# Are you a football fan?



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

Buffalo Bills’ cheerleaders handbook: Here is how to wash yourselves - Salon.com

Excerpt from the story:


> It turns out the world of professional cheerleaders is often anything but cheerful. If the claims of a new lawsuit are to be believed, it can be a job in which you have to fight for minimum wage while being told how to manage the landscape of your own genital terrain. Following in the footsteps of cheerleaders from the Raiders, Ravens and Bengals who’ve come forward this year with their tales of payment disputes and humiliating working conditions, this week the Buffalo Jills suspended all activities in the wake of the new lawsuit that five of its cheerleaders are pursuing against their team and its cheerleader management groups.
> 
> As the Buffalo News reports, the suit against *the Bills — a team for which Mario Williams makes $6,500,000 — alleges it “failed to pay the former cheerleaders the $8 minimum wage for all the hours they worked* … The five former Jills, who worked as long ago as the 2010-11 season and as recently as the 2013-14 season, were paid amounts ranging from as little as $105 to as much as $1,800 a year.” And what obligation to the organization does this sort of money buy? According to documents obtained by Deadspin, “the Jills were subjected to weekly ‘physique evaluations’ during which defendants’ representatives tested the Jills’ bodies for ‘jiggling.’”


These are the kind of sports organizations men cheer on and support everyday - how about you ladies?


----------



## Happyfamily

Crazy. I had no idea. For me, football is a stupid waste of time. For others, okay - whatever floats your boat. But I thought these cheerleaders were the equivalent of playboy bunnies. Competitive tryouts and lots of rehearsing.


----------



## over20

I know that cheering is not a full-time job. My daughters friend is on the Detroit Spirit squad. It is very grueling and the cheerleaders do also make appearances for an extra fee.

I do like football! Hubs played in high school and our son played also. Even though I should route for Detroit, I am a Patriot fan all the way!!


----------



## arbitrator

*In Houston, at any of the pro sports venues, it's basically a "contract as needed," minimum-wage city! The gals who elect to do it are simply dreaming of it eventually turning into something of sheer stardom!*


----------



## Ikaika

http://youtu.be/O5-wjLlyYlQ


----------



## I Notice The Details

I am a football fan and a big Dallas Cowboy fan. I can say that the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders are a classy organization. I know someone who was a former cheerleader there, and she had nothing but high praise for their organization and management. It is clear that other teams don't put the same value or investment into their cheerleaders....now if we could just get back to a Superbowl....someday.


----------



## xakulax

At the risk of sounding ridiculous why do the NFL teams have cheerleaders anyway :scratchhead: I mean really I have been to several games rooting for my team and never really understood what impacted they have on raising morale


----------



## over20

xakulax said:


> At the risk of sounding ridiculous why do the NFL teams have cheerleaders anyway :scratchhead: I mean really I have been to several games rooting for my team and never really understood what impacted they have on raising morale


They are pretty to look at during time outs and half time!......speaking from a former cheerleader


----------



## xakulax

over20 said:


> They are pretty to look at during time outs and half time!......speaking from a former cheerleader



LOL well that is true but unfortunately I spend most of my time with my head in my hands when watching my skins.


----------



## magnoliagal

over20 said:


> They are pretty to look at during time outs and half time!......speaking from a former cheerleader


This makes me wonder if NFL cheerleaders really think the team employs them to lead cheers. Does anyone in the stands yell, Go Bills Go!" when the cheerleaders lead cheers? Do they lead cheers? Or do they simply dance?


----------



## xakulax

magnoliagal said:


> This makes me wonder if NFL cheerleaders really think the team employs them to lead cheers. Does anyone in the stands yell, Go Bills Go!" when the cheerleaders lead cheers? Do they lead cheers? Or do they simply dance?




I think they do but its more like GO AWAY BILLS GO AWAY!


----------



## I Notice The Details

These Dallas ladies have beauty, class and talent. They do their best to be ambassadors for the Cowboys. I do have to give them credit.


----------



## over20

magnoliagal said:


> This makes me wonder if NFL cheerleaders really think the team employs them to lead cheers. Does anyone in the stands yell, Go Bills Go!" when the cheerleaders lead cheers? Do they lead cheers? Or do they simply dance?


Good point Mag, as far as Detroit Spirit goes, they prep very hard and have a very specific routines during games.


----------



## over20

xakulax said:


> I think they do but its more like GO AWAY BILLS GO AWAY!


Oh ....so you dont' like Buffalo.....neither do I!


----------



## xakulax

i'm more of fan of the wings then the team :rofl:


----------



## over20

xakulax said:


> LOL well that is true but unfortunately I spend most of my time with my head in my hands when watching my skins.


Friend, who is your fav team?


----------



## xakulax

Washington Redskins

http://http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_RnRejIPRpAY/StdFBmTGVXI/AAAAAAAAKxU/E89ne31p7nQ/s1600-h/Redskins+Logo.bmp


----------



## over20

Nice....hubs and I can't wait for the 2014 draft. Looks like the Texans are in number 1...why am I not surprised?


----------



## xakulax

over20 said:


> Nice....hubs and I can't wait for the 2014 draft. Looks like the Texans are in number 1...why am I not surprised?



Hay the Texans are a good team with one of the best stadiums in the league next to that monstrosity in Dallas :rofl: The Texans will have there day.


----------



## Middle of Everything

Go Big Red. So yes I am. :smthumbup:


----------



## over20

I agree...I have so LOVED the Patriots though..and met one.....my second is Detroit, Stafford and Johnson ...they are my favs...IMHO they own that team and they deserve better....but I know we will never see it....makes me sad


----------



## arbitrator

xakulax said:


> Hey the Texans are a good team with one of the best stadiums in the league next to that monstrosity in Dallas :rofl: The Texans will have there day.


*Greatly provided that the Texans want to fill the balance of Reliant Stadium seats immediately, then they'll draft Manziel. But conventional wisdom tells me that Clowney will be their man, since Manziel's attributes don't quite fit into new coach O'Briens offensive scheme!

But owner McNair may have the last word on that though!*


----------



## over20

What do you think of Caldwell, the new Lions couch, opening up Monday night Football soon?.....I am hoping for the best..IDK Detroit is playing the Giants that night.......:scratchhead:


----------



## tacoma

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> These are the kind of sports organizations men cheer on and support everyday - how about you ladies?


This thread isn't going down the way you thought it might is it?

:scratchhead:


----------



## I Notice The Details

tacoma said:


> This thread isn't going down the way you thoughtful might is it?
> 
> :scratchhead:


:rofl:


----------



## over20

tacoma said:


> This thread isn't going down the way you thought it might is it?
> 
> :scratchhead:


Sorry OP :scratchhead:


----------



## ScarletBegonias

I'm not into pro sports.I think they're useless and people taken them way too serious. It's all about greed now.


----------



## xakulax

ScarletBegonias said:


> I'm not into pro sports.I think they're useless and people taken them way too serious. It's all about greed now.



You could say that for just about any ‎corporate run organization, NBA, NFL, MLB ,the girl scout they're all pretty greedy especially the last one buy just one box yeah right who can buy just one box of do-si-dos!


----------



## ScarletBegonias

xakulax said:


> You could say that for just about any ‎corporate run organization, NBA, NFL, MLB ,the girl scout they're all pretty greedy especially the last one buy just one box yeah right who can buy just one box of do-si-dos!


I wouldn't argue that.The question wasn't about girl scouts though.


----------



## Caribbean Man

tacoma said:


> This thread isn't going down the way you thought it might is it?
> 
> :scratchhead:


Tacoma!:rofl:


----------



## Thunder7

ScarletBegonias said:


> It's all about greed now.


I find it funny when people (not saying you, SB, just people in general) complain about the salaries of pro athletes, yet say nothing when Tom Cruise makes 10-12 million for a movie. As far as degree of difficulty I would argue a pro athlete has a much tougher, more physically demanding job. Not to mention, a much smaller window with which to earn a living in that profession. Pro sports, like the movie business, is a part of the entertainment industry and salaries are determined by what the market dictates. So, no biggie.

BTW, die hard member of the Raider Nation, here.


----------



## Caribbean Man

I'm no longer a sport fan, but the only football I like is English Premier League and Man-U [ Manchester United ] is my team.

I also look at UEFA Champion league sometimes.

Lol,

Neither of them use cheerleaders , but sometimes an excited fan 
[ woman or man] might just run on the field buck naked for the crowd's entertainment.
I think they're called " streakers."


----------



## Mr The Other

Speaking as a sports adminsitrator, we replaced cheer leaders and a dancing troupe with kids giving out candy to the crowd. A success, not least because kids are more reliable.


----------



## xakulax

ScarletBegonias said:


> I wouldn't argue that.The question wasn't about girl scouts though.


Sorry mini rant lol


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> These are the kind of sports organizations men cheer on and support everyday - how about you ladies?


My team, the Ravens is on that list. Just FYI, the Ravens have male and female cheerleaders (the only male cheer leaders in the nfl). The guys mostly hold the girls up and throw them in the air. While not the traditional cheerleader, the Ravens also have a marching band.

The only cheerleader controversy I'm aware of was that some of the squad wasn't allowed in the Superbowl. Only 30 cheer squad members are allowed to the superbowl from each team. Having one of the larger NFL cheer squads (60 people), a lot of people get left. A woman complained that she didn't get to go because she gained 2 pounds. The team claims their selection was based on seniority, performance ability and personal conduct.

Its widely thought to be nothing more than a case of sour grapes, but given they are an acrobatic cheer team, I wouldn't find it unreasonable to downgrade the girl on weight. If you're getting thrown in the air and caught... weight is relevant even if you take aesthetics out of the equation. If you look at her, she is heavier than the average cheerleader to begin with and she still made the squad. Leaving her behind because of two pounds? I highly doubt it. The Ravens are one of the most well respected and tolerant NFL organizations year in year out. The accusation just doesn't fit.

http://www.insideedition.com/entert...eader-speaks-out-amid-weight-gain-controversy


----------



## Rowan

I'm not much of an NFL fan so I don't keep up with their cheerleaders. Frankly, I don't ever really notice the pro team cheerleaders one way or another when I'm watching a game. But I do really love college football - in that nearly rabid way that Southern women do.


----------



## DoF

Caribbean Man said:


> I'm no longer a sport fan, but the only football I like is English Premier League and Man-U [ Manchester United ] is my team.
> 
> I also look at UEFA Champion league sometimes.
> 
> Lol,


Now we are talking REAL football.....and ohh yea, I hate you (kidding kidding).

I'm a huge Liverpool fan.....bad weekend, I know. Great week for you guys (I like Giggs)

As for cheerleader/American football thing. personally I think entire "cheerleeding" thing is very .....WRONG?

I just don't like any activity that puts woman body on the stage like a piece of meat (and especially with those intentions) . Very against it actually, just morally wrong to me.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Buffalo Bills’ cheerleaders handbook: Here is how to wash yourselves - Salon.com
> 
> Excerpt from the story:
> 
> These are the kind of sports organizations men cheer on and support everyday - how about you ladies?


Yup and the Jills (the Buffalo cheerleading squad) has been shut down due to that lawsuit (rightfully in my opinion).

I'm an avid football fan and never pay attention to the cheerleaders. They don't bring anything to the game. They don't make fans any more passionate, considering the teams are considered to have the most rabid fan bases already don't even have cheerleaders (Pittsburgh, Green Bay, Chicago, New York Giants, Detroit and Cleveland). They are a waste of energy frankly. Not including Buffalo, 6 of the teams don't even have a cheerleading squad....what do you say about that? 

If a team has a cheer squad, all the power to them. They aren't hurting finding women who WILLINGLY and KNOWLINGLY try out for them.

Plus why don't you pose this question to the men of TAM and ask about the MALE cheerleaders? Look it up, one team has MALE cheerleaders....Oh wait, that might spoil your thread and agenda.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Thunder7 said:


> I find it funny when people (not saying you, SB, just people in general) complain about the salaries of pro athletes, yet say nothing when Tom Cruise makes 10-12 million for a movie. As far as degree of difficulty I would argue a pro athlete has a much tougher, more physically demanding job. Not to mention, a much smaller window with which to earn a living in that profession. Pro sports, like the movie business, is a part of the entertainment industry and salaries are determined by what the market dictates. So, no biggie.
> 
> BTW, die hard member of the Raider Nation, here.


You're dead on Thunder.

People have this mentality that they can do what the Pros do because they played little league baseball or pop warner football etc.

The reality is there are only a handful of people in this world who can do what professionals do. It's capitalism. Supply and demand. The supply of people who can play professional sports is TINY, and the demand is multi-billion dollar industries. Most pro athletes, especially in football, are underpaid when looking at it from an economics standpoint.

If there was no collective bargaining agreements or other checks and balances, how much do you think a Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers could demand in salary. Higher than what they're making now.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

Dad&Hubby said:


> Yup and the Jills (the Buffalo cheerleading squad) has been shut down due to that lawsuit (rightfully in my opinion).
> 
> I'm an avid football fan and never pay attention to the cheerleaders. They don't bring anything to the game. They don't make fans any more passionate, considering the teams are considered to have the most rabid fan bases already don't even have cheerleaders (Pittsburgh, Green Bay, Chicago, New York Giants, Detroit and Cleveland). They are a waste of energy frankly. Not including Buffalo, 6 of the teams don't even have a cheerleading squad....what do you say about that?
> 
> If a team has a cheer squad, all the power to them. They aren't hurting finding women who WILLINGLY and KNOWLINGLY try out for them.
> 
> Plus why don't you pose this question to the men of TAM and ask about the MALE cheerleaders? Look it up, one team has MALE cheerleaders....Oh wait, that might spoil your thread and agenda.


This thread is specifically about Buffalo Bills and the few other teams that are being sued. If there are male cheerleaders in those teams then it applies to them aswell and this is in no way a gender specific thread. Other than equality, what do you think my agenda is?

Anyway... I think you are missing the point entirely. While to you cheerleaders may not bring anything to the game the fact is, it is a very hard and demanding JOB to do. They are pro athletes and dancers. Professionals should get paid for their job done. The point is they fail to pay to the cheerleaders even a $8 minium wage salaries while just one player is handed millions without a question. In addition to the job, the cheerleaders are being subjected to humiliating practices like they are told how to shave their genital area and what kind of tampons to use, tests how much "jiggle" you are allowed to have etc. by their EMPLOYER. And after all this they don't even get paid. What other civil world job allows this kind off atrocity?


