What's the difference between a Hooters and a Playboy Club? (And porn, and prostitution?)

[Sparkly]

One is considered a family restaurant, and the other is considered a nightclub for adults.

But when you get right down to the branding, the logos, the image, the commercial identity, both use the same "hook" -- women's bodies, as entertainment and as a brand.

Some want to claim that both are really about the menus -- "great wings!" -- and that the commercial use of women's bodies has absolutely *nothing* to do with it. It's just about food. You can't get food anything like what's served at Hooter's and Playboy Clubs ANYwhere else -- it's rare cuisine!

Some have pointed out that you can see the same body parts at the beach, the pool, the gym, etc. (in arguing that Hooters is a fine family place). That's right, you can! That shows that it isn't about "seeing body parts" alone. After all, you don't see much more at a Playboy Club than you do at a Hooter's. So it isn't about what's worn, it's about the context.

How are the contexts different? In my view, they aren't. If anything, I think Hooters is a more obnoxious chain for its "mainstream, family, healthy and wholesome" guise. I don't think it could have existed a few decades ago, which goes to show the effectiveness of the backlash against the women's movement; and I hope it goes the way of Little Black Sambo's restaurants in my lifetime, but I'm not encouraged.

To pre-empt the usual arguments: Do both chains have a right to exist? Of course. Should the government shut them down? Of course not. Am I a "jealous prude hostile to sexuality etc. etc.?" Far from it. What I wish is that the culture would become enlightened enough to make places like Hooters first, and Playboy Clubs second, irrelevant and reviled, as happened to Sambo's.

With Sambo's, the confederate flag, and the civil rights movement in general, there have been many claims (continuing even now) that opponents were just "over-reacting," that it's not actually "offensive" if that isn't the intent, that people who take offense have personal problems, etc. Similarly with women's issues -- it's "poutrage," it's being uptight, and if *I* am not personally offended by it, nobody else should be -- so "lighten up."

Well, just as white people don't know what the black experience is, and need to listen in order to learn, so men don't know what women's experience is, and need to listen to learn. (NB: There are many enlightened men, and many unenlightened women.)

Some want to make the debate about criticism of the women who work at these places, but they aren't the point, and I don't criticize them. That is how this relates to porn and prostitution. Individual women have the choice to do what they want within the culture as it is -- I would never deny them that. But consciousness about the culture, as it is, is important to the equation, and a big step in evolving beyond it.

Porn, like Hooter's and Playboy Clubs, commercializes women's bodies, BUT it is largely (not entirely) hidden -- the cultural message is that it's private ("adult").

Prostitution, in my view, is completely different from these enterprises. In prostitution, individual adult women could have the potential to be their own enterprises, to control their choices independently --in private contracts between consenting adults -- with no mass exploitation or commercial messaging. Yet THAT is illegal.

So back to my question: What is the difference between a Hooters and a Playboy Club?

[Ken Burch]

1. UH...Playboy Clubs don't serve wings?

n/t.

[Sparkly]

2. OH -- I forgot that in my OP!!

It's all about the food.... I'll edit.

[Ken Burch]

56. And from what I've heard, the wings aren't that great

"Reno 911!" had an episode in which the sheriff's department was sponsored by a "Hooters"-like wings-n-boobs franchise, with unpleasant consequences for the deputies(they were contractually required to eat the wings every day, with disgusting digestive effects for all).

[Sparkly]

62. Hah!!

"Wings-n-boobs" -- I could see that as a Reno episode!!

But I've heard it's ALLL about the wings, really -- not the boobs at all. People don't care about boobs, ya know. We're so so very healthy about boobs. It's just a family establishment, nothing to do with boobs -- who said anything about boobs?!

I'm sure the deputies just got a bad batch. Of wings, I mean.

[walldude]

171. They used to be good...

Got some not too long ago... terrible.

[cherokeeprogressive]

155. Wanna bet?

[Kaleva]

3. Hooters is a family restaurant?

[Sparkly]

5. So I've been told. nt

[Major Hogwash]

4. I can eat lunch at one . .

And eat a hamburger at the other one.

[Sparkly]

7. Huh?

:shrug:

[EV_Ares]

6. Playboy Clubs have professional entertainment, comedy, best of jazz,

they also had or have great food and service.

[Sparkly]

8. So do other places -- just as places other than Hooters serve burgers and wings.

What's the difference in terms of branding, image, commercial identity, etc., between Playboy Clubs and Hooters?

[EV_Ares]

224. Well, never really understood the poster's purpose. No comparison actually, my point

was that Playboy was its own worst enemy. Because of the stance they took on censorship, nudity, sex, they opened up all of us to those things and their progressive views moved us forward in many ways. Their mag never lowered itself to the levels of the other mags that came out but they always kept their class with good political discussions, interviews etc. Their clubs were also of good standards but as we progressed, they were not much more than a lot of other clubs that came on the scene and even the ones that were just for sex. As the poster stated Las Vegas now has the one in the Palms which is one of the hot spots right now in Vegas.

Playboy broke the ice on a lot of things.

[EV_Ares]

233. History of The Playboy Club

History
The first Playboy Club opened in Chicago in 1960. The last American location was Lansing, Michigan located in the Hilton Hotel. It closed in 1988. International Clubs existed until the 1991 closing of the Manila, Philippines located in he Silihas International Hotel. Manila was the only Club ever to be featured in Architectural Digest. During the last three months of 1961, more than 132,000 people visited the Chicago club, making it the busiest night club in the world.

Playboy Club membership became a status symbol. Only 21% of all key holders ever went to a club. At $25.00 per membership, Playboy earned $25 million for every 1,000,000 members. This revenue stream was critical to the development of the Playboy empire.

In 1965 Hugh Hefner sent Victor Lownes to London to open Playboy's British casinos, following legalization of gambling in the United Kingdom. Gaming income from these casinos enabled Playboy to continue throwing money at financially disastrous clubs, theaters, resorts, record companies and film investments. The magazine's income was modest compared to that from these casinos. In 1981 the casino at 45 Park Lane was the most profitable casino in the world and the British casinos contributed $32 million to the corporation. Playboy showed a total profit of $31 million that year, meaning the rest of the empire made a net loss of $1 million. However, in that year Victor Lownes was fired, and gambling licenses were not renewed, thereby cutting off Playboy's biggest source of income and creating a financial crisis that would only be solved by enormous changes within the empire.

The Playboy Club in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin had a ski slope and was one of the first to install a chair lift.

Playboy recently opened a new Playboy Club in Las Vegas, Nevada. The new club at The Palms, with its very noticeable neon bunny head, has casinos, bars, and a restroom with pictures of Playmates on the walls.

Famous acts
Famous entertainers who performed at the clubs include:

Steve Allen
Milton Berle
Sid Caesar
George Carlin
The Clancy Brothers & Tommy Makem
Ray Charles
Bill Cosby
The Count Basie Orchestra
Dick Gregory
Dizzy Gillespie
Bob Hope
Peggy Lee
Jay Leno
Ann-Margret
Steve Martin
Bette Midler
Ginger Rogers
Mike Ryan
The Smothers Brothers
Mel Tormé
Muddy Waters

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playboy_Club

[Ken Burch]

Almost all the Playboy Clubs have closed.

There's only one left, and it's in Las Vegas.

The clubs reflected an late Fifties/early Sixties notion of sexuality that doesn't really exist anywhere anymore.

And Dean Martin is dead.

[A HERETIC I AM]

59. There is only ONE Playboy club.

The chain closed its last American lounge in 1988 (Lansing, Mi.) and its last international installation (Manila, Philippines) in 1991.

There is only one operating now and it is at the Palms Resort and Casino in Las Vegas and has been open just over a year.

Which means that there were no Playboy Clubs for about 18 years.

[Ken Burch]

61. As Pete Seeger might put it, if he was forced to do so:

"Where have all the 'keyholders' gone, long time passing?"

