:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...orist%20burger

Yes, it could be called "Terror Shack", and would have directions to build a suicide bomb on the placeholder for each person.... ***silence***