[Football] Touching-up v Snowflakes

[Thunder Bolt]

I am not getting at anything, Of course thats the ideal, but why apply for a job which specifies which underwear you must wear. It's wrong, and that should ring alarm bells. You cant change how people behave immediately, but come on, you really think that the girls may have thought oh it's for charity that alright then? No I daresay they were thinking of the tips and job offers, Pimping themselves. Sorry, thats how I see it. It's not like they were on the minimum wage which many 'hostesses'/waitrons are. As I said willy waving and hands up skirts is (I didnt say this bit harassment) not ok of course. But really a hand round the waist or a hand touch whilst you are getting paid a good chunk at a men only event, only being dumb or seriously niaive or an undercover "reporter" would be "shocked"

It's all a load of nonsense. Any job that specifys your underwear? I mean come on whats that all about Youre not stupid

The whole article was about sexual harassment. The writer has said it went way beyound a hand around the waist and a hand touch.
But according to you, the girls were pimping themselves, because they were told to wear black underwear.


https://www.ft.com/content/075d679e-0033-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5

All of the women were told to wear skimpy black outfits with matching underwear and high heels. At an after-party many hostesses — some of them students earning extra cash — were groped, sexually harassed and propositioned.
Over the course of six hours, many of the hostesses were subjected to groping, lewd comments and repeated requests to join diners in bedrooms elsewhere in the Dorchester.

 

[dingodan]

Good sense and reason? Oh come off it!

This would've been sleazy decades ago.

Well it was reported on in 2010, with not a hint of outrage, but I guess 2010 was the dark ages.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...rnby-considers-guru-to-aid-rehab-1876933.html

 

[Brighton Mod]

The Presidents Club has disbanded due this uncorroberated article. Straight away. A club which has been running for 33 years, suddenly disbanded because of some tittle tattle in a paper?


https://www.ft.com/content/29ee70f6-011d-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5


AN HOUR AGO 1

Less than 24 hours after the FT exposé on a men-only fundraising dinner in London where hostesses were groped and sexually harassed, the*Presidents Club*said it would close. The 33-year-old group that organised the black-tie event at the Dorchester hotel said that any remaining funds raised would be “distributed in an efficient manner to children’s charities”.

The fallout from our reporting continued on Wednesday, with organisations that had provided items for the event’s charity auction saying they would not follow through. The Bank of England said a tea with governor Mark Carney had been revoked, and Tesla and BMW cancelled the sale of luxury cars.*

The scandal also shined an uncomfortable spotlight on the real estate sector, while*UK politicians expressed “bewilderment and revulsion” at the reports. (FT)

Sorry, did someone loose their job? Were members paid to attend or was this on a voluntary basis? The club can choose to do what it wants, its not beholdent to a journalist, a politician or any member of the public. Whatever BMW et al want to do is also their business, but it does not justify the article it just strengthens the arguement that we live in a society run by spineless politicians and frightened corporates. BTW whats happened to rape allegations against members of the Labour Party and the sexual harrasment in Parliament. Hypocrisy all over the place.

 

[sant andreu]

Firstly, I absolutely DO NOT condone men groping women when it is unwanted ( or indeed the other way round which DOES happen but people seem to forget this ).

BUT, if my employer asked me to wear certain underwear then I would immediately know what the gig was all about. Someone in the office has a copy of the Sun ( yes, I know ! ), and if the 'uniform' requests to the hostesses is correct then not a single one of the women couldn't have known what this was all about. Any one of them that didn't wish to be involved in that kind of 'thing' could easily have walked before the event. I suspect the reporter would have been equally shocked if she'd gone undercover in a strip club and would have been OUTRAGED at men paying her to take her clothes off.

Maybe I've missed it but other than the reporter I've not seen any account from any of the other hostesses suggesting they didn't know what they were doing or getting into ? I'm with [MENTION=18559]dingodan[/MENTION] on this, this mock outrage waters down the real issues which is sexual assault in the work place and public places on men and women that haven't consented.

So, being told wear black underwear and a dress provided by the organisers was an obvious signal they would be grabbed at and groped on the job? Really??

Even in strop joints or topless bars you can't just go around touching the girls.