[readmoreoften]

9. Or advertising!

:crazy:

[Sparkly]

10. Oh absolutely. nt

[Myhrejl]

11. This is related to the new article in which a woman was fired

for taking her class to hooters. It's dumb because sexuality is so prevalent in our society, hooters is just an expression of it. I don't think it's bad for men to like to see hotties when then eat and drink, and I don't have a problem with them going to that sort of establishment. I honestly don't think there are very many societal contexts where women expressing their sexuality is bad. I can agree that women below their mid to upper teens shouldn't be placed in a sexually provocative roll but it's gray as to how much and what age. I'm sorry if I didn't answer your question, but I can't be outraged at the teacher. I am inclined to think the school admin over reacted.

To your credit I don't know at what age I would feel comfortable explaining to a female child about these aspects of society, but to say that they shouldn't be acknowledged by high school age seems ridiculous to me.

[Sparkly]

12. That sparked it.

"Sexuality is prevalent" -- this is not about "sexuality." This is about objectifying and commercializing parts of women's bodies as commodities. Hopefully you see the difference there.

[denem]

13. In the US Everything is commercialized. Forget Hooters

how about the billions spent on ads to make women hate their own bodies, and the oh so tastefull ads for 'femine hygine' products. To sell a diet pill, a gym, a whatever, it doesn't work unless you hate your body. That inflicts misery across the entire population. Hooters is in a drop in the ocean of commercialized mysogony. No market, including sexualized children, is left untoched by profit.

[Sparkly]

15. It's different.

Trust me -- it is.

It's one thing to grow up with the anxiety that you aren't big enough here, small enough there, you're too quiet, you're too loud, things you don't even know about yourself are acutely noticed and judged by other people (looks, smells, etc.).

It is far worse to see institutionalized acceptance of YOUR body parts for men's amusement. That is a completely different dimension, at least for many of us.

[dusmcj]

14. insofar as they maneuver the public into getting over itself re: sex

which would seem to jive with your goal "that the culture would become enlightened enough to make places like Hooters first, and Playboy Clubs second, irrelevant and reviled" (i.e. that freely available coochie - and dick - don't require an economic arrangement) they both serve a useful purpose.

Fuck freely and joyfully!

[Sparkly]

16. Wrong.

The messages of such places do NOT lead to sexual freedom for women.

If things were really balanced, healthy, accepting, equal, etc., there'd be no market for their commercialization and no tolerance for offensive enterprises.

"Fuck freely and joyfully" -- no problem with that. These establishments are hardly progressive, and don't lead us toward enlightenment.

[dusmcj]

66. I suggest the delivered message may be different than the intended message

I propose that the intended message is "see son, if you play along, you could be able to afford a fine piece of ass like this".

I propose that the delivered message, as delivered by the women themselves is "observe me, I'm attractive in a very basic way, comfortable and unconstrained with my sexuality, including in the presence of you and others, ready to interact pleasantly with you but with an understanding that any more extended interaction is personal between you and me rather than required based on economics; and we can both have a pleasant time together at whatever level of interaction we reach".

A suggested interpretation

[undeterred]

17. A lot of restaurants use attractive young women

to serve food and drinks. When I was a waitress in college I was aware of one steak house where the interview to be a waitress consisted of walking around in a short skirt in front of the manager.

[Sparkly]

18. Yeah, and?

:shrug:

[undeterred]

26. I worked at the steak house that was down the road

and wore the cowgirl dress instead. Waitressing is hard work.

[Sparkly]

31. "Waitressing is hard work"

Been there, I know.

[Sparkly]

19. Hey, unrec'ers -- answer the question! What's the difference?

Why do you think it's okay for teenagers to be taken to one, but not the other?

[TexasObserver]

68. What's the difference between you and the preacher in FOOTLOOSE?

Or the Church Lady?

Or Cotton Mather?

[Sparkly]

77. Are you kidding me?!?!?

What's the difference between you and a head of lettuce?!? GEEZ.

[TexasObserver]

87. Yeah, but this one's eating my popcorn.

That's when I'm joking.

I thought your OP was some kind of parody written in the Onion, but no, it's for real.

[Sparkly]

91. Yeah, it's very real.

Serious as a heart attack, too.

[TexasObserver]

96. It's real, alright. Real sad you can't let others live their lives peaceably.

I wouldn't be caught dead in a Playboy Club or a Hooters, but then, I wouldn't be caught dead in a Neiman Marcus or a Catholic church either. The fact that there are things I wouldn't do or don't approve of doesn't require me to oppose their existence.

You don't like the fact that people are free to use their bodies as they see fit.

[Sparkly]

99. "You don't like the fact that people are free to use their bodies as they see fit."

If you think that, you didn't read my OP.

[timtom]

143. Sparkly was addressing an issue beyond

mere moralization. She was addressing an example of regarding all things as commodities, thereby cheapening the value. You have a sort of funny-book view of the world -- Archie and Jughead, for example.

[TexasObserver]

148. That's what the prudish always claim.

Same as it ever was.

Sex is used to sell stuff. Wow. Profound.

We have a free society that accepts such use of sex to sell things. Those who want to participate can, and those that don't can refuse to do so. The problem is the prudish don't want others to do what they wouldn't do.

[Sparkly]

151. Oh, here we go again -- "prudish!"

So old. Tell it to Archie Bunker, for God's sake.

Girls don't choose to "participate" in seeing a "Hooters" icon in a strip mall showing a part of their body as a logo, slogan, commercial identity.

"Prudish," my ass. Sex and Hooter are NOT synonymous. :eyes:

[timtom]

159. So you perceive her thesis to be that she doesn't want others

to engage in this garden of earthly delights?

I saw it more as a comparison and contrast piece.

"Prostitution, in my view, is completely different from these enterprises. In prostitution, individual adult women could have the potential to be their own enterprises, to control their choices independently --in private contracts between consenting adults -- with no mass exploitation or commercial messaging. Yet THAT is illegal."

Do you see the point she was trying to make?

[MilesColtrane]

162. "all things as commodities"

That's capitalism for you.

If you are a blue collar worker of any kind, your body is a commodity.

Your and my intrinsic value is only the amount of money we can generate for someone else in this economic system.

[Sparkly]

170. Right, but that's about individual workers. I'm talking about something much more pervasive.

This is the thing most men don't seem to understand.

When a girl or woman sees her body parts objectified as commercial property, we relate to the fact that WE have those same body parts. That's US up there, in the Hooters logo. That's MY body part that's being made fun of, taken lightly, criticized or ridiculed or serving as a slogan.

And don't make it all about Hooters -- this is one instance I'm focused on to explore one particular point.

Sharon Stone was made fun of, even by Keith Olbermann I'm sad to say, for a sequel to "Basic Instinct" in her 40s. "Don't show us THAT now!!" basically, har har har like that gorgeous woman is so far gone her vagina is disgusting. What does that say to the rest of women everywhere?

The point is, in owning the very same parts that are bandied about as separate objects, we are all affected in some way. And there is a difference between appreciating them, respecting them, admiring them, and even loving them, vs. treating them as objects, commodities, logos, slogans, and those stupid flaps on the backs of trucks, for instance.

Can you understand that?

[timtom]

173. Only insofar as we allow ourselves to permit the "bottom line"

to be the bottom line. There are many who do things for love, not money.

[Name removed]

226. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

227. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

228. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cherokeeprogressive]

156. I don't think MINORS are welcome at the Playboy Club. That's just for starters...

[Sparkly]

157. Right, and why not?

Why is that "adult," and Hooter is a "family restaurant?"

[cherokeeprogressive]

166. I don't care what you think about one or the other. One no longer exists and the other is built

around the consumption of alcohol.

DO NOT TAKE MY CHILD TO A PLACE WHERE ALCOHOL IS THE FOCUS OF THE EXPERIENCE.

Hooters offers more brands of beer than they do appetizers and entrees combined. Do you grok that?

[Kablooie]

163. It's obvious. You need a key to get into the Playboy club. You don't for Hooters.

or should I say 'needed'.
I don't think there are any Playboy clubs around anymore.

-- Though a golf club that an angry wife uses on her playboy husband might be called a playboy club.

