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
Lumipuna (nee Arctic Ape)
Lumipuna (nee Arctic Ape)
2 years ago

Dvärghundspossen:

Uh… That mermaid thing… SO stupid… There really are lots of whales with dark skin! Maybe because they spend a lot of time near the surface, where I think water actually makes sunlight harder on your skin rather than protecting it? Or for some other reason.

Often it’s camouflage. Many aquatic predators have a dark backside and light bellyside, because when seen from above they’re against dark background and when seen from below they’re against the light.

(Now, THAT would look hot on a humanoid/furry avatar body)

Also, did you mean the merperson has a dolphin-style frontal fat melon, or more like an internal fat helmet against cold? That’s an interesting point.

Aunt Podger, Ketchup-Spewing Feminester
Aunt Podger, Ketchup-Spewing Feminester
2 years ago

Guys, he’s just plagiarizing from an old online comic strip called Badgods, by Lore Sjoberg, one of the guys who did the Brunching Shuttlecocks website in the late 90’s. It’s not available any more, but it’s probably on the Wayback Machine. The title of that particular strip is “Pandering to My Core Demographic,” or some such.

Not that you asked but the cartoon was picture of a sign in the style of Hooters saying something like, “Smart, sarcastic women who will be slightly snarky to me and bring me artichoke dip.” It was before the concept of emotional labor became popularized, let alone been explained as “kind of harder on a woman than being ogled, patronized, and groped, in some ways,” and mildly humorously phrased (probably a lot fewer sibilants than I recall, sweet Prince Rogers Nelson on a pogo stick) if you didn’t know what waitstaff (or non-waitstaff) who present as female go through all the darn time.

Dvärghundspossen
Dvärghundspossen
2 years ago

Re James Bond, I’m pretty sure it’s just a fan theory that “James Bond” is a job title. I think the movies simply play fast and lose with continuity.

Re mermaids I imagined them as having a sort of fat layer all across the skull, between bone and skin. I thought that would be handy when living in cold water!

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Good idea. Let us create a bar called AVFMLounge, where Paul Elam serves drinks to men while giving them a Ear For Men (and drinking himself too) ! What could possibly go wrong ?

A Beer For Men?

On the dark skinned mermaid thing, I think it actually makes more sense that they’d be dark. The theory is that they evolved from a very early hominid that moved into the sea and from there developed the fish tail. This would mean they’d be from sub-Saharan Africa. It’s not like it’d be impossible for them to evolve to have pale skin as modern humans did in Northern Europe. But I don’t see why they’d have to have pale skin.

ellesar
ellesar
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.

I guess the problem there is that you cannot expect them to work topless, or indeed even know what they look like before you arrive for a consultation!

j
j
2 years ago

The idea that mermaids would have human like skin doesn’t compute. Our skin is adapted to dry air with brief dips in the water. I imagine our skin would be a dark leathery blue-grey with an actually literally white underside. Not pale-tan that we call white skin on the surface.

pitshade
pitshade
2 years ago

What merfolk actually look like:

Hope that works!

Dvärghundspossen
Dvärghundspossen
2 years ago

Pitshade: 😀

J: Yeah I always imagined them to have more dolphin-like skin. Thick and sort of a little rubbery.

Catalpa
Catalpa
2 years ago

A cuttlefish-type mermaid with chromatophores would be neat. Then she could be any color she wanted. Which on the surface would probably be dark, because sun, or would be whatever color her surroundings were, because camouflage.

Jenora Feuer
Jenora Feuer
2 years ago

For the black mermaid, there was actually a Kickstarter last year for children’s party supplies using that as a design, which I think I read about here originally:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/craftmyoccasion/party-supplies-celebrating-children-of-color

Lumipuna (nee Arctic Ape)
Lumipuna (nee Arctic Ape)
2 years ago

Re James Bond, I’m pretty sure it’s just a fan theory that “James Bond” is a job title. I think the movies simply play fast and lose with continuity.

So, individual agents are just canon fodder?