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

Caribbean Man said:


> I'm no longer a sport fan, but the only football I like is English Premier League and Man-U [ Manchester United ] is my team.
> 
> I also look at UEFA Champion league sometimes.
> 
> Lol,
> 
> Neither of them use cheerleaders , but sometimes an excited fan
> [ woman or man] might just run on the field buck naked for the crowd's entertainment.
> I think they're called " streakers."


I see what you did there. 

Do you think the American version of "football" is actually handegg?


----------



## tacoma

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Anyway... I think you are missing the point entirely. While to you cheerleaders may not bring anything to the game the fact is, it is a very hard and demanding JOB to do. They are pro athletes and dancers. Professionals should get paid for their job done. The point is they fail to pay to the cheerleaders even a $8 minium wage salaries while just one player is handed millions without a question. In addition to the job, the cheerleaders are being subjected to humiliating practices like they are told how to shave their genital area and what kind of tampons to use, tests how much "jiggle" you are allowed to have etc. by their EMPLOYER. And after all this they don't even get paid. What other civil world job allows this kind off atrocity?


I agree with your point. I also think it's a disgrace how much money is made in pro ball yet they can't seem to pay their cheerleaders a decent wage.

However, this is not a job a person takes to put food on the table.
These people aren't doing this for the money.
They are doing it for the opportunities of exposure (no pun intended) and most probably consider it as an apprenticeship of sorts that will lead to bigger and better things.


----------



## tacoma

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> I see what you did there.
> 
> Do you think the American version of "football" is actually handegg?


In defense of American football when the game was named it did involve a lot more kicking and foot stuff.

It has evolved over time.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> This thread is specifically about Buffalo Bills and the few other teams that are being sued. If there are male cheerleaders in those teams then it applies to them aswell and this is in no way a gender specific thread. Other than equality, what do you think my agenda is?
> 
> Anyway... I think you are missing the point entirely. While to you cheerleaders may not bring anything to the game the fact is, it is a very hard and demanding JOB to do. They are pro athletes and dancers. Professionals should get paid for their job done. The point is they fail to pay to the cheerleaders even a $8 minium wage salaries while just one player is handed millions without a question. In addition to the job, the cheerleaders are being subjected to humiliating practices like they are told how to shave their genital area and what kind of tampons to use, tests how much "jiggle" you are allowed to have etc. by their EMPLOYER. And after all this they don't even get paid. What other civil world job allows this kind off atrocity?


I've been on TAM long enough to see your agenda in all of your posts MRA, all I have to do is look at your name. Sorry, but if you want to have respectful, open minded discussions about topics, it's generally not good to walk into the room with a name tag that antagonizes and insults your "opponent". :scratchhead: that said....

The physical requirements in that lawsuit are abhorent and the Bills should and will hopefully get killed in court over them. I'm speaking specifically about the tampon issue and the landscaping. The "jiggle" issue is real because the cheerleaders are being hired for their physical appearance and abilities. It'd be the same as if Chris Farley tried out for a part in the movie Magic Mike, now don't get me wrong, the Farley/Patrick Swayze SNL skits were hilarious, but if an actor like Chris Farley tried out for Magic Mike, he wouldn't get the part....why....too much jiggle. . So you can argue the issue, but it's real. Sometimes people are hired for their physical appearance.

Now on the issue of pay. Sorry but supply and demand.

How many people on the face of the planet can do what Mario Williams (the player you named) can do. There are probably 5-10 people ON THE FACE OF THE PLANET at his level. Guess what, when there are only 5-10 people who can do something, in a very lucrative industry, they're going to make HUGE dollars. Just look at the top people in ANYTHING. I hate to bust your bubble, but the best business people, the best surgeons, etc. make MORE than these athletes. Now, you have cheerleaders. You have HUNDREDS of women trying out for ONE SPOT. You are a dime a dozen. Yes, the women are at a pinnacle in their sport, but there isn't the demand. If EVERY team dropped their cheerleaders, do you think football, or any sport would be fazed? Not one bit. The teams would just come up with other dead-time entertainment.

I'm not trying to be harsh, just honest. If a cheerleader wanted more pay, she'll have hundreds of women, including the top coming out of college, to replace her.


----------



## over20

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> This thread is specifically about Buffalo Bills and the few other teams that are being sued. If there are male cheerleaders in those teams then it applies to them aswell and this is in no way a gender specific thread. Other than equality, what do you think my agenda is?
> 
> Anyway... I think you are missing the point entirely. While to you cheerleaders may not bring anything to the game the fact is, it is a very hard and demanding JOB to do. They are pro athletes and dancers. Professionals should get paid for their job done. The point is they fail to pay to the cheerleaders even a $8 minium wage salaries while just one player is handed millions without a question. In addition to the job, the cheerleaders are being subjected to humiliating practices like they are told how to shave their genital area and what kind of tampons to use, tests how much "jiggle" you are allowed to have etc. by their EMPLOYER. And after all this they don't even get paid. What other civil world job allows this kind off atrocity?


With all do respect, some squads do get paid by the season, granted it is low. I am only familiar with the Detroit Spirit. The ladies also get paid for making calendars and appearances at off sight locations. If the ladies felt subject to humiliating practices I am sure they would leave. I was a former cheerleader and never ever felt any discomfort/humiliation in what I did, granted that was high school and not professional. I would have loved to go professional though!!


----------



## JCD

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Buffalo Bills’ cheerleaders handbook: Here is how to wash yourselves - Salon.com
> 
> Excerpt from the story:
> 
> These are the kind of sports organizations men cheer on and support everyday - how about you ladies?


What a load of rubbish. Not how they are paid, but how you are characterizing it. 

Take a gander at Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders, the reality show for a minor glimpse at their life.

Why are they doing this?

Well, here is an article which actually covers the issue. It has things like 'nuance', 'perspective', and 'complexity'. It is also written by a woman who is interested in probing the truth of the matter.

Cheerleaders are very superfluous to the show....which is FOOTBALL and not line dancing. A lot of women like Teri Hatcher, Paula Abdul and a lot of other women used this 'free' opportunity to get a career started.

Kind of like interns. Guess what? They aren't paid either and yet, like cheerleading, it doesn't pay anything.

But I note you don't take that practice to task. But there is no opportunity to sneer at men in it.


----------



## JCD

ScarletBegonias said:


> I'm not into pro sports.I think they're useless and people taken them way too serious. It's all about greed now.


How does the average fan get paid? It is something they love and want to talk about outside their mundane lives.

It is mostly harmless.


----------



## JCD

To paraphrase Terry Pratchett: Washer women get paid more than ballerinas (cheerleaders) because there isn't a line out the door for a washer woman position.

Know who else does long, tedious, hot work? Civil war Re enactors.

They spend TONS of money on equipment, time, travel. Same could be said for the SCA, soup kitchen volunteers and people who do so for Habitat for Humanity.

Their 'pay' is in moral preening or adulation, depending on the position. And this is enough to have thousands of women apply for a few slots.


----------



## committed4ever

over20 said:


> What do you think of Caldwell, the new Lions couch, opening up Monday night Football soon?.....I am hoping for the best..IDK Detroit is playing the Giants that night.......:scratchhead:


He's a'ight. He did keep the Colts going until Manning got hurt. Kind of reminds me of Lovey Smith. They both appear to lowkey but except for Manning injury they both had decent teams every year.

I like that Detroit has Golden Tate now -- that should take some heat off of Calvin Johnson.


----------



## committed4ever

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> This thread is specifically about Buffalo Bills and the few other teams that are being sued. If there are male cheerleaders in those teams then it applies to them aswell and this is in no way a gender specific thread. Other than equality, what do you think my agenda is?
> 
> Anyway... I think you are missing the point entirely. While to you cheerleaders may not bring anything to the game the fact is, it is a very hard and demanding JOB to do. They are pro athletes and dancers. Professionals should get paid for their job done. The point is they fail to pay to the cheerleaders even a $8 minium wage salaries while just one player is handed millions without a question. In addition to the job, the cheerleaders are being subjected to humiliating practices like they are told how to shave their genital area and what kind of tampons to use, tests how much "jiggle" you are allowed to have etc. by their EMPLOYER. And after all this they don't even get paid. What other civil world job allows this kind off atrocity?


They have a choice not to do it. And for the amount you have said they get paid I don't hardly think they do it just to "have a job." When you think about it, why would a grown woman want to be a cheer leader? 

Just sayin'


----------



## Caribbean Man

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> I see what you did there.
> 
> Do you think the American version of "football" is actually handegg?


Ah-ha!

You are trying to get me into trouble!

Lol,

But it does look like an over sized egg in his hands...

No comment, carry on!


----------



## I Notice The Details

Awesome....you have one of my favorite players of all time in that picture. That is Emmitt Smith. I wear that exact jersey with his number 22 when I go to the games!

He was a great football player and a classy guy off the field.


----------



## Caribbean Man

tacoma said:


> I agree with your point. I also think it's a disgrace how much money is made in pro ball yet they can't seem to pay their cheerleaders a decent wage.
> 
> However, this is not a job a person takes to put food on the table.
> These people aren't doing this for the money.
> They are doing it for the opportunities of exposure (no pun intended) and most probably consider it as an apprenticeship of sorts that will lead to bigger and better things.


I hear you.

But I think that anyone who's being paid less than minimum wage to do a legitimate job is being exploited.

And exploitation of labor, any type of labour is morally wrong imo.


----------



## tacoma

Caribbean Man said:


> I hear you.
> 
> But I think that anyone who's being paid less than minimum wage to do a legitimate job is being exploited.
> 
> And exploitation of labor, any type of labour is morally wrong imo.


I agree CB especially in this situation.
The money NFL teams make is gross for the most part.
To deny anyone involved with the team in any official role a good wage is reprehensible.

I'm just pointing out why most women will accept this scenario and work for nothing basically.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Caribbean Man said:


> I hear you.
> 
> But I think that anyone who's being paid less than minimum wage to do a legitimate job is being exploited.
> 
> And exploitation of labor, any type of labour is morally wrong imo.


I'm not disagreeing, but what about

Waiters and Waitresses with bad tips
Interns
College scholarship athletes
100% Commission sales people.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Professionals should get paid for their job done. The point is they fail to pay to the cheerleaders even a $8 minium wage salaries while just one player is handed millions without a question.


Players are paid millions without question because the team's performance is what drives ticket sales and popularity. It is a VERY rare person who is 6'5" and can run a 4.4 second 40 yard dash, sell a route, cut precisely, and catch virtually every football thrown their way. The cheerleaders are paid peanuts because they are a dime a dozen talent. You can use "professional" here in only the strictest sense of the word - these are part-time jobs for students, homemakers and people with other primary employment. I'm sorry, but hospitality doesn't pay well. I'm also a fan of motorcycle racing, where its common to have "umbrella girls" (so named because they hold an umbrella over the racer while everything is being prepared at the starting grid -full leathers/helmets in summer = pass out heat). With the exception of a couple elite racing teams, most of these girls aren't paid at all - their expenses are paid. They get to travel the world, hob nob and party with racing teams, and their only duty is to look pretty, pose for pictures with fans and hold an umbrella. Not a bad deal for a young woman who wants to travel and have fun. 

If some cheerleader didn't get paid as agreed, then she has a complaint the same as any employee in any field would... and it happens from time to time in any industry. I don't gather that's your real issue though.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> In addition to the job, the cheerleaders are being subjected to humiliating practices like they are told how to shave their genital area and what kind of tampons to use, tests how much "jiggle" you are allowed to have etc. by their EMPLOYER. And after all this they don't even get paid. What other civil world job allows this kind off atrocity?


If you're taking a superficial hospitality position, then superficial requirements... a la jiggle, figure, or whatever else are perfectly valid - they directly relate to your JOB and the employer's perception of beauty.

NFL cheerleaders are generally paid per game, and for any non-game events they go to - autograph signings, private parties etc. Most are not paid for practices and workouts (neither are most NFL players - they are paid per game, and some have signing bonuses or roster bonuses - a lump sum paid for still being on the roster at a given time). The Baltimore Ravens cheerleaders are paid about $50 per game. A subset of those cheerleaders are also paid for calendar shoots and trips to visit troops overseas.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

JCD said:


> How does the average fan get paid? It is something they love and want to talk about outside their mundane lives.
> 
> It is mostly harmless.


I wasn't implying the fans get paid. I was talking about the things behind pro sports in general when I referenced greed. 

Also, those fans are allowed to talk about it and I'm allowed to say it's irritating and pointless.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Dad&Hubby said:


> I'm not disagreeing, but what about
> 
> Waiters and Waitresses with bad tips
> Interns
> College scholarship athletes
> 100% Commission sales people.


Don't want to hijack the thread.

I don't live in the USA, so I guess our system is different.

In our country, nobody accepts less than minimum wage.
There's a saying that goes, " _if you can't pay minimum wage then you have no right being in business and hiring workers_.."

Our unemployment rate is somewhere close to zero and even migrant workers are paid higher than minimum wage , they represent a significant percentage of the economy.

The concept behind minimum wage is that it represents the minimum amount it would take for a worker to survive, not what the employer can afford or is willing to pay.

But that's just how it is down here. i guess in the US, there might be other systems that would help fill the gap wherever it might be needed.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

tacoma said:


> I agree with your point. I also think it's a disgrace how much money is made in pro ball yet they can't seem to pay their cheerleaders a decent wage.


Its supply and demand. Even if cheerleading was entirely voluntary with only expenses paid, I'd bet the NFL would still be awash with cheerleaders.

Its not something that is done primarily for the money.

The Ravens marching band is all voluntary and quite hard to get into.


----------



## Caribbean Man

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Its supply and demand. Even if cheerleading was entirely voluntary with only expenses paid, I'd bet the NFL would still be awash with cheerleaders.
> 
> *Its not something that is done primarily for the money.*
> 
> *The Ravens marching band is all voluntary and quite hard to get into.*


Well this^^^ puts a different spin on everything.

If that is factual , then the premise of the thread is false.


----------



## LongWalk

> Fraternization
> One of the firmest NFL cheerleading rules is no fraternization--this goes for players, trainers, staff, personnel, management and owners of the team. Fraternization typically includes socializing outside of team events and forming romantic relationships with those associated with the team.
> 
> There have been notable instances where a fraternizing NFL cheerleader has been removed from the squad permanently, such as Christy Oglevee, wife of current Washington Redskins tight end Chris Cooley. Oglevee was a Redskins cheerleader who was fired after it was discovered that she was dating Cooley. This case is especially notable because Cooley met Oglevee through another Redskins cheerleader whom he had previously dated.


Their marriage lasted four years, longer than the average pro career.



