HawkShack.com

Another offseason topic.

The Seahawks have become the 6th team to employ men in their cheerleading squads, which has precipitated a name change to the Seahawks Dancers:

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/seahaw ... fR7_1pkA38

It's been pretty quiet on the cheerleading front after some PR headaches in recent years. I would have thought that teams would have started to disassociate themselves with them and hire a private entertainment company to provide those services.

I would of thought we were moving away, too.

Once California sued the Rams to have the girls (at that time) designated as employees vs. as a independent, self-employed contractor, all the other states, especially the 'liberal' ones, would go along and the gig was up for the cheer squads, but it looks like that's not the stopper.

Overtime, Healthcare, raising minimum wadges, matching Federal SS payments (7.5%), 401k or other retirement plans that are offered to other employees, potential Union representation, locker Room space and Worker's comp are just a few of the typical employee benefits that affect the bottom line.

No wonder the WWE is also fighting this Gov't intrusion.

jshawaii22 wrote:I would of thought we were moving away, too.

Once California sued the Rams to have the girls (at that time) designated as employees vs. as a independent, self-employed contractor, all the other states, especially the 'liberal' ones, would go along and the gig was up for the cheer squads, but it looks like that's not the stopper.

Overtime, Healthcare, raising minimum wadges, matching Federal SS payments (7.5%), 401k or other retirement plans that are offered to other employees, potential Union representation, locker Room space and Worker's comp are just a few of the typical employee benefits that affect the bottom line.

No wonder the WWE is also fighting this Gov't intrusion.

Yea, I hear ya. That's exactly why I would have figured that teams would have looked for another way to provide that type of entertainment and insulate the team from those types of issues or get rid of cheerleaders altogether. There's 6 teams, 5 of them charter members, that do not have cheerleaders..Packers, Browns, Giants, Steelers, Bears, and Lions. I can't imagine that there's enough of a gain in perceived game day experience to offset the headaches that comes with what is nothing less than soft core porn designed specifically to appeal to us men's libido.

I'd really like to hear Sis's take on this subject.

RiverDog wrote:
Yea, I hear ya. That's exactly why I would have figured that teams would have looked for another way to provide that type of entertainment and insulate the team from those types of issues or get rid of cheerleaders altogether. There's 6 teams, 5 of them charter members, that do not have cheerleaders..Packers, Browns, Giants, Steelers, Bears, and Lions. I can't imagine that there's enough of a gain in perceived game day experience to offset the headaches that comes with what is nothing less than soft core porn designed specifically to appeal to us men's libido.

I'd really like to hear Sis's take on this subject.

I was going to go in another direction until I read your response. I actually agree with you on outsourcing the operation to keep the suits and liability at arms length away from the team and thus the NFL. I think it would be easier for an entertainment company to pay wages and have benefits if they were separate from the team.

I wonder how the support staff rings would work for them if they were outsourced. E.g. I think the support staff gets a ring from the organization when they win a conference or SB championship. It may be a moot point if they don't give independent contractors a ring under the current system though.

We had male cheerleaders when I was in HS, ain't no thang but a new name.

c_hawkbob wrote:We had male cheerleaders when I was in HS, ain't no thang but a new name.

I think they still have male cheerleaders in college, too. I think the difference is the roles they play. The ones in the NFL want to be in the line with the women and do what they do as opposed to the traditional male cheer-leading roles. Or maybe I'm just plain wrong on this.

RiverDog wrote:I can't imagine that there's enough of a gain in perceived game day experience to offset the headaches that comes with what is nothing less than soft core porn designed specifically to appeal to us men's libido.

"Soft core porn"?? Maybe if you're a 17th-century Puritan. They're a *dance troupe*, for Heaven's sake.

[edit- and yeah, I could care less who's on the troupe, nor what they call themselves.]

RiverDog wrote:I can't imagine that there's enough of a gain in perceived game day experience to offset the headaches that comes with what is nothing less than soft core porn designed specifically to appeal to us men's libido.

burrrton wrote:"Soft core porn"?? Maybe if you're a 17th-century Puritan. They're a *dance troupe*, for Heaven's sake.

[edit- and yeah, I could care less who's on the troupe, nor what they call themselves.]

Hey, I'm a guy that loves patronizing breasteraunts like Twin Peaks and Tilted Kilt. Puritan is at the very bottom of the list of terms that my friends would use to describe my personality. My point was about the hypocrisy of the league, on the one hand fancying themselves as family friendly and respectful of women and on the other hand, employing half naked women who's primary purpose is to appeal to the predominantly male audience. They're using sex to promote their product.

Calling it soft core porn might be a little over the top, but so is calling them a dance troupe. They don't dress like dance troupes, don't shake their boobs and booty like dance troupes, and dance troupes do not have the television camera angles arranged to highlight their exposed cleavage.

Likewise, we had male cheerleaders in high school, too, and I really don't care one way or another if they have males on the cheerleading squads. As is evident in my comments above, I think that they ought to get rid of them. Their entertainment value is nil IMO.

RiverDog wrote:
Hey, I'm a guy that loves patronizing breasteraunts like Twin Peaks and Tilted Kilt. Puritan is at the very bottom of the list of terms that my friends would use to describe my personality. My point was about the hypocrisy of the league, on the one hand fancying themselves as family friendly and respectful of women and on the other hand, employing half naked women who's primary purpose is to appeal to the predominantly male audience. They're using sex to promote their product.

