Hooters: Family Friendly?

59 posts / 0 new
Last post
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 4 months ago
Joined: 03/16/15
Posts: 53852
Hooters: Family Friendly?

So basically there have been complaints filed against Hooters restaurants for catering to families by having kids menus, booster seats, and even t-shirts that say "Future Hooters Girl" and stuff.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/12/16/BAF61GRRBC.DTL#ixzz18m0X7Zcn

How do we feel about this? Should Hooters cater to families? Is it 'Adult' entertainment?

Offline
Last seen: 1 year 7 months ago
Joined: 01/18/06
Posts: 1626

Those girls are dressed no worse than high school kids these days. *shudder* And aside from that, I don't see what else is so much more un-kidfriendly about Hooters than any other pub.

They can cater to who they want to hopefully gain a larger consumer base. If a family is opposed to their theme, they can easily go somewhere else.

zefroim's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: 05/18/06
Posts: 126

They have a right to offer kids menus, boosters seats and childrens clothing. If you don't care for the atmosphere at Hooters then you shouldn't go, the end.

wlillie's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: 09/17/07
Posts: 1796

"zefroim" wrote:

They have a right to offer kids menus, boosters seats and childrens clothing. If you don't care for the atmosphere at Hooters then you shouldn't go, the end.

This. It's not like they are advertising happy meals or even trying to pretend like they cater to families as their first choice.

culturedmom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

They can have whatever they want and cater to whoever they want.if soeone wants to take their kid into a place like that and buy them shirts that say "Future Hooters Girl" then so be it.

That said, I detest Hooters. I think the way they hide their sexism behind beer and wings sucks. I think they perpetuate a rape culture worse then a strip joint and it makes me hella sad. It's gross, it gives a bad name to women, and is nothing more then a socially accpetable strip club masked as a restaraunt. Blech!

KimPossible's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 min 35 sec ago
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3471

I can't imagine filing complaints. Thats ridiculous to me. Its not like someone is actually forced to bring their kids there simply because they have children's menus and whatnot

Parents have the ultimate decision in if its a family eating establishment or not.

So silly. For example....i would never personally choose to take my family to hooters for a meal.

See? Problem solved! Smile

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"JorgieGirl" wrote:

Those girls are dressed no worse than high school kids these days. *shudder* And aside from that, I don't see what else is so much more un-kidfriendly about Hooters than any other pub.

They can cater to who they want to hopefully gain a larger consumer base. If a family is opposed to their theme, they can easily go somewhere else.

I agree! I have actually been to a Hooters once in my entire life ~ and it was this past fall with three kids! Smile It was this random thing ~ going to see a HS football game for the team that my BIL coaches on a friday night and it was far away and we had no idea that there would be NOTHING around it but a hooters. So, hooters it was! The food was super bad meh but the beer was cold and good! The kids had crayons and coloring books and whatnot, which made the fact that we had to be there much easier and quite appreciated. Definitely not a destination for us to set out to again on purpose, but did the trick in a pinch. I say definitely because of the food ~ we generally don't like food like that much, the actual atmosphere didn't bother me or the kids at all, it was much more sports oriented than boob oriented, actually. My kids see a lot more boobs at home then they saw there. I was actually a little let down. False advertising and all that Wink

Spacers's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4104

I didn't even know we had a Hooters here! :oops:

I don't think NOW has it right. There's a difference between accomodating families and marketing to them. If Hooter's put out a "kids eat free" ad, that would be marketing and I might have a problem with that. But offering a kids menu & booster seats for when a family stops in is an accomodation. Even one of my favorite high-end fancy restaurants has a high chair!

RebeccaA'07's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 10 months ago
Joined: 11/19/07
Posts: 1628

"culturedmom" wrote:

They can have whatever they want and cater to whoever they want.if soeone wants to take their kid into a place like that and buy them shirts that say "Future Hooters Girl" then so be it.