(Yes, I know “canon fodder” is a tvtropes page)

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

@Aunt Podger, Ketchup-Spewing Feminester

Guys, he’s just plagiarizing from an old online comic strip called Badgods, by Lore Sjoberg, one of the guys who did the Brunching Shuttlecocks website in the late 90’s. It’s not available any more, but it’s probably on the Wayback Machine. The title of that particular strip is “Pandering to My Core Demographic,” or some such.


“Appealing to My Demographic”
, apparently. It’s actually a (ugh) Flash file where the still image is accompanied by the first four lines of “Fake French” by Le Tigre.

Not that you asked but the cartoon was picture of a sign in the style of Hooters saying something like, “Smart, sarcastic women who will be slightly snarky to me and bring me artichoke dip.”

Close enough:comment image

It was before the concept of emotional labor became popularized, let alone been explained as “kind of harder on a woman than being ogled, patronized, and groped, in some ways,” and mildly humorously phrased (probably a lot fewer sibilants than I recall, sweet Prince Rogers Nelson on a pogo stick) if you didn’t know what waitstaff (or non-waitstaff) who present as female go through all the darn time.

Soo, it was a garbage take on the issue, even back then.

Moon Custafer
Moon Custafer
2 years ago

Re James Bond, I’m pretty sure it’s just a fan theory that “James Bond” is a job title. I think the movies simply play fast and lose with continuity.

Especially Chitty Chitty Bang Bang — sure, there were gadgets, but Bond was played by Dick Van Dyke, Truly Scrumptious had a punning but insufficiently-naughty name, and Goldfinger was suddenly ruling his own country; total break with series continuity.

Jenora Feuer
Jenora Feuer
2 years ago

@Moon Custafer:
You know, despite having known for years that they were written by the same person, it would never have occurred to me to try to put them in the same universe.

Besides, Caractacus Pott was obviously Q, not Bond.

Nequam
Nequam
2 years ago

I’m pretty sure it’s just a fan theory that “James Bond” is a job title.

The demented 1967 film version of Casino Royale took that premise and ran with it.

Robert
Robert
2 years ago

Nequam, the 1967 “Casino Royale” was the first Bond film I saw. Looking back, I didn’t get a lot of the jokes.

When I read the novel, it occurred to me that Bond doesn’t do any actual *spying* in it – his entire brief is to prevent Le Chiffre from winning at baccarat. Then his KGB paymasters will discover his financial malfeasance, losing a deep cover asset in the process. Bond isn’t a suave playboy, he’s a nasty thug stuffed into a tuxedo.

Moon_custafer
Moon_custafer
2 years ago

The demented 1967 film version of Casino Royale took that premise and ran with it.

I’ve a weird fondness for that acid-trip of a film, or parts of it, anyway. Especially the possibly-a-dream sequence with a non-sequitur Peter O’Toole cameo.

Jenora Feuer
Jenora Feuer
2 years ago

@Robert:

Bond isn’t a suave playboy, he’s a nasty thug stuffed into a tuxedo.

There’s a reason why a lot of the fans who are familiar with the books say that Daniel Craig is a much better ‘Bond’ than Roger Moore was… he’s a lot closer to what was in the books. In the books, Bond was an alcoholic, womanizing sociopath. And the last word was actually a job requirement. The whole ‘Licence to Kill’ thing effectively required a sociopath who could be kept on a leash.

Granted, Bond being a card shark was a plot point in other books as well… I’ve noted before that one of my favourite scenes from the books is the first section of Moonraker, which involves Bond beating Drax at bridge at M’s gentlemen’s club. The club had figured out Drax was cheating, but not how; by watching for a few minutes, Bond figured out exactly how Drax was doing it (using a mirror-finish cigarette case to see the cards he was dealing), and concocted a plan to punish him. A plan which ended up with Bond and M winning the last hand with seven clubs, doubled, re-doubled, and vulnerable, at something like a pound a point, back in the 1950s.

