Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Touching-up v Snowflakes
- Thread starter Leekbrookgull
- Start date
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
----------------------------------------------
"For those who met the three specific selection criteria (“tall, thin and pretty”)".
"All of the women were told to wear skimpy black outfits with matching underwear and high heels."
"At their initial interviews, women were warned by Ms Dandridge that the men in attendance might be “annoying” or try to get the hostesses “pissed”. One hostess was advised to lie to her boyfriend about the fact it was a male-only event. “Tell him it’s a charity dinner,” she was told."
“It’s a Marmite job. Some girls love it, and for other girls it’s the worst job of their life and they will never do it again . . . You just have to put up with the annoying men and if you can do that it’s fine,” Ms Dandridge told the hostess."
------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not condoning groping, I'm personally something of a gentleman, but nobody taking this job could be so naive as to not understand what they were going to be dealing with.
GT49er
Well-known member
Not condoning the groping etc, not by any means - but your comparison is inaccurate; they were hired as hostesses, not waitresses. Rightly or wrongly, some ladies hired as 'hostesses' are indeed ladies that are willing to take things a little further. The FT reporter was obviously outraged (as she fully intended to be) and no doubt some of the other ladies were upset. But what evidence do you have that some of the ladies working as 'hostesses' on the night were not also, how shall we put it, consenting adults?
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
You're missing the point. The charities like GOSH don't want donations raised in that way, & other charities have said the same.
It's almost like receiving immoral earnings. Please note, I said almost.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
This was not your average waitress job, that was clear from the requirements, and made clear in briefings before the event. And obviously it was clear, because why else would the journalist have crashed the party unless she knew she would have an opportunity to create an outrage story out of it?
If this journalist is such a noble defender of women, why did she allow these other women to go through with the work without warning them about the unexpected horrors they were about to endure? Was her story more important? It probably was, but it's also likely that everyone knew what they were getting into, she obviously did or she wouldn't have bothered going.
GT49er
Well-known member
Yes, it's a pretty tough job, on their feet and rushing around for long periods.
Hostesses, on the other hand, are expected to look attractive.
melias shoes
Well-known member
- Oct 14, 2010
- 4,830
I got the impression she took the job for the night as a way of "undercover reporting", i.e. she was after the story.
I'd like to hear from those women who actually took that work honestly, knowing what they were doing, not the journalists who crashed it so they could get offended.
I hope everyone is just as outraged for these guys and wants to see these women publicly shamed and lose their jobs too, and if not, why not?
Because it's women having FUN. Trust me a group of women together on a hen night are as bad if not worse.
GT49er
Well-known member
I didn't miss the point at all. I was not commenting on the charitable status, or otherwise, of the event. Organisations such as GOSH are entirely entitled to decide for themselves whether to accept donations or not, and I have no opinion either way on whether they do or not. My point, which you appear to have missed, is that the women were not lured into the event on false pretences, and all would - or damn well should! - have had a pretty good idea of what sort of 'do' they were going to.
Whether or not such 'do's should be allowed to happen is another matter, but the people in this case weren't mislead.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I'm not speaking from experience but I should be surprised that hostesses would work for waitresses wages.
I suspect that some where hostesses, but others were misled.
Why would a journalist go undercover, if there wasn't something that needed to be investigated?
The Presidents Club has been disbanded today, with all the trustees resigning.
Nothing to do with the event, but I think it’s a bit rich for charities to come out with a quote about receiving immoral earnings. They seem to turn a blind eye to junk mail, unsolicited phone calls or the guilt trip when they stop you in the street or rattle tins in front of you. Not to mention about how much of the money you give doesn’t actually go to the people in need
AlastairWatts
Active member
Exactly. The clues were all there for the hostesses in the dress requirements and the briefing before the event. They way in which its all been reported makes it appear that a group of innocent virginal trainee nuns were somehow involved. Not on your life - I expect all the women involved (except, of course, for the snitch from the FT) knew exactly what they were getting into. And, of course, if they weren't comfortablewith the evening they could have gone home...
CliveWalkerWingWizard
Well-known member
I think it is dangerous that journalists are looking for stories that allow people to be outraged, obviously some behaviour was unacceptable, but hand holding was mentioned by the journalist this morning. This opens the door to false accusations.
"Outraged" makes a good headline......."All went off well" dosen`t..
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
That's not a quote by any of the charities. It was my opinion of why they felt they should return the money.
tedebear
Legal Alien
Personally it's gutter journalism from the FT...she's obviously not clever enough to make her way into the Boardrooms of this country where I witness week in week out, pathetic male egos being salved by putting down women, patronising whilst they flounder in ineptitude. This event is pathetic, and whilst thankfully this story may hopefully be the end of such events, at the end of the day the few men who persist with this pathetic behaviour should be hung out to dry. I don't accept that the women should have expected it or even provoked it with their dress, you don't touch someone elses car you don't own...why touch someone's arse?
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Misleading. She said contact ranged from handholding, to being inappropriately touched, dragged onto laps, & downright sexual assault.
Some of the comments here are typical victim blaming. They knew what they were getting into. They were asking for it.
There is such a thing as look don't touch.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
Exactly. I hope some of these men are able to explain this party to their families.
GreersElbow
New member
I’m sure you’d love it if your wife, daughter, sister or mother was sexually harassed 
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
Glad that that most on here aren't so naive to not know what goes on at these events. There's a whole industry of hostess/promo girls that stops a gnats wing short of prostitution. The FT obviously knew what was going to happen because they sent a reporter there.
It's a grubby world out there people. It's probably why people pretend to be outraged - it's a way of separating themselves from the sordid world that we live in.
It's a grubby world out there people. It's probably why people pretend to be outraged - it's a way of separating themselves from the sordid world that we live in.