…or at least, that is what one is led to believe by the promise of many new ‘Hooters‘ bars cropping up all over England. Hoorah, another way of normalising the objectification and degradation of women.
I’ll link you up to the criticisms on The F-Word, and the relevant Facebook group and petition, but first have a look at what Hooters have to say for themselves:
The element of female sex appeal is prevalent in the restaurants, and the company believes the Hooters Girl is as socially acceptable as a Dallas Cowboy cheerleader, Sports Illustrated swimsuit model, or a Radio City Rockette. The Hooters system employs over 25,000 people - over 15,000 of which are Hooters Girls. The “nearly world famous” Hooters Girls are the cornerstone of the Hooters concept, and as part of their job, these all-American cheerleaders make promotional and charitable appearances in their respective communities. Hooters hires women who best fit the image of a Hooters Girl to work in this capacity. The chain hires both males and females to work in management and host, staff, service bar, and kitchen positions. The Hooters Girl uniform consists of orange shorts and a white tank top, short-sleeve or long-sleeve T-shirt. Pantyhose and bras are required.
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.
The chain acknowledges that many consider “Hooters” a slang term for a portion of the female anatomy. Hooters does have an owl inside its logo and uses an owl theme sufficiently to allow debate to occur over the meaning’s intent. The chain enjoys and benefits from this debate. In the end, we hope Hooters means a great place to eat.
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.
Oh I could continue quoting, but you might as well read the page if it interests you. I’ll just add this one bit:
Sex appeal is legal and it sells. Newspapers, magazines, daytime talk shows, and local television affiliates consistently emphasize a variety of sexual topics to boost sales. Hooters marketing, emphasizing the Hooters Girl and her sex appeal, along with its commitment to quality operations continues to build and contributes to the chain’s success. Hooters’ business motto sums it up, “You can sell the sizzle, but you have to deliver the steak.”
Lovely. It’s one of those ‘the majority is always right, therefore the perceived majority is always right, therefore the media is always right and therefore we are’ decisions. Pretty questionable if you ask me. What they don’t seem to understand is that their company reduces women to mere ’sex appeal’, and normalises the view of women as constantly sexually available, as there for male pleasure and as subservient. As Laura Woodhouse from The F-Word puts it,
Some women may have no problems working there or dealing with the customers. But some women choosing to work there doesn’t mean that the Hooters’ view of women is OK. As long as women are primarily valued and viewed as sex objects for male pleasure/entertainment, all women suffer, because that status allows us to be discriminated against and “justifies” male sexual harassment of women, the myths about rape (she asked for it because she had her breasts out, she wanted it really etc etc), paying us less or barring our access to certain jobs. We will not be seen or treated as equals with equal rights as long as the culture of which Hooters is a part insists that our greatest asset is our breasts, and that these exist for men to look at and make money out of.
Other women have to take any job going, and they shouldn’t have to put up with the Hooters uniform and sexual harassment in order to make a living. Callers on the show last night who claimed that no one has to do a job they don’t like are naive. You think people CHOOSE to empty bins or clean toilets day in, day out for years on end? People have to make ends meet, and they should not have to put up with the Hooters environment in order to do so. I don’t think the women who choose to work there should have to, either.
Here are the anti-hooters links: Both blogs at The F-Word , Facebook group, PETITION, Guardian article.
And here’s the agreement that all of the ‘girls’ have to sign - read paras 2 and 3.
I’d be intrigued to know what you think about this. Personally, as you may have gathered, I’m astonished that this should even be suggested, let alone accepted, as a new branch of restaurants, pleasantly titled ‘breastaurants’ by one of the lawyers for Hooters (which, really, says it all), in England.
Goodness, that’s a bit of a long sentence, sorry. I hope that there is some way of stopping them, really I do. The fact that they are celebrating their 25th Birthday in America is depressing enough, let’s hope they never get to celebrate their first one here.