Moggie
Moggie
2 years ago

How does the “James Bond is a job title” theory make any kind of sense? Why would MI6 need to do that? I have more respect for Bond fans who just shrug off the change of actor, or the fact that the character would be almost a centenarian now. I don’t have any problem with George Smiley being both Alec Guinness and Gary Oldman. It’s just fiction.

Anyway, the real explanation is that Bond is from Gallifrey.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
2 years ago

Sam Mendes did want to utilise the ‘codename’ theory in Skyfall; but EON vetoed that. He wanted to bring Sean Connery back as a retired Bond. You can see the remnants of that idea with that Scottish groundskeeper character; that would have been Connery.

Fluffy Spider Returns
Fluffy Spider Returns
2 years ago

This idea sucks but you know what would make a good restaurant?
Heres some ideas:
A restaurant where you have a private closed booth and a little window where they slide your food through and you order off all screen because you hate the awkward experiences of being in public. And comes with a theme screen of your choice plus music (ok that’s more my dream restaurant )

A restaurant where the waiters play video games with you that would be fun

Mish of the Catlady Ascendancy

@opposablethumbs

The mass-debaters pretend or claim that it’s dialectic, when in fact debate – especially in their terms – is really pure showmanship and points-scoring and has less than nothing to do with actually arriving at a better or truer understanding of some facet of reality.

That’s just one awesome part of your extremely awesome post! (“mass-debaters”, ahahahahahaha).
And you’re right when you note later that arguing well is indeed a valuable skill and can be used to good effect. I think of this often when teaching my academic writing students; their main assignment is an argumentative/persuasive essay, where they have to ‘pick a side’ and defend it using evidence. I’m careful to emphasise that this helps cultivate essential skills, but it’s just one way of dealing with a topic. Evaluative and analytical writing, for example, is very different and in my opinion, takes greater skill.

The posts here on mermaids and aquatic creatures are amazing, by the way, and Dvärghundspossen’s mermaid is adorably terrifying 🙂

tim gueguen
2 years ago

Dalton’s Bond strikes me as a pretty close take to book Bond. Dalton played the character with the sort of weariness an operator with a couple of decades in the business of stopping the world’s deadliest conspiracies would have.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
2 years ago

Trivia quiz: What does this have to do with James Bond?

comment image

opposablethumbs
opposablethumbs
2 years ago

@Mish, yes it always feels like such a – such a waste, kind of (wasted opportunity?) when we (I, me, I hate this but in practice when a dispute arises I can’t seem to find a way of circumventing it) muddy the waters of what could be a productive/informative/exciting discussion with the red-mist baggage of an adversarial model 🙁 (mixing metaphors, moi? Shirley not)

Scildfreja’s comments really brought home to me how difficult it is not to feel defensive and get caught up in that (she’s kind of like a ju-jitsu ninja the way she cedes all possible points and graciously leaves no ground for the bad argument to stand on 🙂 ).

(I can’t claim credit for mass-debaters, though, I’m sure I read/heard “mass debate” and nicked it from somewhere 🙂 )

… argumentative/persuasive essay, where they have to ‘pick a side’ and defend it using evidence. I’m careful to emphasise that this helps cultivate essential skills, but it’s just one way of dealing with a topic. Evaluative and analytical writing, for example, is very different and in my opinion, takes greater skill

I bet your classes are brilliant. Are these undergraduate students?

opposablethumbs
opposablethumbs
2 years ago

@Robert et al

Bond isn’t a suave playboy, he’s a nasty thug stuffed into a tuxedo.

Yes, this. Lewis Collins should have been made Bond when they considered him for it, instead of keeping on Roger Moore (who was much better suited as The Saint).

Jenora is absolutely 100% spot on ” In the books, Bond was an alcoholic, womanizing sociopath. And the last word was actually a job requirement. The whole ‘Licence to Kill’ thing effectively required a sociopath who could be kept on a leash.” He’s a thoroughly nasty piece of work, and messed-up in ways that can work well for the right actors.

