Categories
boobs butts entitled babies incels men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny

Fix struggling Hooters chain by letting men DEBATE THEIR WAITRESSES, dude suggests

Hey, large-breasted women: Debate him if you disagree that you should debate him! (Note: This is not actually the Hooters debate guy, by the way; it’s a meme.)

By David Futrelle

Have you heard the bad news about Hooters? The infamous “breastaurant” chain, a place where America’s creepiest dads and granddads could live out their fantasies of gawking at their waitresses’ boobs without the owners of said boobs being able to complain about it, has been, well, sagging a bit lately.

According to Business Insider, “the number of Hooters locations in the US has dropped by more than 7% from 2012 to 2016, and sales have stagnated, according to industry reports.”

Some are blaming the chain’s troubles on millennials’ alleged lack of interest in boobs, at least compared with their breast-obsessed elders. And maybe they have a point. What’s a business based on boobs supposed to do in an ass-obsessed world like ours? Why should millennials pay to eat overpriced wings while staring at boobs when they could be home eating ass for free?

One enterprising young game developer has some ideas. In a series of tweets (starting here), Eric Adam Hovis explained how he would “fix” Hooters to make it more appealing to geeky millennial dudes like him.

Eric Adam Hovis ‏ @ericadamhovis Follow Follow @ericadamhovis More Replying to @KrangTNelson @shaun_jen For me to be excited about Hooters, there would need to be changes. 1)I'm not a huge fan of the barbie look - bottle blonde, big boobs, scorching tans. 2) I wouldn't be there to LOOK at you, but to TALK with you. A place to eat and chat with good conversationalists? Sign me up.

Waitresses aren’t there to be looked at! They’re there to be TALKED at!

So it would be a place to have conversations and debates with smart/pretty women while eating food. There could be "debate nights" where wings are free or something. There could be activities rooms where people play pool or video games. I think I'm thinking of a geisha place.

DEBATE NIGHT! Come on down to Hooters and DEBATE our GEISHAS! Did we mention the FREE WINGS?

Just remember to tip your waitress, at least if she lets you win the “debate.”

It would also be important to have some specialized setup for the guys who just want to therapeutically vent their woes to women. Like specialized "problem listener" hostesses. This way these guys don't just dump their problems onto each and every woman they encounter.

What’s better than FREE WINGS? FREE EMOTIONAL LABOR from women with huge bazongas!

Oh, and somehow Hooters would need to be SUPER CHEAP since us millennials are BROKE. I think of current Hooters as some weird, exotic, unique luxury experience, like going to a magician restaurant. But then again I think of Applebee's as a fancy, high-class restaurant, too.

But of course. Because millennial men are clearly entitled to all this attention from “smart and pretty women” for practically nothing.

So for me as a millennial to be excited about Hooters it would need to be a fundamentally different experience that, instead of relying on a superficial novelty, instead cultivates meaningful human interactions in a world increasingly isolated by convenience and technology.

Yes, because what human interaction could possibly be more “meaningful” than a”debate” between some dude and a woman who knows that if she challenges him in any significant way he’ll stiff her on the tip? Especially when she has to endure hour after hour of such “debates,” on topics not of her choosing, every single shift, while delivering up plate after plate of wings and jalapeno poppers with a giant smile plastered on her face?

Well, Mr. Hovis got his free debate all right. His tweets inspired a wave of comments and jokes on Twitter and elsewhere. Let’s just say that his ideas weren’t quite as well received as he was perhaps expecting, particularly by women.

Summertime Radness Li'l 🌳 ‏ Verified account @karengeier Following Following @karengeier More Replying to @ericadamhovis @KrangTNelson @shaun_jen you should be permanently banned from ever talking to women probably, which is like your life now, except with legal ramifications

ᴏʜ ғᴜᴄᴋ ɪᴛ's ASHLEY LYNCH ‏ @ashleylynch Following Following @ashleylynch More Replying to @DavidFutrelle “I’d like to speak to the manager. M’lady refused to debate me about why feminism is cancer so I demand that my Macho Nacho Man plate be significantly discounted due to my default victory.”

Alex Jay Brady ‏ @AlexJayBrady Follow Follow @AlexJayBrady More Replying to @ashleylynch @DavidFutrelle Where straight men can get together and mass debate

ritical thot ‏ @beehivesy Following Following @beehivesy More “i would never give money to a sex worker. i mean..,,,call me a feminist but i NEED my chicken waitress to be highly educated, naturally gorgeous and my literal therapist. also i want to pay her pennies lol”

Hovis, who actually sees himself as something of a feminist (or, as he puts it half jokingly in his Twitter bio, as a “Berniecrat progressive leftist sjw libtard feminazi betacuck”), has spent much of the last several days “clarifying” and rethinking his suggestions in a series of followup tweets and in a blog post he’s already revised and rewritten several times.