[Sparkly]

185. But why?

[Kablooie]

190. When you joined the Playboy club and they gave you a key that was your pass to get in.

My Parents were members.

[Sparkly]

194. But why do they require a key, while anybody can walk into Hooters? nt

[Kablooie]

208. The Playboy club was membership only. Hooters ain't.

Though I expect the manager of each Hooters needs a key first thing in the morning.

[Turbineguy]

20. The Rule is

Baptists do not recognize each other in either venue.

[Fumesucker]

22. Ding Ding Ding.. We have a winnah!! n/t

[Sparkly]

23. Yes, that's how they're the same.

Which is my point.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

21. Isn't it/Hooters a byproduct of the women's movement?

Sometimes byproducts are sullied.

[Sparkly]

24. Huh?

In a word, no.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

40. So everything that comes from the women's movement is...

...inherently good? Anything that ruffles your feathers couldn't possibly be some of the rocks that come with the farm?

[Sparkly]

43. Huh?

I still don't know what your point is.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

55. Basically, I'm challenging your premise

I don't think it could have existed a few decades ago, which goes to show the effectiveness of the backlash against the women's movement

I agree that it couldn't have happened prior to the women's movement. But I hardly think it's the result of a blacklash against the movement. I think you're having trouble because you don't agree with the way others express their empowerment.

[Sparkly]

57. Huh?

"the way others express their empowerment" -- So Hooters and Playboy Club are both about women's empowerment?

Since this is NOT about the women who work at such places, how do they promote the empowerment of girls and women overall?

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

76. There's lot's to choose from...

Hooters girls make serious coin, like things the way they are, and would punk you if you tried to shut them down.

Just because you choose to compare Hooters to Sambo's doesn't mean it's a good, because it's not.

[Sparkly]

79. AGAIN... It's not about the women who work there

as I said in my OP.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

84. You said a lot in your OP

I think I've covered the bases.

[Gormy Cuss]

71. Hooters isn't empowering women.

It's reinforcing old stereotypes of women as valued first and foremost for the way their bodies look.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

82. The women's movement empowered women...

...not Hooters. And Hooters girls should thank the women's movement for it, that is, if they've ever heard of the women's movement.

[Sparkly]

88. What?!?

That makes no sense whatsoever.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

106. I find parts of your OP interesting...

...and worth discussing. But not the original question.


Btw, I'm looking for an old article Maureen Dowd wrote that lends itself to this discussion, but in my search, I'm discovering she's pretty reviled by feminists. If that's the case, I suppose no one would be interested in reading her comments.

[Myhrejl]

30. OK

How is this different than say, penis enlargement ads. I'm not crying over that, and I'm a man. Is it because I'm not sensitive to people with small penis's? I mean at some point you have to say, it's your fault for reacting so strongly to it.

[seabeyond]

53. i am not crying over it with my sons. but i am bothered to see them watch history channel

and at 8, 10 yrs old and older repeatedly being told their penis is not good enough and in order for a woman to enjoy them they have to take a drug. i understand the problems it can cause my boys. we have had to have conversations that parents probably have not had to have in the past at much younger ages about male penis sizes.

crying no.... but i dont fuckin appreciate it and a lot of men are bothered over it.

hey wait.... senate floor they talk about it. nfl tried to get it stopped

[yourout]

25. Tilted Kilt is far worse about flaunting womens bodies.

[Sparkly]

28. How so? nt

[yourout]

32. A lot more skin than any Hooters I have been to.

[Sparkly]

36. But it's not about the "skin."

As I said, don't you see more skin at the beach?

[Turbineguy]

29. Link?

:evilgrin:

[LiberalLoner]

27. It's just a matter of time before....

It's just a matter of time before we see clubs where the young women will be expected to actually provide sex as part of the service to male customers. Because it can make more money for the owners, you see. I also expect fully to see child porn legalized soon. There's lots of money to be made there, too, and money and exploitation are what our society is about these days.

Shrug. I guess it's just all about healthy displays of sexuality though, right? I mean, what could be offensive about seeing young 18 year old girls in tight little costumes "exercising" their sexuality by giving blow jobs to twenty or thirty male patrons a night who come "for the great wings"? What could be offensive about seeing a six year old girl exercising her healthy sexuality on film? It's all good, right?

Yeah, no misogyny in our culture, none whatsoever. None. Not a bit.

[Sparkly]

35. Not going to happen.

And not relevant to my point.

[LiberalLoner]

38. Really? It happens in other third world countries....look at Thailand, for example...

Right now we outsource our child porn/sex slave requirements mostly to Thailand, although sex slavery is certainly on the rise here in the U.S. Saw an interesting program about that recently. And every girl knows about sex slavery in the family...patriarchal rights and all of that jazz ya know....

[Sparkly]

42. This isn't Thailand.

It's not the same.

[LiberalLoner]

45. Not yet. Just wait a few more years.

[Sparkly]

52. oookey dokey then.

I think those are seen as perversions and kept underground.

However, a commercial chain called "Hooters" is alternately celebrated as "healthy" and dismissed as "just wings."

That's pervasive.

[LiberalLoner]

63. But what I've been seeing these past few decades...

Is that it's becoming more and more accepted to exploit others, and part of that exploitation involves exploiting women in sexual ways.

This probably isn't a topic that should be brought up because it's not polite conversation, but have you seen any porn recently?

The latest trend seems to be porn that involves choking the girl, hitting her - not just a little love-tap but leaving her with a bruised face or back of the head...and other things that involve pain and degradation of the women involved, that would probably get me tossed off DU if I named the practices specifically.

I remember when porn used to be at least somewhat about both partners getting pleasure.

In my mind, porn reflects where we as a society have gone, and where we are going. I listen on message boards to many young women who describe physical injuries where they are left bleeding after trying to please their boyfriends. These girls are not describing pleasurable trysts, they are describing biting their lip and crying in pain as they try desperately to be "good enough" for their boyfriends, because if they don't give their boyfriends porn sex, some other girl will and they will lose their boyfriend.

And I listen to all of that and think, what are these girls getting out of the experience?

But they are playing the role they have been taught to play.

And likewise we are playing the roles we have been taught to play. We are enduring and hanging on and hoping maybe someday it will get better but it just keeps getting worse, doesn't it?

[Sparkly]

65. I completely agree with you there.

Yes, I think it's both a reflection and then in turn a cause, as it becomes "mainstream" or normalized.

[LiberalLoner]

73. I'm just feeling a lot of despair in general these days, about everything.

And I'm probably getting a bit melodramatic in my posts because I am fighting back tears all the time it seems like. But I really am pessimistic about where we are going as a society, in so many ways.

The person who got raped in "Deep Throat" - the "Star" of the movie so to speak who was actually a rape victim in it - said that she expected it wouldn't be too many years before they were selling lampshades and garments made out of the skin of women on the side of the road. I understood on a very deep level what she was saying.

I'm glad I'm pushing 50. I'm glad I have chronic kidney disease and hopefully won't have to be alive too many more years. I'm glad I never had children. I'm especially glad I never had any female children.

I don't have a problem with sex. I loved sex most of my life, probably a little too much in fact. But I have a problem with brutality and hatred. And there is a little tiny element of that in hooters, although it's buried so far down, most don't recognize it.

[Gwendolyn]

33. Just a minor correction. Hooters has been open for almost 30 years.

[Sparkly]

37. What's the correction? nt

[Gwendolyn]

44. Small picky thing. In your OP you say it wouldn't have been opened a few decades ago.

I believe they started this venture, or whatever you want to call it, in the early 1980's.

[Sparkly]

49. Okay, a few more decades ago!

Don't think they'd have caught on in the 70s, but then again, I didn't think I'd have to argue such points on DU -- so I could well be wrong.

[Name removed]

229. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jim__]

34. Why do you ask?

What difference does it make what we think? In this society we are all just commodities to be exploited for corporate profit anyway. Hooters, Playboy, escort services, massage parlors, off track betting, the latest form of brutal fighting as sport.

If you want to reform anything, you're going to have to change the whole society. If you could do it, I think that would be great. I think it's going to take a cultural collapse to get any real change.