(iirc one of the books has a scene where Bond has to strip naked in order to go and talk to a bloke on a nudist beach. Don’t think that made it into any of the films?)

voxpoptart
voxpoptart
2 years ago

My standard of charity for clueless posts like the OP’s Hooters proposal is “what would my (white male) self have thought when I was 21 years old, socially inept, and involuntarily virginal?” OP scores poorly here:

OP: “Instead of Hooters, how about a cafe where the wait staff are there to engage in debates with the customers?”

Me: “Cool! You’d need a lot of waiters. I’m great at arguing; I should apply to work there.” (I don’t know if I’d have thought “But there should be a mandatory service charge instead of tips”; not sure if I’d have identified that issue.)

OP: “It should be waitresses only.”

Me: “Wait, waitresses? Why wai–”

OP: “And they should look like Hooters waitresses do now, although not necessarily as busty”.

Me: “Uh….”

OP: “Also, going there should be really cheap.”

Me: “DUDE, what the HECK?????”

******
I don’t actually think my 21-year-old self called people “Dude”. But I like to imagine that I’d have recognized a worthy exception here.

tim gueguen
2 years ago

opposablethumbs, I wonder if Martin Shaw might have had a cameo in a Lewis Collins Bond film. Or Gordon Jackson.

Apparently he was a friend of Mike McCartney’s, and they wrote some songs together around the time the Beatles began to take off. When the Beatles decided to dump Pete Best McCartney suggested to big brother Paul that they audition Collins as their new drummer, but he turned down the chance.

Collins spent the last years of his life as a computer equipment salesman in the US.

opposablethumbs
opposablethumbs
2 years ago

I wonder if Martin Shaw might have had a cameo in a Lewis Collins Bond film. Or Gordon Jackson.

Why not both!?!?! A consummation devoutly to be wished 🙂 (ha, that would have been so. much. fun!!!!) Although tbh I think he was under-used in comedy and was much funnier than generally given credit for.
what an arresting thought re the Beatles thing … (he was bass player in the Mojos, though – didn’t know he was a drummer as well???)

tim gueguen
2 years ago

Wikipedia says drums were his first instrument, and that his first gig was playing in his dad’s band.

Cyborgette
Cyborgette
2 years ago

Forget Bond, I want to see Aud Torvingen on the silver screen.

https://nicolagriffith.com/2014/02/23/the-aud-books/

Re men wanting women to be their therapist, it’s kind of amazing how pervasive that is. Just yesterday an older guy at a bus stop decided he wanted to chat me up, and I was just creeped out enough to give him a fake name and some other vague lies. Having figured I would listen, he proceeded to spill a whole bunch of personal stuff – some of which might have been pretty useful for an identity thief or blackhat hacker.

I eventually got him to shut up, walked away, and forgot most of what he said because it wasn’t relevant to me. But wow, talk about bad opsec. If I were a penetration tester, I could probably get all kinds of network access hanging around restaurants near a client’s office and chatting up lonely guys. “Hey you’re cute for an older guy, do you have a wife, really, I like a dad bod, lemme know your email and we can chat a bit!” etc, followed by a spear phishing email with a trojan that harvests workstation credentials. Or so many other ways in through a man’s ego and insecurities.

And the sad thing is, I even understand where this comes from a bit. Being a guy (or trying to live as one) in a society that erases male emotional intimacy and close friendship is really frickin’ lonely. And reaching out to other men is scary even if you’re willing, because they tend to dismiss attempts at intimacy, not take you seriously, exploit your vulnerability, maybe even do you violent harm. Showing vulnerability in front of men is DANGEROUS. It’s like rolling over and showing your belly to a pack of hungry wild dogs.

But all this is still not an excuse for spilling compromising and uncomfortable stuff to total strangers just because they’re women, or at least clearly not men, or whatever. It’s creepy AF. Grow some boundaries, please.

Mish of the Catlady Ascendancy

@opposablethumbs

I bet your classes are brilliant. Are these undergraduate students?

