(Prolifer)ations 12-28-10
by Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN
As always, we welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs! Please email Susie@jillstanek.com.
- ProWomanProLife wonders if, in the future, combating female sexual dysfunction as an effect of the Pill will be treated with – you guessed it – another pill.
- Wesley J. Smith notes the trend toward planning premature births (which can obviously be detrimental to the health and well-being of children) for no reason other than the mother’s convenience. Just another result of the “me first” mentality infiltrating modern parenthood.
- SoapboxFive discusses complaints brought against the Hooters franchise by the CA NOW for Hooters’ exploitation and sexualization of children through their merchandise. Hooters markets themselves as a family restaurant/food provider with a kids’ menu, but has admitted to the EEOC that they are primarily a provider of “vicarious sexual entertainment.”
- Hyscience points out the dead Obamacare “death panel” myth isn’t such a myth and isn’t so dead, thanks to some stealth actions of the Obama administration.
- SuzyB has Marjorie Dannenfelser’s latest interviews with RNC Chair candidates. Electing a pro-life chairman to the RNC is crucial.
Dec.28, 2010 3:30 pm |
Blogs |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
SoapboxFive discusses complaints brought against the Hooters franchise by the CA NOW for Hooters’ exploitation and sexualization of children through their merchandise.
I am NOT defending Hooters marketing strategies [suggest you compare Univision or Telemundo info babes choice of apparel to that of the ABC, NBC or CBS].
The Hooters execs have just discovered a way to comply with the requirements of the present social, political and legal systems.
Reminds me of the strip club in Seattle that was forced to install hand rails in the ‘shower scene’ prop one of their dancers used in her routine in order to comply with federal, state and local American with Disabilities Act requirements. [Some politically correct graduate of the local womens studies department at UW was using the power of the local government to enforce her own personal agenda.]
Or my sister being upset when her husband was able to wrangle a larger salary out of his employer by justifying his demand for a larger salary by saying his male ego required that he make more money than his wife.
I told my sister she ought to just get over it and enjoy the additionall income.
Sometimes you just have to figure out how to navigate the system in order to reach your goal.
Hooters is not a place that I frequent. From prior experiences in a former life I know that Hooters is not a ‘strip joint’ and the females who go to work there know what the ‘dress code’ is going in.
[Anybody notice the wardrobe and dance of the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders? I am confident Jerry Jones is not targeting middle aged married women with that gaggle of gals shakin’ what momma gave em.]
Tolerating sexual harrassment or sexual assault is another matter. I find it difficult to believe that most Hooters managers would allow their clientel to behave like they are the typical boors eating the noon buffet at the local strip joint.
Hooters caters to males and uses the same marketing strategy as the aforementioned Univision and Telemundo [and Jerry Jones]. I do not believe they would find the same degree of success if they marketed themselves as ‘The Golden Girls’ franchise unless they served up some real good eats.
[I like to frequent the independently owned cafes where the waitresses call me ‘sweety, sugar, honey, baby, darlin,etc. This kind of language makes my older feminista sister apoplectic. She believes these servers are demeaning all women by indulging in this 19th century behavior.]
It is called the ‘free market’.
I am a little bit skeptical of the claim that Hooters also markets itself as a ‘family friendly’ restaurant, unless their idea of a family is the same as Hugh Hefner.
The only items I can imagine on the kids menu would be for nursing infants.
[‘My momma always gave from the heart or someting near by.’]
My wife and daughters get all a twitter when I mention Hooters, though none of them have ever been in one.
I had to point out to my wife the doble entendre of the name and the logo. [Hooters is NOT about ‘owls’and those two circles with the dots in the middle are not just ‘eyes’.]
I drive by a strip club in Dallas named the ‘Santa Fe Gentlemens Club’.
Translated into English, ‘Santa Fe’ is ‘Holy Faith’.
I have been tempted to go into that particular establishment just to enquire of the owner if she/he is aware of that fact.
Is this a religious edifice, where the altar girls receive the offering from the grateful and sweatty palms of the fraternity of the pious peones?
Are the offerrings tax deductible?