[Sparkly]

39. "Cultural collapse"

Yes, in a way. It's happened in other areas, at least to a significant extent.

I don't expect a big change in my lifetime, though.

[Myhrejl]

41. Hooters

to me hooters doesn't cross into unhealthy terrain. Apparently for some people it does. I don't know what to say other than you are unfortunately in the societal fringe. Maybe we should make women wear bee keeper suits so they aren't sexually exploited or even looked at, and then we can beat them if they take them off (for their protection of course)

[Sparkly]

47. "Unhealthy terrain"

For you, it might not -- you could be just fine with it.

That doesn't mean others aren't affected by the message its commercialization of women's bodies promotes -- especially girls.

As for your hyperbole, please... This has NOTHING to do with changing what women choose to wear. So spare me. :eyes:

[dusmcj]

120. Renta-Burkah, a moneymaking opportunity for you my friend

nyuk nyuk nyuk nyuk nyuk. Your point well-taken though.

[Kali]

46. I have to echo someone above: Hooters is a family place?

I try to stay out of chains and hooters is just offensive to me in concept, from the name to the "uniforms."

So never having been inside I had no idea they were anything other than a mens' sports bar sort of place.

[Sparkly]

48. So I have been told.

Right here on DU. That's the difference between Hooters and Playboy Clubs, apparently.

[Myhrejl]

50. Ahem

so if it doesn't have to do with what women wear, or show, then what does it have to do with.

[Sparkly]

54. That's what I'm asking.

Why is Hooters wholesome and mainstream, and Playboy Clubs are "adult?"

[Kali]

60. Well, maybe someone who has been in one will chime in and enlighten me.

I haven't been in a Playboy club either (they don't exist anymore do they?) but my sort of absorbed-by-advertising/media impression is that playboy clubs were white collar martini sorts of establishments and hooters is more blue-collar, beer drinking, rather than adult vs. family. What do I know?:shrug:

[Sparkly]

67. That's basically it.

So it's not about "what shows" -- not much difference there.

Yet one is seen as "adult," and the other is seen as fine, mainstream "family" dining (where a teacher can take teenage students on a school trip).

[TicketyBoo]

214. If she

is looking to get fired, evidently.

[seabeyond]

75. a parent threw a 5th grade bday party. dont know how many boys showed up

a divorced father out of sons life for a decade comes into town and take 10 and 12 yr old son to bond over women boobs then tell them not to tell mom

another x gets bag of hooter wings, goes to middle school to have lunch with son and calls other boys to join. seperating girls and boys. and they bond over tits and wings.

three stories. i know more.

instead of fathers bonding over baseball or teaching how to change oil, they now do it over tits.

[paulsby]

168. men have always bonded over tits

plus ca change

[seabeyond]

172. with their ten yr old sons? nt

[paulsby]

197. 10 yrs is a bit young

but they certainly have .

legs too.

fathers and their sons DO bond over the whole attraction to hawt wimminz thing.

my dad and I did. and my friends' dads did with them too.

i bonded with my mom over poetry, art, and literature.

i bonded with my dad over math, computers, sports, and boobs.

butts too.

my dad was respectful, but admirous. i think that's a good attitude to have. i never ever saw him disrespect a woman. i saw him appreciate a beautiful woman. and let's remember, breasts evolved (the vast majority of breast tissue is non-functional as to milk production) for a VISUAL cue in the upright bipedal animal, as an analog to the buttocks cleft.

ironically, i'm not much of a boobs guy. i am way more attracted to a woman with no boobs and a great butt than the other way around.

i think that's partly because, as an athlete, i am around a lot of very strong women with very muscular legs, but such low bf, there is often minimal boobage.

i've learned to appreciate a very strong pair of legs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZR_s7jRAQY&feature=related
off da charts...

or...

arguably the most stunning female athlete in the world

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N_Jduavgpw

and i love the way she wears earrings and make up on the field. and KICKS ASS

[elizfeelinggreat]

51. I like your question !

Perhaps the difference is the local zoning board who first let Hooters get away with their shtick and opened the door to the many who followed in their path?

[Myhrejl]

58. How is hooters degrading

Just curious. I need a definition because I believe women are empowered in our modern day society, and I fail to see how their sexuality shouldn't be a part of that. They can take advantage of their good looks, just as much as any male actor can.

[Sparkly]

70. It's not about the women who work there.

It's about the wider message to ALL girls and women (and to boys and men ABOUT girls and women).

[elizfeelinggreat]

111. Yes - messages

When we moved to Texas I was shocked and dismayed for my young daughter when we saw the so-called gentleman's clubs billboards plastered all over the highways. Great values, huh?

[EmeraldCityGrl]

64. The old Playboy Club when it was

outside Chicago was about a lifestyle. Hooters is a chain restaurant that uses breasts to draw male customers
so they can swill beer, stuff their faces with chicken wings, and ogle women's breasts.

[Myhrejl]

69. and whats wrong with that

I like boobs beer and wings too. Sorry just being honest here.

[Sparkly]

74. My question isn't about what you enjoy.

It's about a larger matter.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

139. Nothings wrong with it if you're into

that sort of thing. It's the family version of Bada Bing.
Just remember to tip the waitress.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

72. Hooters is still in business....

Playboy Clubs, generally, are not. I understand that there's been an attempt to resurrect the franchise by opening a Club in Las Vegas. My question is, which will last longer: the Club or Hugh Hefner's pacemaker? My money is on Hef.

[Sparkly]

78. Heh

I dunno. Maybe if he restarted them in suburban strip malls and called them "PlayBoobs" it'd go nowadays.

Maybe the bunny costumes could be changed to cats, or something.

Same thing, as far as I'm concerned.

[Myhrejl]

81. Women know men objectify them

It's part of thier genders power. Women are awesome, and their bodies are beautiful. There is nothing wrong with that on it's own. If they are violently being taken advantage of, then yes their is a problem, but with their consent I don't really have a problem. And women should be aware. It's hard to admit that we as a people can be so base, but it's biological. I know that may be hard to explain to your daughter, but by high school she should know.

[Sparkly]

86. "By high school she should know"

... that "people can be so base."

Yeah, I think most do. And as others have pointed out, girls have major problems with body image, anorexia, bulimia, depression, cutting, etc...

You wrote, "I don't really have a problem." It's not all about you.

[Mopar151]

175. Not in these parts - all the Hooter's have closed up

For me, there is a basic difference between Hooters and Playboy clubs - the utter hypocrisy of the Brooks family, who insist that they are running a family resturaunt. The Hooters costume can be as much of a miracle of engineering as the Bunny suit ever was - especially if a lady is "naturally qualified" for Hooters.
And the reason they tanked in these parts - you cannot get a decent meal in a Hooters, i.e. it is all fried, mostly nuke sauced, and a steady diet will kill you. Most actual bars have far better food.
Playboy always claimed to be an adult nightclub and/or resort - and had a full menu of real food. IMHO, high overhead and changing times did them in - and the declining income of the American worker. Too bad, cuz they were racer friendly - the looniest dag racer I ever met said it was the only posh joint he'd ever been in where they did'nt give them shit for working on the Funny Car in the parking lot - instead, the valets asked them to work on it right out front, 'cuz they dug it.

[Gold Metal Flake]

80. It's about the food.

Food and, apparently, science.


Just regular guys touching other regular guy's scantily-clad daughters. For the food.


Good, holesome family values.

[Sparkly]

83. Wings, AND science?!?

No wonder it's so popular and wholesome!! hah!! :hi:

[Gold Metal Flake]

85. Wings, science and nipples with no bra.

[MilesColtrane]

179. Hooters girls are required to wear bras.

They make a point of saying that on their web site. (I was there purely for research purposes...really)

God forbid there's TOO much motion.

[Myhrejl]

89. Man those women look miserable

They are probably going to kill themselves.

[Sparkly]

92. For the umpteenth time

It is not about individual women who work at such places.

