Middle School Football Coach Chooses Hooters for End of Season Party


Leah
 Share

Recommended Posts

I definitely would not want my daughter to work there. Those outfits are immodest. The top is tight and shows cleavage and the shorts are way too short. I want people to be able to look at my daughter for her natural beauty inside and out. Those outfits imo are there to incite lustful thoughts and she is better than that! Sorry, just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes, I would be.

The image I posted that was removed showed how non-playmate Hooters uniforms are. They really are just a sleeveless top and shorts. The franchise honestly does not live up to the reputation that the media and ultra-conservatives have given it.

Ditto.

I first started going in FL.

The location was on the beach...and the staff was hands down more dressed than the clientele. Including the one piece with shorts on over the suit.

Their uniform is a lot less revealing than even the "modest" cheer uniforms at my highschool, and is a lot more modest than 90% of other athletic & dance uniforms.

I was surprised, the first time I went, after hearing so much about it.

I honestly didn't even know I was in a "insert dramatic musical score" HOOTERS, when I first went.

I loooooooooooove their Buffalo Chicken sammies.

Serious YUM.

And I also love their Support The Troops

Which they have public days...

But while on ship going from A-B the long way

A bunch of guys and I from our unit wrote them how much we missed their buffalo chicken Sammie's...And. They. Airlifted. Several. Hundred. Frozen. Ones. To. Us.

Totally without fanfare (no media credit).

Enough not just for us, but the whole crew we were catching a ride from, to have a "steel beach BBQ".

While they do have the Calendar Girls, and in house competitions (company wide)...

So do fire departments.

I'm fine with both Hooters & the Fire Department.

My daughter is welcome to work at either.

Q

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, they have the servers with tight shirts and shorts, but then, I live in a part of Florida were bikini tops are common place on that boardwalk even in November.

So yeah, I don't get that knee-jerk reaction when somebody says Hooters!

Although, in fairness, there's probably a difference in standard attire on a Florida beach versus standard attire in northern Oregon.

I guess my thought is: The Hooters folks might be very generous to soldiers. They may even have great food. But frankly, they're selling an experience; and part of that experience is deliberately objectified women. It's not incidental to their business, like the fire department Quin mentions--it's a core activity. There's a reason the o's in their logo look the way they do; and it ain't because of the roundness of their dinner rolls.

If their waitress uniforms are no longer considered revealing or sexualized, it's only because society as a whole has coarsened; and I daresay that those uniforms would change before you could say "string bikini" if the management believed that a significant portion of their customer base thought that those uniforms were now being considered "modest".

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.lds.net/forums/general-discussion/56238-anti-porn-petition.html

http://www.lds.net/forums/general-discussion/56273-censorship-not-dirty-word-seriously-whats-wrong-people.html

I suppose all sports games are out, considering they objectify women with the cheerleaders, or all grocery checkout aisles are immune to objectifying women . Then again, I did read Playboy for the articles back in the day. Still, its sort of amusing to think that that some believe Hooters is extreme, therefore validating the "experience" as sexual. Thinking in extremes, only perpetuates and adds fuel to the thought that breasts are sexual. Then the same women who concern themselves with appearances or modest clothing, are offended when they receive public scrutiny for using them for their proper use in the open.

Its like telling someone not to think about the elephant in the room, but of course they are going to think about the elephant, as that is what was specified to think about. So the name Hooters can be a blessing or a curse, depending on the patrons state of mind.

Never been to Hooters, but I can respect that the servers are not ashamed of who they are and confident in what they do, as no doubt the people in line for the night club next door are probably wearing more revealing attire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose all sports games are out, considering they objectify women with the cheerleaders, or all grocery checkout aisles are immune to objectifying women.

I think we should re-evaluate that, yeah. But note my distinction about "core activities".

Still, its sort of amusing to think that that some believe Hooters is extreme, therefore validating the "experience" as sexual.

What's the link between "extreme" and "sexual"? I don't follow you.

I think two issues would undercut any allegation that Hooters is innocent in nature and only sexualized by those prudish, repressed conservative folk:

1. Hooters' failure to change its logo, or to put its waitresses in attire that more accurately reflects the industry standard for restaurants; and

2. The fact that the place is called "Hooters" and not "Mammaries", and the complete absence of breast pumps, bottles, nursing shawls, and other baby/nursing paraphernalia in the decor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't want to work at a job where you have to sign a statement that jokes and sexual innuendo are commonplace and therefore you must put up with it to be hired.