That said, I detest Hooters. I think the way they hide their sexism behind beer and wings sucks. I think they perpetuate a rape culture worse then a strip joint and it makes me hella sad. It's gross, it gives a bad name to women, and is nothing more then a socially accpetable strip club masked as a restaraunt. Blech!

This x3!! I've only been one time, well before kids, and I didn't find anything appealing there. The food sucked sucked and the atmosphere was full of a bunch of creepy dudes trying to get a feel. Personally, I don't like a side of boobs with my wings.

And seriously...they really have a t-shirt like that? Ewwwww.

Back to the OP - They can say what they want, parents can choose not to take their children there. If they have 1/2 a brain, they will realize that Hooters really isn't a kid place to begin with even if they do offer booster seats and crayons.

Alissa_Sal's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 06/29/06
Posts: 6427

Yeah, I think that they should have the right to offer kids menus and booster seats, and that parents should have the say about whether to take their kids there. I ve never been, but as far as I know the waitresses arent showing anything that you couldnt see at the mall or at least the beach.

I do have to question a parent that would put their kid in a "future Hooters girl" shirt.

carg0612's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 5 months ago
Joined: 09/23/09
Posts: 1554

It's their right to have booster seats and be tasteless at the same time if they want. That doesn't mean I need to bring my kids there - that's my choice.

If you don't like it, don't go. Alternatively - if you like it then get a sitter.

Offline
Last seen: 57 min 50 sec ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763

The restaurants in San Francisco, San Bruno, Sacramento and Orange County are classified as "adult entertainment" establishments but also serve minors, NOW's California chapter said in papers filed with police and prosecutors.

What's more, the organization said, Hooters provides child menus, high chairs and booster seats, and sells T-shirts in children's sizes that identify the wearer as a "Future Hooters Girl."

Patricia Bellasalma, NOW's California president, asserted that Hooters is violating state and local laws prohibiting sexually oriented "adult" businesses from serving minors. The chain is also violating federal employment standards, she said.

But in recent years, she said, the company has promoted itself as more family-friendly. She cited a statement on hooters.com that "10 percent of the parties we serve have children in them."

"If they want to switch and turn the chain into a family-style restaurant, more power to them," but Hooters would then have to follow the same anti-harassment rules as other restaurants, Bellasalma said.

If I understand the article correctly, the issue is not that they are catering to families, but that they are classified as "adult entertainment" and therefore are not supposed to serve minors. It sounds like Hooters wants it both ways: the leeway in regards to harassment of female employees and attracting families.

I've never eaten at Hooters, and doubt I ever will. I don't see them as a family restaurant. The CEO was one of the first undercover bosses; I wasn't impressed.

Spacers's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4104

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

If I understand the article correctly, the issue is not that they are catering to families, but that they are classified as "adult entertainment" and therefore are not supposed to serve minors.

How can it be considered "adult entertainment" when the albeit skimpy uniforms they wear don't come off? Everything that would make it "adult entertainment" is covered. They supposedly wear tights under the shorts, so even the appearance of butt cheeks is just an illusion.

Offline
Last seen: 1 year 7 months ago
Joined: 01/18/06
Posts: 1626

"Spacers" wrote:

How can it be considered "adult entertainment" when the albeit skimpy uniforms they wear don't come off? Everything that would make it "adult entertainment" is covered. They supposedly wear tights under the shorts, so even the appearance of butt cheeks is just an illusion.

I agree. It really is not very different, aside from theme, than most other pubs. Including good beer, and sucky food, lol.

momW's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 3 months ago
Joined: 09/29/09
Posts: 5634

I don't guess I care about whether people go to Hooter's or whether they offer children's paraphernalia. I've been to Hooter's a couple times, the food is okay, the beer is cold and the waitresses are polite. I've seen waitresses wearing skimpier clothes at our local restaurant/bar where they do encourage families to eat.