> Chris Cooley is having a not-so-great year. Not only did the Redskins release the veteran tight end, but now it turns out his marriage to second wife Christy Oglevee is over.
> 
> The divorce, filed Aug. 29 in Loudoun County, has been in the works for months: The couple separated in January and, despite having no pre-nup, we’re told, have already hammered out a settlement deal.
> 
> “Both Christy and Chris worked hard to be reasonable with each other so they could settle this matter without litigation,” said her lawyer, Lindsay Hendrix. “They are both to be credited for reaching a resolution that permits their private lives to remain private.”
> 
> Private? Not the word you associate with the Redskins’own Barbie and Ken, a bubbly couple who shared (and overshared) their courtship and marriage. Chris was separated from his first wife in 2005 when he met the comely Redskins cheerleader, who was quickly fired from the squad for fraternizing with a player. She lost her $75-a-game job but gained a fiance, who signed a $30 million-deal with the Skins in 2007.
> 
> The uncensored Cooley loved to blog about his girlfriend’s hotness: “She walked into the house like she had climbed out of a poster in my high school bedroom.” But it also seemed like a true romance. Just before their May 2008 wedding, he told us, “She’s the most influential person in my life. We’re extremely good friends as well as in love.”
> 
> The couple made plenty of news: Her photo shoot for Maxim, the art gallery they opened together in Leesburg. Christy threw herself into life as an NFL wife: A regular at Redskins fan appreciation days and charity events like Tanya Snyder’s breast cancer luncheons, she modeled for the NFL’s women’s apparel campaign, and taped a “True Hollywood Story: Football Wives” for the E! network in 2009.
> 
> Their separation, however, was more quiet. Lawyers for both told us not to expect anything juicy in future court filings.
> 
> Christy, 27, has reverted to her maiden name and is working at her parent’s hair salon. Chris, 30, is waiting to see if he lands back with the Redskins or another NFL team.



Read more: NFL Cheer Rules | eHow


----------



## Thunder7

Caribbean Man said:


> Well this^^^ puts a different spin on everything.
> 
> If that is factual , then the premise of the thread is false.


It is factual. The Baltimore Colts marching Band stayed in existence even after the Colts left for Indianapolis. When the Ravens arrived in town in 1996 the band changed their name and their colors and continued the tradition. They are not employees of the team and receive no compensation. They are not, however, cheerleaders.


----------



## chillymorn

anybody that takes a job that pays little to nothing because they are hoping to get a jump start to their career deserves what they get.If they endure and gain stardom great good for them if they endure and get the shaft well great for them also they chose to do it nobody held a gun to their head.

maybe people should have a little more self respect. and not take jobs that treat you like crap and the later complain boohoo this isn't fair.


----------



## ScarletBegonias

chillymorn said:


> anybody that takes a job that pays little to nothing because they are hoping to get a jump start to their career deserves what they get.If they endure and gain stardom great good for them if they endure and get the shaft well great for them also they chose to do it nobody held a gun to their head.
> 
> maybe people should have a little more self respect. and not take jobs that treat you like crap and the later complain boohoo this isn't fair.


yup. I can't say I have much concern for or respect for cheerleaders.


----------



## JCD

Caribbean Man said:


> Don't want to hijack the thread.
> 
> I don't live in the USA, so I guess our system is different.
> 
> In our country, nobody accepts less than minimum wage.
> There's a saying that goes, " _if you can't pay minimum wage then you have no right being in business and hiring workers_.."
> 
> Our unemployment rate is somewhere close to zero and even migrant workers are paid higher than minimum wage , they represent a significant percentage of the economy.
> 
> The concept behind minimum wage is that it represents the minimum amount it would take for a worker to survive, not what the employer can afford or is willing to pay.
> 
> But that's just how it is down here. i guess in the US, there might be other systems that would help fill the gap wherever it might be needed.


Our hospitality professionals make SUBSTANTIALLY more than minimum wage. We are a tipping culture. If I didn't pay a 15% gratuity for the wait staff, I would be considered a pretty cheap skinflint. Bartenders too. It is outlined this way to ensure GOOD service...at least that is the theory.

As far as interns, that is an apprenticeship position. Some pimple faced kid from school gets to sit in a REAL business, learn some of the ins and outs, has something to put on his resume' besides 'school'...and in return he puts in 20-40 hours a week in free labor for a few months. Often, the wheat finds itself springboarded into a lucrative job (or any job in this economy)

So, interns aren't particularly SKILLED or an asset to the company...yet.

As far as cheerleaders? No one is putting a gun to their heads. The labor laws are such that they are probably told pretty bluntly exactly what to expect in remuneration...and they do it anyway. I am curious why the OP is not Pro Choice :scratchhead:

And as indicated in that article I linked: some women want money. Some want adulation; happy that a million men across America SEE them and want them. There are a lot of things that money cannot buy. This is one of them. So a girl with mediocre physical skills and a winning genetic combination can reach a status far outside her normal 'weight class' socially. If she puts 'Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader' on her business card, it opens doors that someone like...oh...I don't know...the OP wouldn't have access to.

They get to jet set around, meet important and rich people, and maybe land a cushy job or marriage. Meanwhile they have fun and get free stuff. I am sure the under the table remuneration is quite nicer than their formal pay as well.


----------



## JCD

Caribbean Man said:


> Well this^^^ puts a different spin on everything.
> 
> If that is factual , then the premise of the thread is false.


Um...even if the premise is true, NO ONE IS FORCING THEM TO JOIN. Even if these women are dumb as stumps, once they get that first paycheck and see what the life that is offered them...they are STILL free to walk away.

Guess who is outside that door if they do? A long line of other women who are happy to take her 'underpaid, overworked' place.

If this is such a horrible thing, why is there a line around the block to get a slot?


----------



## JCD

ScarletBegonias said:


> yup. I can't say I have much concern for or respect for cheerleaders.


Concern I get. Respect? What exactly are they doing wrong?


----------



## ScarletBegonias

JCD said:


> Concern I get. Respect? What exactly are they doing wrong?


It's just a personal viewpoint I have that isn't necessarily fair or correct.This would be the only place I'd feel comfortable saying it bc I am sort of ashamed of not respecting certain people for their chosen professions.


----------



## LongWalk

The cheerleaders are athletes, gymnasts and dancers so they are willing, like many semi-amateurs, to pay for the pleasure and prestige. Do they marry upwards? Are many of them married.

I wonder if they have medical coverage for blowing out their knees?


----------



## Fordsvt

You bet 
CFL - Winnipeg Blue Bombers
NFL - Baltimore Ravens / Packers / Vikings too


----------



## JCD

ScarletBegonias said:


> It's just a personal viewpoint I have that isn't necessarily fair or correct.This would be the only place I'd feel comfortable saying it bc I am sort of ashamed of not respecting certain people for their chosen professions.


That is fair. There are a bunch of people whom I don't respect as well. Journalists, for one, if there is a hint of bias either way. 

I appreciate the anonymity of the internet as well.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

ScarletBegonias said:


> It's just a personal viewpoint I have that isn't necessarily fair or correct.This would be the only place I'd feel comfortable saying it bc I am sort of ashamed of not respecting certain people for their chosen professions.


And what is your "respectable" profession if I may ask? Perhaps a clean and easy office desk job fiddling papers all day? I guess you're one of those people who don't respect waiters or janitors either.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

JCD said:


> Um...even if the premise is true, NO ONE IS FORCING THEM TO JOIN. Even if these women are dumb as stumps, once they get that first paycheck and see what the life that is offered them...they are STILL free to walk away.
> 
> Guess who is outside that door if they do? A long line of other women who are happy to take her 'underpaid, overworked' place.
> 
> If this is such a horrible thing, why is there a line around the block to get a slot?


Had you read the article in question you'd know that in these particular cases they didn't get that paycheck at all. If you have a job contract that says you get paid a certain amount of money for your work don't you think it's reasonable to expect the employer to fill their part of the contract? Especially if the employer obviously does not have money problems if they hand out millions to a single player. Would you be OK with your employer telling you how to shave your pubic hair and what kind of tampons to use (if you're a woman)?


----------



## LongWalk

Who checks the shaving and tampons? Do they get minimum wage for that job?

The NFL has faced labor problems before. The players banded together and fought long battle to gain the right to bargain collectively. The way the owners originally treated the players was casual and exploitative to say the least.

The NFL's owners have long known that players suffered brain damage, but they resisted changing the lucrative industry until former players gained negative PR for the sport by being violent, suicidal or demented. So, anyone looking for enlightened decency and kindness from the NFL owners is being naive.

The cheerleaders are in weaker position.

A greater injustice is the professional football and other sports run by universities. It is dishonest to call the enormous college football entertainment business anything but a business. The players are employees. 

Football coaches are routinely paid more than the most brilliant professors.

I grew up in love with the Green Bay Packers after reading Jerry Kramer's Instant Replay. The game is great entertainment. I can't help but watch a few highlight replays now and then. I read about my alma mater in the student newspaper. But another side of me wonders, if Americans place 1/10 of the efforts put into football and basketball into study, then America could become more competitive economically.

Professional and "amateur" college sports have had a huge impact of integration. When I was a kid Blacks were considered too stupid to play quarterback. Now players with some percentage of African genes dominate football and basketball. There are discussions about the complete absence of White running and cornerbacks in the NFL.

Another interesting aspect of football is the tribalism. Fortunately the US does not experience fan violence like soccer in Europe. Wonder why?


----------



## ScarletBegonias

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> And what is your "respectable" profession if I may ask? Perhaps a clean and easy office desk job fiddling papers all day? I guess you're one of those people who don't respect waiters or janitors either.


I admitted to not being proud of my snobbery toward cheerleaders and you decide to take a shot at me. Aren't you classy.

I actually do have respect for waitstaff and the folks in public sanitation positions such as janitors. 

Not respecting cheerleaders might make me a b*tch but it doesn't make me a total ass hole as you've decided to paint me. 

my feelings about cheerleaders and small number of other professions isn't the topic of the thread though.If you'd like to discuss it further you can PM me.


----------



## JCD

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Had you read the article in question you'd know that in these particular cases they didn't get that paycheck at all. If you have a job contract that says you get paid a certain amount of money for your work don't you think it's reasonable to expect the employer to fill their part of the contract? Especially if the employer obviously does not have money problems if they hand out millions to a single player. Would you be OK with your employer telling you how to shave your pubic hair and what kind of tampons to use (if you're a woman)?


I can't speak for the shaving, but honestly, a 'tampon' malfunction on NATION WIDE T.V. might be something a family geared organization might want to avoid. Maybe you don't mind these discussions with your kids. Other people would.

If they aren't paying the pittance they promised to pay, preferably the perpetrators should be properly punished.

However, I see you pointedly protesting the practices of the entire perverted patriarchal pack, not petty pecuniary pilferage by a few prevaricators.


----------



## chillymorn

I used to be a big football fan. Played in high school.loved it! liked the physical aspect,the friendship,and the game itself. after high school I would have a case of beer and some munchies all lined up with some good friends to waste all day watching the best NFL team of all time(JMHO) the pittsburgh steelers! 

Then I grew up! all my friens and myself got married and started families. I still fought it for a while but eventually I came to the conclusion that I can't afford to waste any of my precious days watch a bunch of selfish millionairs play a game. I still listen to them on the radio when out in the garage trying to get $hit done before winter but I have lost a lot of interest for the game. when their on in the eve I catch a game here or there but I could really careless if i miss a game. I read somewheret that the NFL is one of the biggest if not the biggest industry in the world and the money they make is outragious. I just can't wrap my head around wasting my time so they can get richer and richer. 

My time is too valuable to me. I'd rather spend it coaching my kids baseball,hunting fixing our old cars,taking the dog for a walk the possibilities are endless. 

as for cheerleaders or anybody that is complaining about their job . you know what its a free country and you can complain about it and be all boo hoo or you can do something about it and better yourself by finding a new job. Might have to get some training or take some chances but as the saying goes nothing ventured nothing gained!


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

ScarletBegonias said:


> I admitted to not being proud of my snobbery toward cheerleaders and you decide to take a shot at me. Aren't you classy.
> 
> I actually do have respect for waitstaff and the folks in public sanitation positions such as janitors.
> 
> Not respecting cheerleaders might make me a b*tch but it doesn't make me a total ass hole as you've decided to paint me.
> 
> my feelings about cheerleaders and small number of other professions isn't the topic of the thread though.If you'd like to discuss it further you can PM me.


You brought your feelings yourself into this thread not me. Maybe it's the wording and you didn't really mean it like that but it came out like you don't think cheerleaders should get paid because it's not respectable job to you. At least you admit it is a profession instead of calling it a hobby.

PS. I never called you that name in your post. Actually I've no idea how it went through the profanity filter.


----------



## chillymorn

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> You brought your feelings yourself into this thread not me. Maybe it's the wording and you didn't really mean it like that but it came out like you don't think cheerleaders should get paid because it's not respectable job to you. At least you admit it is a profession instead of calling it a hobby.


I'm guessing your a cheerleader.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

JCD said:


> I can't speak for the shaving, but honestly, a 'tampon' malfunction on NATION WIDE T.V. might be something a family geared organization might want to avoid. Maybe you don't mind these discussions with your kids. Other people would.
> 
> If they aren't paying the pittance they promised to pay, preferably the perpetrators should be properly punished.
> 
> However, I see you pointedly protesting the practices of the entire perverted patriarchal pack, not petty pecuniary pilferage by a few prevaricators.


As far as I know cheerleaders are still wearing pants so how would you even see into their vagina. Please explain how does this differ from any other sports or dancing in this aspect.

"Family geared organization," that's was a joke right. :rofl:


----------



## ScarletBegonias

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> You brought your feelings yourself into this thread not me. Maybe it's the wording and you didn't really mean it like that but it came out like you don't think cheerleaders should get paid because it's not respectable job to you. At least you admit it is a profession instead of calling it a hobby.
> 
> PS. I never called you that name in your post. Actually I've no idea how it went through the profanity filter.


 Yes,that's exactly what I meant.I'm so high on myself that I feel cheerleaders shouldn't be paid simply bc I don't respect their chosen career path. 

You didn't have to call me a name,your post was quite clear without needing to outright say it. Oh and FTR,I don't respect the career of "Stripper" or "Member of Congress" either. I still think they deserve to be paid though


----------



## Dad&Hubby

JCD said:


> I can't speak for the shaving, but honestly, a 'tampon' malfunction on NATION WIDE T.V. might be something a family geared organization might want to avoid. Maybe you don't mind these discussions with your kids. Other people would.
> 
> If they aren't paying the pittance they promised to pay, preferably the perpetrators should be properly punished.
> 
> However, I see you pointedly protesting the practices of the entire perverted patriarchal pack, not petty pecuniary pilferage by a few prevaricators.


so let me simply add that it’s my very good honour to meet you and I shall call you P.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> As far as I know cheerleaders are still wearing pants so how would you even see into their vagina. Please explain how does this differ from any other sports or dancing in this aspect.


