Dear Diary - I'VE BEEN CENSORED!
Friday, November 20, 2009 at 6:05PM 
Dear Diary,
I am pissed.
In the American sense (pissed off), not the English sense (drunk), unfortunately.
Although I'm about to head for the Vinho Verde and correct that.
Why am I seething, dear Diary?
Well, here's what happened.
I read a blogpost on a California newspaper website. It was about another blogpost by a Virginia man who had taken his 11 year old son to Hooters. Mr Virginia said on his blog that he had taken his son there to see how he would react to the women.
I left a comment on the California newspaper website.
If I remember correctly, it went something like:
If there was a restaurant chain called Shooters, where tanned, handsome men with six packs waited on tables in Calvin Klein tighty whities and leather chaps, then this would be OK.
But there isn't, so it's not OK.
If Hooters had male waiters in orange shorts and tank tops stretched over their pecs, this would be OK.
But they don't, so it's not OK.
If this man had taken his son to another part of town to "see how he reacts to black people" would that be OK?
If there was a restaurant called NIGGAS where all the waiters were black and you could call them “boy” would that be OK?
If you are ever confused about whether something is sexist, substitute "black" for "women" and see if it sounds wrong to you.
And by the way, Hooters' hiring practices are something Mrs Palin, on her bookpushing Magical Mavericky Tour, believes in -- "profiling."
The reason I said that the above was what "I thought" I wrote, is this:
THEY DELETED MY COMMENT.
Here's their very nice email:
Hello,
I am one of the managers of [The Blog] on [Website]. While we
welcome comments to our posts and try our best not to censor anyone, I have
to ask you to revise a sentence in your comment before we can publish it.
Here is the sentence: If there was a restaurant called NIGGAS where all the
waiters were black and you could call them “boy” would that be OK?
I understand the point you are making, but it is our policy at the [The Newspaper] not to print the N-word except if it is necessary in the context of a news
story for news worthy purposes.
I really do like the points you made. Could you please re-send your comment
without the use of that word?
Thank you,
[Name][Job title]
I guess they don't have a very strong sense of irony.
Reader Comments (9)
I see. Obviously, to quote the great Mr Baldrick, for them, "irony is like tinny, only made of iron."
While I also appreciate what you were getting at, your analogy is not the least bit ironic. I think it is much too simplistic to substitute the word "black" for "women" to check to see if something is sexist. Your analogy almost implies that men go to Hooters primarily to call the waitresses by derogatory names. While I'm certain this happens on occasion, I'm doubly certain many more men go there to have a nice looking woman pay attention to/be nice to/flirt with them, if not for the food. Calling them offensive names would defeat that purpose. You imply it is accepted practice to go to Hooters and openly call the staff something like "bitches". Its not, you'd get thrown out. The article talks about a guy taking his son there to see how he would react to the women, not to encourage him to be sexually inappropriate, insensitive, insulting. A mainstream newspaper is NEVER going to let the "N-word" stay on their media, no shock there. Otherwise, hey, I enjoy your blog/tweets and believe you can tolerate a civil disagreement.
Jeff - I think the point she is making is that the very name "Hooters" is derogatory to women, in the same way the censored name is derogatory to blacks. Roughly the same as calling a place "cocks" or "balls" and having men in little tighty whities, as mentioned - how would it make you feel, to go into a place knowing the only reason women were there was to leer at men's crotches? That is kind of what it feels like to live in a world where "Hooters" is a fine name for a restaurant....
@Cindy
Thank you for your insightful comment.
@Jeff
Hey, it's OK if we disagree.
But I have to clarify one point - the irony lay in the fact that the newspaper would not let me use the N word because we as a society are sensitive to racism, but I was using it to make the point that people get sensitive about racism, but not sexism. And - guess what?- they got sensitive about the N word, but allowed the post about Hooters.
I was not saying that the man who took his son to Hooters was taking him there to call the women names. I was saying that Hooters having only hot women, and not hot men, is wrong.