Now, do I have a problem with the overall message a place like Hooter's sends to society about the acceptance and preference of girls dressed like this? Yes. But I do not think they started this trend towards skimpy, skinny, dingy=good and all others=bad. If you want to get on a kick about that, let's talk Hollywood......

KimPossible's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 min 35 sec ago
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3471

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

If I understand the article correctly, the issue is not that they are catering to families, but that they are classified as "adult entertainment" and therefore are not supposed to serve minors. It sounds like Hooters wants it both ways: the leeway in regards to harassment of female employees and attracting families.

I've never eaten at Hooters, and doubt I ever will. I don't see them as a family restaurant. The CEO was one of the first undercover bosses; I wasn't impressed.

This is one of those things where i could see how you could catch them on this technicality, but considering that the environment isn't some sort of hard core adult entertainment, it would lead me to wonder what type of person would care so much as to actually make an issue about it.

This amounts to tattle tailing to me in my book...getting someone in trouble for the sake of getting them in trouble.

JMO

daniellevmt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 6 months ago
Joined: 07/25/06
Posts: 213

"momW" wrote:

I don't guess I care about whether people go to Hooter's or whether they offer children's paraphernalia. I've been to Hooter's a couple times, the food is okay, the beer is cold and the waitresses are polite. I've seen waitresses wearing skimpier clothes at our local restaurant/bar where they do encourage families to eat.

Now, do I have a problem with the overall message a place like Hooter's sends to society about the acceptance and preference of girls dressed like this? Yes. But I do not think they started this trend towards skimpy, skinny, dingy=good and all others=bad. If you want to get on a kick about that, let's talk Hollywood......

Yes, but can't we say the same about the message? If you don't agree with taking your kid into Hooters, then you choose not to. In the same regard, can't you just choose NOT to buy into the whole "pretty and skinny=the best" message? Or choose not to promote that to your kids?

I'm not saying I disagree with you at all, I actually DO agree. But since there is no way to change the fact that most actresses are thin and pretty, I can still choose not to believe or perpetuate the myth.

Offline
Last seen: 4 years 1 month ago
Joined: 03/21/11
Posts: 5

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

If I understand the article correctly, the issue is not that they are catering to families, but that they are classified as "adult entertainment" and therefore are not supposed to serve minors. It sounds like Hooters wants it both ways: the leeway in regards to harassment of female employees and attracting families.

I agree. If they are going to get around the rules requiring employers to protect their workers from harassment by customers by labeling themselves as adult entertainment, then they should not be allowed to cater to children. And IMO, offering a children's menu is catering to children.

That being said, we were given a Hooters bib a few years ago as a joke; and we use it all the time because it covers more area than the usual baby bibs. Wink

culturedmom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

"daniellevmt" wrote:

Yes, but can't we say the same about the message? If you don't agree with taking your kid into Hooters, then you choose not to. In the same regard, can't you just choose NOT to buy into the whole "pretty and skinny=the best" message? Or choose not to promote that to your kids?

I'm not saying I disagree with you at all, I actually DO agree. But since there is no way to change the fact that most actresses are thin and pretty, I can still choose not to believe or perpetuate the myth.

No,because "buying into the message" is not the same as buying a pair of jeans or an ice cream cone. NOW's point has always been to advocate not only against the obvious sexism but the institutional and less obvious sexist messages. The problem with catering to children is that a child is not mature enough to blow off these message. They are forming the basis of who they are, and if anyone thinks that taking a young child to a Hooters, were the theme is sex and the point of the waitresses is about using their bodies to solicit patrons for more money via tips, you're kidding yourself. But again, if a parent is fine taking their child there,that's there peroggative. But I don't blame NOW for standing up to it and I really don't see why anyone else does.

As to the idea that you see the same thing at the beach or at the mall, well I disagree that it's the same at all. You may see the occasional hoochie outfit at teh mall but it's not in your face or all over the place. And as for teh beach, I go to the beach almost everyday in the summer (just went yesturday, yay) and unless you go to south beach, where I wouldn't take my kids anyway, most people dress appropriatly for the beach. I'm pretty sure there is a huge difference between a stripper wearing a bikini on stage and a lady wearing a bikini at the beach.