This particular one is a “bridging course” – it’s part of a program at one uni that helps students prepare for a tertiary degree. People from disadvantaged backgrounds; people who failed high school or had to drop out; older people who want to get a degree, etc. etc. We start from the ground up, basically, with the fundamentals of academic writing and research, so that they’re ready.
What’s fabulous is (1) the program has won national awards and (2) a recent longitudinal study just confirmed what we suspected anecdotally – our students actually do much better than their peers, once in their degree, in terms of overall grades and graduation success.
(sorry – I’m a bit passionate about this stuff!)

opposablethumbs
opposablethumbs
2 years ago

@Mish, so it’s brilliant in conception as well as in execution! Because damn, that’s just the kind of course you’d want to be available to all, ideally, isn’t it :-s Sounds like both the passion and the awards are well-founded 🙂

Full Metal Ox
2 years ago

@Alan Robertshaw:

Trivia quiz: What does this have to do with James Bond?

Barry Nelson, as well as portraying Stuart Ullman in The Shining, was the first actor to play 007 onscreen, in a 1954 one-hour adaptation of Casino Royale for the TV drama anthology series Climax!

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
2 years ago

@ full metal ox

Yey; you win!

The second James Bond was Blockbusters host Bob Holness.

comment image

He does sort of look the part; even though it was a radio adaptation.

comment image

Jenora Feuer
Jenora Feuer
2 years ago

On a side note along with the Bond stuff… there’s a strong suspicion (though never actually formally admitted by Fleming) that one of the inspirations for the name was a church in Toronto near where Fleming was staying when he was over in Canada doing some training work that might have led to the ‘License to Kill’ concept:

The St. James-Bond Church, which was an amalgamation of the St. James Square Presbyterian Church and the Bond Street Congregational Church.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
2 years ago

@ jenora

You probably also know about this possible source.

comment image

The Bond origin stuff is pretty fascinating. I’ve just delated a huge essay on it, as I suspect I’d just be teaching you to suck eggs.

Emil
Emil
2 years ago

I’m not kidding, I lost my absolute shit at “Come on down to Hooters and DEBATE our GEISHAS!”

I don’t think I’ve ever laughed so hard in my life. Damn near broke a blood vessel.

Jenora Feuer
Jenora Feuer
2 years ago

@Alan:
Heh. My grandfather was the real expert in the family. He had copies of every book by Ian Fleming, including some very early editions. It’s mostly thanks to him that I read the original books. (He also had copies of every book by humourist Stephen Leacock, including the economics textbooks. My grandfather was a high school teacher with some interesting tastes.)

But with regards to the name, honestly, I have my doubts that there is any ‘single inspiration’. James is hardly an uncommon name, and while Bond isn’t as common, it’s also far from unheard of. And given how writers’ minds work (I say from experience) it’s quite possible to have several bits of inspiration percolating in the back of your mind and have them all suddenly mesh together later after you’ve forgotten their original sources.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
2 years ago

@ jenora

I like that they used the book as Pierce Brosnan’s holiday reading in Die Another Day.

comment image

There’s some really interesting background to the Bond inspiration. Peter Fleming’s memoirs are well worth a read in that regard; although it’s clearly his brother who got the literary talent.

You may know though that Major Boothroyd (“Q”) was named for an armourer who wrote to Fleming criticising Bond’s firearms choices. The real Boothroyd suggested the PPK. Boothroyd also lent Fleming one of his own pistols for use on a book cover. Unfortunately an identical weapon was used in a triple murder, and there was some embarrassment when the police turned up and asked Boothroyd to account for the wherabouts of his gun.

(“Is that right sir? James Bond you say sir?”)

Amaror
Amaror
2 years ago

This is really ugly. I honestly expected better from you Daniel.
Calling out casual mysoginy is correct and important, especially when it’s going unchallenged. But there’s a point where it gets too much.
This guy has already been dogpiled to death on Twitter and had multiple articles written about him.
You can bet he has already received lots and lots of harassment and this article most likely send a good chunk more in his direction.
This is not so different from the youtubers who kept making videos about Anita and kept sending harassment her way and I won’t support it, no matter which side is doing it.

kupo
kupo
2 years ago

@Amaror
Who is Daniel?