Calling it soft core porn might be a little over the top, but so is calling them a dance troupe. They don't dress like dance troupes, don't shake their boobs and booty like dance troupes, and dance troupes do not have the television camera angles arranged to highlight their exposed cleavage.

Likewise, we had male cheerleaders in high school, too, and I really don't care one way or another if they have males on the cheerleading squads. As is evident in my comments above, I think that they ought to get rid of them. Their entertainment value is nil IMO.

I wouldn't agree that their entertainment value as nil because I like to check em out when there's a play stoppage at the game. And as you can tell by my avatar, I like taking pictures with them at open practices and game days. That said, if they disappeared all together I wouldn't be terribly upset either.

e.g. they are not why I go to the practices and games.

idhawkman wrote:I wouldn't agree that their entertainment value as nil because I like to check em out when there's a play stoppage at the game. And as you can tell by my avatar, I like taking pictures with them at open practices and game days. That said, if they disappeared all together I wouldn't be terribly upset either.

e.g. they are not why I go to the practices and games.

I was speaking for myself when I said that their entertainment value is nil, and I was thinking more along the lines of novel game day activities that are unique to a football game, like marching bands. And yea, I don't close my eyes when they happen to be in my view. I like the eye candy just as much as the next guy.

Calling it soft core porn might be a little over the top, but so is calling them a dance troupe.

Nonsense. So You Think You Can Dance just started a new season- watch a few of the performances. Or hell, go see the Rockettes. Or the Wazzu dance team.

I'm not arguing they're not sexualized, but that's what a lot of dance is these days.

RiverDog wrote:
I was speaking for myself when I said that their entertainment value is nil, and I was thinking more along the lines of novel game day activities that are unique to a football game, like marching bands. And yea, I don't close my eyes when they happen to be in my view. I like the eye candy just as much as the next guy.

Yeah, what you said.

burrrton wrote:Nonsense. So You Think You Can Dance just started a new season- watch a few of the performances. Or hell, go see the Rockettes. Or the Wazzu dance team.

I'm not arguing they're not sexualized, but that's what a lot of dance is these days.

Here's an opinion piece out of USA Today from a little less than a year ago that captures my feelings on the subject:

Actually, a beauty-pageant swimsuit competition is mild compared to what passes for “cheerleading” in the NFL, which dives into its 2018 preseason this week. Besides putting the sexy young performers on the sidelines in bikini-sized costumes, professional football teams have them shake and twerk in ways more akin to pole-dancing than traditional cheerleading.

Over recent months, we’ve seen the crumbling of any last pretense that these women are out there to lead cheers and pump up fans’ enthusiasm for the action on the field. Reports have spilled out about the performers facing constant groping and verbal come-ons when forced to interact with fans, cheerleaders on Washington's team being required to parade topless for an all-male group of suite-holders at a photo shoot, and several NFL teams fielding offshoots of their cheerleading squads that don’t even appear on the sidelines; their job is to mingle with the high-rollers in the stadium luxury suites.

Cheers for the home team? The real essence of NFL cheerleading is captured by reports like this gem from TMZ Sports: “Roughly 1,000 of the hottest chicks in Texas went down to Houston this weekend ... to try out for a spot on the Texans cheerleading squad ... and TMZ Sports has pics from the smokin' hot audition.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 897735002/

And how many college teams have rules for their cheerleaders such as these:

Rules that can be found across several teams include:

Undergoing regular weigh-ins
Maintaining an 'ideal weight'
Following specific shaving techniques
Adhering to tampon usage guidelines
Removing or covering body piercings
Refraining from showing tattoos
Taking water breaks only at specific times
Socializing or dating as per team guidelines
Leaving the stadium before changing into regular clothes
Not wearing sweatpants in public
Limiting activity on social media
Observing nail polish and jewelry guidelines
Not interacting with the team's players in person or online
Not eating in the same restaurant as a player of the team
Leaving if a player enters the restaurant where they are dining
Blocking the team's players on social media

ihttps://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/art ... ealed.html

Now you can't tell me that the costumes, behavior, and expectations of Wazu cheerleaders, participants on "Dancing with the Stars", or even the "Rockettes" is anything close to that which is on display in the NFL.

NFL cheerleaders are a vestige of high school glory days . . . except they wear even less clothing.

Now you can't tell me that the costumes, behavior, and expectations of Wazu cheerleaders, participants on "Dancing with the Stars", or even the "Rockettes" is anything close to that which is on display in the NFL.

Rules and expectations aren't what make actual porn "porn", and if you don't think the costumes and behavior of those dancers can rival NFL cheerleaders', you haven't watched them.

This isn't the hill you want to die on.

[edit]

In fact, it's so silly, it's not even worth arguing about. Believe what you want without me hassling you. Out.

Now you can't tell me that the costumes, behavior, and expectations of Wazu cheerleaders, participants on "Dancing with the Stars", or even the "Rockettes" is anything close to that which is on display in the NFL.

burrrton wrote:Rules and expectations aren't what make actual porn "porn", and if you don't think the costumes and behavior of those dancers can rival NFL cheerleaders', you haven't watched them.

This isn't the hill you want to die on.

[edit]

In fact, it's so silly, it's not even worth arguing about. Believe what you want without me hassling you. Out.

I already admitted that my characterization of it being soft porn was over the top. Indeed, my main point is about the hypocrisy of an organization selling themselves as this family friendly, female friendly business yet doing things like employing young attractive "cheerleaders" to do nothing else but fraternize with high rollers in their luxury suites.

And it's the off season. What the hell else are we going to argue about? Robert "Rub 'n Tug" Kraft?