Your posts are baffling. The tampon issue isn't a matter of what tampon to use or being forced to do this or that - the relevant portion of the handbook in question lists a set of simple health guidelines, proper tampon use being one of many. NFL players get the exact same thing on nutrition, avoiding athletes foot, even sexually transmitted diseases... all aimed at keeping healthy to promote a longer career. Is it a crime to provide health information? I'm pretty sure nobody is inspecting their vaginas... well, except some of the players maybe, but that fraternization is also against the rules.

Many of the restrictive guidelines apply to almost anyone who represents a brand, and is aimed at avoiding bringing embarrassment or controversy to the company. 

From the Washington Post article: 

"do not be overly opinionated about anything" ... 
translation: don't get into arguments - you represent the team. Your job is hospitality, not antagonism.

"do not linger in restrooms having conversations while other people are using the facilities" ... 
translation: avoid gossip that may bring embarrassment or controversy to the team.

"Never use your fingers" to collect food - uh... is it a crime to mandate that your hospitality staff have etiquette and manners?


Not getting paid as agreed upon is a proper offense. Not getting paid for preparation is debatable. Not getting your expenses required to meet team guidelines is also debatable. I'm a software guy. I'm required to keep abreast of the latest in software development, and in this field, things change rapidly. Its my responsibility as a professional to keep my skills up to date. I'm not generally paid to learn these constantly changing technologies. I'm paid to apply them. If technology changes and I don't bother to keep up... I won't have a job much longer. This is something every programmer is aware of and something taken into account by our salary demands. Not a whole lot of people are able and willing to do so, so salaries in my field are pretty good. Meanwhile, there's a host of women lined up to be NFL cheerleaders in spite of the high need to prepare, doting team regulations and low pay. 

But let's be real here: the top end of pay for NFL cheerleaders is about $200/game, or $3,200/year. This is side work, not a career. The NFL easily gets cheerleaders because its glamorous, and it would do so even if it relied on volunteers. But regardless, teams have every right to provide health information and require people associated with the organization to act in accordance with team regulations - even if they were volunteers.

My company has ergonomic guidelines. How dare they tell me how I should sit!?


----------



## Dad&Hubby

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Your posts are baffling. The tampon issue isn't a matter of what tampon to use or being forced to do this or that - the relevant portion of the handbook in question lists a set of simple health guidelines, proper tampon use being one of many. NFL players get the exact same thing on nutrition, avoiding athletes foot, even sexually transmitted diseases... all aimed at keeping healthy to promote a longer career. Is it a crime to provide health information? I'm pretty sure nobody is inspecting their vaginas... well, except some of the players maybe, but that fraternization is also against the rules.
> 
> Many of the restrictive guidelines apply to almost anyone who represents a brand, and is aimed at avoiding bringing embarrassment or controversy to the company.
> 
> From the Washington Post article:
> 
> "do not be overly opinionated about anything" ...
> translation: don't get into arguments - you represent the team. Your job is hospitality, not antagonism.
> 
> "do not linger in restrooms having conversations while other people are using the facilities" ...
> translation: avoid gossip that may bring embarrassment or controversy to the team.
> 
> "Never use your fingers" to collect food - uh... is it a crime to mandate that your hospitality staff have etiquette and manners?
> 
> 
> Not getting paid as agreed upon is a proper offense. Not getting paid for preparation is debatable. Not getting your expenses required to meet team guidelines is also debatable. I'm a software guy. I'm required to keep abreast of the latest in software development, and in this field, things change rapidly. Its my responsibility as a professional to keep my skills up to date. I'm not generally paid to learn these constantly changing technologies. I'm paid to apply them. If technology changes and I don't bother to keep up... I won't have a job much longer. This is something every programmer is aware of and something taken into account by our salary demands. Not a whole lot of people are able and willing to do so, so salaries in my field are pretty good. Meanwhile, there's a host of women lined up to be NFL cheerleaders in spite of the high need to prepare, doting team regulations and low pay.
> 
> But let's be real here: the top end of pay for NFL cheerleaders is about $200/game, or $3,200/year. This is side work, not a career. The NFL easily gets cheerleaders because its glamorous, and it would do so even if it relied on volunteers. But regardless, teams have every right to provide health information and require people associated with the organization to act in accordance with team regulations - even if they were volunteers.
> 
> My company has ergonomic guidelines. How dare they tell me how I should sit!?


Dvls, Please leave your logic and business knowledge at the door.

This discussion is only to promote emotional reactions in strangers over the internet with total disregard to facts and common AND LEGAL business practices!


----------



## ReformedHubby

For what its worth a very good friend of mine from college used to cheer for the Ravens. She cheered in college and really missed it after graduation, so she tried out. She did it because she loved cheer leading, not for the money. She actually had a pretty decent full time gig too. Cheering was just for fun.


----------



## JCD

Dad&Hubby said:


> so let me simply add that it’s my very good honour to meet you and I shall call you P.


I have to do something to amuse myself.


----------



## JCD

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> As far as I know cheerleaders are still wearing pants so how would you even see into their vagina. Please explain how does this differ from any other sports or dancing in this aspect.
> 
> "Family geared organization," that's was a joke right. :rofl:


Temptresses turning teasingly athwart the field would test tampon technology totally.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

JCD said:


> I have to do something to amuse myself.


Well your "P" rant amused me :smthumbup:

The scene in V still stands as one of my favorite movie scenes of all time. 

I especially enjoy the part 

"Evey: Who are you?
V. : Who? Who is but the form following the function of what and what I am is a man in a mask.
Evey: Well I can see that.
V. : Of course you can, I’m not questioning your powers of observation, I’m merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is.
Evey: Oh, right."


----------



## over20

JCD said:


> Temptresses turning teasingly athwart the field would test tampon technology totally.


:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Your posts are baffling. The tampon issue isn't a matter of what tampon to use or being forced to do this or that - the relevant portion of the handbook in question lists a set of simple health guidelines, proper tampon use being one of many. NFL players get the exact same thing on nutrition, avoiding athletes foot, even sexually transmitted diseases... all aimed at keeping healthy to promote a longer career. Is it a crime to provide health information? I'm pretty sure nobody is inspecting their vaginas... well, except some of the players maybe, but that fraternization is also against the rules.
> 
> Many of the restrictive guidelines apply to almost anyone who represents a brand, and is aimed at avoiding bringing embarrassment or controversy to the company.
> 
> From the Washington Post article:
> 
> "do not be overly opinionated about anything" ...
> translation: don't get into arguments - you represent the team. Your job is hospitality, not antagonism.
> 
> "do not linger in restrooms having conversations while other people are using the facilities" ...
> translation: avoid gossip that may bring embarrassment or controversy to the team.
> 
> "Never use your fingers" to collect food - uh... is it a crime to mandate that your hospitality staff have etiquette and manners?
> 
> 
> Not getting paid as agreed upon is a proper offense. Not getting paid for preparation is debatable. Not getting your expenses required to meet team guidelines is also debatable. I'm a software guy. I'm required to keep abreast of the latest in software development, and in this field, things change rapidly. Its my responsibility as a professional to keep my skills up to date. I'm not generally paid to learn these constantly changing technologies. I'm paid to apply them. If technology changes and I don't bother to keep up... I won't have a job much longer. This is something every programmer is aware of and something taken into account by our salary demands. Not a whole lot of people are able and willing to do so, so salaries in my field are pretty good. Meanwhile, there's a host of women lined up to be NFL cheerleaders in spite of the high need to prepare, doting team regulations and low pay.
> 
> But let's be real here: the top end of pay for NFL cheerleaders is about $200/game, or $3,200/year. This is side work, not a career. The NFL easily gets cheerleaders because its glamorous, and it would do so even if it relied on volunteers. But regardless, teams have every right to provide health information and require people associated with the organization to act in accordance with team regulations - even if they were volunteers.
> 
> My company has ergonomic guidelines. How dare they tell me how I should sit!?


Just answered to your baffling remark about "incident with tampons." Are you looking at their genitalia during the game?

You are only quoting selectively from these "handbooks" to make it look better. Here are some of the uncensored versions:

Insane Handbook: Bills Cheerleaders Are Told How To Wash Their Vaginas
The Raiders’ unbelievably sexist cheerleader handbook - The handbook implies that if cheerleaders are lied to or sexually assaulted by players, it's their own fault
Rules For Ben-Gals Cheerleaders: "No Panties," "No Slouching Breasts"

Your "family geared organization" tells its employees not to wear panties and not to have slouching breasts. Yep, these are totally normal job requirements and rules.  (That last sentence was sarcasm in case you missed it.)

Someone brought out that cheerleaders don't bring anything to the table. Well, according to the Ben-Gals lawsuit it cites a "Forbes article that claims *cheerleaders bring in an estimated $1 million per team*."

Pom-Poms And Profits - Forbes
NFL Cheerleading Is A Scam: A Former Ravens Cheerleader Tells All


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

Dad&Hubby said:


> Dvls, Please leave your logic and business knowledge at the door.
> 
> This discussion is only to promote emotional reactions in strangers over the internet with total disregard to facts and common AND LEGAL business practices!


Dad&Hubby, I'm sorry if this thread and discussion has made you emotional. That is not its intention at all. Maybe you could take a break and come back when you feel better.

I find your (emotional?) comment about facts and legal practices the most illogical one yet since there are several lawsuits against the teams in process. This thread is a discussion about that.


----------



## Shooboomafoo

I can watch a game, and enjoy it, but I don't watch regularly. One of my biggest fails amongst a group of dudes, is when they start talking teams and stretching their foreskins in attempt to divulge how much sports history and stats they know.. It becomes competitive in itself. I don't have a favorite team, unless you want to go for logos, in that case, the Dolphins have a cool logo, but evidently the team sucks and awards he who dare speak their name a permanent position as doofus..

The industry seems to have really changed, to the point that in the earnest interest of $$ to be made, I think certain things are rigged about the outcomes/ref calls/injuries....
Stuff like watching a basketball player intentionally fall down and writhe on the floor in hopes for a foul call... ridiculous.

So, , I devote no time to intentionally watching football as a goal. I get bored easily. I think they make way too much money for the "work" being done. It saddens me to see so many females include that in their dating profiles in hopes to ensnare that couch potato of a potential mate..


----------



## JCD

MRA...whatever.

Welcome to the world you have helped create. In days of old, men and women were expected to know this from (gleaned from one of your links) their sensible aunties. 

Now, these reasonably self evident things need to be laid out in microscopic detail because if they aren't, the person can legitimately say "I didn't know I wasn't supposed to cuss out the preacher and talk about atheism..."

Were you in favor of yeast infections? Does it offend you they offer this information to their employees? Does it prove anywhere that there are vagina inspections? That this is anything more than information passed along?

Want to know who else puts out these sort of health issues in tedious and painstaking detail? The U.S. Military. They have many mandated rules of exactly how a female can use make up and put their hair.

But added to this fact, the cheerleaders are PUBLIC REPRESENTATIVES. OMG, how DARE an organization who cares about how it appears advice their public speaker how to publically speak! Particularly when you are dealing with girls from...how do I say this nicely...the ENTIRE socio economic spectrum who may not have had a 'sensible aunt'. Girls who may NEED this advice.

But rant. Rave. I don't care about these lawsuits, either for or against. God knows Salon is an objective, first :rofl: rate...:rofl::rofl: news organ....

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

I'm sorry...I tried to keep a straight face. I did.

If the girls get more money, great. If they lose their positions, great! You have gotten your 'feminist street cred' by being outraged over volunteers joining organizations with rules which you can't personally stand but they seem A Okay with (for the most part). 

There is this phrase: It doesn't get better if you strike.

But those who want to get outraged over other's choices really don't care if that pesky babe goes out with the bathwater.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Just answered to your baffling remark about "incident with tampons." Are you looking at their genitalia during the game?


The point of the guidelines is not on the appearance of wearing a tampon. Its instruction on general health. Don't dodge the question - is it wrong of the team to provide such information? Is my company wrong to provide me with ergonomic information?



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> You are only quoting selectively from these "handbooks" to make it look better. Here are some of the uncensored versions:


No I'm not. I cited exactly what you brought up. How to use tampons and how to wash your vag. So what? This is just general health information. Your case completely dissolves into thin air when you realize that NFL players receive similar information on cleaning to avoid infections common to athletes - especially fungal infections on their privates and feet. But a host of other guidelines and restrictions pertaining to alcohol, STD awareness, getting enough water, and avoiding injury. Tell me how this is anything other than offering health information out of concern for your employees?



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> The Raiders’ unbelievably sexist cheerleader handbook - The handbook implies that if cheerleaders are lied to or sexually assaulted by players, it's their own fault


It implies no such thing. It says "this has happened, be aware". Where the hell do you or that journalist get "this is your fault if it happens"?



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Rules For Ben-Gals Cheerleaders: "No Panties," "No Slouching Breasts"


So? If Hugh Jackmon wants to keep playing Wolverine, he better not get flabby. They have every right to dictate apparel and aesthetics.




MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Your "family geared organization" tells its employees not to wear panties and not to have slouching breasts. Yep, these are totally normal job requirements and rules.  (That last sentence was sarcasm in case you missed it.)


Oh, no need for sarcasm when what you're saying is actually true. Those are totally normal job requirements for such professions. See previously mentioned Vegas dancers. 



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> NFL Cheerleading Is A Scam: A Former Ravens Cheerleader Tells All


Again, so what? They can have whatever physical standards they want to have. 

The male cheerleaders don't get flown to Fiji for all expenses paid photoshoots... you don't see them crying about mistreatment.

The only legitimate issue is whether they're paid as agreed upon.

They're required to get approval prior to other modeling gigs? No kidding. Cheerleaders represent the team image and they don't want someone on the team taking work that contradicts the image they want to present. They have every right to do so. You know, my employer requires that I get approval for every new project I take on in my side business. Their goal is to ensure that the projects I take on are not competing with company interests. Again, they have every right to make such demands as a condition of my employment.