[Kali]

152. actually I was thinking that in that top photo

only the tall girl at middle right had a genuine smile. The others look like fake smile fo the camera smiles. The next photo is similar - only a couple of them look like the smile goes deeper. That girl with the guy doesn't look happy at all. "Actress smile"

[paulsby]

174. boobs and x-wing fighters?

does the nerd from robot chicken know about this place

[comrade snarky]

213. Ahem.... That's the fighter from the original Battlestar Galactica

I hate myself a little right now.

[paulsby]

215. wow. just wow.

i totally lost nerd cred.

i am hanging my head in shame. SHAME!

[comrade snarky]

217. If you decide to end it all in the snow

Dress like Lorene Greene before you do. Nerd cred regained!

[paulsby]

220. leave a dramatic corpse ! nt

[janx]

90. It's women as things. n/t

[Myhrejl]

93. WOMEN ARENT THINGS THEY ARE PEOPLE

AND THEY CAN BE SEXY AT THE SAME TIME!@!@!!!!!

WTF IS THAT HARD TO UNDERSTAND!

[Sparkly]

95. It's not hard to understand.

What about my OP is hard to understand? :shrug:

[seabeyond]

94. ya, so shut up woman. why in the world would you, a woman, not listen to a man

tell you, how a woman is suppose to think and feel

geeeesh

[Myhrejl]

97. Shes not working at hooters is she

Thats called choice. She has it. Great.

They did. They like being the object of admiration. That is THEIR choice.

[Sparkly]

98. It. Is. Not. About. The. Women. Who. Work. There.

:crazy:

[Myhrejl]

100. Ok so its about society

A society that has no problem with cheerleaders on national television. I think you should start their. Hooters is not your problem. I think the human form is awesome and I dont know how this is obscene. So please tell me.

[Sparkly]

103. "the human form is awesome and I dont know how this is obscene"

I couldn't agree with this more! That's why I hate it when people call images of women's bodies "filth" or "smut" or "dirty." Wrong!

I don't have a problem with cheerleaders on TV, or with women showing their bodies (no matter what their shapes!) -- in fact, I always had a problem with the fact that on a hot day, boys/men can take their shirts off and I could never do the same without being arrested for "indecent exposure."

Hooters is both a symptom and a cause. I don't think it's a bit different from Playboy Clubs, except that it's more prevalent, insidious, and harmful in that it's seen as "normal, mainstream," etc. It objectifies and commercializes a part of women's bodies. The message in that is NOT healthy for many, many, many girls and women (or for that matter, many boys and men, although they may not suffer from it).

[Myhrejl]

110. there is a deeper conversation

that should take place (but cant because Im a little hammered) about commercialism and sexual preference. I don't know exactly how to say it all, but ill stab at one point of it and say that some of it is based on not only sexual preference in terms of gender, but physicality of the body. Some bodies are simply more valued and in a capitalist society those ones are given more appreciation. Thus we have hooters, And the "thunder from down under". There is another discussion that intersects about appropriate age for exposure to these sort of things. Both conversations tangle together.

[Sparkly]

125. That's true, too.

You make good points there.

There seem to be biological, evolutionary reasons certain physical traits are considered attractive. On the other hand, women's bodies are subject to the whims of fashion (flat and thin in the 1920s and 30s; buxom hourglass figures in the later 1940s and 50s; stick-thin again in the 1960s and 70s; full again in the 1980s, and now this ideal not usually found in nature). One theory is that when women are making strides politically, the fashion is thin; when it's about staying home and being maternal, the fashion is full breasts and hips.

Anyway, yes it makes sense these would be commercialized but ONLY in a culture with some twisted sense of it all.

What if we all had some bizarre fixation on -- I don't know, say elbows. If elbows were taboo -- not to be seen in public, spoken of only in hushed tones, veiled as fetishes and revealed only for a price, then nightclubs might bring people in by offering a chance to see the obscene elbow up close. It's not a good parallel because we all have elbows, but... the point is, it's become bizarre when, if we were all really sane about nature, it wouldn't have to be.

[paulsby]

180. evolution requires that some body types are more valued

that's been true since the dawn of time and always will be true.

we could wank endlessly about waist hip ratios (for women)

or shoulder waist ratios for men.

or about facial symmetry.

or about how breast cleavage in the bipedal homo sapiens resembles buttocks cleavage. IT'S A VISUAL CUE

we are animals. remember?

i'm not saying that society shouldn't be more "enlightened"

i am saying that these are deep seated BIOLOGICAL desires that hooters et al takes advantage of.

society didn't invent the idea that men should be attracted to hawt women

biology did

[Sparkly]

186. True.

Which is not being debated here.

[paulsby]

201. i agree

i'm sayin' two things. hooter isn't inventing something new. they are simply capitalizing on natural biological urges.

society, with its culture mores religion ethics taboo etc. can and does and should often rise above mere animal urges.

although it's fun to be an animal sometimes.

you should see me attack a steak!

[paulsby]

177. in many jurisdictions you can take your shirt

off and not be arrested for indecent exposure.

NY state comes to mind.

oregon.

i am sure there are other places.

i can't recall ever hearing a woman in my jursidiction being arrested for exposing breasts, but i haven't read up on the case law.

NY state's i know

[Sparkly]

189. You get the point.

It would hardly get the same reaction.

[paulsby]

202. i do, but there is one critical difference

men's chests and women's breasts are not the same organ.

give a man enough estrogen and he can make a great fascimile, though!! (man- boobs. )

i certainly agree with you that women SHOULD be able to bear boobs just like men can bear chests.

but i do acknowledge that it is not a 1:1 comparison due to the different structure and difference in the hormonal milieu.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

193. You're asking people to compare something they may have gone to...

...to something they've never gone to. And your asking us to base our responses on your presumptions.

Hmmm... When I go to a concert, I like to know it's not "all ages." There's no difference between over-21 shows and all ages; I've been to both. Same amount of alcohol is served; same amount of pot is smoked. I just don't want kids around me.

Since I've never been to a Playboy Club, but you have a hardon for us to answer it anyway, I'm gonna go with, they don't want kids hanging around. Who would? I hate kids.

[Name removed]

230. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[seabeyond]

102. lol, you and i on same wave length. talk real slow

i just had more to say. lol

[Sparkly]

105. LOL!

"Brawwwk!!" If I just had a parrot that could type!! "Not about the workers!" "Not about sexual repression!" "Not about great wings!' "Brawwwwwk!!"

[seabeyond]

101. this. is. not. about. the. workers. the conversation is talking beyond the workers

it is talking about the effects of society. it is talking about what is happening with it. no one is telling these girls not to do it. how many times do people have to flat out spell that out for you.

for a poster to comment, it is making the women things for male entertainment is not saying the women cannot work there

it is a statement. it is making them things

for a person to question making this a family restaurant and how healthy is that for our young girls and boys is not saying they cannot be open

it is a discussion on what it says about a society when tits.... and that is what hooters is about, tits.... when tits is used as the main focal point of the business.

not. about. the. workers. and. their. right. to. work.

is that clear yet. cause i have noticed all down the board, that point being made to you

[Myhrejl]

104. I guess it just doesn't make sense to me

or the majority of society. If you want to remove sexuality from society that is your call. I'm not in favor of that. I personally treat all women with respect as people and am able to differentiate between that and their sexual attractiveness. I think all people should. If some people cant then that is a shame. But there is nothing wrong with sexual entertainment. It is pervasive and real. Regardless of gender.

[Sparkly]

108. "remove sexuality from society"

No, you don't get it. It's not at all about that. Healthy, balanced, accepting, individually-empowering sexuality is GREAT.

Appreciating differences, attraction, etc., is GREAT.

Telling girls that their bodies are commodities for men's enjoyment, rejection, approval, disapproval, commerce, oggling, evaluation, billboards, logos, signs, jokes, slogans, ridicule, and general objectification as common societal symbols, in a culture where they are NOT equally empowered, is NOT great.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

200. True. And someone is starting to cash in on boys.

Have you seen 20-something men lately? I can't imagine it takes long for people--women or men--to develop all sorts of complexes and disorders because of the way they're supposed to look.