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"culturedmom" wrote:

were the theme is sex and the point of the waitresses is about using their bodies to solicit patrons for more money via tips, you're kidding yourself. But again, if a parent is fine taking their child there,that's there peroggative. But I don't blame NOW for standing up to it and I really don't see why anyone else does.

Lana, have you ever been in a Hooters? It does not sound like it to me, based on my one experience there. The theme was sports. And honestly, the point of the waitresses is to bring food, you don't get a side of blow job with your wings or a lap dance with your tall beer. I think that comparing these mostly college girls trying to make a living in a decent and honorable profession (serving food) which has hours that suit the needs of a college person or someone who needs a second job, to strippers, is a real reach.

I've seen hostesses or bartenders in super high end NYC restaurants and the like showing a lot more skin, in a much sexier way, than the tight gym shorts coupled with nude hose and a t-shirt of a hooters waitress.

I have a problem with it because NOW should have some real fish to fry, in this day and age. This is silly. Those women are choosing to work there, they are not underage prostitutes and sex slaves sold into the Hooters industry. Families who go there choose to. With all that choice involved, in a Nation where teen pregnancy is epidemic, girls are cutting themselves and eating disorders are spiraling out of control, women make less than men, our maternity leave policies suck, birth control is often unaccessable to low income women, abortion is under fire......well......HOOTERS? I mean, that is why it bothers me.

culturedmom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

Yes Melis, I have been to a Hooters. My SIL worked at a Hooters for 3 years in Ca (and didn't tell her dad for 2 years, hmmmm I wonder why?), so I am quite familiar with it. I'mnot sure I get the "college girls who need money and the hours are good" reference. what does that have to do with it? I know girls who stripped during college for the same reason. of course they have a choice to be there and do what they do. So? I would argue the choice is not an equal one and though itmay not be overtly sexist, I believe that that is onyl because we are hegemonized to see it as acceptable,a chocie, and don't recognize the message that is perpetuated and the harm it does because it is so sublte and covert.

Back in the day, sexism, racism, etc.where so much easier to spot and fight. They were overt and blatant. now it's all about PC and it's not OK to just come out and say "women are only good for one thing", so it has to be twisted and made tolook like a choice and a good thing for all qhen in fact under the surface, the message taken in subconsciously is the same. IMO, it perpetuates a rape culture plain and simple and to me that's not OK. just advocating against big and obvious problems is just missing the small and incedious ones that over time can cause just as much damage.

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

The reference is because I think that your statements make it seem like these girls are prostitutes, which is as wrong of you as the men who go there to "oogle them and cop a feel and perpetuate a rape culture".

Then again, I'm all for strip clubs, strippers, and safe, legal prostitution. Their body, their choice. That goes for Hooters, too. I don't understand what you mean when you say "the choice is not an equal one", could you explain?

I don't know why she hid it from her father, I suppose because she assumed he would not approve? You say in one statement that we are hegemonized to see it as acceptable, yet admit that people hide it. Clearly it isn't all that acceptable.

culturedmom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

Ohand how is not selling sex the point? They are showing boobs and *** for what pupose? to promote breastfeeding and health and fitness? It's called Hooters with the "OO";s looking like breasts becasue...? The girls have to be inspected for weight and the right amount of cleavage before their shift for what exactly? I can see not agreeing with me ont he cause and effect, but I think it's pretty clear the purpose and intent of "theme" of the bar.

culturedmom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

"Potter75" wrote:

The reference is because I think that your statements make it seem like these girls are prostitutes, which is as wrong of you as the men who go there to "oogle them and cop a feel and perpetuate a rape culture".

Then again, I'm all for strip clubs, strippers, and safe, legal prostitution. Their body, their choice. That goes for Hooters, too. I don't understand what you mean when you say "the choice is not an equal one", could you explain?