This article talks about arbitrary enforcement of the rules... welcome to every workplace ever to some degree. Some people get dinged for being late... other people get away with it. The world is full of cliques and networks and the advantages that come from being IN them; its kinda sucky... its even unfair sometimes... but its human nature, and it always will be. Anywhere you go you will find the little biases of human nature and friendship. My boss can require me to work and send his pet employee to a golf tournament. If he wants to pay someone to play golf, that's his discretion. If I'm unhappy with it, I don't have to work for him.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Dad&Hubby, I'm sorry if this thread and discussion has made you emotional. That is not its intention at all. Maybe you could take a break and come back when you feel better.
> 
> I find your (emotional?) comment about facts and legal practices the most illogical one yet since there are several lawsuits against the teams in process. This thread is a discussion about that.


The only aspect of these lawsuits that has any merit is whether the cheerleaders are paid in accordance with labor law.

All this other crap is frivolous. "Oh noes! They told me how often to change my tampon to avoid infections! They want to control my vagina!" That is ridiculous.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Shooboomafoo said:


> One of my biggest fails amongst a group of dudes, is when they start talking teams and stretching their foreskins in attempt to divulge how much sports history and stats they know.. It becomes competitive in itself.


Boy have you missed the boat. That isn't competitive. Its interest. Competition ensues when two guys try to make a case for the success of a team or player based on those statistics. ie... "Quarterback X is gonna have a break out year... he threw for 3500 yards and had a 62 completion percentage last year with subpar talent around him. Now that he has some capable receivers, he's going to own." Opponent: "QB X is crap and will never get it together. His poor performance is the reason those receivers last year looked so bad. Receiver X put up 1100 yards and 8 tds the year before with an actual, good qb. The team brought in a new receiver who is slowing down, and even though he put up good numbers last year, watch his numbers plummet this year with QB X throwing to him."

Other times its just fun to debate whether greats of the past would be great today. Would great receivers today have fared as well in the past without so many rules against contact? Sometimes the trash talk between fans of opposing teams is fun. "Good luck today, you'll need it, Ben Roethlisberger has been running scared ever since Haloti Ngata broke his nose." Its just jawing. The most common one I used to hear was that the Ravens win a lot because everyone is afraid of being murdered by Ray Lewis.



Shooboomafoo said:


> Stuff like watching a basketball player intentionally fall down and writhe on the floor in hopes for a foul call... ridiculous.


Try watching soccer, you'll wonder if they hand out Oscars after the game. That's just sports in general. Known performers get more benefit of the doubt and calls in their favor, and refs are most likely to notice egregious fouls... which creates incentive to play up the foul. 



Shooboomafoo said:


> It saddens me to see so many females include that in their dating profiles in hopes to ensnare that couch potato of a potential mate..


I never miss a Ravens game. I have PSLs - most of the tickets I sell since I don't live in Baltimore. I fly up for a few games a season. Game days are preferably social events - where I live its mostly college football. For Ravens games at home, I usually make crab cakes and grill up some corn with some old bay, often have a friend of mine over for the game (another Maryland transplant), and have some drinks (Heavy Seas ftw!). If a woman hates football then she's not going to be much a part of those weekend game trips to bmore and game day get togethers... she's missing out on a big connection. Interest in football is something I definitely key on. Rooting for the same team and sharing all those high and low moments is connection building imo. Rooting for teams, loyalty to a location... make you feel closer to those who share them, even complete strangers. People generally like enthusiasm.


----------



## JCD

I couldn't agree with DvlsAdvc8's post more.

A pithier response: If you don't like the rules where you work; quit!

If they can't get any employees, they will change their practices.

Here is the hurdle you have to face with this lawsuit: was this information for instruction and guidelines or some set of prohibited mandates.

Unless they have annual vag swabs, I think the burden of proof is on the girl's part.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8, you seem a little confused. You're misquoting me, those posts were not made by me. Back to editing table.


----------



## Shooboomafoo

I missed the boat? But then competition ensues when....

Yeah...


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Shooboomafoo said:


> I missed the boat? But then competition ensues when....
> 
> Yeah...


Yeah, knowledge of stats isn't competition. You framed it as if its a matter of "my stat knowledge penis is bigger than yours". I'm actually on a football forum dedicated to analyzing football statistics beyond even the standard metrics, and I can say definitively, that's never the case.

Stats can be used to back up a case one is making for one player or another, but who knows the most stats is not a competition.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> DvlsAdvc8, you seem a little confused. You're misquoting me, those posts were not made by me. Back to editing table.


Oops... copy paste mistake. My apologies. 

Corrected.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Originally Posted by Dad&Hubby
Dvls, Please leave your logic and business knowledge at the door.

This discussion is only to promote emotional reactions in strangers over the internet with total disregard to facts and common AND LEGAL business practices!



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Dad&Hubby, I'm sorry if this thread and discussion has made you emotional. That is not its intention at all. Maybe you could take a break and come back when you feel better.
> 
> I find your (emotional?) comment about facts and legal practices the most illogical one yet since there are several lawsuits against the teams in process. This thread is a discussion about that.


Hahaha, so you are trying to portray my post as me being emotional.... Welcome to Mr. Robinson's neighborhood. The word of the day is sarcasm.

You routinely make threads and discussions with the sole intent of stirring the pot. Sorry but this thread has not made me emotional LOL. I actually find this thread to be somewhat silly, not in the issue, but how it was presented. I feel for you that you get some weird satisfaction in trying to stir the pot. You should change your name to Giantspoon, because they are the best for pot stirring. 

PS How is my statement illogical. It is common business practice in the NFL for teams to be that specific towards their cheer squads. It is also legal...up until the point where it's deemed illegal. Please find for me the law where what the team has done is illegal. You can't because this is the first time it's being addressed in the courts. The funny thing is, even if the 5 cheerleaders win, it doesn't mean it will make the practice completely illegal, it will only set precedence over what LEVEL a team can go to. Teams will still put restrictions on their cheer squads, but they'll reword it and make it "safe" under the new precedence.

The great thing about lawsuits is it is based on interpretation of the law. The 5 Jills might go to court and be told they have no case. They also might be awarded millions of dollars. And once either happens, a precedence will be set which will either reinforce the current situation or bring about changes. But at the CURRENT moment, it is not illegal.

But please feel free to grab onto the minutia of a discussion and spin some post in order to continue the pot stirring.

My opinion is that the handbooks are too invasive in their "health" recommendations. I have half of those things posted at my job, the coughing and sneezing, washing hands etc. but I think the tampon discussions are a little out of bounds. The place for a woman to learn those lessons isn't at work.

So do I think the teams are going to get hit, yes. I'm interested to see to what extent. I'm a fan of just eliminating cheerleading all together. It's unnecessary and somewhat sexist. It's almost as bad as the bikini ring girls in fights.


----------



## JCD

How funny. Quibbling about who the bile is directed at. Instead who is irrelevant. The point remains and that DvlsAdvc8 answered instead of the original target is almost irrelevant.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

Dad&Hubby said:


> Originally Posted by Dad&Hubby
> Dvls, Please leave your logic and business knowledge at the door.
> 
> This discussion is only to promote emotional reactions in strangers over the internet with total disregard to facts and common AND LEGAL business practices!
> 
> 
> 
> Hahaha, so you are trying to portray my post as me being emotional.... Welcome to Mr. Robinson's neighborhood. The word of the day is sarcasm.
> 
> You routinely make threads and discussions with the sole intent of stirring the pot. Sorry but this thread has not made me emotional LOL. I actually find this thread to be somewhat silly, not in the issue, but how it was presented. I feel for you that you get some weird satisfaction in trying to stir the pot. You should change your name to Giantspoon, because they are the best for pot stirring.
> 
> PS How is my statement illogical. It is common business practice in the NFL for teams to be that specific towards their cheer squads. It is also legal...up until the point where it's deemed illegal. Please find for me the law where what the team has done is illegal. You can't because this is the first time it's being addressed in the courts. The funny thing is, even if the 5 cheerleaders win, it doesn't mean it will make the practice completely illegal, it will only set precedence over what LEVEL a team can go to. Teams will still put restrictions on their cheer squads, but they'll reword it and make it "safe" under the new precedence.
> 
> The great thing about lawsuits is it is based on interpretation of the law. The 5 Jills might go to court and be told they have no case. They also might be awarded millions of dollars. And once either happens, a precedence will be set which will either reinforce the current situation or bring about changes. But at the CURRENT moment, it is not illegal.
> 
> But please feel free to grab onto the minutia of a discussion and spin some post in order to continue the pot stirring.
> 
> My opinion is that the handbooks are too invasive in their "health" recommendations. I have half of those things posted at my job, the coughing and sneezing, washing hands etc. but I think the tampon discussions are a little out of bounds. The place for a woman to learn those lessons isn't at work.
> 
> So do I think the teams are going to get hit, yes. I'm interested to see to what extent. I'm a fan of just eliminating cheerleading all together. It's unnecessary and somewhat sexist. It's almost as bad as the bikini ring girls in fights.


Calm down. Seems you are being emotional if this _discussion _is "stirring your pot." Otherwise it's not clear what other "pot" you think is being "stirred," this is The Ladies Lounge not The Men's Clubhouse. Maybe you are mistaken about the platform. 

Your passive aggressive raging is getting old soon. Instead of personal attacks against me, perhaps you could clarify what it is that is "stirring your pot" in the OP. If you think there are errors I can take a look at them or we can discuss about it. Sounds fair?

You ask how is your statement illogical?


> This discussion is only to promote emotional reactions in strangers over the internet with total disregard to facts and common AND LEGAL business practices!


This discussion is exactly about facts, ethics and legality of NFL business practices. How did you fail to see that. Again if you think there are errors in the articles linked in this thread you can always take it to the authors of those articles, there is no need to lash out your feathers at me.


----------



## LongWalk

Mike Webster

If Webster's brain had not been examined


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> The point of the guidelines is not on the appearance of wearing a tampon. Its instruction on general health. Don't dodge the question - is it wrong of the team to provide such information? Is my company wrong to provide me with ergonomic information?


Yes. It's not appropriate for an employer to tell what kind of tampons its female employees should use. How are they going to verify their rule, will they do regular vaginal inspections and then fire the emplyee if it's a wrong kind of tampon or perhaps she wanted to use a pad?



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> No I'm not. I cited exactly what you brought up. How to use tampons and how to wash your vag. So what? This is just general health information. Your case completely dissolves into thin air when you realize that NFL players receive similar information on cleaning to avoid infections common to athletes - especially fungal infections on their privates and feet. But a host of other guidelines and restrictions pertaining to alcohol, STD awareness, getting enough water, and avoiding injury. Tell me how this is anything other than offering health information out of concern for your employees?


Again, it's not appropriate for an employer to tell its employees how to wash their genitalia. It's WAY OUT OF LINE.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> It implies no such thing. It says "this has happened, be aware". Where the hell do you or that journalist get "this is your fault if it happens"?


Secret Oakland Raider cheerleaders' handbook patronizes, demeans - latimes.com


> In a section of the book about fraternization, it acknowledges, “There have been a few relationships between the two groups that have resulted in a few happy marriages and lovely children,” but goes on to warn, “HOWEVER, *we have also had more situations where, quite frankly, the Raider organization and the Raiderettes narrowly escaped ruined reputations*.” It goes on to elaborate: “One such example concerns a player who gave Halloween parties every year and many of the Raiderettes attended. *This same player was suspended from the team for drug use but also arrested for date rape. For you on the squad who have attended those parties, just think how narrowly you missed having your photo in all the local papers and/or being assaulted.*” And/or. Whatever. *But mostly, think upon how you might have sullied the team’s good name by getting in the papers.* For being raped. Oh and by the way, the definition of date rape is rape. It’s even in the state penal code!


The above quote should be self explanatory.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> The male cheerleaders don't get flown to Fiji for all expenses paid photoshoots... you don't see them crying about mistreatment.


I have a feeling you take this as a male vs. female issue which it's not. Quite frankly it would explain a lot of your posts.


----------



## JCD

However thin you slice it, it's still baloney. This seems to be a healthcare text and a PR text. It is perfectly legally defensible for the organization to say "This is something you should be aware of. This is an issue which can have negative repurcussions."

I can imagine the youtube hits of an errant pad flying out of the tight shorts of some girl making a kick. Play stopped because the players think it's a red flag...dogs and cats...living together...pure anarchy.

Do you, as a woman, often think about tampon technology failure as you do high kicks? Ever considered something like this? No? Or how about how MORTIFYING it would for the woman in question who, not thinking, put in a rather large sized Kotex which CLEARLY leaves a big bulge in those skin tight WHITE shorts.

A woman outfitted like that...surrounded by men with large telephoto lenses.... Hmm. Again, something I think many women might not think about. So as an organization, maybe they want to make sure any dim bulbs in the Jills actually THOUGHT of this before they find themselves on the cover of The Tattler or whatever other lurid organization would post such a thing or they find themselves on some low brow blog which goes viral. 

The copy writes itself: "The Blue Tide faces the Red Wave". "The Pittsburgh Sealers". "Dallas Kotex Cheerleaders."

Not exactly publicity they want. And guess what? As an organization, they are able to say "we don't want this sort of publicity. Don't do this."

YOU don't like it. Sorry, but your opinion is not God's Writ from on High. It is not the Constitution. It is not law. That someone, somewhere might become offended is an absolute certainty.

It will get it's day in court. It is sort of frivolous. The lawyer for the defense will very fairly say 'if they don't want to follow these guidelines...they can quit.'

This point, repeated about a dozen times now, just hasn't penetrated your skull for some reason. Instead, you want to believe that the mice get to tell the cat what to do. 

I am not discussing the pay thing. If they are not paid on time in the amounts promised, the company is wrong. So far, that is the ONLY point you seem to have.


----------



## Shooboomafoo

"Yeah, knowledge of stats isn't competition. You framed it as if its a matter of "my stat knowledge penis is bigger than yours". I'm actually on a football forum dedicated to analyzing football statistics beyond even the standard metrics, and I can say definitively, that's never the case."

"Stats can be used to back up a case one is making for one player or another, but who knows the most stats is not a competition. "


You are on a football forum, that discusses and analyzes stats. That is far different than the typical billy beer belly talking about Dallas... In my experience, it has almost always been the case, and I had fallen far short of knowledge of the area. You seem insistent that your observations are prevalent everywhere. I did not suggest my opinion of football was "right" or, that you were "way off base"...
because doing so indicates a severe lack of awareness.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Yes. It's not appropriate for an employer to tell what kind of tampons its female employees should use. How are they going to verify their rule, will they do regular vaginal inspections and then fire the emplyee if it's a wrong kind of tampon or perhaps she wanted to use a pad?