The dude had every opportunity to back away. He chose to double down and tell us we misunderstood him. He’s the oppressor here, throwing his misogyny around casually. He doesn’t get to play victim because he was rightly called out for it.

Amaror
Amaror
2 years ago

@kupo
*David, my mistake.

Sure, I don’t disagree that he should be called out. But Harassement and inciting hatred is still wrong. Which is what this article is doing at this point, as the dude has already been called out to hell and back.
It would be different if he had censored the guys name. Then he would just increase the awareness against this sort of behaviour, while not sending harassment towards this person.
But David explicitly included his name and just kicks the dude while he’s down. That’s not good behaviour.

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

Please show me the harassment, and where David is inciting ‘hatred’.

Censoring the dude’s name wouldn’t have done anything, since this was already shared all over everywhere. Also, it would have made it impossible to link to the tweets themselves, which allows people to read them ‘in context’.

This dude isn’t ‘down.’ A quick google search brings me nothing where he talks about the harassment he’s receiving. He’s still tweeting as normal, and if I click any of the recent things he’s posted, he doesn’t even have any replies.

Example

https://twitter.com/ericadamhovis/status/1034473281703878656

https://twitter.com/ericadamhovis/status/1034424835181617154

This doesn’t rule out private harassment, but that shit is NOT OKAY. That is the stated rule of this site, and of the commentariat.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
2 years ago

Calling out casual mysoginy is correct and important, especially when it’s going unchallenged. But there’s a point where it gets too much.

Ah, yes, that old sliding scale of “Too sexist -> Too not sexist.”

Amaror
Amaror
2 years ago

@Rhuu – apparently an illiterati
Have you seen the replies to the when he tweeted his blog post?

https://twitter.com/ericadamhovis/status/1031323667274317832

One dude straight up tells him to smash his head in with a mirror. So yeah.

The inciting hatred part was maybe a bit exagerated, but generally a famous person with a bigger reach shining a negative spotlight on the actions of a person with less reach often leads to harassment.
Is that wrong? I am not an expert on the subject, but I have seen similar definitions often used in larger cases of harassment like Anita Sarkeesian, etc.

It’s true that he hasn’t been harassed of twitter or anything. Maybe I was too harsh in my previous posts.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Twitter handles are public. You can choose to use your real name, but it’s not required or anything.

To be clear I’m not saying that people are to blame for harassment if they do use their own name instead of a pseudonym. Just that due to the public nature of Twitter, it’s not doxxing to respond publicly to a tweet without censoring their handle.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
2 years ago

@ amaror

I was drafting some big thing about Twitter mobs, harassment, incitement, proportionality, and the like. I enjoy rambling on those sorts of issues.

But I couldn’t get past one thought.

These days a woman can’t tweet “I quite enjoyed the new Star Wars”, without getting rape and death threats; so I just can’t conjure up any sympathy for this bloke.

Admittedly that lacks nuance and any sort of forensic analysis.

But have you ever posted “Hey, what’s with the dogpile?” when that’s happened, it’s not like there’s a dearth of examples; and, if not, why not?

Amaror
Amaror
2 years ago

@Alan Robertshaw
Yes, I have. Why would you think I didn’t condemn those much larger cases of female harassment?

Harassment campaigns like the ones against Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn or Kelly are horrible and should be rightfully condemned at every turn.

I also think that the dude in question was clearly in the wrong and is kind of a dufus, which he showed by sortof doubling down in his blog post.
I am not asking anyone here to come to this guys rescue and openly defend the guy. But you should at least not kick the guy while he’s down and join the dogpile.

kupo
kupo
2 years ago

@Amaror
I gave him some solid feedback on The Mary Sue but he ignored me. There’s only so many fucks I can give for Male Feminists (TM) who double down when called out on their misogyny. 🤷‍♀️ And yeah, we’re gonna make fun of the dude for not understanding how anything works. That’s what this blog is for.