He insists he didn’t mean to suggest that “waitresses/bartenders should … have to be people’s therapists” — I’m not quite sure how this denial squares with his bit about “‘problem listener’ hostesses” who would basically be serving as therapists. He also declares that everyone at his new, improved Hooters “should be paid a living wage” — despite his demand that the restaurants also be ‘”SUPER CHEAP.” Oh, and he also thinks “Hooters should be more body-inclusive” even though his reference to “smart and pretty” waitresses in his original tweets made clear that he thinks looks should play a big part in the company’s hiring decisions.

But Hovis’ original tweets are much more, well, revealing than his somewhat less-that-altogether-convincing “clarifications.” And that’s because his original tweets reflect something about our society’s insidious tendency to dump emotional labor onto women, and to demand that women do this labor largely for free.

Many if not most of us could benefit from having someone listen to our problems. But this responsibility shouldn’t be foisted off on hostesses working for a casual dining chain famous for its skimpy outfits. Nor should it be foisted on wives or girlfriends. People should be able to get the therapy they need from actual therapists, well-trained professionals paid for their expertise. And, like Hovis’ imaginary improved Hooters, this service should be “SUPER CHEAP” if not free, with costs subsidized by a beefed-up health insurance system based on Single-Payer or Medicare for All  (as should the rest of our medical expenses).

And if after all this you still want some hot wigs, well, there are better places to get them from than Hooters.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

167 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tabby Lavalamp
Tabby Lavalamp
2 years ago

This is why computers and other devices should have built in hands that extend out and slap people when they’re about to write something significantly wrong-headed.

Mish of the Catlady Ascendancy

I almost feel sorry for this guy for the supreme dunking he’s received for his tweets. It’s hard to even get mad at him, his ‘thoughts’ are just so cringe-inducing and embarrassing.

But yeah, in an ideal world, we would all have people who supported us and listened to us, plus access to quality, professional therapy if it was needed. As for emotional labour, oof. At work, caring about students is a big part of what I do, and it can have incredible results, as people find their confidence and start to thrive. But in both personal and professional contexts, the question of “am I giving too much?” or “am I not giving enough?” is a constant anxiety.

On a far more silly level, please no-one ask for the typo in the last line to be corrected; I’m very fond of it 🙂

And if after all this you still want some hot wigs, well, there are better places to get them from than Hooters.

Dormousing_it
Dormousing_it
2 years ago

Some MGTOWs complain about having to function as “emotional tampons” for emotionally needy (according to the MGTOWs) women. Now, this dude here wants women who already work as waitresses to be extremely underpaid / unpaid therapists, AKA “emotional tampons”.

I’ve held numerous customer service jobs. One of the worst things about these jobs, overall, was people using me as a captive, unpaid sounding board / therapist. Now, I’m not what’s known as a “people person”, and the emotional labor I was obliged to perform tended to deplete my energy more than anything else. I’m certain many of the customers who used me in this way were quite aware of what they were doing.

One other thing about Hooters waitresses: They’re required to wear full makeup and have their hair styled, not just thrown into a ponytail. I’ve noticed the few I’ve seen off-work also have their nails manicured. I don’t know if it’s required of them, though. All these grooming requirements take time and *money*.

griffon8
griffon8
2 years ago

The one and only time I ever ate at a Hooters was when a friend of mine and I were waiting for a movie to start. We hadn’t seen each other for a while after having been room/housemates for five years so we talked to each other and completely ignored the fact that there were busty waitresses around.

Early 2006. I had won two tickets to an early screening of V for Vendetta. My friend was the only one in our group of friends interested in seeing it. Probably because he was the only one in our group who was still local and not in a serious relationship or married (my one extra ticket could not cover a couple).

I do not remember the food. Which means it was acceptable enough, neither noticeably good or bad. I don’t really remember the waitresses.

NotTom
NotTom
2 years ago

I used to really enjoy this blog. Not only was it roasting people who well deserved it, but it did it in a smart, funny way that made a good, intelligent points.

I’m guessing it’s a lot harder to find appropriate targets these days, things have shifted a bit. Personally, and perhaps this is just me, but it feels like lately the posts are about assumptions of the people being discussed, rather than what the they actually said. And the roasting just comes off as angry and heckling for the sake of it, rather than to drive a point home.

But what bothers me most is that the people you’re targeting are edge cases. They clearly have problematic attitudes, but they also have redeeming qualities that deserve to be highlighted as well. By just roasting them you’re just highlighting the divide for entertainment purposes, which I feel feeds into the more toxic elements of feminism. And I doubt the people in question will actually read it, but the attitude isn’t a helpful one to promote.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

God. It’s bad enough dudebros trawl around the internet foisting debates on women who didn’t express interest in debating anyone. Now they want to do it at restaurants too? Ick.