Don't say it, I know. You aren't talking about the objectification, exploitation, or commercialization of people in general, you just want to know the difference between Playboy Club and Hooters.

[janx]

121. You have misunderstood me completely. n/t

[seabeyond]

124. it got confusing.

the poster yelling at you women were people not things. before that post got a subthread it was more clear. i was really responding to his post. here you are a woman and this man is telling you what you are suppose to think about this

i was being sarcastic. sorry for the confusion.

[janx]

130. YES.

:hug:

[leftstreet]

107. How about if we had clubs where you could go look at disabled people?

Maybe (insert slang term for disablity) Restaurants!

Sadly, almost everyone's missing the OP's point.

[Sparkly]

109. Thank you!!!!!

:hi:

[leftstreet]

112. Hey!

:hi:

It was driving me nutz!

[Myhrejl]

115. So if I want to go to a resteraunt with

people serving me with red hair then that is degrading to people with out red hair?

[leftstreet]

117. No, actually it says more about you than it does about red-haired people

n/t

[Gwendolyn]

118. Disability fetishists would swarm the place.

I'm thinking the servers with artificial limbs would rake in a fortune.

[janx]

113. Sparkly, I agree with you.

I live on my own now and have to caution my adult daughters about this. Cheers :toast:

[Sparkly]

127. Thanks, janx!

:hi:

[Synicus Maximus]

114. Hooters is still open and the Playboy Clubs closed 10-15 years ago?

[Myhrejl]

122. I honestly believe it is you argueres against hooters

that are attaching too much importance to sexual parts. I'm too exasperated too explain. I don't think you are degrading women by liking boobs. No more than you could by not liking them.

[seabeyond]

128. it is everywhere. every friggin sec of the day. boobs boobs. you say

we are making the big deal about boobs. the obsessive behavior about boobs is not the women, my friend. every friggin sec. to the point a woman or girl just out and about is always having our boobs or someones boobs shoved in our face.

you might want to rethink who is making the damn big deal about boobs.

we have a rebok commercial of talking boobs. doesn't even show a woman, just body part. and now the body part is talking as if it is the ONLY part of a female

get this, being male, you dont get it.

[Sparkly]

136. Of course, if you try to use them for their actual purpose,

feeding an infant, that's just "GROSS!!!"

[seabeyond]

140. exactly. yes. god forbid they are used for anything but entertaining men. nt

[paulsby]

182. i wonder how far a male

in DU would get with this argument

"get this, being female, you don't get it"

i would opine... not very far

[seabeyond]

191. i think we can say that about anything. a white person cannot understand a blacks experience

unless they are willing to listen, at the very minimum and then they would only get so much. a straight person can only possibly get so much of a gay person. and i can go on and on and on.

as much as we like to think we are open minded, unless we experience, we will not truly know.

i understand i cannot know what a man experiences. and in that knowledge i spend a lot of time listening and asking.

there are men, and many on this thread that does not spend the time listening. but i am thinking another thread particularly where the men acted surprised, surprised i tell you at what was being said, even though many women spelled it out clearly. the reality is, there was no desire to understand or place themselves in a womans shoe

no

i dont think there would be an issue if a man said that.

[paulsby]

199. i agree with you 100%

with everything, except i think there WOULD be an issue if a man used that argument to a woman.

since i've never SEEN it happen here, i'm speculating. but the fact that i haven't seen it here is at least a bit predictive imo

[applegrove]

Um prostitution is really dangerous for the girls who do it.

[Sparkly]

132. Not necessarily.

A "girl" might have reckless sex with 12 strangers, and that's legal; if a "girl" has sex with ONE person, and he leaves $5 on the dresser, it's illegal.

Lots of dangerous things are legal.

[applegrove]

146. Oh don't get me wrong. I am all for legalizing prostitution so that it is safer

for the girls who do it and perhaps they can work out of safe locations and would not be dependant on pimps for protection who just abuse and drug them. I'm all for decriminalizing it. I just don't think you can compare it to those other things in terms of how serious an issue it is.

[Sparkly]

149. Here's the difference.

First, I am not talking about the women who work at places like Hooters and Playboy -- I've said this over and over and over again, even after making that clear in the OP.

I am talking about the WIDER issues -- what it says to and about our culture that Hooters is a mainstream, "family" restaurant in shopping plazas all over the country, vs. "adult" entertainment kept in the dark. I don't see much difference.

The problem is in the message this gives to girls and women (and boys and men) about women's body parts as commercial icons, basically.

Prostitution is not a public neon sign claiming to be a wholesome, "family" thing or a supposed celebration of women's bodies or whatever. It's a private transaction, AND it's at least potentially (legalized, as you say) a choice of a woman for herself alone. It doesn't profit a corporation blaring signs and logos of our bodies.

I think it's serious for the culture as a whole.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

205. What happens to you when you go to the beach?

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

209. You're spurting out cliches

At least I was seeking a "WIDER" answer from your OP.

Nothing here...

[Gwendolyn]

225. Hooter's is not really perceived as a mainstream family restaurant.

The majority of patrons are still male. There is a demographic upthread someone pulled from the site. It's still known as a "sports bar" that serves good wings. There are local no-name sports bars in everybody's town that use the basic formula which includes servers in scanty costumes.

The reason Hooter's "passes" as semi-acceptable to the sometimes visits of families is that the costume is a track uniform, which you can see anytime you turn on the tv to watch the Olympics. The servers wear hideous support hose under them, and are required to wear bras. The name "Hooters" is becoming more and more obsolete as a pejorative for breasts, and many young people would associate the word as much with a blunt/drugs as with the female anatomy. This differentiates them from Playboy club, an offshoot of a porn mag, which was adult and member only, and catered strictly to men who believed themselves to be privileged bachelors indulging a "lifestyle."

Both are objectifying in different degrees, but then so are thousands of other establishments. Hooters is no different from many other less famous places.

You seem to be arguing that prostitution is "better" than the Hooters concept because a woman can be in business for herself. As far as the concept of objectification goes, your premise is bullshit. Prostitutes totally engage in the business of objectification and if there were a hierarchy of degree, it would grace the pinnacle.

[NYC_SKP]

116. Simple. You can bring the Kids and Mom to Hooters!!!

Like, DUH!!!

[Sparkly]

133. Yup, that's about it.

[Kali]

119. I need to get out more

or not. I'm sitting here in shock. People TAKE CHILDREN TO HOOTERS????11

I can see the stupid Uncle or brother-in-law taking teen boys (not what I would want, but I can see that) but I am having trouble picturing any mother or average father taking their kids to a place where the servers are dressed like that and the name of the bar (restaurant? REALLY?) is basically "Boobies"

[Myhrejl]

123. This is

a very plain example of how most American views on sexuality are immature. WTF. Seriously any mention of boobs is degrading to women. WTF. Do you know how ridiculous that is?

[leftstreet]

126. Let's start a restaurant called Nutz. Guys in speedos with testicles bulging

Would that ratchet up the maturity level you seek?

[Myhrejl]

129. I wouldn't go

but horny women would. The problem is that other women would call them sluts and so they wouldn't go. I seriously doubt that any men would give a flying #$%@ if such a place existed.

[seabeyond]

135. rooster. too O's are balls and a dip for the penis. then bring our family in and ogle the crotch

jeer, make comments. hey son, hubby, look how well he is hung.

[Kali]

165. right

a place called HOOTERS is mature. :rofl:

[Lucian]

131. So, if Hooters has the right to exist, and you don't want them shut down,

then what are you going on a tangent about?

:shrug:

Edit: Hooters is way different than porn.

[Sparkly]

137. :sigh:

Please read for comprehension.

[Myhrejl]

138. I dont want them to shut down

I've been argueing that expression of sexuality is good. Everyone else here seems to think that hooters is vulgar. I don't have a problem with hooterz, or NUTZ.

[Sparkly]

142. "vulgar"

Read again. It's not about "vulgar."

[seabeyond]

144. but then i bet a good number of the men are being vulgar to the women

as they are just "appreciating" the beauty.