[Edit: It would appear that actually they have been successful in getting permission for a Hooters in Southend on Sea. Damn damn damn damn. But that does not mean (obviously) that we just give up and accept their existence in our country. Or indeed anywhere. Keep fighting the good fight, my friends. And on that note, as ever, adieu.]



![me and me =] me and me =]](http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3167/2530107407_91183565a4_t.jpg)
22 comments
Comments feed for this article
April 21, 2008 at 12:00 am
Jacob Ward
Hopefully it will be extremely unsuccessful and will close down and the bastards will stay the fuck away from our island in future.
Who the hell would take their kids there? Might as well drop by a stripper joint on the way home and buy them some crack cocaine just for good measure. Parents like that need to go to prison, or perhaps labour camps so they can in some way contribute to society, as they’re probably unemployed
I disagree with Ms Woodhouse…there’s always a choice. Toilet cleaners, if they really dislike their line of work, can opt for a different job - they may be paid less and have to make some compromises, but if it matters that much then they can. It’s greed which prevents that, and greed which ‘forces’ girls into working at such despicable places as this. If they don’t want to work there, they really don’t have to. If money meant less to them than dignity then they’d work in a shop.
We could burn it down when it opens?…
April 21, 2008 at 8:45 am
Sunday Night, Monday Morning « The Daily Terror
[...] Hope, Telegraph) MPs to rebel over 42-day terror detention limit (Robert Winnett, Telegraph) Apparently society really is moving backwards… (The Token [...]
April 21, 2008 at 1:36 pm
Jacob Ward
And, unpleasant as Hooters is, just thank fuck you live in a country where at least some people aren’t clinically insane.
Link
April 21, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Caitlin
Jakey, just because the majority appear to be happy to go along with what you and I would probably agree is ridiculous, outdated and really, downright disgusting, does not mean that everyone in Saudi Arabia is clinically insane. But you know that - we’ve had this conversation before haven’t we. *Tuts*
Ok, so I agree with you when you say that you hope that it will close down. That’d be dandy - it would be even better if it just never opened here. Burning it down would be somewhat illegal, but I’m sure it’d be mighty satisfying…
But I think that’s where us agreeing ends RE your comment.
The parents that take their children there do not need to go to prison. I know you’re prob joking - but it should still be said that just because a family goes into such a foul establishment that does not mean that they are unemployed/don’t contribute to society. I’m not condoning going - it encourages the company and allows the children to be subjected to the degradation of women as though it were a normal thing. But really, parents that hit their children should go to prison. Parents that abuse their children in any way should go to prison. Not parents that take their children out to lunch/dinner and make a very unfortunate choice of ‘restaurant’.
As you no doubt know, however, it is on the issue of whether the women that work there ‘always have a choice’ that we differ. I think it’s a bit naive, Jake, to think that if you dislike your job you can ‘always opt for another one’. Sometimes it’s just not that easy. Needing money is not greed - it’s sadly a necessity of life. Without money, you can’t really do much round here. It is not greed, therefore, to work in a job which you find degrading in order to get by. Because without said job you would be unable to pay your way through education, or have somewhere to stay, or hell even something to eat.
People do jobs that they don’t like all the time. That doesn’t make it ok for these women to have to. Especially when the job is degrading and sexist, and reinforces a view of women in society which has very negative effects. So some of the women may want to work there - I’m not denying that - but there will also be those who simply can’t afford to do anything else. For whom it is ‘easy money’ and they have to try and ignore their own discomfort. Toilet cleaners, Jakey, often can’t just get another job. Maybe they aren’t qualified enough, maybe they are just unlucky - there are no doubt hundreds of reasons. Do you seriously think that there are many people who do jobs like cleaning toilets, taking the bins etc who genuinely like their jobs? Or are they working out of necessity?
It is wrong to blame these women for the existence of such an establishment. Those to blame are the owners of the company, and indeed the people who willingly passed the planning permission for Southend-On-Sea.