Funny how some such as Dingo Dan are seemingly quite upset - and dare I say it maybe even outraged - by their notion that the journalist was seeking to cause outrage.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Well it was reported on in 2010, with not a hint of outrage, but I guess 2010 was the dark ages.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...rnby-considers-guru-to-aid-rehab-1876933.html

I would stake my life on that being written by a man.

 

[Triggaaar]

if my employer asked me to wear certain underwear then I would immediately know what the gig was all about. Someone in the office has a copy of the Sun ( yes, I know ! ), and if the 'uniform' requests to the hostesses is correct then not a single one of the women couldn't have known what this was all about.

Yeah, it was about looking sexy and having matching uniforms. The fact that they needed black underwear would suggest that it would be possible for people to get glimpses of their underwear as they moved around in their short skirts, so they wanted it all matching. Had they asked for crotchless underwear, that would be different. Given that there were clear guidelines that harassment was not acceptable, I'd think that the hostesses would think that harassment was, well, not acceptable.

 

[Grombleton]

Would be helpful to state that David Walliams tweeted he didn't see any of these things going on. Or is he in on a conspiracy, this would balance the article and if the journalist had bothered to gather any more evidence than that of her pre conception of events, her reason for going 'undercover', she could be believed, but nothing other than her views.

I'm kinda hoping you're being sarcastic, if not then Jesus H Christ.

 

[dingodan]

The whole article was about sexual harassment. The writer has said it went way beyound a hand around the waist and a hand touch.
But according to you, the girls were pimping themselves, because they were told to wear black underwear.


https://www.ft.com/content/075d679e-0033-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5

All of the women were told to wear skimpy black outfits with matching underwear and high heels. At an after-party many hostesses — some of them students earning extra cash — were groped, sexually harassed and propositioned.

Groped and sexually harassed are pretty vague terms, so far I've heard one anonymous claim about a hand up a woman's skirt, if true, that woman should report it to the police, but other than that one account of the behavior of one man, the rest does sound limited to hands on hips and lower backs, or having a woman sit on a lap. I'm not saying it's perfectly wholesome behavior, I'm saying people seem to have lost all sense of proportion.

 

[Hamilton]

It's amazing how this thread has become all about the women.

Only in a predominantly male chatroom could that happen.

Frankly, I don't give a stuff what the women that were there did or didn't think they were being hired to do. What I do care about is the fact that the men in the room thought it was ok to behave in such a way, and that according to reports the behaviour was widespread. What I also care about is the fact that these men are in positions of power in industries that shape the way we all think and behave - WPP is the biggest ad and marketing agency in the world.

Let's get back to what we should be talking about. The men in that room need flushing out, and their behaviour needs calling into account. Forget the women. Let's focus on the men.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

 

[Westdene Seagull]

He's not ever actually been elected to Parliament in this country has he?

Calm down son. I was simply asking you a question because I was too lazy to look on Google for the answer. A question, I might add, which you've yet to answer.

People really are so touché on here today.

OK, just for shits and giggles I'll answer your strange question. The answer is No ..... but you knew that surely ? Which begs the question, what was the point of your question ?

 

[maffew]

The whole article was about sexual harassment. The writer has said it went way beyound a hand around the waist and a hand touch.
But according to you, the girls were pimping themselves, because they were told to wear black underwear.


https://www.ft.com/content/075d679e-0033-11e8-9650-9c0ad2d7c5b5

All of the women were told to wear skimpy black outfits with matching underwear and high heels. At an after-party many hostesses — some of them students earning extra cash — were groped, sexually harassed and propositioned.
Over the course of six hours, many of the hostesses were subjected to groping, lewd comments and repeated requests to join diners in bedrooms elsewhere in the Dorchester.

Like I have already said, I dont see as putting my arm around someone or holding a hand as groping but I do see getting your cock out or sticking your hand up someones skirt uninvited as assualt. People get propositioned at nearly every party ever, not me I am afraid.

You maybe misunderstanding me that thinks this is ok, I am far from that. But yes turning up to a mens only night for good money and being advised what underwear you should carry I do see as pimping yourself. Sorry

 

[A1X]

For those of you who haven't seen the full guest list, here it is (although it should be pointed out that this is the invite list, whether they attended or not is not recorded).