[Sparkly]

145. Yes, there is that.

"Hey, I LOVE wimmin!!! All kindza wimmin, I love!!!" You know the type -- real proud to be liberated.

[lib2DaBone]

134. The difference? Well..Playboy clubs do not even exist any more..

But if they did exist.. Playboy woud be expensive.. adult-night-club-oriiented.

Hooters...on the other hand.. is a neighborhood Hamburger joint. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bXHPqj3NcI

[Sparkly]

141. And what's the difference as far as brand, identity, etc.?

Why is one a "family restaurant" and the other "adult?"

[Myhrejl]

147. Seriously

you aren't going to protect a single woman by getting rid of hooters. Why don't you start by worrying about the sex slave trade in asia if you are 'truly' concerned about the welfare of women.

[Sparkly]

153. "getting rid of hooters"

Read my OP again.

[Myhrejl]

150. and I think you

are saying that women shouldn't be objectified, because its vulgar right?

[Sparkly]

154. I never used any words like "vulgar," no.

I'm not talking about "vulgarity."

[Myhrejl]

164. Eh @#$% it

too drunk to argue coherently at this point. I will simply say this: everyone needs to chill out when it comes to sexuality, that people deserve to be able to express themselves, and take advantage of their own sexuality, that no one is beyond it, man or woman. Some expressions by women are taken more sensitively than others in our society and I take issue with that. I wish you the best, even though you seem to think their should be a double standard on men vs. women on this particular issue,

[Sparkly]

176. There IS a double standard between men and women

and it pervades our whole culture -- economically, politically, and personally.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

211. Dial a cliche. No wonder we're frustrated with you.

You really have nothing to add to the WIDER issues; you're just regurgitating cliches.

[MilesColtrane]

196. Know Your Enemy

This spin, for you rebuttal, from the Hooters web site:

Claims that Hooters exploits attractive women are as ridiculous as saying the NFL exploits men who are big and fast. Hooters Girls have the same right to use their natural female sex appeal to earn a living as do super models Cindy Crawford and Naomi Campbell. To Hooters, the women’s rights movement is important because it guarantees women have the right to choose their own careers, be it a Supreme Court Justice or Hooters Girl.

Women occupy management positions all the way from Assistant Manager to Vice President of Training and Development, Kat Cole, who started her career at Hooters as a Hooters Girl.

-snipetty-

Hooters characterizes itself as a neighborhood place, not a typical family restaurant. Sixty-eight percent of customers are male, most between the ages of 25-54.

Hooters does not market itself to families, but they do patronize the restaurants. Ten percent of the parties we serve have children in them. Hooters is in the hospitality business and provides the best possible service to anyone coming through the door. For this reason, the chain offers a children's menu.

[ChickenHawk]

198. I'm thinking it's because

that the Playboy clubs were based on a magazine that was known for it's nudity, scantily clad women, and overt sexuality. When men went to a Playboy club, they were buying into the whole Playboy lifestyle.

Hooters is basically a crappy sports bar that uses scantily clad women to get men in there to eat overpriced wings and drink beer.

So there is definitely a difference in the two establishments, based on their genesis.

Also, I understand that this is not about the women, but they do deserve part of the blame for society's acceptance of the restaurant. If they refused to work there, then the restaurant wouldn't have the ability to market it's workers and advertise the way it does.



p.s. - Is it funny that when I wanted to type "bar" in the second paragraph that I first typed "bra" and then typed "bare" before I got it correct. Wonder what Freud would say. :)

[seabeyond]

207. those little slips, lol. nt

[thelordofhell]

158. What's the difference between Maxim and Playboy magazines?

[dysfunctional press]

206. nudity.

[cherokeeprogressive]

160. I don't give a FUCK what the difference is. DON'T take my underage child to a place where alcohol

is a large part of the experience.

Yeah, they sell alcohol in LOTS of places. Lots of restaurants that do lunch sell alcohol. HOOTERS is built around the consumption of alcohol.

[AngryAmish]

221. Wrigley Field? No child goes there?

[Captain Hilts]

161. Hooters is NOT considered a family restaurant. nt

[Sparkly]

178. I was told that it is.

That was a rationale for why it was okay for a teacher to take a class of teenagers there.

[A HERETIC I AM]

167. What's the difference? Outside of the target market, nothing.

I'm probably going to regret this, but here goes.

What is the difference between a Hooters and a Playboy Club?

Nothing, really. One caters to a different demographic than the other, that's all. When Hefner started the Playboy Club concept, his target market was the growing "Jet Set" of young, upwardly mobile, traveling businessmen. When the original Hooters opened, the target market was, and for the most part continues to be, middle class working males. The fact is, sex and sex appeal sells.

How are the contexts different? In my view, they aren't. If anything, I think Hooters is a more obnoxious chain for its "mainstream, family, healthy and wholesome" guise.

While Hooters certainly doesn't discourage women and children from coming to the restaurants, the target market is most certainly men. Men who like to drink beer, watch sports on TV and have their beer served to them by attractive women. It's a formula that works. As I was told by a manager of one of their stores once, "Two things that will never go out of style are cold beer and beautiful women." He was right.

I don't think it could have existed a few decades ago

Perhaps, but then, timing is everything. They came on the scene at the right time and have been enormously successful. The number of their stores that have opened and subsequently closed is incredibly low.

(But) consciousness about the culture, as it is, is important to the equation, and a big step in evolving beyond it.

What makes you think we should or even want to evolve beyond it? Men like to look at women. It is a fact of life. Hell, entire cultures have dress codes for women because the men (it's always the men, isn't it?) are so concerned about other men looking at their women, the popular cultural dogma demands women cover themselves from head to toe, or at least dress in a "modest" way.


You may consider yourself and those who hold a similar point of view to be enlightened and the rest of us to be unenlightened but I'll tell you this; Speaking only for myself here, I like looking at beautiful women. I enjoy it and I don't see anything wrong with it. I don't have masturbatory fantasies about every women I look at (damned few, actually). I don't have a problem with my sexuality. I'm not a misogynist. I don't grope or touch strangers. I just like pretty women. I have a feeling I'm not alone, because there is an entire print and internet industry devoted to supplying endless images. There also seems to be an endless supply of women willing to be photographed and/or filmed as well, not to mention rather intricate industries devoted to supplying women with the various accoutrement to enhance their appearance, most of which I'm led to believe are financially successful.

The point of your OP is well taken, but men are men. Always have been, always will be.

[Sparkly]

183. You're still making it all about YOU.

I'm suggesting there's another perspective to consider.

Would you take your daughter to a Hooters? If not, why not?

And if not, do you think there's any effect from her seeing the "Hooters" iconography, knowing that she herself has, or will have, breasts?

How about listening to what women have to say about the experience of growing up with a female body in this culture, rather than what YOU think about YOUR perspective?

[A HERETIC I AM]

210. Well, to be perfectly frank, yeah, it is about me... (edited)

certainly in the context of what I wrote above.

(Edit added here) I tried to answer a couple of the points in your OP. Then I editorialized a little. Sorry.

Would you take your daughter to a Hooters?

If she wanted to go, sure. If you make the experience all about the women that work there, then its all about them, isn't it? If it's just a place to go and have a beer and a burger and to watch the game, then it isn't about the women at all, is it?

And if not, do you think there's any effect from her seeing the "Hooters" iconography, knowing that she herself has, or will have, breasts?