I’m not really clear on how this plan is supposed to work either. Servers tend to be working multiple tables at once and unless the place is dead are kept busy merely serving the food and drinks. How are they supposed to have time to debate or provide therapy to the customers too? There would have to be one server for every customer. This would cost the restaurant a whole lot of money and would definitely prevent the experience from being low cost. I’m not an expert on geisha houses by any means, but I’m pretty sure that the clients are wealthier men and there’s a reason for that. Wanting this kind of skilled and individualized attention for the cost of a fast food meal is entitled on a level that is just mind boggling.

Catalpa
Catalpa
2 years ago

On top of everything else wrong with this dude’s proposal, this system would all but guarantee that the hostesses at MasterdeBaters would be harassed by customers who expect the hostesses would be blown away by their Superior Intellect and definitely want to date them.

I mean, it’s not like women in customer service positions aren’t ALREADY propositioned by creepy assholes who think that a woman being nice to them as required by her job means she’s seconds away from jumping on his dick. But I’m sure that the proposed system would just make things worse, given the types of dudes who would be attracted to the setup in the first place, and the fact that dudes seem to assume that emotional labor is something that is only provided by a wife/girlfriend.

Mish of the Catlady Ascendancy

@wwth

It would be much more expensive, for sure. Anecdata time: I once worked at a gentlemen’s club – waitresses in lingerie, each assigned to ‘serve’ a specific table, the whole deal. We had to light their cigarettes for them, chat to them, pour their drinks, etc. That place was incredibly pricey. Not that we saw much of the money, obv.

Laugher at Bigots
2 years ago

I am a little ashamed to admit that I was sucked in by this man’s proposal briefly. To one raised as a lower-middle-class, white, heterosexual male, (as I was,) it seems superficially good for all involved. This is why it is important for white heterosexual men (and for all people, really, but for white heterosexual men especially) to read and listen to the experiences and opinions of people of other demographics: because their privileged position in society hides them from them, as the walls of a castle hide its lord from the outside.

calmdown
calmdown
2 years ago

It’s bad enough dudebros trawl around the internet foisting debates on women who didn’t express interest in debating anyone.

This reminded me, Fox news says Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a coward for refusing to debate Mr. Logical, Ben Shapiro. Apparently, when running for political office you must debate anyone who asks you, no matter how underqualified or irrelevant they are. Of course, if you’re a woman you must also be all things to all men at all times.

Corkey
Corkey
2 years ago

Just move to Japan. Plenty of hostess clubs have this exact business model. You just need to buy alcohol by the bottle, at the club rate. This may exceed the “be cheap” requirement though.

Some Guy
Some Guy
2 years ago

Since everything else seems to be covered by other commentary, lemme just point out that “millennials are killing boobs” is further than even I thought that stupid trend would go >_>

Jane Done
Jane Done
2 years ago

Who on earth would possibly think that a “debate” between a waitress, one of the least well-paid positions in a restaurant, and a customer, the chief source of income that keeps said restaurant in operation is even remotely close to a good idea? That’s like asking the entry-level data entry clerks to “debate” the company stockholders in order to maintain their job. That’s not a debate, that’s ego-stroking.

And on top of all that now we’re going to say that the purely emotional satisfaction of the customer is part of the package? It’s already difficult enough to satisfy ornery customers when they have to objectively prove that a service or product doesn’t meet their needs but now we’re just going to give them free reign to just say “I don’t feel satisfied” with no justification? Why not just give every person who enters the restaurant a little slip of paper with checkboxes that says “Server: Fire/Keep”.

And ON TOP of all that, opening the doors wide open to debate the staff, well, people who have a burning desire to “debate” with random conventionally attractive women strangers about anything at all are usually people with a chip on their shoulder and not very level-headed. Not the kind of people who should have power over another person’s means to live.

Even IF we just totally ignore the harassment H-bomb that this theoretical establishment would become, it would self-implode worse than a bastard child of Enron from bad reviews alone. It’s guaranteed to get bad reviews because it’s literally targets a demographic of ill-tempered, immature men.

Seriously, who on earth would even think up an idea like th-
Oh.

Game developer.

Yup.

That’s exactly the kind of fantastical “business” idea that I imagine a white male yuppie programmer to think up.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
2 years ago

Henceforth, Hooters shall be known as Sea Lions.

I’m trying to imagine how this would work on a date. Would their dining companion be off the hook for providing a “Feminism Is Cancer” rebuttal, or would these supreme gentlemen carry on two debates at once?