I don't know why she hid it from her father, I suppose because she assumed he would not approve? You say in one statement that we are hegemonized to see it as acceptable, yet admit that people hide it. Clearly it isn't all that acceptable.

If I thought of these girls as prostiitutes I woud have said so. Selling sex and having sex is not the same. You really took away from everything I said that I liken these girls to prostitutes?

I think you make a good point. we ahve a fundamental difference in how we view the issue of strippers and prostitutions and businesses that use sex to make money (not just by having sex in the verb form but as a djective as well). so we are nto going to agree ont hsi issue. I have had this discussion with Robin before and I think it ended where we see feminism in two different ways with the same end goal. We just disagree with how to get there.

I ahve to get kids ready fro school, so I'll have to leave it there for now.

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"culturedmom" wrote:

Ohand how is not selling sex the point? They are showing boobs and *** for what pupose? to promote breastfeeding and health and fitness? It's called Hooters with the "OO";s looking like breasts becasue...? The girls have to be inspected for weight and the right amount of cleavage before their shift for what exactly? I can see not agreeing with me ont he cause and effect, but I think it's pretty clear the purpose and intent of "theme" of the bar.

Selling food is the point. Making money is the point. Like any restaurant. They have the right to have any theme that they choose, so far as it is bringing in customers and legal and the women are working there by choice.

I don't wear a low cut shirt on occasion to promote breastfeeding or health. I do it because I feel good about my body and enjoy dressing that way sometimes. I don't think that everything anyone does is to promote breastfeeding or health, why should a restaurant/sports bar be held to different standards? Believe me, based on what I saw there, if they are inspected for weight, they have some pretty, uh, generous, requirements Smile It was hardly glamorous, you know? Flight attendants, models and many other professions get inspected for weight or uniform, are they prostitutes as well?

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"culturedmom" wrote:

If I thought of these girls as prostiitutes I woud have said so. Selling sex and having sex is not the same. You really took away from everything I said that I liken these girls to prostitutes?

I think you make a good point. we ahve a fundamental difference in how we view the issue of strippers and prostitutions and businesses that use sex to make money (not just by having sex in the verb form but as a djective as well). so we are nto going to agree ont hsi issue. I have had this discussion with Robin before and I think it ended where we see feminism in two different ways with the same end goal. We just disagree with how to get there.

I ahve to get kids ready fro school, so I'll have to leave it there for now.

I did take that away (the prostitute thing), I wasn't going for effect. But I agree, we do have the same end goal, just a divergence on certain issues pertaining to ownership of ones own body.

Darn kids for ruining a good discussion ;). I'm sitting here with J snoring away on my lap waiting to hear footsteps coming down the stairs and then the storm begins.......

Alissa_Sal's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 06/29/06
Posts: 6427

I agree with Melissa - I don't think that they are wearing low cut shirts to promote breastfeeding - of course they are doing it to look sexy. But honestly, as long as it is the woman's choice - what's wrong with looking sexy? If I choose to wear a low cut top because I like the attention it brings me, am I in the wrong? Am I even anti-feminist? See, I think that there is a certain empowerment to a woman being able to celebrate (and even use) her body as she sees fit. When that choice is taken away (either through someone forcing the woman to dress sexy, or from someone forcing the woman to "cover up" - that is where I see a problem.

In any case, I have never been to a Hooters, but from what I have seen and read, they wear short shorts and t shirts. Honestly, you could see that ensemble anywhere you go. I guess I just don't find it as all that risque.

Offline
Last seen: 57 min 50 sec ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763

"culturedmom" wrote:

Ohand how is not selling sex the point? They are showing boobs and *** for what pupose? to promote breastfeeding and health and fitness? It's called Hooters with the "OO";s looking like breasts becasue...? The girls have to be inspected for weight and the right amount of cleavage before their shift for what exactly? I can see not agreeing with me ont he cause and effect, but I think it's pretty clear the purpose and intent of "theme" of the bar.

