3 ms·

Another way to look at it is the players are worth far more to the team than the cheerleaders. Given the choice between telling TO he has to leave a restaurant,

by coolso 9y ago

Another way to look at it is the players are worth far more to the team than the cheerleaders. Given the choice between telling TO he has to leave a restaurant, and telling a cheerleader, which do you choose? Similarly, given the choice between telling Gal Gadot she has to leave a restaurant, and telling a male extra from the set of Wonder Woman, which do you choose?

jacquesm 9y ago
That makes no sense. Someone in the middle of the meal obviously gets to finish their meal no matter who walks in the door. That's besides the point of asking anybody to leave which is ridiculous in the first place. People should be able to eat in the same restaurant without busybodies micro managing their lives.
- coolso 9y ago
  So as a team owner you'd be fine with the idea of players and cheerleaders co-mingling all the time? You don't think that's an unprofessional look? The team and league can't win. Let them co-mingle, then there's the potential for drama surrounding the team because of the stories that get out about the players and cheerleaders screwing around. Or even if they don't screw around, it still looks like they are, which can be just as bad. The "F" in "NFL" already has been replaced with a few different words, disparaging the league and making it look bad. If that were to happen we'd have yet another "F" that would start being used. So you get half of America disliking all the sex drama and who just wants to watch football, and the other half disliking the fact that players are "taking advantage" of cheerleaders and the team is "allowing" it. Punish players that exploit or take advantage of cheerleaders, and now you have to deal with punishing a valuable part of the team who you pay millions of dollars to (because it's hard to find good players), when you could have avoided it by forbidding the co-mingling in the first place. The easiest option is just don't allow the co-mingling. Is it really that big of a deal for a person to have to leave a restaurant and eat somewhere else? It's part of the job. A job that thousands of other women would love to have thanks to the exposure and how good it looks on your resume.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    > So as a team owner you'd be fine with the idea of players and cheerleaders co-mingling all the time? I'm not a team owner, I'm a human being looking at this the way I would look at other professions. When the clock stops your time is yours and you get to eat (and do whatever else you want to) wherever you want. > You don't think that's an unprofessional look? Men and women having food in the same place? No, I'm totally ok with that. Doesn't strike me as unprofessional, but it does strike me as practical. > Is it really that big of a deal for a person to have to leave a restaurant and eat somewhere else? Obviously, yes. Because you know, you got there first. NFL players are not minor royalty. I once was in a place in Toronto and the artist formerly known as 'Prince' aka the Symbol aka whatever his real name was walks in and asks the manager to remove the plebs. Instead the manager told 'the celebrity' to fuck off. To mild applause. > It's part of the job. No it isn't. The job is to cheerlead, not to 'restaurant evacuate'. Hence the job title of 'cheerleader'. > A job that thousands of other women would love to have thanks to the exposure and how good it looks on your resume. I have absolutely no idea why cheerleading is a job anybody would like to have or why it would look good on your resume.
    - coolso 9y ago
      > I'm not a team owner, I'm a human being looking at this the way I would look at other professions. When the clock stops your time is yours and you get to eat (and do whatever else you want to) wherever you want. Most other professions don't involve being in the public eye all of the time. > No it isn't. The job is to cheerlead, not to 'restaurant evacuate'. It is if that's in the contract you sign. I highly doubt it's a common occurrence anyway. > I once was in a place in Toronto and the artist formerly known as 'Prince' aka the Symbol aka whatever his real name was and asks the manager to remove the plebs. Instead the manager told 'the celebrity' to fuck off. To mild applause. As the manager should've - but that's not an analogous situation. > I have absolutely no idea why cheerleading is a job anybody would like to have or why it would look good on your resume. It puts you in front of millions of people on national TV as well as other outlets. Being one of the select few - among thousands and thousands - that gets hired by an NFL team to cheerlead looks great on your resume if you have any desire to be a model, dancer, or involved in the entertainment industry. It gets you tons of exposure. Plus, maybe it's fun?
hmahncke 9y ago
None of the above?
mcphage 9y ago
> Similarly, given the choice between telling Gal Gadot she has to leave a restaurant, and telling a male extra from the set of Wonder Woman, which do you choose? Both of those options are asinine. The right answer is the obvious one: neither.