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

@Laughter at Bigots

Make that the two of us, friend. Though the OP isn’t quite on the incel/MGTOW/Redpiller end of the misogyny spectrum, his proposal was pretty brogressive, and that in itself is deserving of correction.

Not to mention that most of the replies in this thread have automatically (and probably correctly) assumed that it would be the men who shade closer to incel who would visit Hooters in the first place…

(Tangent: Is it considered tone-policing to feel that the dunking the OP got was disproportionate?)

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Tangent: Is it considered tone-policing to feel that the dunking the OP got was disproportionate?

I wouldn’t call it tone policing, but I’ve got to disagree with you. I think that the reason we get to a place in which so many men are violently misogynistic is because casual misogyny is just so normalized. And we let it slide. All the time. I’m glad this stuff is getting called out more. We need the opinion that women exist to serve men do become socially unacceptable. Or else it’s not going to change.

Bina
2 years ago

Yeah, pay women peanuts so you can have the pleasure of boring us to death with your silly opinions, dude. That’s even MORE fun than paying us peanuts to let you ogle our boobs. /s

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

@wwth

I’m all for having casual misogyny being called out (Heaven knows I’m not blameless of it). I’m just wondering if having a thousand people telling the OP specifically (since they’re directly replying to him) the same thing (“your idea is problematic and you should rethink this”) in varying tones of anger and seriousness is really…I’m struggling to find the right word…nice? productive?

(I’m mostly pondering this as an attempt to figure out where my personal line between activism and bullying lies, so apologies if this is getting self-indulgent.)

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

I’m not sure it’s productive or convincing for him, but it does set an example. Other men might see the fallout from making a boneheaded remark like that and start to think before the opine on what women should be doing for them. Women might see and feel empowered too speak up when a man treats them like they must prioritize men’s feelings over absolutely everything else. The reason there’s such a backlash against “political correctness” is because this stuff works. Not all at once. But eventually.

Of course, if anyone threatened him or harassed him over this, I’m against that.

It could be my own biases though. I’m not by nature a people pleaser. As the trolls we get here could attest to. I resent the fuck out of the expectation that women provide emotional labor to any man who decides she should. It’s a bit of a rage button for me!

occasional reader
occasional reader
2 years ago

Hello.

I think i’m thinking of a geisha place.

You think that you think ? Is it some kind of inception ?
Anyway, are you sure you have explored all your cliché list ? And geisha still means “artist” (and it is basically genderless, out of context), even if in occidental minds it is still only associated to sex entertainer women in some kind of traditionnal japanese outfit (and as research motors bring those stereotypes first when you do a request on this word, this is not going to change quickly).

Game developper, ha ? Well, would you be happy if someone engage you in a debate while you are crunching to meet the deadline of your videogame production (and being paid almost nothing for the code you piss) ?

Well, after thinking that you are thinking, i am suggesting that you debate you debatting with yourself. You would be able to pay yourself with peanuts, and you would be able to debate with someone with the same level of smartness ! Total win !

Have a nice day.

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

@NotTom

I’m guessing it’s a lot harder to find appropriate targets these days, things have shifted a bit.

I think “brogressives” have always been considered ‘acceptable targets’ by this blog. The comments section, at least, doesn’t care for them.

Personally, and perhaps this is just me, but it feels like lately the posts are about assumptions of the people being discussed, rather than what the they actually said.

While I believe that some of the negative assumptions about the OP are unwarranted (I don’t think he’s gone Redpill, for example), and I’m still uncomfortable about the tendency of Twitter to become a dog-pile, no one deserves to get a free pass from criticism just because they’re mostly in the right.

The more salient point of this post was not about OP’s statements, but rather to point out the fact that his statements contained embedded in them the expectation put on women to do emotional labor for free (or as a side job) for any man who asks. This is, by its sheer pervasiveness, quite an important attitude to correct. What’s more, passively accepting it as a thing gives cover to more overtly misogynist talking points (e.g. “women are more suited to nurturing roles”).

They clearly have problematic attitudes, but they also have redeeming qualities that deserve to be highlighted as well […] the roasting just comes off as angry and heckling for the sake of it, rather than to drive a point home.

Ehh, the fact that OP kept digging instead of saying “I was wrong, I apologize, and I will do better next time” gives me pause about exactly how much of the roasting (on this blog, at least) was unwarranted.

But what bothers me most is that the people you’re targeting are edge cases.

I don’t quite see a general trend in recent posts of targeting “edge cases” (i.e. people with problematic attitudes but redeeming qualities).