What does one have to do or believe to be included in that circle of fellowship and what would one have to do to be disfellowhipped/excommunicated/
Backroom deals and and Chicago’s political crooks are in control of DC. They had to take death panels out of Obamacare in order to pass it; knowing they would put it back into the law through the HHS oversight of the ‘rules’. The libs must not see that the next conservative administration will also be able to legislate over THEM through administrative order. Watch for the libs to start pulling their hair out and screaming about how unfair it is when conservatives get power of them through ‘Obamacare’ and the HHS Secretary that the conservatives appoint in 2012. Support for Obama and Obamacare is inviting bureaucratic control of every body. For freedom’s sake we must repeal Obamacare. And Ex-RINO, you have got to be nuts to talk about how happy you are to watch Obamacare ‘unfold’. You were never really GOP if you support that kind of government control over the people.
Or my sister being upset when her husband was able to wrangle a larger salary out of his employer by justifying his demand for a larger salary by saying his male ego required that he make more money than his wife.
Ken, if that’s really the deal, then, uh…… That’s pretty wild.
Do you realize how unbelievable it is, as stated?
I think I was subjected to a death panel the other day…was asked if I wanted to be an organ donor. I mean, questions or counselling about decisions that might need to be made at the end of my life? The horror!
Doug,
I editorialized a bit. I don’t believe my brother in law actually mentioned his ‘ego’.
My brother in law was interviewing for a job. When he told the perspective employer the profferred salary was too low and he would have to make at least x $ per hour, the owner asked him why. He told him and he met his demand. He possessed the necessary job skills. THey were just negotiating salary.
Sometimes you have to know the ‘secret handshake’ in order to access the benefits of the good ole boys club’. Figureatively speaking of course.
I am sure there is also a ‘good ole gals club’ with it’s own set of unwritten but understood rules.
Ex-RINO,
You are one the few proud minions of the state who see it as good that bureaucrats will be making “decisions that might need to be made at the end of my life?” Do you feel the same allegiance to the state when they are dictating decisions over your health care for you at the beginning and the middle of your life too? Do you have no problem with the mandate either? Hail Obama. Hail his czars who will provide oversight of your eligibility for care based on your productivity/return on investment for the state.
And what about the fact that Congress had specifically removed these panels from Obamacare and they put it back in through administrative rules? That doesn’t bother you? Do you believe that Obama and his administrative czars know better than you about what is best for you? He continues to govern OVER and against the will of the people. Does the unconstitutional mandated purchase of Obamacare disturb you? It is painful to me watching Obama and Sebellius ‘unfold’ Obamacare but I will enjoy 2012 when we further purge our political system of the ones who support increased statist control over the people. You should move to China, your views could easily get you a job in government there. Does the Chinese government encourage loyalty by allowing government workers in China more than the state sanctioned one child (just wondering if you could move your whole family over there or if you would be limited to a wife and one kid?
The “death panels” brouhaha began when Sarah Palin made one of her kooky Facebook entries.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/dec/18/politifact-lie-year-death-panels/
The ides for end-of-life planning is not new; in fact, Republicans have brought it up in prior years.
http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/08/death-panel-architect-a-pro-life-republican-from-georgia.html
Ken, good post about Hooters.
They do have the waitresses dress in push-up bras, t-shirts and short pants, but you see lots of families and lots of kids in there.
Anybody notice the wardrobe and dance of the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders? I am confident Jerry Jones is not targeting middle aged married women with that gaggle of gals shakin’ what momma gave em.
I’m a big football fan, but NFL cheerleaders, especially the Cowgirls or whatever they call themselves, dress like strippers, which I find annoying.
When my son was about twelve, we went to a Hooters in Miami. The food was mediocre, but the main attraction, of course, were the attractive young ladies in short shorts and tight tops. My son and husband, of course, enjoyed the “scenery.” I wouldn’t go there again, but I didn’t see anything scandalous about it. There were attractive young women walkinga round the street clad in less than what the Hooters waitresses wear. And on the beach women walk around the beach in even less clothing. Does that mean that children shouldn’t be allowed to go there?
Feminists get furious about strip clubs, Playboy centerfolds, etc., but I thought part of the movement was about choice. Shouldn’t women have a choice to be strippers, or NFL cheerleaders, or Hooters waitresses if they want?
The whole “controversy” is rather ridiculous.
