Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Rhiannon on May 26, 2018, 12:47:15 PM
-
Lewis Hamilton channelling the 1950’s there.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/44251859
-
Lewis Hamilton channelling the 1950’s there.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/44251859
I couldn't help but hear it as Swiss Toni saying it.
-
I couldn't help but hear it as Swiss Toni saying it.
:D
He’s smooth, that Lewis.
-
The Radio 5 Live Grand Prix podcast did a whole programme about grid girls which was quite illuminating. They interviewed a few of them and they generally questioned the idea that it was exploitation, at least not exploitation by anybody but themselves, the point being that it got them into the heart of F1 whilst being paid and without them having to shell out exorbitant prices for tickets.
I feel a bit sorry for them because, what was a hobby for them, was taken away.
-
Yes, I’ve not heard any grid girls talk about being mistreated. Not sure why Hamilton thinks that calling women ‘beautiful’ somehow makes it ok for them to be paid for him to look at.
Times are changing and F1 is finally catching up.
-
Yes, I’ve not heard any grid girls talk about being mistreated. Not sure why Hamilton thinks that calling women ‘beautiful’ somehow makes it ok for them to be paid for him to look at.
Times are changing and F1 is finally catching up.
Is it wrong for people to be paid for their looks?
-
Is it wrong for people to be paid for their looks?
There’s a difference in people being paid because of how they look and people being paid to be looked at.
-
There’s a difference in people being paid because of how they look and people being paid to be looked at.
What is the difference please?
-
There’s a difference in people being paid because of how they look and people being paid to be looked at.
Which of those two are you claiming is wrong and why?
-
Is it wrong for people to be paid for their looks?
It would certainly decimate the entertainment industry.
-
Which of those two are you claiming is wrong and why?
I didn’t say either was wrong ; people are free to do with their bodies as they wish. But in paying someone to be looked at - make as well as female - they are dehumanised and objectified. Hamilton thinks it’s ok to treat beautiful women as objects. The bosses of F1 no longer think that’s an image they want their sport to have. It isn’t just about the grid girls but about society’s attitude to women generally, and F1 wants to show it has moved on and acts responsibly. Personally I like the idea of watching Martin Brundle’s grid walk without cringing at the women in short dresses and frozen smiles holding umbrellas for the drivers. My teenagers watch F1 with me and think it’s embarrassing. Not the image F1 wants to cultivate with its younger audience.
-
It would certainly decimate the entertainment industry.
Entertainers are paid because of their looks plus their ability to entertain - act, present, sing, dance, whatever. And there are all kinds of looks that are sought by the entertainment industry, not just classical beauty.
-
But in paying someone to be looked at - make as well as female - they are dehumanised and objectified.
Are they? Was the woman who sat for the Mona Lisa dehumanised and objectified by the experience?
Hamilton thinks it’s ok to treat beautiful women as objects.
Does he?
I think, if he does, he would do it whether the beautiful woman in question was being paid or not.
The bosses of F1 no longer think that’s an image they want their sport to have. It isn’t just about the grid girls but about society’s attitude to women generally, and F1 wants to show it has moved on and acts responsibly.
That's their decision and, of course, they can do what they want. Having listened to actual grid girls, I think some of their reasoning was erroneous.
Personally I like the idea of watching Martin Brundle’s grid walk without cringing at the women in short dresses and frozen smiles holding umbrellas for the drivers. My teenagers watch F1 with me and think it’s embarrassing. Not the image F1 wants to cultivate with its younger audience.
Would it be OK if they didn't wear short dresses (many don't because the more body covering you have, the more advertising you can carry) or have frozen smiles? Somebody has got to hold the umbrella. Would it be OK if it was a mix of attractive young people of all varieties of gender and colour?
-
Why not just get someone from the team to hold the umbrella? They have PA’s.
As I said, I’ve never heard a grid girl complain. That’s not the point. It’s as outdated as beauty contests and Page 3. It’s embarrassing. Clare Williams has welcomed the end of using grid girls; she is keen to encourage more women into the sport and putting an image out there that females are welcomed but mostly only to be looked at is a hinderance to that.
-
Why not just get someone from the team to hold the umbrella? They have PA’s.
Well they could but that would make the PA the grid person.
As I said, I’ve never heard a grid girl complain. That’s not the point. It’s as outdated as beauty contests and Page 3. It’s embarrassing. Clare Williams has welcomed the end of using grid girls; she is keen to encourage more women into the sport and putting an image out there that females are welcomed but mostly only to be looked at is a hinderance to that.
Ultimately, grid girls are there to sell brands. Sponsors will pay money to have their logos on the apparel of the grid person. Would you see a problem if they weren't restricted to being just women?
-
Well they could but that would make the PA the grid person.
Ultimately, grid girls are there to sell brands. Sponsors will pay money to have their logos on the apparel of the grid person. Would you see a problem if they weren't restricted to being just women?
I’ve no objection to someone doing a job. If an umbrella needs to held, find someone to hold an umbrella.
If the grid girls were there purely because if sponsorship then they did a shit job, because I’ve never knowingly noticed who had sponsored them. I know individual companies are still hiring women to wander around - Tag Hauer did at Monaco.
If the people of both genders were chosen purely for their looks and to stand around looking decorative then I would still object, yes. I guess that historically it has been women that have been objectified the greatest and some may argue that in objectifying men too some kind of balance is created, but that’s not my POV. Treating people as objects is dehumanising.