Recent posts (from oldest to newest) have been about
– rape advocates,
– Literal Nazi Andrew Anglin,
– Jordan Peterson,
– some incel who doesn’t know how cattle-farming works,
– some Reddit fat-shaming edgelord,
an evo-psych journal with alarmingly shoddy research,
– Macho Trump memers,
– Jordan Peterson (again),
– Qanon believers,
– some Reddit dom getting self-owned by an IQ test, and
– Michael Cohen and Paul Manafort.

Pretty edgy (I make no apologies for that pun), but I don’t see anyone with “redeeming qualities” in that rogues’ gallery.

By just roasting [people with problematic attitudes but redeeming qualities] you’re just highlighting the divide for entertainment purposes, which I feel feeds into the more toxic elements of feminism. And I doubt the people in question will actually read it, but the attitude isn’t a helpful one to promote.

If anyone has, as their main takeaway from this post, that it is permissible to try to get their knives into this guy, they are simply terrible people who would be given no quarter on this site. I believe the readers of this blog are more sober-headed than that.

Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
Surplus to Requirements, Observer of the Vast Blight-Wing Enstupidation
2 years ago

@NotTom:

I’m guessing it’s a lot harder to find appropriate targets these days

Are you effin’ kidding? The Trump regime has created the ultimate target-rich environment. 😛

TreePerson
TreePerson
2 years ago

@NotTom:

I have seen a slight shift in tone in the past year or so,
but its gone from “these people have hilariously bad arguments and logic” to “these people are actual terrorists and an active threat to the life and safety of others”.

Considering the real world raise of violent extremism seen in incels and other groups David has started to go from comedy writer to legit journalist and (probably) the worlds foremost expert on incel radicalization and violence.

Faceball
Faceball
2 years ago

@TreePerson

Things David Futrelle is not an expert in:

1. Terrorism
2. Incel Violence
3. Men’s Rights
4. Economics
5. Really anything requiring a level of cognitive functioning that might go beyond that needed to pass the 5th grade with a C average.

Things David IS an expert:

1. Stuffing his face with moon pies
2. Rolling over on his back for women who wouldn’t even touch him, let alone rub his belly for being such a good boy.

Dvärghundspossen
Dvärghundspossen
2 years ago

I saw someone else suggest that Hooters should go with an actual owl theme, have the waiting staff in owl costumes etc.

Virgin Mary
Virgin Mary
2 years ago

Wow. I could imagine Sacha Baron Cohen’s extreme liberal character coming up with exactly this. What a stupid idea.
Hooters has to die. Fortunately we only have a handful in Britain (if that’s the right term) and that’s too many.
I don’t see how having to work there could help anyone’s self respect.
This idea reminds me of those creepy teenager cafes in Japan where middle aged dudes pay to keep company with sexy teens. Disgusting stuff.

Gijoel
Gijoel
2 years ago

I’m thinking of opening a chain of restaurant where the wait staff are middle aged, white, male scientists tell you to clean your room and just-so stories about feminism and human evolutionary history.

I’m thinking of calling it Peterson’s.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
2 years ago

Why should millennials pay to eat overpriced wings while staring at boobs when they could be home eating ass for free?

I’ll use this if I ever get invited to hooters again
(went once as a kid. Friend’s step dad, of course named Guy, took us. Didn’t leave much of an impression. Him or the restaurant)

Thing is, a place to eat and chat with interesting people sounds like a cool idea. I wouldn’t go within 100 yards of that type A, people people pit of sorrows, but sounds cool. Except dudes like this (by which I mean nearly all dudes to various degrees) is exactly why anyone who’d start up such an establishment would be a fool to do so

Oh, and if there’s a lesson here, it’s tip your waitstaff. In restaurants and otherwise. I get paid… relatively well, but it’ll never be remotely enough to deal with yall’s needy asses. Not the commenters here specifically, y’all generally…

Rattus
Rattus
2 years ago

I just went to the dude’s Twitter. I don’t believe he is inherently evil. He has clarified some of his thoughts and he wasn’t defensive and angry about it – pro living wage and body positivity, wait staff should not be forced to be therapists. I think his vision was poorly worded rather than actively misogynistic. Dude just wants to converse with live people rather than whatever is typing at the other end.

Moggie
Moggie
2 years ago

Gijoel:

I’m thinking of opening a chain of restaurant where the wait staff are middle aged, white, male scientists tell you to clean your room and just-so stories about feminism and human evolutionary history.

I’m thinking of calling it Peterson’s.

Would you serve lobster?

Mish of the Catlady Ascendancy

@Moggie, Jordles is into ants now, do try to keep up 😁 😂

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

@Rattus

“Dude” should not expect wait staff at any restaurant to be having long conversations with patrons, particularly since they’re being paid to, y’know, wait tables, ‘living wage’ or no. He’s not evil, just blinded by privilege.

whatever is typing at the other end

They’re called “people”; annoyed, angry people on a hair-trigger because of an unending wave of sealions and other bad-faith proposals, and therefore slightly inclined towards giving shit rather than taking it, it is true, but people nonetheless.