The “controversy” is this, according to the CA NOW:
“Local and state authorities should demand that Hooters, Inc. either comply with EEOC prohibitions against sexual discrimination, if they wish to be a family restaurant that serves children, or comply with regulations covering providers of sexual entertainment, which prohibit children from the premises.”
Currently, they are not doing this. They are also marketing their things to children.
It has less to do with what they *require* the waitresses to wear and more to do with how they’re marketing themselves. Are women on the beach told to expect their rears to be pinched and have innuendo launched at them – and then told to serve the offenders drinks if they want a good tip? There’s a difference.
Oh, and all classy dads should totally buy their little boys an “I only date Hooters Girls” t-shirt. Just the kind of value every little boy needs to grow up with. Yay.
Well, I didn’t see anyone get their bottoms pinched while I was there. I’m not defending them, but no one is forcing these women to work at Hooters. We all have a free will. Parents should be the ones who decide whether their children go there or not, or whether to buy their kids a happy meal. I don’t like the idea of a nanny state.
And why is NOW so concerned about children seeing scantily clad women when they think it’s okay to slice and dice them in utero, even when they are obviously past the “blob” stage?
No one forces women to work at strip clubs, either. It’s good money. More than women get when working at other restaurants. I’ve been told this by women who actually work there.
If they are, as they themselves have said, a place primarily of “vicarious sexual entertainment,” then children shouldn’t be allowed on the premises. It’s not just about seeing “scantily clad women,” it’s about marketing your products to them and FOR them. I don’t like it when Playboy does it, and I don’t like it when Hooters does it.
As for the abortion issue, that is where the NOW and I part ways.
I’ve never seen anybody pinch rumps at Hooters, and do not think it’s allowed or that the employees are told to expect it.
The food isn’t great, and the darn chicken wings used to have so much breading that I hated them. Now at least you can get them “naked.” : P
The statement about occasional buttocks slapping (I said pinching, so I got it wrong) is from the sfist article on the CA NOW.
The Smoking Gun posted some info on the Hooters handbook a while back: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/so-you-wanna-be-hooters-girl
Also, since we know the food isn’t great, why do people go there? ;) lol
I don’t see why it’s so hard to admit that Hooters isn’t really a place fit for children. I’ve heard stories from Hooters Girls about kids having their birthday parties there. Whose idea, I wonder, was that? :D Mom’s??
truth –
So, since when did conversations between a doctor and a patient about future end-of-life decisions become a death panel? Would you rather have that information not known – leaving the decision to somebody else? Keep somebody hooked up to a machine for years? Going through unwanted care because the decision was never asked? Seems like you advocate withholding information from patients and causing confusion when things get rough at the end.
RINO,
I don’t want a government payed physician to recommend my care based upon statist standards.
truth –
That’s fine – deny the session (are you going to deny all of Medicare when you are older?).
Follow-up. Do you want to deprive others the opportunity if they so choose?
A discussion is fine. What is not ok is when the people who are making the decisions about your “eligibility” for care are the ones paying for the discussions be held. Would you be ok with the HHS mandating certain of their pamphlets get handed out during these discussions in order for the doctors to eligible for reimbursement?
Excellent truth – just read through section 1233 – words “brochure” or “pamphlet” don’t even come up.
I just don’t see the fuss about it. It seems like those against it are hoping for more Terri Schiavo type situations where the intentions of the person is not clearly defined.
From the Hooters handbook:
‘Only approved Orange Hooters Girl Shorts are to be worn, sized to fit, and should NOT BE SO TIGHT THAT THE BUTTOCKS SHOW.’
I’ve definitely seen some employees pushing against the limit of that rule, if not smashing it to smithereens.
Have also seen the kids’ birthday parties, and saw nothing objectionable there – everybody was having a great time, some of the employees had their kids there too….
http://thestir.cafemom.com/big_kid/114025/kid_celebrates_birthday_at_hooters
You cannot seriously tell me a kid would have more fun at Hooters than at someplace like Chuck E. Cheese. There’s a video at that link. I do not doubt the sincerity or kindness of the women who work there. My issue (and apparently, the NOW’s) is that Hooters needs to choose. Either BE a family establishment with bad food, or be a sexually charged entertainment establishment with bad food. We really do know why it’s so popular, and it ain’t for the wings.