Anyway I gotta go - if that didn’t make much sense, do say and I’ll try and re-word it
April 21, 2008 at 7:12 pm
Jacob Ward
You correctly picked up on my flippancy
I’m not blaming the employees, though without them the company wouldn’t be able to continue.
It’s really how you define ‘necessity’ that is the source of our disagreement. No one, save slaves, has to do a job they don’t want to. They can quit at any time they like, but they would have to put up with the compromises I alluded to, be they having to return to live with their parents, dropping out of school, going hungry for a while, or innumerable other hardships. I don’t contest that millions of people labour on in jobs they detest, but they don’t have to. If they’d be prepared to put up with a lower standard of living then they could get a lower paid job elsewhere, or live off the state.
I would plead the same allowance for nonsensicalness, as dinner is on its way to my lap as I write, lol.
April 21, 2008 at 9:12 pm
Caitlin
No, they don’t have to. Just like we don’t have to eat, or drink, or sleep. We don’t have to do anything, if we don’t want to live.
So for you, then, life is not a necessity? It’s simply not as easy as going home to stay with your parents. You have no idea what situations these women are in, just as I have no idea. But I know that a lot of women that get involved in stripping/prostitution do so because there seems to be no other way to get by. They can’t go home - maybe there are no parents to go home to, maybe they lived in an abusive family. Should they have to go back to that? No. Why should they have to drop out of education? Everyone has the right to an education, and by ‘dropping out of school’ they are, in effect, condemning themselves to a lifetime of vapid jobs - with no qualifications, they really aren’t going to get the job that they enjoy. Go hungry for a while? No Jakey, this is not about choosing to quit now, this is about choosing to degrade yourself or to eat. You say that they are wrong, greedy even, to choose to be a Hooters Girl over eating? Riiiight. That sounds fair.
April 21, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Jacob Ward
Life’s never fair and it never will be.
You really cannot equate strippers/prostitutes with Hooters girls. If you can get a job in Hooters you can probably get a job in some other place with only a minimal pay cut, or even a pay rise. I was exaggerating with the eating thing.
I’m ok with them signing up to be Hooters girls (given that, contrary to our wishes they do in fact exist) if that’s what they want to do, but to apply if you don’t want to be one because it may pay more than other jobs is undeniably motivated by avarice. Like I say, compromises are always possible. My interpretation of the necessity alluded to by Ms Woodhouse is that some girls ‘have’ to work in Hooters. That is all I contest.
April 23, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Matt Gates
This debate is expanding- having just had a lengthy conversation with someone else about it it’s time for me to stick my oar in as well =)
Reading and weighing it all up the fact that ‘women can choose to work there’ is not a valid argument for me. Indeed, the fact that ‘men shouldn’t go there’ doesn’t work either. What bugs me about ‘Hooters’ is the message it sends out- that objectification of women is ok. I know what many people have said- it’s just a small thing and there’s plently worse BUT the human mind (and society doesn’t work like that.)
It’s the same for any association with anything - our minds build up a sterotype (aka a schema) from like cues that we see (whether it be an advert on tv or a hooters bar) which then forms our way of thinking about a place or thing- and Hooters is adding to that sterotype. If the image of women in society (which is constructed mainly by the little things put together) is to be stopped than it is the little things that need to be abolished as it is these that create sexism
That’s my viewpoint anyway, a bit of psychology, a bit of feminist social constructionism. Not saying everyone will agree with it, they dont’ have to either, but I think that this is the case =)
April 24, 2008 at 11:24 am
Caitlin
That’s what I’ve been saying, you crazy fool. Glad you agree.
but in the fact that the women who take those jobs often do so out of need rather than greed, and that the job is degrading and perpetuates an idea of women in society which is negative. Hooters does deals where bachelor parties get a discount on local strip clubs if the ‘dine’ in a Hooters restaurant, so not only do the women who work there get objectified, the company condones strip clubs, encouraging men to go to them.
But I think, if you’re responding to mine and Jake’s debate, that we may all agree that Hooters sends out a negative image which affects the way that society thinks, but Jakey believes that the women who work there have the choice to work there, and that to work there therefore indicates greed, while I disagree.