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

Ariblester wrote:

I’m all for having casual misogyny being called out (Heaven knows I’m not blameless of it). I’m just wondering if having a thousand people telling the OP specifically (since they’re directly replying to him) the same thing (“your idea is problematic and you should rethink this”) in varying tones of anger and seriousness is really…I’m struggling to find the right word…nice? productive?

I understand what you mean; getting piled on tends to elicit a defensive reaction, which shuts down one’s ability to intake new information, ideas, and perspectives. And this also happens vicariously, especially when the person under the pile has some similarities with the observer in question.

The thing is, change is almost never easy. It’s hard work, and sometimes it’s painful or embarrassing, and that can be a huge hurdle, especially for men who have been raised in a patriarchal society.

But…

weirwoodtreehugger wrote:

I’m not sure it’s productive or convincing for him, but it does set an example. Other men might see the fallout from making a boneheaded remark like that and start to think before the opine on what women should be doing for them. Women might see and feel empowered too speak up when a man treats them like they must prioritize men’s feelings over absolutely everything else. The reason there’s such a backlash against “political correctness” is because this stuff works. Not all at once. But eventually.

WWTH’s point is crucial, especially the part I bolded. The root cause of the discomfort associated with changing unconscious patriarchy is the ubiquitous, often invisible reinforcement of patriarchy. The only way to change that is to change what gets reinforced socially, and the only way to do that is through constant effort over the course of decades and generations. Piling on to casual misogyny highlights the fact that it’s so pervasive, and even if people feel defensive about seeing it the first few dozen times, once they’ve seen a thousand people get called out for the same thing, it starts taking hold. Hell, just look at how Cheeto Hitler can sway folks just by repeating blatant falsehoods over and over and over and over…. We can harness that dynamic just as easily as he can.

And besides, if the OP is truly as progressive as he claims, he should be able to see the merits of the criticism he’s receiving. Being wrong doesn’t make you a bad person; clinging to your wrongness even when you’ve been shown how wrong you are does.

Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
2 years ago

Wait staff at a Hooters should NOT have to act as therapist for this “boob”…

THATS WHAT BARTENDERS ARE FOR!!!

E.T.A. that’s probably more of a dated, 1950’s meme… today’s bartender would likely tell you to go to a therapist…. 🙂

Catalpa
Catalpa
2 years ago

I don’t believe he is inherently evil.

Evil, no. He probably thinks he’s a great feminist dude, one of the most feminist and progressive dudes there is. He’s very likely not making the suggestion out of active malice towards women, not like most of the people featured on this blog.

That doesn’t mean the suggestion wasn’t misogynistic, though. Dude very clearly has some deeply embedded and (at least at the time) unquestioned sexist biases. Honestly, I suspect he STILL has those unquestioned biases, because he’s responding to people with “no no no, you just didn’t UNDERSTAND my proposal”, not “oh jeez I didn’t think of it like that, yikes. Sorry, I’ll do better.”. He CAN’T possibly be the least bit misogynistic, because he’s a Feminist and Good Person. Therefore anything he thinks is feminist and good and doesn’t need to be examined at all! There’s no need whatsoever for self improvement.

These kinds of guys, while generally not on the same level of danger as incels, still normalize misogyny, and still perpetuate sexism. And going “aw, he means well, let the little guy have his cheap pretty geisha waitress fantasy” isn’t going to improve anything. (I suspect the roasting he gets won’t improve HIM any, given how he’s responded to it, but witnessing it may make other similar dudes examine their biases.)

TL;DR you don’t have to be “Evil” to support harmful and prejudiced power structures. It happens by default in our society. Being unwilling to face up to your fuckups means you’re going to KEEP doing that.

Moon_custafer
Moon_custafer
2 years ago

Skeevy as Woody Allan is, I still find some of his early writings pretty funny – but there’s one, about an escort service where pretentious guys can hire women dressed as grad students to listen to them and nod in agreement, that’s close enough to this to be both hilarious and kind of chilling.

Katamount
Katamount
2 years ago

I went to a Hooters once when I was 16.

I never went back. It was just that forgettable and off-putting.

Speaking of escorts, I saw the weirdest ad stapled to a telephone pole near the bus stop I board at. It was for a sex doll brothel opening in North York.

Yes, a brothel… for sex dolls.