I think that is the point NOW is making. The requirements for this job and the harassment tolerated are based on the adult entertainment industry standard. I don't know how broad that category is, but I assume it would cover casinos, bars, and strip clubs. It's not fair to these women to have to put up with more than a server at other restaurants that cater to children. Perhaps it is a technicality, but it is one that benefits the business owners at the expense of the servers.

Alissa_Sal's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 06/29/06
Posts: 6427

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

I think that is the point NOW is making. The requirements for this job and the harassment tolerated are based on the adult entertainment industry standard. I don't know how broad that category is, but I assume it would cover casinos, bars, and strip clubs. It's not fair to these women to have to put up with more than a server at other restaurants that cater to children. Perhaps it is a technicality, but it is one that benefits the business owners at the expense of the servers.

What harassment are the women expected to put up with? Honest question, I really don't know. Someone else mentioned "groping" but I doubt that - you're not allowed to grope strippers and they are definitely in the adult entertainment industry.

Andy1784's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
Joined: 09/18/08
Posts: 1372

I think that different hooters locations have different standards out of necessity. I met some people for a couple of beers at a more rural Hooters a few years ago and there was definitely some women I would consider fairly small breasted and others that were overweight. Then there is the Hooters in downtown Minneapolis, its entrance is inside a skyway building so I have passed it several times. The waitresses there are much more what you expect. They are consistently skinny, pretty, and big boobed.

I am not bothered by Hooters. As previously suggested, there is way too much else to be upset over in today's world for that to register in my mind. I don't particularly care for their food, it is overpriced and not particularly tastey. I have no desire to party inflated prices for a gimmick that doesn't underway me. I have no qualms with my kids being inside one though, if we happened to go to one. The ones I have seen had the same vibe that most sports bars do with better lighting. I'm sure some Hooters have more adult atmospheres though.

Offline
Last seen: 57 min 50 sec ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763

"Alissa_Sal" wrote:

What harassment are the women expected to put up with? Honest question, I really don't know. Someone else mentioned "groping" but I doubt that - you're not allowed to grope strippers and they are definitely in the adult entertainment industry.

I don't know exactly either. But I think Hooters Girls are supposed to accept a certain amount of comments on their bodies that servers at other restaurants wouldn't be.

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

If you mean that they are forced to be sexually harassed, you are wrong. They work at will, like any other server on earth. If they choose to flirt or be coy to up a tip? So what? I did that as a bartender too. I chose to, I could accept or not accept any attention that I chose, at any time. They don't give up a single legal right to not be harassed by choosing to work there.

And this is about taking children there ~ do you think that many families who go there for a meal are oogling and trying to cop a feel and hoping for a quickie out back by the dumpster? I mean, really?

Our waitress was adorable, loved the kids, and my husband treated her just like any other server who has ever waited on us.

Offline
Last seen: 57 min 50 sec ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763

"Potter75" wrote:

If you mean that they are forced to be sexually harassed, you are wrong. They work at will, like any other server on earth. If they choose to flirt or be coy to up a tip? So what? I did that as a bartender too. I chose to, I could accept or not accept any attention that I chose, at any time. They don't give up a single legal right to not be harassed by choosing to work there.

And this is about taking children there ~ do you think that many families who go there for a meal are oogling and trying to cop a feel and hoping for a quickie out back by the dumpster? I mean, really?

Our waitress was adorable, loved the kids, and my husband treated her just like any other server who has ever waited on us.

I am going off what was published in the article:

Bellasalma said the federal government has not subjected Hooters to the rules requiring employers to protect their workers from harassment by customers. The Atlanta restaurant chain has successfully argued that its employees know they will be working in sexually charged surroundings, Bellasalma said.

But in recent years, she said, the company has promoted itself as more family-friendly. She cited a statement on hooters.com that "10 percent of the parties we serve have children in them."

"If they want to switch and turn the chain into a family-style restaurant, more power to them," but Hooters would then have to follow the same anti-harassment rules as other restaurants, Bellasalma said.