We are, I think, desensitized to sexism.
There is a common myth that women have equality and so nobody needs to worry about sexism in the West anymore (Africa and the Middle East is a different story).
The existence of Hooters, without the existence of a similar establishment exploiting males, shows that women have not, in fact, won equality yet. Other signs, such as the glass ceiling, married women of child bearing age somehow "not being the right person for the job", there not being as many female CEOs/Board members/senior politicians etc. are more proof.
I don't think all Hooters should be closed down. That's like trying to eradicate prostitution or weed or gambling or alcohol or porn or teaching kids abstinence to avoid teenage pregnancy. Research shows that it just doesn't work.
So we need equal opportunity.
Recently, in Australia, they did a retrospective of a famous talent show, including recreating a Black Face routine. Harry Connick Jnr, who was a guest on the show, was appalled, and said so. This is the kind of thing that we have learnt is wrong, yet Hooters is a "family" restaurant.
A simple way to make people understand is to demonstrate to them that if it is not OK on the basis of race, it isn't OK on the basis of gender either.
I am not a radical feminist, but I do think that we have become complacent (and, by "we", I mean both men and women) and, now and then, someone needs to say something.
And, by the way, if they opened a Shooters with hot men serving, I would totally go there. As long as there is equal opportunity.
Which is also why prostitution should be legalized... but that's another conversation.
Not having read the article in question, I have to ask why the father was taking his 11 year old there to gauge some reaction. What reaction was he expecting from his son?
Personally, I LOVE Hooters! They have great food, the waitstaff is great (there are some males, but not many), and it IS a family restaurant. I've taken my kids there (2 girls, 1 boy) for as long as I can remember. It's great fun. :-) Of course, myself and my (now) ex were enthralled by all the boobage, but I don't recall ever seeing any reaction from my kids. Then again, my kids were brought up in a home where "society's" snooty standards were frowned upon. Hmmm, how about a restaurant that's a bit more equal opportunity, called "Hooters & Danglers". I'm so there, people! :-D
I completely understood the meaning behind your post, and I think it sucks, royally, that you were censored. Did you send an amended response, or did you just leave it at that?
Danglers?! When's the opening night? :)
@Shelli
Thank you for telling me there are men serving at Hooters. I didn't know that! Are they hot?
I think you are right that small children will not stare at boobies like adults do but, sadly, the portrayal of women in Western society is like a slow drip from a faucet - each individual drip seems inconsequential but, over time, we are filled to saturation with a certain perception of how women should be.
It's the same argument that gets people in a lather over fashion magazines. I love magazines - I love Vogue. But I have to admit that I am constantly berating myself for not having a body like a model. If that is what we teach our little girls, we're in trouble.
And so, now and then, I get pissed off at one of the little drops of water. Because my cup runneth over, in a bad way.
@Everywhereventually
I am sure you have been to an equivalent of Danglers. Just wish you'd taken me with you!
I honestly can't remember if the male servers were hot or not. I do remember it was incredibly busy, every table full with people waiting outside for a table. I think some of the men from "behind the scenes" were out helping. I think the only reason I remember there being men at all, was because from my vantage point, boobies were replaced with flat-chested t-shirt, which made me look up and take notice! *giggle*
I'm probably no help with your argument ... none whatsoever I'm sure! ;-) I appreciate beauty in all forms, so I'm not really one to worry about women being objectified. Now, violated is another story altogether! And only having skinny models and role models is SO wrong! I'm grateful for round or curvy or downright fat women who are making a stand against the status quo in the entertainment industry. I need to see more women who look like I do, and who are confident and not down on themselves all the time, like I am. But on the flip side, I also need to see more pretty boobies. *snort* Sorry, had to be said. ;-)
@Shelli
I completely agree that larger people who make it in the entertainment industry are a breath of fresh air.
But I wish that Seth Rogan wouldn't try to convince us that he could get Katherine Heigl!