You say you do, but without an argument…I’d love to hear your argument though, keep this discussion going
Jakey - sometimes, people are in situations where they need jobs which pay more highly. They do things that they would otherwise disagree with in times of need. Take the guy they wrote about in the Guardian yesterday (here)
- he was trying to pay off a huge amount of debt so got involved in selling illegal dvds, with a gang which he did not realise was so violent. It’s horrible, but an example of work that you do because it’s necessary, rather than out of greed.
Also - what kind of argument is ‘life’s not fair’?? Overall, no it might not be. Does that mean you just accept unfairness? That’s like saying well, society is sexist (it is), therefore we should just leave it as sexist. There’s nowt we can do. I disagree.
And yes, you can equate them with prostitutes/strippers - perhaps not in the magnitude of their job (that might be the wrong word…my apologies…
It all sickens me, totally sickens me. And so does the ‘just don’t go there then’ attitude that so many people seem to have!!
April 24, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Jacob Ward
Hooters is, primarily, a restaurant, with the degradation of women as a side dish so to speak. As such it would not employ crack addicts or anyone else who would be ridiculously unreliable - the kind of people pushed into prostitution. Furthermore, their waitresses get paid minimum wage for the state they’re in, plus 1% of tips - extraordinarily low. I fail to see how someone desperately in need of cash would be forced into a job that pays as little as $2.13(that’s £1.07) per hour. Thus, anyone who works in Hooters could quite easily get a higher paying job; selling lemonade by the side of the road would be more profitable. Having discovered this I retract my statement about Hooters girls being ‘forced’ to work there through greed, as that is a paltry sum, though I stand by my original point that they’re not forced to work there and can always find employment elsewhere.
I stand by my principle though; it is avarice which pushes people into doing things they ‘wouldn’t normally do’; COMPROMISES are always possible, even if it means going to prison, it’s far preferable to behave as you feel you should. Than bend your morals, break the law and screw up your life.
I have little sympathy for that guy; he shouldn’t have come into the country illegally in the first place. Surely everyone in the world has by now heard some horror story about people traffickers and would therefore be somewhat reluctant to do business with them. And no, that doesn’t mean I think he deserved it.
Did I ever say I liked the idea of Hooters? I know full well it’s degrading. My point is that girls don’t work there out of either need or greed, purely as just another job for a bit of cash which they could get elsewhere if they wanted. I work at the castle; if I wanted I could get another low paying job somewhere on Lewes High Street - it’s the same situation. The content of the job has nothing to do with it. I wouldn’t want to work in a place like Hooters (if I were female), so I would choose to get a job elsewhere. They are not working there out of necessity. As such you CANNOT equate prostitution/stripping with working at Hooters. Of course they’re all about the degradation of women, but their employees have little in common.
It was not an attempt at an intelligent argument, merely an observation; every aspect of life is unfair, and it will not become so because people are people, not machines, so they cannot be programmed into all behaving in a certain manner. Just say, as a random example, that your partner of a year and two months were to sleep with some stranger at a music festival, thereby destroying your life as you had come to know it. What would be the thing to do; never have a relationship again because there’s a chance the next one would do the same thing to you or get on with your life, having accepted the reality that it may happen again, because that’s what life is like.
I agree it is not exactly pleasant and I would prefer they’d fuck off out of my country, if not the world, but it’s unlikely to happen. Life sucks.
April 24, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Caitlin
I’ll reply to you properly later. For now, just one Q - where did you find out how much the Hooters girls earn?
April 24, 2008 at 6:33 pm
Jacob Ward
HERE
The figure $2.13 came from Wikipedia as the federal minimum wage for tipping jobs.
April 24, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Caitlin
“flexible hours, great money and tuition reimbursement”
Would they be able to claim ‘great money’ if it weren’t an unusual amount? Also where did you find out their definition of gratuity? And where does it say they get 1% of the tips??