by coolso 9y ago

jacquesm 9y ago

That makes no sense. Someone in the middle of the meal obviously gets to finish their meal no matter who walks in the door. That's besides the point of asking anybody to leave which is ridiculous in the first place. People should be able to eat in the same restaurant without busybodies micro managing their lives.

coolso 9y ago
So as a team owner you'd be fine with the idea of players and cheerleaders co-mingling all the time? You don't think that's an unprofessional look? The team and league can't win. Let them co-mingle, then there's the potential for drama surrounding the team because of the stories that get out about the players and cheerleaders screwing around. Or even if they don't screw around, it still looks like they are, which can be just as bad. The "F" in "NFL" already has been replaced with a few different words, disparaging the league and making it look bad. If that were to happen we'd have yet another "F" that would start being used. So you get half of America disliking all the sex drama and who just wants to watch football, and the other half disliking the fact that players are "taking advantage" of cheerleaders and the team is "allowing" it. Punish players that exploit or take advantage of cheerleaders, and now you have to deal with punishing a valuable part of the team who you pay millions of dollars to (because it's hard to find good players), when you could have avoided it by forbidding the co-mingling in the first place. The easiest option is just don't allow the co-mingling. Is it really that big of a deal for a person to have to leave a restaurant and eat somewhere else? It's part of the job. A job that thousands of other women would love to have thanks to the exposure and how good it looks on your resume.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  > So as a team owner you'd be fine with the idea of players and cheerleaders co-mingling all the time? I'm not a team owner, I'm a human being looking at this the way I would look at other professions. When the clock stops your time is yours and you get to eat (and do whatever else you want to) wherever you want. > You don't think that's an unprofessional look? Men and women having food in the same place? No, I'm totally ok with that. Doesn't strike me as unprofessional, but it does strike me as practical. > Is it really that big of a deal for a person to have to leave a restaurant and eat somewhere else? Obviously, yes. Because you know, you got there first. NFL players are not minor royalty. I once was in a place in Toronto and the artist formerly known as 'Prince' aka the Symbol aka whatever his real name was walks in and asks the manager to remove the plebs. Instead the manager told 'the celebrity' to fuck off. To mild applause. > It's part of the job. No it isn't. The job is to cheerlead, not to 'restaurant evacuate'. Hence the job title of 'cheerleader'. > A job that thousands of other women would love to have thanks to the exposure and how good it looks on your resume. I have absolutely no idea why cheerleading is a job anybody would like to have or why it would look good on your resume.
  - coolso 9y ago
    > I'm not a team owner, I'm a human being looking at this the way I would look at other professions. When the clock stops your time is yours and you get to eat (and do whatever else you want to) wherever you want. Most other professions don't involve being in the public eye all of the time. > No it isn't. The job is to cheerlead, not to 'restaurant evacuate'. It is if that's in the contract you sign. I highly doubt it's a common occurrence anyway. > I once was in a place in Toronto and the artist formerly known as 'Prince' aka the Symbol aka whatever his real name was and asks the manager to remove the plebs. Instead the manager told 'the celebrity' to fuck off. To mild applause. As the manager should've - but that's not an analogous situation. > I have absolutely no idea why cheerleading is a job anybody would like to have or why it would look good on your resume. It puts you in front of millions of people on national TV as well as other outlets. Being one of the select few - among thousands and thousands - that gets hired by an NFL team to cheerlead looks great on your resume if you have any desire to be a model, dancer, or involved in the entertainment industry. It gets you tons of exposure. Plus, maybe it's fun?

hmahncke 9y ago

None of the above?

mcphage 9y ago

> Similarly, given the choice between telling Gal Gadot she has to leave a restaurant, and telling a male extra from the set of Wonder Woman, which do you choose? Both of those options are asinine. The right answer is the obvious one: neither.