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/24/guest-list-presidents-club-all-male-charity-gala

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Groped and sexually harassed are pretty vague terms, so far I've heard one anonymous claim about a hand up a woman's skirt, if true, that woman should report it to the police, but other than that one account of the behavior of one man, the rest does sound limited to hands on hips and lower backs, or having a woman sit on a lap. I'm not saying it's perfectly wholesome behavior, I'm saying people seem to have lost all sense of proportion.

Tosh. Stop trying to demean the article. See my post #181 with direct quotes from the article in the FT.
You're getting desperate now, trying to say it was just one woman or one man.

A wealthy club which has been running for 33 years has fallen apart because of one incident? Incredulous.

 

[BLOCK F]

Do you think that all women that work as hostesses at events are happy to hold hands with men that attend? Is that your view of them? Of them all? Of every woman who has ever sought employment as a hostess at a corporate event?

Oh fer cryin' out loud, can you really get into a foment about a hostess holding hands with a crusty old so and so at a 'gentlemens' do'?
This wasn't a run of the mill corporate event, was it. The hostesses knew the kind of occasion it was and were told( if they really needed to be) that the attendees might be 'annoying'.

 

[dazzer6666]

Good sense and reason? Oh come off it!

This would've been sleazy decades ago. I can remember an old school friend of mine being hired to jump out of a cake at the Metropole wearing a skimpy costume.
As pointed out, look but don't touch is/was definitely the order of the day then, as it should be now.

Agree with this

Things are changing but as always it takes a generation or two for this to feed through into what becomes 'normal' or 'acceptable' behaviour perhaps for the unenlightened. Some of the things I've seen/events I've been to (not a million miles away from what appears to have happened here) simply don't go on any more as it's rightly unacceptable.

-when I was a kid in the 70s, it was entirely normal to see blokes openly slapping women on the arse etc. It usually resulted in either a cheeky smile, a 'get orf you dirty old sod' comment, or a slap across the face. I could still tell you now which of my dad's mates, or other blokes in the village, had 'reputations'. Women went out of their way to avoid them. It''s similar to the way we used to call the one black kid in our school unpleasant names.

-I've been to a few (not recently though) 'gentleman's dinners or 'sportsman's dinners' as they were sometimes laughably called, almost always charitable events. Some had hired entertainment of a very adult nature - the entertainers would obviously have known exactly what they were doing, but even then anything like touching would have resulted in a bouncer chucking you through a window (if you were lucky it would have been open). I don't see this kind of event being organised these days (or maybe I just don't get invited any more ) - used to be normal for Round Table-type groups to set them up. Groping waitresses at an event like this would have still been out of order.

This event doesn't seem to have known what it was supposed to be (or is in denial now they've been called out). It's very obviously set itself up with grubby old (rich) pissed-up men surrounded by tall, pretty, deliberately provocatively dressed girls, so they would have been able to completely predict what was going to happen (and arguably encouraged it). Doesn't make it acceptable of course, but in some ways the old farts need protecting from themselves.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

OK, just for shits and giggles I'll answer your strange question. The answer is No ..... but you knew that surely ? Which begs the question, what was the point of your question ?

sometimes lad, the most simple answer is the right answer.

 

[dingodan]

No you are right, if women just about to get married can go out and behave outrageously and go to strip clubs etc then rich men should be able to touch up and get their knobs out for the hired help while getting tax write offs at a charity do. Exactly the same thing.

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Reread your post, if you are a consistent person and your post reflects your views you would have to be against hen nights too.

Unless you overdid the outrage at the expense of nuance and detail, which is my whole point.

 

[Hamilton]

Oh fer cryin' out loud, can you really get into a foment about a hostess holding hands with a crusty old so and so at a 'gentlemens' do'?
This wasn't a run of the mill corporate event, was it. The hostesses knew the kind of occasion it was and were told( if they really needed to be) that the attendees might be 'annoying'.

What do you think the attitude of these men will be towards other hostesses at other events once they have attended The President's Club. Do you think it will be better or worse? If worse, do you therefore think it is ok for us to just let this one go? Behaviour begets behaviour, and thats what makes this dangerous to just pass off.

(and I'm not inferring you are approving of the event in any way, to be clear)

 

[Westdene Seagull]

sometimes lad, the most simple answer is the right answer.

OK Pal, thank you for that rather worthless advice