It's funny the sort of things that rouse our ire even though we logically understand it happens all the time and is unlikely to change.

Again, this is less a poker issue than a societal issue. As long as women are still seen as commodity to be used to sell other things by advertisers and society in general, this type of thing will be the norm.

Now, you can argue the tables are VERY SLIGHTLY starting to turn - has anyone seen that Gillette ad where three women talk about how they like their men to style their body hair? I mean the women are gorgeous of course, but the underlying message of the ad is that if you want a hot woman, guys, you better be prepared to alter something about your body that the women find objectionable, even though body hair is, you know, pretty natural when you get right down to it. It's the same message women receive on a lot of different levels from childhood on (you want the hot guy? you better be the right weight/wear the right clothes/have the right hairstyle/makeup/etc.), which I guess I must either be numb to or just don't care. But that Gillette commercial, which you'd think I'd like on some level since it turns the tables to a small degree on guys, fills me with the rage of 100 fiery suns.

Interesting. Ive never seen the commercial. Post the link so we can look at it. Maybe Diamond Dixie will like it.

LOL

Bottom line sex sells stuff!

I LOATHE this commercial.

Ha, I actually like this, partly for the reasons you mentioned above (that women are expected to shave much of their body hair, so why shouldn't men). I also just dislike male body hair and think it's great that it's becoming more socially acceptable for men to shave/wax.

I mean if a guy wants to shave/wax more power to them. I just...I just HATE this commercial.

"And this is Genesis. She likes her men completely hairless and no she doesn't think that's weird."

Um, yeah it is ****ing weird. You know who's hairless? Little kids. Closet pedo commercial IMO.

THIS - IS - MAGNIFICENT!!!!

OMG I love this It illustrates a concept I've been trying to show someone else for a few days now: That preference is completely subjective despite cultural norms. Women are allowed to be selective in odd ways just like men, and this video is starting to expose that. I absolutely love it.

Ya, and you know what else SHOULD be wierd? Men's general obsession with fat deposits that were designed to nourish children.

There are plenty of sexual preferences out there I find odd but I don't put them down or make fun of them. My own personal sexual preferences, while they seem perfectly normal and fun to me, may be shocking and repulsive to others. If it's not your thing, hey that's cool. But pedo commercial? That's a bit far.

But let's turn on sexist mode here for a second: If I was a guy, sixteen, and hairless and "Genesis" walked up to me and started hitting me up? I would have jumped on that train without a moments thought.

Of course at 16 I probably would have jumped on any train without a moments thought, but that's a horse of a different color.

I was obviously exaggerating for effect, I don't think it's really a closet pedo commercial. I don't care who or what you want to have sex with, as long as that other person is old enough and sane enough to give consent.

Like I said I can't even articulate WHY I hate this commercial so much, I just do.

They sure are hot though, probably not much brains upstairs, but hot.

"Most poker players are men, men like hot women, therefore we will include hot women in our poker TV show."

Its not too complex if you think about it in the producers eyes. I cannot really see any downside.


Also who will bring out the money to dump on the table when its HU?

That commercial is perfect for metrosexual and homosexual men. A lot of men and women dont like masculinity.

Not me, I like manly men!

Well it just keeps getting worse: http://calvinayre.com/2013/08/02/pok...-and-handbags/

"If you are female, have a great figure, look aesthetically pleasing to the eye and have the intelligence and the time to learn how to play poker then what are you waiting for?"

I guess anyone who's already playing and a decent player should just quit if they don't fit this description.

I think that's a rather misguided statement. What do you expect the girls are going to tell you -- a "customer" they barely know (no offense but it's true) -- about liking when guys come talk to them while on the job? Sounds like they gave the proper, politically correct answer (as they should). It's not like they're just going to tell every Tom, Jane, and Harry who asks, "Oh yeah, I totally ****ing HATE when these nerdy guys with questionable hygiene sit next to me for 3 hours at a time, try hitting on me by talking about nothing but ranges and value bets, and I can't even leave because it's my job to sit there and act interested. Can you believe that!?!?! As soon as my application gets picked to be on The Bachelor, I'm so outta here." Models are a dime a dozen, so they could probably get fired just for saying something like that.

This isn't a generalization about stereotypes like "all poker players are creepy" and "hot girls must be bored by 'lower value' men". In fact, I'd bet any amount of money some of the RFG have been on dates with poker players since being hired. That said, you'd be kidding yourself if you think they don't have awkward, endless interactions during those social bars at FTs that they'd kill to get out of. Just think of it in relation to any normal bar/social mixer. A guy is well within his rights to approach a woman. They may connect, they may not. The difference is when a girl doesn't connect/is creeped by a guy at a bar, she can walk away whenever she wants. The RFG not only cannot walk away, but they have to continue engaging the guy as if they were interested because they are paid to do so. That leads to the guys they don't connect with (maybe not necessarily all of them but the law of large numbers would say it happens at least once per FT) "overstaying their welcome". Having seen a few of these WPT webcasts it's often not hard to tell when this is happening, and yes, it's hard to watch.

It's not exactly new for a brand to hire hot women to promote said brand, so I have no issue with RFG in general. That said, the social bar needs to go. It's awkward to see in the background, and more importantly it's making the rest of us look bad.

That article makes me...ugh...I can't even...

SO MUCH RAGE.

Okay hooold on there cowboys and cowgirls. Yes, his moronic "Lipstick and High Heels" generalization is total and complete bull**** and yes his absolute stereotyping of how female poker players should "have a great figure, look aesthetically pleasing to the eye and have the intelligence and the time to learn how to play poker...." is beyond defense, if you go through the rest of the article it actually has some interesting talking points.