I can think of few things less appealing than that. I know that the manosphere buttwhistlers think that women’s bodies are gross and icky if they happen to be sexually active, but I wouldn’t trust my ding-dong to bunch of skeezy guys applying caustic chemicals to molded silicone. Assuming they even get that far. O.o

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Perhaps someone should open a business that platonically hooks guys up with other guys who just want conversation and emotional support. It is an issue that there is a stigma around men having these kinds of conversations with each other because men aren’t supposed to be vulnerable with each other. This is one of those ways that patriarchy can hurt men. But as usual, when patriarchy hurts men, men turn around hurt us. Then we excuse that by saying “he’s not such a bad guy” or “he’s just hurting.”

It stinks that straight men put all the emotional labor and support burden on their wives and girlfriends because they’re the only ones willing to do so. It stinks that straight men with no wife or girlfriend have no one to do talk to and get support from when they’re hurting.

The solution to that is not for society to find new circumstances under which women are expected to provide support for men who need it. The solution to that is for men to be better to each other. But I know it’s hard for men – particularly young men – to ask this of their friends and risk being mocked in their friend group for it. So, I propose an app. It would be sort of like OK Cupid. But only for men and only for friendship. Users can find other men who share their interests and values who are willing to ask for and to receive emotional support.

Why is it that when men are lonely or in pain we always look for ways to make women responsible for fixing it and then scold women for not responding kindly to this expectation. Men, you created patriarchy and you created toxic masculinity. You fix it.

BTW, I’m pretty sure that NotTom is a Jordan Peterson fan who is concern trolling and that’s what he meant by the claim that this blog is targeting non-misogynists now. I’m guessing he was never a fan in the past.

j
j
2 years ago

There are tons of women who are eager to listen to people’s problems. They’re called therapists and they’re way way way more helpful than a busy wife or a stranger waitress.

But there’s an interesting question. How much burden or problems should a spouse be expected to download off their partner? Surely “none” is neglectful but “all” is burdensome and exploitative right?

Assuming equal reciprocity.

Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
Axecalibur: Middle Name Danger
2 years ago

@j

Assuming equal reciprocity

Nah, too simple. More like from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs. Some people simply need more emotional work than others. Or in different ways. Some need low key, background taking care of. Others need an occasional therapy session. And partners should be able to provide that for each other. But it’s also important that neither rely on the other too much that it becomes a true burden (connotations intended) if at all avoidable. It’s a balancing act, but that’s what trust, effort, and communication are for 🙂

K.
K.
2 years ago

Speaking of Clueless Dudes Who Just Won’t Get It (and crappy chain food)…

Papa John Is Convinced Only Papa John Can Save Papa John’s

epitome of incomprehensibility

A Hooters opened last year on Crescent Street (Montreal). The street’s known for its bars and restaurants but they’re mostly local ones, not big chains. So why put a stupid Hooters in the middle of it? We are a HIPSTER party street, dammit.

Plus, Hooters is conceptually muddy. It’s difficult to know which bird is symbolically predominant. The name comes from breasts being called “hooters” (somewhere, somehow), which leads to the owl theme, but THEN they’re known for cooking chicken, not owls. Chicken breasts are often the most expensive part, but (as someone pointed out before) Hooters are better known for their wings. What’s up with that?

Personally, I blame postmodernism. 🙂

As for the tweets, I began to frown at the third one. Why does this guy think that if men don’t get to talk to food servers they’ll “dump their problems onto each and every woman they encounter”? Why? And why women specifically?

Rhuu - apparently an illiterati
Rhuu - apparently an illiterati
2 years ago

Re – does the huge response telling him wrong help anyone –

I would say that it does. It might not help the OP, but in the comments there are two people who went “Oh, I wouldn’t have seen the problem with this suggestion without the explanation provided.” *

People won’t necessarily see this guy’s tweet, but (in my limited understanding of twitter), someone’s followers WILL see the reply of someone going “wtf is this shit? This is the worst idea ever!”. That way, the reaction to it will hopefully help people who wouldn’t have thought twice about how shitty this idea is now understand the true depths of its terrible-ness.

And I hate to pull a ‘sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander’ thing, but this is just how twitter works. It sucks, but you can say something and then it can blow up, and you can then have to deal with the consequences.

You can mute mentions, so you don’t have to deal with it on that specific tweet, and there’s also blocking anyone who is harassing you.

Harassment over this = NOT OKAY. But seeing this, and going ‘Hell to the No’ and saying something, well… Might not help the first dude, but might help other people.

Also, being able to see how many other people are not okay with something can be very empowering. It is good for marginalised people to be able to push back on something, and see that others are doing the same. It makes the world feel like there are other people who maybe don’t want low-paid women to bear the brunt of emotional labour for everyone.

Do I think that *he* is evil? Not really. Do I think that the unexamined misogyny is evil? Well, yeah.