You seem to not understand the difference between information and rules. I read the handbook. This is not a rule. This is health information. You may question whether its appropriate of them to provide it, but its not illegal of them to provide it, nor are they interested in verifying. My employer doesn't come around checking to make sure my monitor is at the recommended height - the information is for my own benefit. In any athletic field, such health information is common... for such a personal thing to make it into the handbook, the team likely had a number of women develop infections and miss practices or something. That is why the NFL provides STD information and even classes that emphasize caution in choice of women to its players - getting STDs and pulled in by gold-digging women are common problems among these young athletes.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Again, it's not appropriate for an employer to tell its employees how to wash their genitalia. It's WAY OUT OF LINE.


Providing health information is far different from how you characterize it as mandating how your employees wash their vag. Providing such information is not out of line. Its information on hygiene and hygiene is critically important to health in sweaty, infection prone, athletic fields. The players receive such information as well.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> I have a feeling you take this as a male vs. female issue which it's not. Quite frankly it would explain a lot of your posts.


I do not. I take this as a legal issue. The only legitimate issue here is whether the cheerleaders are paid as agreed upon and in accordance with law. I do however take you as mostly being here to stir the male/female relations pot. Its the character of virtually ALL of your posts, and even your choice of username.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Shooboomafoo said:


> You are on a football forum, that discusses and analyzes stats. That is far different than the typical billy beer belly talking about Dallas... In my experience, it has almost always been the case, and I had fallen far short of knowledge of the area. You seem insistent that your observations are prevalent everywhere. I did not suggest my opinion of football was "right" or, that you were "way off base"...
> because doing so indicates a severe lack of awareness.


You declared that knowledge of stats is some sort of measuring competition between men in your experience. I declared that it is not, in my experience. You have self-described as having a passing interest in football to begin with... so I can see why you might think that as an outsider looking in. Which one of us probably has more experience with the trotting out of statistics in discussion of football? Forum, bar or otherwise?

I simply disagree with your characterization of it. I suspect your feathers got ruffled by my saying you missed the boat... my apologies. But I reiterate that throwing out statistics isn't about who has the bigger statistical knowledge peen - which is decidedly dismissive to say. It does carry some status, but no competition... its more in the sense of respect that you know your sh*t - not unlike a variety of other subjects. I enjoy conversations with old timers who've been watching football evolve for 50 years and saw some of the greats play - they have a lot of perspective on the quality of players and rules changes today. People may be competitive over allegiances to different teams, but nobody competes over who knows the most stats.

If you don't know much in the way of stats? So what? Nobody cares unless you insist how terrible or great xyz player is, or who is better than who. If you do, THEN they expect you to have some information to justify that opinion. Follow me? Have you gotten some kind of flak from someone for not knowing football statistics or something?


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> You seem to not understand the difference between information and rules. I read the handbook. This is not a rule. This is health information. You may question whether its appropriate of them to provide it, but its not illegal of them to provide it, nor are they interested in verifying. My employer doesn't come around checking to make sure my monitor is at the recommended height - the information is for my own benefit. In any athletic field, such health information is common... for such a personal thing to make it into the handbook, the team likely had a number of women develop infections and miss practices or something. That is why the NFL provides STD information and even classes that emphasize caution in choice of women to its players - getting STDs and pulled in gold-digging women are common problems among these young athletes.


It seems to be you who are confused. *"Do not be..." "Do not use..." "Do not consume..." "Always say..." "Always avoid..." "Don't use lufa's or sponges..." "Intimate area's: [sic] Never use a deodorant or chemically enhanced product." "When menstruating, use a product..." "Clean/rinse razor often while shaving."* Those quotes are only a few examples from only one of the teams handbook. Sound like rules to me if they can get benched or even fired if not following them.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Providing health information is far different from how you characterize it as mandating how your employees wash their vag. Providing such information is not out of line. Its information on hygiene and hygiene is critically important to health in sweaty, infection prone, athletic fields. The players receive such information as well.


There is a difference between information and invasion of privacy. As I showed above they are rules not just information. We will see after the lawsuits are finished whether it's considered out of line or not according the law. Ethically it's past inappropriate.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I do not. I take this as a legal issue. The only legitimate issue here is whether the cheerleaders are paid as agreed upon and in accordance with law. I do however take you as mostly being here to stir the male/female relations pot. Its the character of virtually ALL of your posts, and even your choice of username.


I don't believe you. You are not qualified to say whether it's legitimate or not. You seem to take this personally and try to use ad hominems to attack me in every post while actually you have no argument on this subject. The question is why are you trying to shut down the discussion about this subject?

It's also funny that when I invalidated your claim that one of the handbooks didn't imply rape victim blaming you ignored that part selectively. Well, it's your lucky day; here it is again in case you missed it:


> In a section of the book about fraternization, it acknowledges, “There have been a few relationships between the two groups that have resulted in a few happy marriages and lovely children,” but goes on to warn, “HOWEVER, we have also had more situations where, quite frankly, the Raider organization and the Raiderettes narrowly escaped ruined reputations.” It goes on to elaborate: “One such example concerns a player who gave Halloween parties every year and many of the Raiderettes attended. This same player was suspended from the team for drug use but also arrested for date rape. For you on the squad who have attended those parties, just think how narrowly you missed having your photo in all the local papers and/or being assaulted.” And/or. Whatever. *But mostly, think upon how you might have sullied the team’s good name by getting in the papers.* For being raped. Oh and by the way, the definition of date rape is rape. It’s even in the state penal code!


Do you need translation what that bolded part means?


----------



## JCD

Still avoiding the point.


----------



## LongWalk

Who cares that much about the cheerleaders?

Isn't the brain damage that comes from playing football disturbing?


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> It seems to be you who are confused. *"Do not be..." "Do not use..." "Do not consume..." "Always say..." "Always avoid..." "Don't use lufa's or sponges..." "Intimate area's: [sic] Never use a deodorant or chemically enhanced product." "When menstruating, use a product..." "Clean/rinse razor often while shaving."* Those quotes are only a few examples from only one of the teams handbook. Sound like rules to me if they can get benched or even fired if not following them.


Has anyone ever been fired for not cleaning their razor? No. What they MAY get is an infection and nasty looking legs... and THAT may get them benched or fired. You are deluded if you think teams fire cheerleaders for using tampons too large or small. What they may be fired for is missing practice as a result of having fire crotch. I'm sorry you can't tell the difference.

The issue will be litigated soon enough and we'll have a definitive answer.

I have the little ergonomic handbook my company issues here in my desk drawer. It says "Do not slouch." Am I going to get fired for slouching?



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> There is a difference between information and invasion of privacy.


I'm sorry, does the team inspect their vaginas for proper tampon use? Was sex ed in school a violation of your privacy? You should change your underwear every day. -did I just violate your privacy?



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> I don't believe you. You are not qualified to say whether it's legitimate or not. You seem to take this personally and try to use ad hominems to attack me in every post while actually you have no argument on this subject. The question is why are you trying to shut down the discussion about this subject?


I don't care what you believe, and I'm not taking anything personally. Where have I attacked you?



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> It's also funny that when I invalidated your claim that one of the handbooks didn't imply rape victim blaming you ignored that part selectively. Well, it's your lucky day; here it is again in case you missed it:
> Do you need translation what that bolded part means?


I responded to that EXACT sentence. Don't blame me for your comprehension. Go back and look.

I explicitly stated that this in no way implies blaming the victim for rape. It is a cautionary guideline based on past experience: other women HAVE been raped at such events. The statement on sullying the teams reputation is not specific or pertaining to rape/assault. It is advising cheerleaders to be cautious of joining such activities - given past experience. It is a personal injury risk, it is a career risk (having your photo taken at a party where people often get out of control and run afoul of the law - EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT INVOLVED IN IT) - most of these girls have modeling aspirations - and such bad press can ruin a career, and it is a risk to the team's reputation. You completely misconstrue the statement to mean that she causes the team embarrassment by getting raped. Its complete nonsense. The mention of rape is to express the personal risk she is taking. To cause the team embarrassment, she doesn't have to be involved, only present. No matter who is responsible for whatever goes down that makes headlines, it is still an embarrassment to the team that their employees were associated with this reckless party behavior. The same advisement is given to the players. You see the words rape/assault and you become blind to the predominant meaning of the sentence: all kinds of bad things go down at these parties, don't be a part of something that is going to damage the team's reputation. That is the primary message. The rape/assault mention is an addendum to that message, not only does the cheerleader risk the team's image in attending activities where all kinds of bad things are going on - specifically mentioning drug use, but its personally dangerous for her - rape/assault. Your error is in applying the statement about team embarrassment/photo in the paper to the rape/assault. A cheerleader being raped causes no embarrassment to the team unless a player did it. A bunch of cheerleaders present at a party loaded with illegal narcotics and where some guy raped some girl - not even a player or a cheerleader, and everyone raises an eye brow as to what kind of people the team is employing that they'd even be at such a party. Get it now? You're doing the linking. You object to certain guidelines the team issues, are incensed by the compensation dispute, and after that - its digging to find every nugget that you can possibly contort into something offensive.

Its your own colored lenses at fault. No one anywhere is blaming a raped cheerleader for embarrassing the team. Its absurd to me you believe this.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Has anyone ever been fired for not cleaning their razor? No. What they MAY get is an infection and nasty looking legs... and THAT may get them benched or fired. You are deluded if you think teams fire cheerleaders for using tampons too large or small. What they may be fired for is missing practice as a result of having fire crotch. I'm sorry you can't tell the difference.
> 
> The issue will be litigated soon enough and we'll have a definitive answer.
> 
> I have the little ergonomic handbook my company issues here in my desk drawer. It says "Do not slouch." Am I going to get fired for slouching?


You can twist it however you want but it doesn't change the facts. You can get benched or fired for slouching depending on the job. In fact one of the rules in the books was "no slouching breasts." I assume you've already watched the HuffPost video interviewing a couple of the cheerleaders. I really don't know what are you trying to prove to us... There are several lawsuits in process and your rants here don't change that fact.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I'm sorry, does the team inspect their vaginas for proper tampon use? Was sex ed in school a violation of your privacy? You should change your underwear every day. -did I just violate your privacy?


Sex ed is like the name says, education at school. If you were my employer - hell yes you'd have violated my privacy with that statement. It's none of your business as an employer even if I didn't wear underwear at all. BUT that is HIGHLY unlikely you'd ever be in that position to be my employer, no offense.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I don't care what you believe, and I'm not taking anything personally. Where have I attacked you?


If that's so, why do you keep quoting my posts?



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I responded to that EXACT sentence. Don't blame me for your comprehension. Go back and look.
> 
> I explicitly stated that this in no way implies blaming the victim for rape. It is a cautionary guideline based on past experience: other women HAVE been raped at such events. The statement on sullying the teams reputation is not specific or pertaining to rape/assault. It is advising cheerleaders to be cautious of joining such activities - given past experience. It is a personal injury risk, it is a career risk (having your photo taken at a party where people often get out of control and run afoul of the law - EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT INVOLVED IN IT) - most of these girls have modeling aspirations - and such bad press can ruin a career, and it is a risk to the team's reputation. You completely misconstrue the statement to mean that she causes the team embarrassment by getting raped. Its complete nonsense. The mention of rape is to express the personal risk she is taking. To cause the team embarrassment, she doesn't have to be involved, only present. No matter who is responsible for whatever goes down that makes headlines, it is still an embarrassment to the team that their employees were associated with this reckless party behavior. The same advisement is given to the players. You see the words rape/assault and you become blind to the predominant meaning of the sentence: all kinds of bad things go down at these parties, don't be a part of something that is going to damage the team's reputation. That is the primary message. The rape/assault mention is an addendum to that message, not only does the cheerleader risk the team's image in attending activities where all kinds of bad things are going on - specifically mentioning drug use, but its personally dangerous for her - rape/assault. Your error is in applying the statement about team embarrassment/photo in the paper to the rape/assault. A cheerleader being raped causes no embarrassment to the team unless a player did it. A bunch of cheerleaders present at a party loaded with illegal narcotics and where some guy raped some girl - not even a player or a cheerleader, and everyone raises an eye brow as to what kind of people the team is employing that they'd even be at such a party. Get it now? You're doing the linking. You object to certain guidelines the team issues, are incensed by the compensation dispute, and after that - its digging to find every nugget that you can possibly contort into something offensive.
> 
> Its your own colored lenses at fault. No one anywhere is blaming a raped cheerleader for embarrassing the team. Its absurd to me you believe this.


That's EXACTLY what it says: "But mostly, *think upon how you might have sullied the team’s good name by getting in the papers*." That IS blaming the victim. That he/she might have sullied (=ruined) the team's reputation by being a victim of violence. Not the offender who really is to blame for everything.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> You can twist it however you want but it doesn't change the facts. You can get benched or fired for slouching depending on the job. In fact one of the rules in the books was "no slouching breasts." I assume you've already watched the HuffPost video interviewing a couple of the cheerleaders. I really don't know what are you trying to prove to us... There are several lawsuits in process and your rants here don't change that fact.


lol, I'm not twisting anything. If they don't want cheerleaders with slouchy breasts that's their right. They are in fact paying for a look. Pretty sure they don't want fat girls either. That is their right. You think that an employer hiring a person for a job based significantly on her physical traits may not dictate their own standard for those traits? Really??

There are a lot of lawsuits in process - most of them are frivolous. I can sue you for whatever I want... it doesn't mean my case has any merit.







MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> hell yes you'd have violated my privacy with that statement. It's none of your business as an employer even if I didn't wear underwear at all.


Actually, uniform is totally their business, because your appearance is totally their business. Even something as simple as their desire to not see your panty line, or desire to create a skin tight look in booty shorts. The look they seek and what's required to get it are entirely at their discretion.

To violate your privacy, the team would have to know something about you that you want to keep private? Simple logic no? "Use appropriately sized tampons" doesn't reveal anything private about you. Are you embarrassed by the discussion of tampon use? Maybe. Grow up... or better, choose another job if you're uncomfortable with this one. Its not illegal nor an invasion of privacy. If my company wants to pass out rudimentary information on how to put on a condom, more power to them. So what? Its not illegal. Inspecting our ability to put condoms on - illegal. The teams do no such thing.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> If that's so, why do you keep quoting my posts?


Uh... so you know what I'm replying to? Duh? :scratchhead:



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> That's EXACTLY what it says: "But mostly, *think upon how you might have sullied the team’s good name by getting in the papers*." That IS blaming the victim. That he/she might have sullied (=ruined) the team's reputation by being a victim of violence. Not the offender who really is to blame for everything.


