I would just like to clarify where I stand on this.
Hooters is not to my taste. I probably wouldn?t go there and I wouldn?t take children to one. I do not think the OP is unreasonable to think Hooters is ?sad? or ?wrong? as she is entitled to have that opinion. However, it is only that ? her opinion and other are equally entitled to disagree with that opinion.
What I object to on this thread is the idea that a woman?s right to make her own choices should be compromised when those choices do not adhere to views of posters. I find that particularly difficult to swallow when it is wrapped up and presented to me as ?feminism? by other women.
To me, feminism is the belief that women should have equal right - socially, politically, financially, culturally and should be able to make their own free choices within the law. I think most people would agree with those principles.
However, principles are easy to have. I believe in Freedom of Speech. That is easy to say. It is harder to hold fast to that principle when you hear airtime being given to people whose views you diametrically oppose. I intensely dislike the views of the BNP, and I find it uncomfortable hearing their views aired. And yet they MUST retain the right to air those view whether I agree with them or not if the principle of free speech is to be upheld.
Likewise ? I believe if you believe that a woman should have equality and freedom, you must uphold her right to that, even when her actions or the choices she make are not choices or actions you approve. For some, a woman choosing to use her body or sexuality to make money is a choice they find abhorrent. You are entitled to that view, but you must still uphold her right to make that choice.
What happens however, is those that do not approve of this choice tend to claim that the woman is NOT making a choice but is being coerced or exploited. There are clear and terrible example of the exploitation of women in society and it is right to oppose these. However, working at Hooters is not such an example. Women chose to work there. Women are free to leave that employment at any time. This isn?t exploitation. It may be tacky, it may not to be to every ones taste and yes the sex appeal of the waitresses is the main selling point. But without force, deception or coercion it is NOT exploitation.
Bimbo and others have said that in an ideal they would like to see Hooters closed down because it sexualises women. Fine. Of course they have the right to that preference. But they do not have the right to make that choice.
If Hooters was banned because it sexualises women, where we do go from there? Do we say ?Well, Hooters has gone ? that?s the sexualisation of women ended?? Of course not.
So we either accept that banning Hooters was a rather futile excerise, but hey ho ? or we carry on. We ban make up as it sexualises women, We ban short skirts as they sexualise women. We ban high heels. We impose a code of dress for women. We ban careers where women can use their sex appeal for commercial gain. We look at other careers that sexualise women ? fashion model, make up counter, etc etc. And where are we then? Not looking at much freedom or choice or equality. (I am assuming at no point have we bothered with a dress code for men or worried about their sexualisation ? only womens).
If we want women to have choice and equality we have to accept that some women will make choices we don?t agree with. Just like if we want freedom of speech we will have to hear views we don?t like.
There has been a lot of judging of women?s choices on this thread, there have been a lot of examples of people seeking to invalidated women?s choices suggesting they could not possibly have made the freely ? simply because the poster does not agree with them. This is insulting to women and promotes the idea women are easily coerced and do not know their own minds. That to me is not a good message and not one that ?feminism? should be trying to communicate.
I for one do not see how women are better off if they are forced or expected to adhere to a code of conduct and way of behaving, whether that code is determined and enforced by men ? or by other women. In fact I think it is worse when we do it to ourselves.
No one has to like Hooters. The OP is entitled to think it is sad and wrong. But if you really support freedom, equality and choice you cannot revoke those privileges when you disagree with the choices women make. Nor an you seek to simply invalidate them. Closing Hooters removes a woman?s choice to work there and enforces your own standards of conduct.
Opposing a womans right to use her sexuality for her own gain isn?t allowing her freedom or equality. Opposing a womens right to use her own body in whatever she wishes is not freedom, Wishing to control how a woman dresses, whether for work or not is not freedom. These are merely new forms of oppression that suit a particular viewpoint and opinion.
People can have any opinion they want. But people should not seek to limit and devalue the choices women make, especially when they call themselves feminists.