I concede, if they are paid poorly then the argument that they need to do it to survive becomes somewhat difficult to maintain. However I have issues with the sources of your ‘information’ and believe that, even if they only were paid the minimum wage, the tips on top of it would be substantial. And whether ‘gratuity’ is tipping or something extra that Hooters does is unclear.
Anyway I’m off to bed for some Hooters-fuelled nightmares, ciao.
April 24, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Jacob Ward
Gratuity is the term for tips prevalent in America.
What on earth is your problem with my information? It’s a Hooters advert. If you want more then here
and here
and here
The 1% came from here though it would appear that it usually depends on the size of your breasts.
Of course they say it’s great money, most employers with uncertain pay due to tips would.
At this low rate, who would work there save those who really want to work there or have been fired from all other local restaurants?
On a more personal note, I should really take my bag to my mum’s in the evening as I currently have what will shortly be a very painful migraine and no pills to deal with it with. Hey ho.
I’d say sweet dreams, but unless there’s something you haven’t been telling me, then I guess you won’t enjoy your Hooter girl dreams
Night
April 24, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Jacob Ward
Why aren’t my posts coming up?
Lol.
April 24, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Caitlin
Your posts? I have no idea…I haven’t set it to regulate them, maybe you just haven’t written any
And I am fully aware that it is now past midnight and I said I was going to bed. I’m a terrible person.
April 24, 2008 at 11:29 pm
Jacob Ward
I’ll email it to you and perhaps you could post it (for the millions of fans who follow our disputes :P) How strange.
April 25, 2008 at 9:49 am
Caitlin
Ok, I’m sorry that I have a problem with your info. I just think that it is unlikely that Hooters could get away with 1% of tips (is that even legal?) and so I question them. And if that piece of info came from Wiki, isn’t it fair to have a problem with the info?
As for your sources, none say that the ‘girls’ aren’t tipped substantially. Indeed, while they acknowledge that they are paid the minimum wage, they also make a point of how important tips are:
I got rid of one of the links as it didn’t work, but all of the others do. I just think that at least some women who work there do it for the money, in order to get by, rather than out of a general desire to be objectified. But that doesn’t mean I think that all of the women who work there want to be elsewhere - far from it, sadly.
April 25, 2008 at 9:56 am
Caitlin
Ah. It thought you were spam. My bad - I think I’ve sorted it now
April 25, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Jacob Ward
Only the info about minimum wage was from wikipedia, and it’s usually right on such things. A quick Google search corroborates it.
Anyway, I think this argument has reached its logical conclusion, and I have a migraine still, so I certainly shan’t write any more.
…ow.
See you tomorrow….do you want me to bring anything in particular or just the usual selection of rubbish? Lol.
May 5, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Nikki Mitchell
The restaraunt business is hard- whether it is at Hooters or elsewhere. To be in a male dominated enviroment is going to be a trying experience, no matter where you are. I think its important that we support women who are making an honest living- even if it is at Hooters. Like it has already been said, if you don’t like it, don’t go. Disrespecting people only furthers the problem. And if a woman wants to utilize her sexuality, what exactly is wrong with that? It does not make her unintelligent or less than. It’s kind of silly that people who are such strong supporters of feminist ideals are actually attacking women for their choices. The feminist movement is all about choice. How about respect that?
May 5, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Caitlin
I can respect women for their choices and still believe that the very concept of a Hooters ‘restaurant’ is wrong. I can respect their choice, but I don’t believe that the objectification of women should be a choice that women have to make - it shouldn’t be there in the first place. A place like Hooters normalises an ideal of women that has a negative impact not only on those who work there, but also on women generally. The very fact that most Hooters restaurants have stag night deals which combine a meal at Hooters with a discount at the local strip club shows that Hooters is not about an honest living, it’s about a company that employs women for male enjoyment. I do not disrespect the women who work there - I appreciate that women need to work just as men do, and that for some women this is seemingly the best option available. But I don’t believe that it should be an option, because the ideal that it subscribes to is one which degrades women.