Again, you link that sentence exclusively to the rape/assault. The preceding sentence is not focused on rape/assault, it is focused on the cheerleader's presence at an event she knows there is high probability of there being some kind of trouble. Its rule of PR to avoid the appearance of impropriety and guilt by association. This guideline is no more than "Hey, stay away from these seedy parties and avoid seedy people! It looks bad for the team... oh and its dangerous!!" The danger of rape is a secondary persuasive detail, not the focus on the sentence. The primary case is "don't hang out with people causing trouble", the media will judge you and the team by your associations with bad people - its bad for the team, its bad for potential modeling careers. The team simply doesn't care who is responsible for a rape, only that its cheerleaders are careful to avoid dangerous situations where team embarrassments and even rape have occurred.

You read it with a negative slant by your own predisposition. Its amazing how concern for your reputation, her reputation and her safety can be twisted into "she embarrassed the team by being raped". That's an amazing stretch. Do you really, honestly believe that second sentence is referring to the possibility of being raped/assaulted as her causing team embarrassment as opposed to the participation in a seedy party with seedy people where sh*t regularly goes bad? And I thought I was a cynic.

"Mostly, think about the team's reputation" -don't go to sleazy events. Did you think "mostly" was used for no reason? It was used because there's something other than the team's reputation at risk... her rape/assault. Being in bad places is what risks the teams reputation, not her rape.

We don't have to continue. I'll follow the case and gloat later.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> lol, I'm not twisting anything. If they don't want cheerleaders with slouchy breasts that's their right. They are in fact paying for a look. Pretty sure they don't want fat girls either. That is their right. You think that an employer hiring a person for a job based significantly on her physical traits may not *dictate their own standard* for those traits? Really??


Yes, in other words - they are rules they are dictating. Thank you for pointing out yourself what I've been trying to explain to you in several posts now. I'm glad we agree on that. 



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Actually, uniform is totally their business, because your appearance is totally their business. Even something as simple as their desire to not see your panty line, or desire to create a skin tight look in booty shorts. The look they seek and what's required to get it are entirely at their discretion.


So... you wear panties and tampons at work? And require for your employees to wear panties too and show their "pantylines"? What kind of workplace is that? 



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> To violate your privacy, the team would have to know something about you that you want to keep private? Simple logic no? "Use appropriately sized tampons" doesn't reveal anything private about you. Are you embarrassed by the discussion of tampon use? Maybe. Grow up... or better, choose another job if you're uncomfortable with this one. Its not illegal nor an invasion of privacy. If my company wants to pass out rudimentary information on how to put on a condom, more power to them. So what? Its not illegal. Inspecting our ability to put condoms on - illegal. The teams do no such thing.


Yes, it would be VERY embarrassing if my employer talked with me about tampon use. I wouldn't know where to put one... Should I grow up some body part I'm not aware of? Have you done this yourself?



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Uh... so you know what I'm replying to? Duh? :scratchhead:


If you didn't care like you stated you wouldn't even reply.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Again, you link that sentence exclusively to the rape/assault.


This just displays you don't understand the text you've read. Everyone else understands the meaning and its implications if they are not in denial.


----------



## richie33

LongWalk said:


> Who cares that much about the cheerleaders?
> 
> Isn't the brain damage that comes from playing football disturbing?


Poor cheerleaders....they are being exploited. All the while young men are paralyzed for life, massive brain injuries, living the rest of their lives on painkillers. You don't hear one peep about that from the people who think these women are being exploited.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Yes, in other words - they are rules they are dictating. Thank you for pointing out yourself what I've been trying to explain to you in several posts now. I'm glad we agree on that.


The appearance standards ARE rules they are dictating. Where have I said otherwise? They have every right to dictate what look they want. If you agree, what are you complaining here for?



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> So... you wear panties and tampons at work? And require for your employees to wear panties too and show their "pantylines"? What kind of workplace is that?


What?? You don't make any sense. If a team doesn't want cheerleader panty lines to show in their booty short uniforms, yes, they can dictate what sort of underwear to wear, or none at all. The same is true of other entertainment dancers. If a movie includes a sex scene that involves baring an actresses breasts, the studio has every right to demand she bares her breast. If she doesn't want to, she can find other work.

Do you see how irrational your position is?



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> If you didn't care like you stated you wouldn't even reply.


I care about the issue, not about what you think. If these cheerleaders are unhappy, I have an awesome solution for them: finding new employment. The only legal issue here is pay. The employer may dictate whatever appearance standard they want for a position based on physical appeal. They may provide health information left and right - and likely do so because such infections have come up before. In court, a team is going to say "Yes, we provide information on vaginal hygiene, as a result of 10 cheerleaders missing practice or claiming to be unable to perform as a result of infection on this day, that day, this date etc. etc. Here are the records of those absences." They didn't just randomly decide to provide this information.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> This just displays you don't understand the text you've read. Everyone else understands the meaning and its implications if they are not in denial.


I understand it exactly. I'm sorry you don't. Your interpretation takes a cynical leap into the absurd.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> The appearance standards ARE rules they are dictating. Where have I said otherwise? They have every right to dictate what look they want. If you agree, what are you complaining here for?


In case of Jills, the whole thing, named _"NFL Buffalo Jills Cheerleaders Agreement & Codes of Conduct 2013-2014,"_ is one legal document including rules about appearance, behavior, fraternization and hygiene. Failing to follow these rules can result in dismissal which is same as getting fired. You stated they are not rules that can result getting fired. Are you taking your statement back? 



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> What?? You don't make any sense. If a team doesn't want cheerleader panty lines to show in their booty short uniforms, yes, they can't dictate what sort of underwear to wear, or none at all. The same is true of other entertainment dancers. If a movie includes a sex scene that involves baring an actresses breasts, the studio has every right to demand she bares her breast. If she doesn't want to, she can find other work.
> 
> Do you see how irrational your position is?


You stated that my employer would be totally OK to request _"to not see my pantyline"_ or _"to create a skin tight look in booty shorts."_ Then you stated _"Are you embarrassed by the discussion of tampon use? Maybe. Grow up..."_ I'm sorry but that's not OK. Nothing against crossdressers or you if you're into wearing panties at work or talking about tampon use with your boss but sorry, that's really not my thing. It has nothing to do with growing up. 

I have a question for you. How many employers have you had: 1) tell you how to wash your penis, 2) how to shave your genital area, 3) what kind of 'panties' you're wearing, 4) how often you change your 'panties', 5) talk with you about what kind and size of tampons you should use and how often change them?



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I care about the issue, not about what you think. If these cheerleaders are unhappy, I have an awesome solution for them: finding new employment. The only legal issue here is pay. The employer may dictate whatever appearance standard they want for a position based on physical appeal. They may provide health information left and right - and likely do so because such infections have come up before. In court, a team is going to say "Yes, we provide information on vaginal hygiene, as a result of 10 cheerleaders missing practice or claiming to be unable to perform as a result of infection on this day, that day, this date etc. etc. Here are the records of those absences." They didn't just randomly decide to provide this information.


You complaining about it here instead of discussing peacefully isn't going to help anyone. This passive-aggressive hissy-fitting is not productive. Your story about "10 cheerleaders missing practice or claiming to be unable to perform as a result of infection" is fiction you just made up. Besides, did you know women can get infections even if they have perfect hygiene.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I understand it exactly. I'm sorry you don't. Your interpretation takes cynical leap into the absurd.


Most people who read it understand it. I'm sorry you cannot comprehend the paragraph. We just have to agree to disagree.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> In case of Jills, the whole thing, named _"NFL Buffalo Jills Cheerleaders Agreement & Codes of Conduct 2013-2014,"_ is one legal document including rules about appearance, behavior, fraternization and hygiene. Failing to follow these rules can result in dismissal which is same as getting fired. You stated they are not rules that can result getting fired. Are you taking your statement back?


Nope. The specific items pertaining to hygiene are not rules that can result in dismissal. Has anyone ever been fired for improper vag cleaning? No. Does the team perform inspections of said vag? No.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> You stated that my employer would be totally OK to request _"to not see my pantyline"_ or _"to create a skin tight look in booty shorts."_ Then you stated _"Are you embarrassed by the discussion of tampon use? Maybe. Grow up..."_ I'm sorry but that's not OK. Nothing against crossdressers or you if you're into wearing panties at work or talking about tampon use with your boss but sorry, that's really not my thing. It has nothing to do with growing up.


It doesn't matter what your thing is. It only matters what is legal. The teams have a right to dictate standards of appearance, and these girls know it when they take the job. The same applies to a host of dance careers. Let me demonstrate the absurdity to you, since you are clearly not firing on all cylinders: may the owner of a strip club dictate that all the dance girls go topless? Yes indeed. 100% personal. 100% legal by nature of the work.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> I have a question for you. How many employers have you had: 1) tell you how to wash your penis, 2) how to shave your genital area, 3) what kind of 'panties' you're wearing, 4) how often you change your 'panties', 5) talk with you about what kind and size of tampons you should use and how often change them?


I'm male. However, I was in the Marines. They tell you how to dress, how to behave, how and when to wash, what kind of underwear to wear, and how often to change your socks... and a hell of a lot more. Your poor cheerleaders would faint. How do you like my answer?



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> You complaining about it here instead of discussing peacefully isn't going to help anyone. This passive-aggressive hissy-fitting is not productive. Your story about "10 cheerleaders missing practice or claiming to be unable to perform as a result of infection" is fiction you just made up. Besides, did you know women can get infections even if they have perfect hygiene.


I'm whining? Lmao. I didn't start the thread. I'm passive aggressive? My username isn't a shot at whoever MRA boys are. Classic. lol

The story was hypothetical example. Do I have to define the term for you? My example is usually why such instructions make it into such manuals. Yes, women get infections for all kinds of reasons, they get a hell of a lot more for some specific reasons - one of which is using the wrong tampon or using certain chemicals.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Most people who read it understand it. I'm sorry you cannot comprehend the paragraph. We just have to agree to disagree.


You know most people? That's impressive. Its not my comprehension that's in doubt, Lady with a passive-aggressive name. We disagree, but we'll see who comes out on top in this court case.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

LongWalk said:


> Who cares that much about the cheerleaders?
> 
> Isn't the brain damage that comes from playing football disturbing?


Maybe its not as important as the horrible injustice of telling a cheerleader she should wash her sweaty naughty bits after cheer practice, and that its not a good idea to use harsh, scented chemicals? Haha


----------



## LongWalk

I think the statistics that will emerge from degenerative diseases will hurt the NFL. However, they may be able to keep the PR going. College football will have a harder time since they will face lawsuits that question the very ideal of preparing young people for the future.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

The head injury question is a difficult one. On one hand, concussions are just a risk of the sport. The same goes with boxing, or breaking collarbones racing dirt bikes.

They've adjust the rules repeatedly to try and reduce the number of concussions, and I'm not sure it has had much of any effect, besides the players themselves generally being against such rules.

Its a pretty complicated thing when they have a large, immediate cash incentive to fly around and make plays. Its a fast, hard hitting game by nature. People are going to get hurt.

I'm an avid motorcycle racing fan, and every couple years someone dies in the premier class. At the lower classes, death and injury are even more common. These organizations ought to take reasonable safety precautions, but at some point, the person going out there assumes the risk imo.


----------



## CharlieParker

BBC News - The strange demands of life as a cheerleader


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Nope. The specific items pertaining to hygiene are not rules that can result in dismissal. Has anyone ever been fired for improper vag cleaning? No. Does the team perform inspections of said vag? No.


It's an agreement of rules they need to comply.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> It doesn't matter what your thing is. It only matters what is legal. The teams have a right to dictate standards of appearance, and these girls know it when they take the job. The same applies to a host of dance careers.


What right is it that allows them to dictate what tampons to use and how to wash and shave their genitalia?



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Let me demonstrate the absurdity to you, since you are clearly not firing on all cylinders:


This is yet another personal attack from you.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> may the owner of a strip club dictate that all the dance girls go topless? Yes indeed. 100% personal. 100% legal by nature of the work.


Apples and oranges. Nothing to do with the subject of this thread.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I'm male. However, I was in the Marines. They tell you how to dress, how to behave, how and when to wash, what kind of underwear to wear, and how often to change your socks... and a hell of a lot more. Your poor cheerleaders would faint. How do you like my answer?


Apples and oranges again. I don't have cheerleaders employees. Your answer is invalid because you failed to answer to any of the points. Try again.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I'm whining? Lmao. I didn't start the thread. I'm passive aggressive? My username isn't a shot at whoever MRA boys are. Classic. lol


Yes, you are whiny. One could think you have a personal issue with this subject. There is no shots in my username. Don't you like peanuts? Are you allergic?



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> The story was hypothetical example. Do I have to define the term for you? My example is usually why such instructions make it into such manuals. Yes, women get infections for all kinds of reasons, they get a hell of a lot more for some specific reasons - one of which is using the wrong tampon or using certain chemicals.


Hypothetical, like most of your posts in this thread.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> You know most people? That's impressive. Its not my comprehension that's in doubt, Lady with a passive-aggressive name. We disagree, but we'll see who comes out on top in this court case.


I'm an impressive guy. What lady are you talking about? Seems you are confusing posters again... At least you quoted right posts this time.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> It's an agreement of rules they need to comply.


No. It is a handbook - handbooks contain some mandates, some guidelines and some simply helpful information.

They NEED to comply to appearance standards, as this is checked.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> What right is it that allows them to dictate what tampons to use and how to wash and shave their genitalia?


No such dictation is made. It doesn't say, "always use small tampons, we like our girls tight - tampon review will be at 0800 daily", or "you may only use Dove natural soap and make sure you really get into every fold". It says, in order to avoid infection, this is best. It is basic health information particularly important to athletics, where infection is common and hygiene paramount. Have you ever participated in organized athletics? At the very least, you should have gotten instruction on avoiding/eliminating athlete's foot. But I'm going to guess not.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> This is yet another personal attack from you.


Don't give if you're afraid to get.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Apples and oranges. Nothing to do with the subject of this thread.


Its not apples and oranges just because you say so. What's your logic? The principle is identical. If someone hires you to perform to a certain aesthetic, they have a right to dictate that aesthetic, whether it be going topless at a strip club, or not wearing panties, or having to wear thongs under your skin tight booty shorts in order to avoid panty lines and achieve whatever aesthetic the employer wants.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Apples and oranges again. I don't have cheerleaders employees. Your answer is invalid because you failed to answer to any of the points. Try again.