This is actually really awesome news!!! Participation of female poker players is up and their skills are starting to be noticed! Acceptance is growing! This is a good thing!

Framed in his original sexist statements, this paragraph is tough to read without considering it a gender slam of some kind. However, consider this:

1: The purpose of Ladies-Only events is to encourage people who would otherwise not play to come and enjoy the game in a comfortable environment.

2: The Ladies-Only Event is being billed the "Ladies Championship", bracelet and all.

These two ideas are in direct opposition with each other. You are attempting to offer a tournament that will attract newcomers and create a comfortable and friendly environment, while at the same time using that tournament to host a high-competition environment by making it a Championship and attaching a bracelet to it. Can you imagine how much the female pros of the poker world are salivating over this? You're going to have a ton of new and inexperienced players in a small field that's going to have sharks who will completely destroy and decimate them.

How's that for a safe and comfortable environment?

They have, in fact, created one of the softest fields to get a bracelet simply by employing a marketing ploy. It doesn't make sense to me. Can someone please help me see it from another perspective?

I did see this on Pokernews.com, and it only reinforced my opinion.

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2013/0...lbst-16036.htm

Please keep in mind I don't see that women only events are bad for poker, merely that by offering a bracelet event for "Ladies Championship" you are essentially creating a easy shot for someone to get a bracelet.

The first three in F1 motor races walk up staircases lined with identically dressed women. There must be a hundred of them. Standing and clapping and being pretty but otherwise having no function whatsoever. Apart from the sexism it just looks so weird.

I don't watch that much TV poker so I don't know what show this was but at the final table two women come and perch on stools in the back of the set. And just sit there. For hours. And try not to fidget.

I can understand it when there's a job to do, however minor, like handing over a trophy or leading a winning horse into the enclosure. But it's people as literally no more than ornaments that looks so peculiar and incongruous.

Who doesn't like hot women though? I cant grasp how people would turn on the TV and have the mindset of "look at those hot girls in their skin-tight sponsor race suits, clapping for the drivers for this stupid racing event...."<scarfs down another 2 liters of ice cream sitting on the couch>

Seriously though no guys on the planet dislike the combo of hot women and sporting events, no matter how little impact they have on the event or how little sport is actually involved (poker).

I mean what else are these women supposed to do when you look that good? Models have employed since forever and its mostly just posing and standing around thats like the definition of model.

So... if you are against things like the royal flush girls, clapping F-1 girls, car show girls that just stand there next to the car etc, you are basically denying that these women should work in this career choice they have made. Would you prefer they add to the growing national unemployment rate and collect welfare? The logic of that alone is wrapped in layers of stupidity.

Some men are gay.

Go to school, become engineers, teachers, doctors, etc. Be encouraged by society and their families to use their brains and personalities to formulate their self worth. Use their superpowers for good and not evil. I dunno, anyone think of anything else?

But it's cool to be totally misogynistic on the internet, amirite?

Yeah, they took a career in modeling because they have the mental capacity to be a Engineer or a Doctor but chose MODELING instead! Not everybody is born with remotely that capacity.

Also good job at judging womens success based solely on their career choice. Maybe she is super happy as a model, makes 100k a year, has nice family etc.

lol@you

You asked the question, not me. Your question implies that women who look that good either cannot nor should not do anything else but be models. Assuming you didn't really mean to imply that, then you've learned the importance of linguistic precision.

And how do you know they don't have the mental capacity? Have you had the experience of being a young girl in junior high school? If you think girls aren't influenced from a young age that looks and beauty are more important than science and math (or school/education in general), you are sadly naive.

Barbie says, "Math class is hard!" *giggle* More like, teachers and society and boys and other girls told Barbie that math class is supposed to be hard, and when you're young and impressionable, that pressure is a very real and influential thing, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Thank god for people like Danica McKellar (Winnie Cooper!) who are actively trying to bridge that gap. http://www.mathdoesntsuck.com/

I tried to talk my sister out of conforming to gender stereotypes and being bad at math but it didn't take.

Ditto with my brother who excelled at math but had problems with English.

Bastards.

Here is an interesting rebuttal to that article by poker writer Jen Newell:
http://www.poker.co.uk/table-talk-ho...lay-poker-now/

Loved Jenn's article, she nailed it!

I personally don't know how much this relates to women's career choices. No one is forcing or even railroading models into the jobs they have. For all we know many of them may feel like it's their lifes work to look "perfect" or maybe they honestly love the work they do and get satisfaction out of it.

It's hard to say that people are turned off things they would have fallen in love with because of peers. Bill gates was bullied relentlessly for his interest in programming all through his schooling life even from a younger age, but he continued to do it because he loved what he was doing, and once he had gotten a taste he wasn't going to stop something so enjoyable and interesting to him.

Inversely i don't think any amount of coddling can make people want to do certain things. I was pointed in the direction of IT and music by my parents and although i was intelligent enough to learn the subject matter (the girls / women you talked about would most likely be of maths / science), i simply didn't want to go that way. It didn't interest me.

At the moment I think that any women even SLIGHTLY thinking of picking up poker would have role models like liv boree and anette to look up to and also have a much easier chance at a bracelet and sponsorship than dudes. If seeing some women in a slightly negative light (under their own choosing) is enough to turn a prospect off the game, then that person would have been turned off very soon later down the track by another one of the not so nice realities of poker.

My main point is that no amount of coddling can make people do something they have no base interest in regardless of what their capability in that field would have been, and no amount of negative peer response will turn people away from something they truly love.