Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltedDonkey
Dude I am not a libertarian and I'm not like defending the integrity of any contract no matter what but if there is no specific coercion or extenuating circumstances then I don't see the problem. Like, if cheerleading sucks so bad, why don't they just be waitresses instead or something? Is there some reason they can't?
I really don't think you should be talking about cheerleading at all, because the nature of cheerleading as described in the one paragraph you've said you're focusing on is not an
isolated summary of cheerleading, it is
in addition to and
inseparable from the incidents I posted from the article. When it comes to this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltedDonokey
I interpreted:
Cheerleaders are paid **** money and are expected to hand over control of their lives in exchange for visibility or having "former NFL cheerleader" on their resume or whatever it is they're expecting to get out of it
as a related but separate statement referring to the job of cheerleading generally (not to the Costa Rica incident specifically). It is the job of cheerleading generally (outside of that incident) that I am trying to discuss.
I do not concede that you can discuss "the job of cheerleading generally (outside of that incident)". The two are part and parcel. For another example, the "groping and harassment" article I linked describes
another Redskins incident where cheerleaders, who are often booked for promotional gigs at hospitals and charities and the like, were instead booked (without their knowledge) to a skeezy house party with a bunch of dudes who wanted the cheerleaders to dance for them.
The job of cheerleading that
you are trying to discuss, by taking my paragraph out of context, is not a real job; it doesn't exist. That's why I'm talking about libertarian philosophy and stuff, because the conversation you're trying to have sure seems like a philosophical one and not one grounded in any kind of empirical reality we can frame it around.