* I think you were one of them, *wink*.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
2 years ago

This idea doesn’t “fix” Hooters at all. It still presupposes that women are entertainment for men.

If this new Hooters had male waitstaff, or extremely smart, articulate women who could dunk on mansplainers all night long, that would totally ruin it. He doesn’t want an equal sparring partner. He wants to be fawned over and told he’s something special. He wants to be able to explain the world and have something pretty to look at while he’s doing it. Someone who will validate, but never challenge, his perceptions, while serving wings and beer. He wants someone who will do all of this practically for free.

Men keep insisting that they need women’s emotional labor, but they refuse to ever value it.

Robert
Robert
2 years ago

I get an appropriate amount of emotional support from my husband, but I don’t expect him to be my therapist. I have a therapist for that*. I’m certainly not going to expect it of service staff in a restaurant.

Virgin Mary, there are also host clubs in Japan. Somewhat disturbingly, many of the women who patronize them are workers from hostess clubs who go to have a (relatively) young, congenial man actually listen to and pay attention to them.

*She’s suggested I look into existential philosophy as part of the cognitive therapy for my depression.

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

@Rhuu

I would say that it does. It might not help the OP, but in the comments there are two people who went “Oh, I wouldn’t have seen the problem with this suggestion without the explanation provided.” *

* I think you were one of them, *wink*.

Guilty as charged (as I said in my reply to @Laughter at Bigots).

I actually saw this “millennials are killing Hooters” thing parenthetically mentioned on Jim Sterling’s Twitter feed, and subsequently saw OP’s Tweets on Reddit (front page, posted on r/WhitePeopleTwitter or similar). I have to admit that my first thought was, “Well, duh it has to be cheaper for millennials to afford”, and totally skipped over the “I want to talk the ear off a woman who is duty-bound by their job description and paycheck to pay attention to me” bit. Until it showed up here.

So piling on does help to increase the visibility of problematic attitudes. I’d hate to be the one in the center of said pile, though (then again, this is why I tend to be circumspect about any public statements, and rarely post on social media in the first place 🙂).

Rabid Rabbit
Rabid Rabbit
2 years ago

@WWTH

Perhaps someone should open a business that platonically hooks guys up with other guys who just want conversation and emotional support. It is an issue that there is a stigma around men having these kinds of conversations with each other because men aren’t supposed to be vulnerable with each other. This is one of those ways that patriarchy can hurt men.

The weird thing is that once upon a time, strong emotional connections between men were all the rage, because women weren’t full human beings and didn’t have the brains to provide genuine support. Which is a point of view you’d think these chucklefucks would be all in favor of.

One weird side effect of the current iteration of patriarchy in which men can’t be vulnerable with each other is that people looking back at men in the Renaissance end up going “OMG they were all gay!” Obviously, some of the close male relationships we know of from back then would have qualified as what we now think of as “homosexual,” but there’s this weird insistence that men displaying emotional closeness with one another must have been sexually involved.

Obviously, evidence of respected men having had same-sex relationships is hugely important for normalizing such relationships (if it still needs normalizing). Seriously, Leonardo da Vinci was the flamingiest flaming flamer who ever flamed, and once that’s pointed out it’s pretty hard to argue that gay people never provided anything to the human race.

Point is, it’s really weird even more oppressively patriarchal societies allow for emotional relationships between men, while now, when there are cracks in the patriarchal structure, such relationships have apparently become a major threat.

Itsabeast
Itsabeast
2 years ago

Many if not most of us could benefit from having someone listen to our problems. But this responsibility shouldn’t be foisted off on hostesses working for a casual dining chain famous for its skimpy outfits. Nor should it be foisted on wives or girlfriends. People should be able to get the therapy they need from actual therapists, well-trained professionals paid for their expertise.

Too many men rely on their SO’s too much for emotional support, but usually you don’t need to outsource it to a professional. Partners should support each other–equally. I agree that the average person’s baggage is too much for one person to handle, which is why people should also cultivate mutually emotionally supportive friendships. If you need more emotional support than your partner or friends can give, and you have the money, THEN seek therapy.

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

@wwth

BTW, I’m pretty sure that NotTom is a Jordan Peterson fan who is concern trolling and that’s what he meant by the claim that this blog is targeting non-misogynists now. I’m guessing he was never a fan in the past.

Dang it, and I spent so long addressing his statements.

A little late on my part, but thank you for your reply to me. I felt that it was very enlightening. What particularly made it click for me was the statement (later also quoted by @Gaebolga):

The reason there’s such a backlash against “political correctness” is because this stuff works. Not all at once. But eventually.

Powerful words.

Thanks also for being resident troll-hunter.

1 2 3 4