I'm not married. Never have been and likely never will be. I don't have any children. My last girlfriend did have a daughter however and she most certainly struggled with her self esteem and her self image, just as her mother did. I had nothing to do with that and as hard as I tried, the fact is, she didn't see herself the same way I saw her: as a lovely young lady with unlimited potential. And for what it's worth, this young lady was very well endowed at a very early age, so yes, she had boys and men staring at her chest as a 14 year old. There is no way in the world I can fully understand what she went through and how she dealt with it internally. I know how she dealt with it externally though. As I said, she struggled with her own self image every single day. I lived with this young lady for 3 years. I watched her grow up a little bit. I watched her struggle with Meth and alcohol. I watched her associate herself with the kind of boyfriends that I would rather she didn't. In retrospect I'm convinced much of her self esteem issues stemmed from her mother who had them in spades. That was the primary reason our relationship failed. It was impossible to stay in love with her because she didn't love herself. In one long, teary conversation, my Ex's daughter confessed she didn't like herself, didn't think she was pretty (she was) and hated her lot in life. It broke my heart because I knew, as a "walk on father" so to speak, that there was damned little I could do to change these things in any meaningful way. I just did my best to let her know that I loved her, that I cared for her, that I would always protect her and that if she ever needed me to come rescue her, I'd be there. (edit added here) Is that an answer to your question? No, it probably isn't. I don't know if the Hooters iconography had any effect on her at all, but I certainly know the rest of the world she lived in did. The Hooters Owl logo would have been the least of her and my worries.

How about listening to what women have to say about the experience of growing up with a female body in this culture, rather than what YOU think about YOUR perspective?

Well, I've been listening to you (or reading, anyway) and your perspective pretty much all evening. Look, I understand your point. I understand what it is you are trying to convey, truly I do. It is just that to a certain extent, I think you are tilting at a biological and evolutionary windmill here. You aren't going to change the way men think about women on a thread on DU (I know you know this, OK?) and your perspective, while completely rational, understandable, reasonable and lucid, in the larger scheme of things, means very little to most men precisely because it is about them as well. You are calling into question what seems to me to be a very basic biological drive in men - that they like to look at women - and there is damned little you or I or anyone are going to do to change it.

[girl gone mad]

188. Your post reminds me of that famous scene and the great Nicole Kidman line..

from "Eyes Wide Shut"


Alice Harford: Millions of years of evolution, right? Right? Men have to stick it in every place they can, but for women... women it is just about security and commitment and whatever the fuck else!

Doctor William Harford: A little oversimplified, Alice, but yes, something like that.

Alice Harford: If you men only knew...

[girl gone mad]

169. Playboy club keeps men dumb, Hooters keeps them dumb and fat?

:shrug:

[Hello_Kitty]

181. A Playboy club would never be passed off as a "family" restaruant.

Though why it wouldn't is beyond me. Recently, I went with a group of people, to a local Hooters for lunch. I was kind of bothered by the fact that I was there, and by my unwillingness to insist that we go somewhere else. Interestingly, it was the same Hooters in Phoenix that the teacher is under fire for taking her students. Quite honestly, the attire of the servers was consistent with what is expected at a number of restaurants with "high prestige" (read: young and attractive) female servers in the Greater Phoenix area. The "Hooterfication" of America has caused us to regard nearly naked women (in the presence of fully clothed men) as nothing remarkable.

But hey! Reducing women to their tits and ass is as American as apple pie!

[Triana]

184. For YOU Sparkly...

...beware.

http://www.derailingfordummies.com/

[Sparkly]

Perfect!!!!

I gotta save that one! Thank you! :hi:

[Sparkly]

195. Perfect!!!!

I gotta save that one! Thank you! :hi:

[Cleita]

187. Or, Hooters, the Playboy Club and other similar type restaurants gave

women a job with good tips that helped many a girl get through college even though she was capitalizing on her youth and attractiveness at a time of her life that she was in her prime. Before men go boo hoo, many men also put themselves through college doing jobs that utilized their youth and strength enabling them to make good money as well before they settled down to that career desk job forever.

I don't see where prostitution and porn are anywhere similar to a job that entails hard work, and any waitress will tell you that, and lets you make extra money in tips while you are working on your future.

[Sparkly]

192. Oh my GOD, not again...

As I wrote in the OP, and have posted over and over again, this is NOT ABOUT THE WOMEN WHO WORK THERE.

:crazy:

[Cleita]

204. My post isn't either. It's about the job, which is for all intents

and purposes an honest job. I guess you object to the fact that attractive kids are being used to attract business, but there is nothing wrong with it. It works in lots of venues, movies, other entertainment venues and even in offices where the front office persons, who meet the public, are usually younger and more attractive than those working in the back offices.

[dysfunctional press]

203. i saw andy kaufman at the playboy club in lake geneva...

waaaaay back when he was doing 'the mighty mouse' theme song in his pre-taxi days.
the guy was a genius.

i never saw him at a hooters though.

so there's that.

[kelly1mm]

212. I will admit I have been to a Hooters and in fact am going to one

in a few days with 3 other guys before a college basketball game. It has decent food and the servers are nice and nice to look at. I have no illusions that these women are being nice to us for anything other than a decent tip. I see nothing wrong with it and, in fact, I have a niece who worked at on for two years while in college. And I will add that the wings ARE good too!

[grahamhgreen]

216. none really

[omega minimo]

218. "both use the same hook" or the same hookers?

"But when you get right down to the branding, the logos, the image, the commercial identity, both use the same "hook" -- women's bodies, as entertainment and as a brand."

[tammywammy]

231. Are women that work at Hooters hookers? n/t

[krabigirl]

219. I don't see a big deal about Hooters. I did when I was younger and more naive. ro

But as a woman in her 30s, who has had friends work there, it's not some anti-feminist horror. I am not a big fan of the food and I felt bad for my friend to have to wear those horrid orange shorts and scary nylons (seriously looked uncomfortable), but it's not a place I feel uncomfortable. It is what it is.

[AngryAmish]

222. Does the Playboy Club still exist?

The one in Chicago closed when I was a child. I did go to their resort at lake geneva. I liked grabbing at the bunny tails. I was 4.

[Imagevision]

223. Obviously you've never been to A Playboy Club. (When they were more available)

Hooters? ya mean like Billy Bob's place? Hooters compared to a Playboy Club? hahahahahahahhaahaha...oh shit!

[jmowreader]

232. I'm trying to figure out where the "family restaurant" meme came from

The place is a bar, m'kay? Yeah, they'll let you in if you have minors with you (as we saw from another thread here), but they'd probably prefer you not bring your non-beer-drinking young'uns in there in the first place.

[EV_Ares]

234. History of The Playboy Club

History
The first Playboy Club opened in Chicago in 1960. The last American location was Lansing, Michigan located in the Hilton Hotel. It closed in 1988. International Clubs existed until the 1991 closing of the Manila, Philippines located in he Silihas International Hotel. Manila was the only Club ever to be featured in Architectural Digest. During the last three months of 1961, more than 132,000 people visited the Chicago club, making it the busiest night club in the world.

Playboy Club membership became a status symbol. Only 21% of all key holders ever went to a club. At $25.00 per membership, Playboy earned $25 million for every 1,000,000 members. This revenue stream was critical to the development of the Playboy empire.

In 1965 Hugh Hefner sent Victor Lownes to London to open Playboy's British casinos, following legalization of gambling in the United Kingdom. Gaming income from these casinos enabled Playboy to continue throwing money at financially disastrous clubs, theaters, resorts, record companies and film investments. The magazine's income was modest compared to that from these casinos. In 1981 the casino at 45 Park Lane was the most profitable casino in the world and the British casinos contributed $32 million to the corporation. Playboy showed a total profit of $31 million that year, meaning the rest of the empire made a net loss of $1 million. However, in that year Victor Lownes was fired, and gambling licenses were not renewed, thereby cutting off Playboy's biggest source of income and creating a financial crisis that would only be solved by enormous changes within the empire.

The Playboy Club in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin had a ski slope and was one of the first to install a chair lift.

Playboy recently opened a new Playboy Club in Las Vegas, Nevada. The new club at The Palms, with its very noticeable neon bunny head, has casinos, bars, and a restroom with pictures of Playmates on the walls.

Famous acts
Famous entertainers who performed at the clubs include:

Steve Allen
Milton Berle
Sid Caesar
George Carlin
The Clancy Brothers & Tommy Makem
Ray Charles
Bill Cosby
The Count Basie Orchestra
Dick Gregory
Dizzy Gillespie
Bob Hope
Peggy Lee
Jay Leno
Ann-Margret
Steve Martin
Bette Midler
Ginger Rogers
Mike Ryan
The Smothers Brothers
Mel Tormé
Muddy Waters

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playboy_Club