Now you're just being obtuse. I answered every one of your points. You asked for other employment subject to such conditions, and I gave you one. There are many many more.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Yes, you are whiny. One could think you have a personal issue with this subject. There is no shots in my username. Don't you like peanuts? Are you allergic?


You apparently haven't noticed my username. I have no personal issue with the subject, I enjoy debate (DvlsAdvc8... derp). On the issue however, I'm sorry, but you're wrong and the only thing that might hold up in court is the pay issue. The teams can even require ladies to shave their naughty bits for that oh so skin tight look they want - just as show girls, and certainly strippers, are often required to do.

The cheerleaders themselves are irrelevant to me. I say fire the lot of them, save that money and thus sell me stadium beer cheaper. Cheerleaders are pointless. If I want scantily clad women hopping and flipping around, I'll go to a strip club, or ask my gf to dance for me.



MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> I'm an impressive guy. What lady are you talking about? Seems you are confusing posters again... At least you quoted right posts this time.


You're a GUY!? To be honest, your name is even more hilarious to me now. I don't know many guys who concern themselves with the size of peanuts. But to each his own.

And OOOH BURN! Copy-paste error smack! Ouch man. Ouch. lol


----------



## ScarletBegonias

ROFL @ "derp" 

I don't know why it cracks me up whenever someone uses that but it does. 

hmm...correction, it cracks me up except when my 11 yr old says it to me.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> No. It is a handbook - handbooks contain some mandates, some guidelines and some simply helpful information.
> 
> They NEED to comply to appearance standards, as this is checked.
> 
> No such dictation is made. It doesn't say, "always use small tampons, we like our girls tight - tampon review will be at 0800 daily", or "you may only use Dove natural soap and make sure you really get into every fold". It says, in order to avoid infection, this is best. It is basic health information particularly important to athletics, where infection is common and hygiene paramount. Have you ever participated in organized athletics? At the very least, you should have gotten instruction on avoiding/eliminating athlete's foot. But I'm going to guess not.


Now you're just being obtuse again. This is wrong information you have. 



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Its not apples and oranges just because you say so. What's your logic? The principle is identical. If someone hires you to perform to a certain aesthetic, they have a right to dictate that aesthetic, whether it be going topless at a strip club, or not wearing panties, or having to wear thongs under your skin tight booty shorts in order to avoid panty lines and achieve whatever aesthetic the employer wants.


Apples and oranges again.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Now you're just being obtuse. I answered every one of your points. You asked for other employment subject to such conditions, and I gave you one. There are many many more.


LOL at being obtuse. You've heard that A LOT lately, haven't you? LOL!



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> You apparently haven't noticed my username. I have no personal issue with the subject, I enjoy debate (DvlsAdvc8... derp). On the issue however, I'm sorry, but you're wrong and the only thing that might hold up in court is the pay issue. The teams can even require ladies to shave their naughty bits for that oh so skin tight look they want - just as show girls, and certainly strippers, are often required to do.
> 
> You're a GUY!? To be honest, your name is even more hilarious to me now. I don't know many guys who concern themselves with the size of peanuts. But to each his own.


You seem to have issues with women in general. You are all over TAM arguing in numerous threads with the ladies. You are protesting in this thread and started arguing with me because you though I was a woman. Maybe you are projecting past trauma I don't know but it's obvious to everyone.


----------



## Faithful Wife

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> You seem to have issues with women in general. You are all over TAM arguing in numerous threads with the ladies. You are protesting in this thread and started arguing with me because you though I was a woman. Maybe you are projecting past trauma I don't know but it's obvious to everyone.


That's why he's so happy that a new girl is here who is still willing to do this with him.

On and on and on and on.....


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> You seem to have issues with women in general. You are all over TAM arguing in numerous threads with the ladies. You are protesting in this thread and started arguing with me because you though I was a woman. Maybe you are projecting past trauma I don't know but it's obvious to everyone.


I started arguing with you because your case is garbage. I don't care that you're not a woman.

You keep saying apples and oranges, but make no case in support of your claim. Brilliant! If logic truly worked that way you might make more sense.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Faithful Wife said:


> That's why he's so happy that a new girl is here who is still willing to do this with him.
> 
> On and on and on and on.....


Who's the new girl? Funny thing about going on and on... I seem to recall you doing the same with a number of people. More Pot and Kettle from you? What a surprise.

Whether MRA is male or female, his case is still weak. I took interest in the subject because I like football. Fortunately, we'll know for certain after these cases are decided. I hope nobody settles. Better yet, NFL, get rid of cheer leaders entirely.

As the decisions in these cases will prove, the only legitimate damages these women may receive is whether they receive proper compensation for work done - and that's the only change you'll see (in fact, some teams are already changing their pay to hourly as a result of these cases... with no other changes to their handbooks).


----------



## Created2Write

Faithful Wife said:


> That's why he's so happy that a new girl is here who is still willing to do this with him.
> 
> On and on and on and on.....


:rofl:


----------



## Created2Write

roflol!


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I started arguing with you because your case is garbage. I don't care that you're not a woman.
> 
> You keep saying apples and oranges, but make no case in support of your claim. Brilliant! If logic truly worked that way you might make more sense.


You fail to see that I have no case and you are protesting and whining for nothing. It's just a thread discussing about the details of a few lawsuits against the teams. There is no argument for you to "win."

Though, I think with your logical skills you are better suited to hanging upside down on that climbing frame in your selfie than arguing here. Have a nice day.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

Faithful Wife said:


> That's why he's so happy that a new girl is here who is still willing to do this with him.
> 
> On and on and on and on.....


I take that as a compliment since it's from you... I think.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> You fail to see that I have no case and you are protesting and whining for nothing. It's just a thread discussing about the details of a few lawsuits against the teams. There is no argument for you to "win."
> 
> Though, I think with your logical skills you are better suited to hanging upside down on that climbing frame in your selfie than arguing here. Have a nice day.


You argue a lot for there being no argument.

For example, you said:

"Apples and oranges" - an idiom to present a false analogy. This is literally an argumentative position. Strange that you'd use an argumentative position without having an argument.

I think with your logical skills you'd be better suited to measuring peanuts; to wit, a selfie is by definition a picture taken of oneself by oneself which my upside down pic can't be given my hands are both visibly occupied.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> You argue a lot for there being no argument.
> 
> For example, you said:
> 
> "Apples and oranges" - an idiom to present a false analogy. This is literally an argumentative position. Strange that you'd use an argumentative position without having an argument.


Argument does not equal to 'case.' You continue to fail to see it's not my 'case.' I'm just discussing about the news articles and you are apparently trying to shut down the discussion for what ever reason. Just like you were in my rape statistics thread.



DvlsAdvc8 said:


> I think with your logical skills you'd be better suited to measuring peanuts; to wit, a selfie is by definition a picture taken of oneself by oneself which my upside down pic can't be given my hands are both visibly occupied.


Actually I have a digital scale if I need to measure peanuts; far better than trying to use your logic for that.

You're right, perhaps a 'selfie' isn't the best word describing the photo. Perhaps an 'apie' would suit better?


----------



## LongWalk

Do the cheerleaders have to do club approved kegel exercises?


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut said:


> Argument does not equal to 'case.' You continue to fail to see it's not my 'case.' I'm just discussing about the news articles and you are apparently trying to shut down the discussion for what ever reason. Just like you were in my rape statistics thread.


You advanced the argument that these practices are absurd and illegal. I disagreed. You countered by saying,

"cheerleaders are being subjected to humiliating practices like they are told how to *shave their genital area *and *what kind of tampons to use*, *tests how much "jiggle" you are allowed to have *etc. by their EMPLOYER. And after all this *they don't even get paid*. What other civil world job allows this kind off atrocity?"

This is the evidence you provided to make your case. This exceeds discussion of a news article and sets up a debate.

I made a case that these practices were not unusual or illegal... noting strippers, showgirls, the health information provided in equivalent handbooks given to NFL players (which even cover avoiding STDs and gold diggers), and even the Marine Corps telling how to shower and what underwear is allowed.

What you object to, is in fact common place in such entertainment and athletic fields. If you don't like superficial requirements, don't enter a superficial field like cheerleading or being a showgirl. The employer has every right to dictate whatever superficial aesthetic they desire.

Is my disagreeing with you shutting down "discussion"?

Note that I'm not the only one who has argued with you on this thread and others and discerned your motivations. One would have to be a fool to think your purpose is solely discussion of news. Skimming through this thread, apparently few are fooled. 



> What a load of rubbish. Not how they are paid, but how you are characterizing it.
> ...
> But I note you don't take that practice to task. There is no opportunity to sneer at men in it.





> one team has MALE cheerleaders....Oh wait, that might spoil your thread and agenda.





> I've been on TAM long enough to see your agenda in all of your posts MRA, all I have to do is look at your name. Sorry, but if you want to have respectful, open minded discussions about topics, it's generally not good to walk into the room with a name tag that antagonizes and insults


You're quite an unusual "fella", but don't pretend you're just here to discuss the news.


----------



## MRABoysHaveSmallPeanut

LongWalk said:


> Do the cheerleaders have to do club approved kegel exercises?


Wouldn't that be sexist towards the male cheerleaders though... How do you suppose they would complete that task? "Put it in the rear and get over with it"? 

Also, what do you think are the rules for the male cheerleaders about "pantylines" and "skin tight look" mentioned in this thread?


----------



## Faithful Wife

There are kegels for men, the male cheerleaders can do them, too.


----------



## LongWalk

Faithful Wife banned?


----------



## committed4ever

LongWalk said:


> Faithful Wife banned?


Why? I don't see any posts that were offensive or against forum rules?


----------



## Created2Write

Me neither.


----------



## Dredd

committed4ever said:


> Why? I don't see any posts that were offensive or against forum rules?


Any posts, if they existed, where probably deleted my moderators. But I am as equally surprised.

Someone should make a Faithful Wife banned thread


----------



## committed4ever

Dredd said:


> Any posts, if they existed, where probably deleted my moderators. But I am as equally surprised.
> 
> Someone should make a Faithful Wife banned thread


Let's see if she comes back first. I wouldn't be surprised if she asked to be banned. I know she was getting frustrated with the constant male/female banter fighting back and forth. Come back FW!!!!!!!


----------



## Dredd

committed4ever said:


> Let's see if she comes back first. I wouldn't be surprised if she asked to be banned. I know she was getting frustrated with the constant male/female banter fighting back and forth. Come back FW!!!!!!!


Yeah, you guys really need to stop feeding the trolls  You can't fix stupid.


----------



## Happilymarried25

I have no interest in football but my husband LOVES it, loves watching it and loves talking about it all year round. When he talks to me about it I listen, I comment and I may ask a question or two. Do I care when he is talking about? No but I enjoy talking to my husband and if that's what he wants to talk about then that's what I will talk to him about.


----------



## ReformedHubby

This is a dead thread but I experienced something today that made me think of it. Initially I didn't have thoughts on this thread one way or the other. After my experience today that has changed. I am thinking about getting a corporate box for NFL games. Today I went on a tour. 

One part of the sales pitch was a bit creepy. Apparently one of the perks is that I get to help judge cheerleader tryouts. Also I get to handpick one of the cheerleaders of my choosing to drop by my area once a game. The last part made my jaw drop. If I want to pay for it I can go with the cheerleaders on a trip during the off season (think tropical country). I asked the salesman if anything ever happens, he smiled and said "sometimes". He showed me pics of much older men with their arms around the girls.

Knowing this has changed my frame of thought a bit. Sure they sign up for cheering, but the other stuff seems a bit much. I found the whole premise offensive.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

ReformedHubby said:


> I asked the salesman if anything ever happens, he smiled and said "sometimes". He showed me pics of much older men with their arms around the girls.


I agree, that's creepy. Even if the girls themselves took it on themselves for "something" to happen, its quite creepy of the salesman to say it. Picking is certainly a little weird.

The rest is par for the course for this sort of hospitality though, not just the NFL. Umbrella girls at motorcycle races for example, are literally paid to walk around smiling and waving at guys, and letting guys get a picture with them. I dated a girl who did this as a fun part-time gig in AMA racing. She had paid travel around the country, and soaked up all the attention.

If you object to it though, you don't have to take the job right? Neither of these is an actual support yourself career.


----------



## LongWalk

ReformedHubby said:


> This is a dead thread but I experienced something today that made me think of it. Initially I didn't have thoughts on this thread one way or the other. After my experience today that has changed. I am thinking about getting a corporate box for NFL games. Today I went on a tour.
> 
> One part of the sales pitch was a bit creepy. Apparently one of the perks is that I get to help judge cheerleader tryouts. Also I get to handpick one of the cheerleaders of my choosing to drop by my area once a game. The last part made my jaw drop. If I want to pay for it I can go with the cheerleaders on a trip during the off season (think tropical country). I asked the salesman if anything ever happens, he smiled and said "sometimes". He showed me pics of much older men with their arms around the girls.
> 
> Knowing this has changed my frame of thought a bit. Sure they sign up for cheering, but the other stuff seems a bit much. I found the whole premise offensive.


:lol:Some older men are hot and some cheerleaders have daddy issues.


----------



## Created2Write

ReformedHubby said:


> This is a dead thread but I experienced something today that made me think of it. Initially I didn't have thoughts on this thread one way or the other. After my experience today that has changed. I am thinking about getting a corporate box for NFL games. Today I went on a tour.
> 
> One part of the sales pitch was a bit creepy. Apparently one of the perks is that I get to help judge cheerleader tryouts. Also I get to handpick one of the cheerleaders of my choosing to drop by my area once a game. The last part made my jaw drop. If I want to pay for it I can go with the cheerleaders on a trip during the off season (think tropical country). I asked the salesman if anything ever happens, he smiled and said "sometimes". He showed me pics of much older men with their arms around the girls.
> 
> Knowing this has changed my frame of thought a bit. Sure they sign up for cheering, but the other stuff seems a bit much. I found the whole premise offensive.


Ewww. Very creepy.


----------



## ReformedHubby

LongWalk said:


> :lol:Some older men are hot and some cheerleaders have daddy issues.


I'm usually the first guy to joke around on TAM but I can't get there on this one. I guess you had to be there and see the pics for yourself. Body language is something that is apparent in photographs (at least to me). None of these ladies seemed all that into it. I also don't get why they are forbidden to date players yet trotted out like a buffet dish for corporate box owners:scratchhead:?

The whole creepy portion of the sales pitch made zero sense to me. For starters I will be entertaining female execs and female clients, not just men. It made me wonder if there was something about me that made him think I would be excited about the "opportunity". It made me feel cheap and I'm not even one of the cheerleaders. If this is one of the "perks" of so called success I ain't interested.


----------