And this statement that must be signed also says the business is based on sex appeal. It doesn't say their business is based on their wings.

So You Wanna Be A "Hooters" Girl? | The Smoking Gun

Edited by pam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some random school district in Oregon has a problem with it, but we don't as Latter-Day Saints?

Well I live in SE Florida and spend allot of time on our beaches and will say you just kind of get accustomed to half or (mostly) naked people running around. Sad but necessary I suppose if one wants to get out to the wind and waves. Despite that I recently ran into a Hooters girl in uniform doing some grocery shopping and she definitely appeared out of place.

You can call me a prude or ultra-conservative or whatever but I would never consider taking my family there. I'm sure the food is great and all, but I don't want my daughters to see their Priesthood holding Dad frequent an establishment that plays on and celebrates a sexual double-entendre for female body parts.

I've spent my time in Football Locker rooms as well and this coach has done his players a disservice by endorsing the immature objectification of women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some random school district in Oregon has a problem with it, but we don't as Latter-Day Saints?

That's been exactly my thought as well. I've just been scratching my head over this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last image was not "scantily clad". It was a sleeveless top and shorts. But ok.

Of short shorts and a tank top which are not what our young women are taught to wear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've spent my time in Football Locker rooms as well and this coach has done his players a disservice by endorsing the immature objectification of women.

I started a thread here long time ago about how I don't understand why LDS people support the NFL. I was very well in the minority for accusing the NFL of objectifying women with their NFL Cheerleaders.

This coach doing the players a disservice for having the poor taste of choosing Hooters for an end of season venue may well be doing his kids a disservice for giving them dreams of joining the NFL one day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me this is really simple... If as a parent I decide to take my kids to Hooters well then it is on me and it is totally my call. I have that Right plain and simple.

But as a coach or a teacher of other kids I don't have that right. I can not take a kid anywhere over the objection of their parents. (To do otherwise is known as kidnapping)

In the article the coach says he forced the issue because he wants the kids to learn to stand up for what is right. That is a good thing to teach but on this issue the coach has no Right and is in fact quite wrong. And the life lesson you need to teach in that case is to say "opps I was wrong lets fix this".

Edited by estradling75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me this is really simple... If as a parent I decide to take my kids to Hooters well then it is on me and it is totally my call. I have that Right plain and simple.

But as a coach or a teacher of other kids I don't have that right. I can not take a kid anywhere over the objection of their parents. (To do otherwise is known as kidnapping)

In the article the coach says he forced the issue because he wants the kids to learn to stand up for what is right. That is a good thing to teach but on this issue the coach has no Right and is in fact quite wrong. And the life lesson you need to teach in that case is to say "opps I was wrong lets fix this".

I agree with everything you're saying here.

But, I didn't get in the article that the coach forced the kids to go to the party. My understanding is that some parents told the coach their kid is not going to be able to go because of the venue and the coach did not accomodate them... which, to my understanding says, "We'll have the party without ya". This is different from something like, the coach telling the parents, if your kids don't go they're going to get an F in PE... or something. Standing up for what is right could well include Standing up for your conviction not to go to Hooters... or standing up for not playing on Sunday. The coach doesn't have to remove the team from the Sunday games because of some parents' convictions. This can be looked at in the same manner although it is still in bad taste for the coach because... it's a lot easier to change the venue than to win a tournament while missing Sunday games. Unless, like I mentioned earlier, the venue is already bought and paid for.

Edited by anatess
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started a thread here long time ago about how I don't understand why LDS people support the NFL. I was very well in the minority for accusing the NFL of objectifying women with their NFL Cheerleaders.

This coach doing the players a disservice for having the poor taste of choosing Hooters for an end of season venue may well be doing his kids a disservice for giving them dreams of joining the NFL one day.

I could pretty much guess that the majority of those LDS who watch football don't do it for the cheerleaders. It's all about the game. I watch NFL football and rarely do I even see the cheerleaders unless it's a pan shot of them which lasts a couple of seconds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could pretty much guess that the majority of those LDS who watch football don't do it for the cheerleaders. It's all about the game. I watch NFL football and rarely do I even see the cheerleaders unless it's a pan shot of them which lasts a couple of seconds.

Yes. The same way the coach didn't choose Hooters so the 12-year-olds could oggle some Hooters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. The same way the coach didn't choose Hooters so the 12-year-olds could oggle some Hooters.

From what I can gather online, it seems there is no Hooters in Corbett, Oregon--you have to go into Portland, at least half an hour away; byassing Applebee's, Texas Road House, Chili's, and a host of other restaurants. Surely the venue wasn't chosen because those 12-year-olds all know Hooters' reputation for haute cuisine?

It's the food or the mammaries; and I doubt these kids have what you'd call refined palates. Ergo . . .

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can go to a football game and fairly easily avoid looking at, let alone ogling, the cheerleaders. There are lots of other things to see. Like the game.

I can't go to Hooters and avoid seeing. . . hooters. The logo, the waitresses, the promotional materials. It's all pretty in-your-face, and even they are very open about that being their schtick. It's disingenuous to say otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also: I wasn't going to say this initially, but the more I look into this situation and how much this guy's going out of his way to get these kids to Hooter's specifically, the troublesome it becomes and, I think, the more it has to be said:

Putting hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars of your own money into a group of kids is one thing. We call that charity. Taking that same pool of kids and driving them half an hour out of your way to undermine their parents' moral authority and provide them with a sexualized experience? Well, in the criminal defense world, that's when words like grooming start getting thrown around.

There's a fine line between churlishness/piggery, and creepiness--and this coach is flirting with it.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I can gather online, it seems there is no Hooters in Corbett, Oregon--you have to go into Portland, at least half an hour away; byassing Applebee's, Texas Road House, Chili's, and a host of other restaurants. Surely the venue wasn't chosen because those 12-year-olds all know Hooters' reputation for haute cuisine?

It's the food or the mammaries; and I doubt these kids have what you'd call refined palates. Ergo . . .

It was mentioned in the article. Hooters plays end of season videos. There are only 2 places I know besides a private venue that does that in my town - the Korean Karaoke place and Sports Bars.

And I bet that if the article would have said... the coach took the kids to Sneakers this wouldn't have made LDS.net news. Yes, the place's name refers to shoes instead of owls but if you're sensitive to waitresses with tight shirts this is no different.

No, I'm not defending Hooters. I am merely pointing out that there are many reasons people go to Hooters that has nothing to do with mammaries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also: I wasn't going to say this initially, but the more I look into this situation and how much this guy's going out of his way to get these kids to Hooter's specifically, the troublesome it becomes and, I think, the more it has to be said:

Putting hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars of your own money into a group of kids is one thing. We call that charity. Taking that same pool of kids and driving them half an hour out of your way to undermine their parents' moral authority and provide them with a sexualized experience? Well, in the criminal defense world, that's when words like grooming start getting thrown around.

There's a fine line between churlishness/piggery, and creepiness--and this coach is flirting with it.

Agreed. But I don't see the undermining of authority here. This is a party. If the parents don't want their kids to go they don't have to go. And parties usually mean, the parents are invited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was mentioned in the article. Hooters plays end of season videos. There are only 2 places I know besides a private venue that does that in my town - the Korean Karaoke place and Sports Bars.

Am I to conclude that in the entire Portland metropolitan area, not a single, solitary, family restaurant would be willing to set up a TV or play a video on an existing TV, in order to accommodate a party of several dozen paying customers?

I don't buy it.

And I bet that if the article would have said... the coach took the kids to Sneakers this wouldn't have made LDS.net news.

Frankly, I had never even heard of Sneakers until you mentioned them in this thread.

I am merely pointing out that there are many reasons people go to Hooters that has nothing to do with mammaries.

Couldn't the same thing be said for strip clubs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I to conclude that in the entire Portland metropolitan area, not a single, solitary, family restaurant would be willing to set up a TV or play a video on an existing TV, in order to accommodate a party of several dozen paying customers?

I don't buy it.

Sure, there may be. But, if one doesn't find anything wrong with Hooters, then why go to all that trouble to find one you don't know is going to be a good place?

This coach's children spent their own end-of-football season when they were middle-school-age 15 years ago at Hooters and this coach was one of the concerned parents who scouted Hooters before agreeing to send his kids with the team. They had fun and he didn't find anything wrong with it, so he chose Hooters when he had the opportunity to pick a venue.

Frankly, I had never even heard of Sneakers until you mentioned them in this thread.

Couldn't the same thing be said for strip clubs?

Are you really going to put Hooters and strip clubs in the same category?

But yes, the same thing can be said for NFL games with their NFL Cheerleaders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share