Of course the women can quit. But the point NOW is making is that the standards for what qualifies as harassment by customers are different at Hooters than at other family-friendly restaurants.

Spacers's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4104

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

I think that is the point NOW is making. The requirements for this job and the harassment tolerated are based on the adult entertainment industry standard. I don't know how broad that category is, but I assume it would cover casinos, bars, and strip clubs. It's not fair to these women to have to put up with more than a server at other restaurants that cater to children. Perhaps it is a technicality, but it is one that benefits the business owners at the expense of the servers.

You don't think it also benefits the servers??? Hooters is the only place I know of where a 50% tip is considered minimum, and a 100% tip isn't unexpected. And the servers have no sidework (filling catsup, cleaning shelves, stocking things, etc.) the only job they are expected to do is take orders, deliver food (sometimes not even that if a runner delivers it if they're busy) and flirt. All servers flirt with their customers to some degree. Hooters just makes it part of the job requirement, and set up their restaurants so that the servers have the time to do it.

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

I am going off what was published in the article:

Of course the women can quit. But the point NOW is making is that the standards for what qualifies as harassment by customers are different at Hooters than at other family-friendly restaurants.

Of course Ballasama says that! She is the one filing the petition! She is an attorney grandstanding to the press when she says that! She can have a good time proving that in court. I will be interested to see if this gets thrown out before it even goes to trial.

And from everything that I have read in a quick google scan, the harassment cases that Hooters has lost have been in regards to Managers harassing their employees. With 17,000 employees and a business in the restaurant industry, that does not shock me.

Spacers's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4104

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

But the point NOW is making is that the standards for what qualifies as harassment by customers are different at Hooters than at other family-friendly restaurants.

Of course it's different! Harassment is unwanted or unwelcome verbal or physical behavior. At any other restaurant the attention given to servers would be harassment because it would be unwanted & unwelcome. At Hooters, you sign on knowing that you *will* be getting a certain amount of verbal, and perhaps physical, attention from your customers; it's not harassment, it's good business.

Offline
Last seen: 57 min 50 sec ago
Joined: 04/12/03
Posts: 1763

"Spacers" wrote:

You don't think it also benefits the servers??? Hooters is the only place I know of where a 50% tip is considered minimum, and a 100% tip isn't unexpected. And the servers have no sidework (filling catsup, cleaning shelves, stocking things, etc.) the only job they are expected to do is take orders, deliver food (sometimes not even that if a runner delivers it if they're busy) and flirt. All servers flirt with their customers to some degree. Hooters just makes it part of the job requirement, and set up their restaurants so that the servers have the time to do it.

"Spacers" wrote:

Of course it's different! Harassment is unwanted or unwelcome verbal or physical behavior. At any other restaurant the attention given to servers would be harassment because it would be unwanted & unwelcome. At Hooters, you sign on knowing that you *will* be getting a certain amount of verbal, and perhaps physical, attention from your customers; it's not harassment, it's good business.

This doesn't sound like a business catering to families. Perhaps Hooters should decide which
it wants to be and stop trying to be both.

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: 06/22/10
Posts: 5602

am i the only one the finds their outfits not skimpy?:eek:

that being said, i have never been to one. there arn't any around here and i havn't really had the opportunity when travelling. adult entertainment?? hardly. I see more "adult entertainment" at the mall

Alissa_Sal's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 06/29/06
Posts: 6427

"janijanis" wrote:

am i the only one the finds their outfits not skimpy?:eek:

that being said, i have never been to one. there arn't any around here and i havn't really had the opportunity when travelling. adult entertainment?? hardly. I see more "adult entertainment" at the mall

I agree. I would have a different opinion if the servers were topless or wearing pasties and a g string, but we're talking about short shorts (with hose underneath no less) and tight t shirts. Call me jaded, but I'm not really scandalized by short shorts and tight tops. It's not a look that I would wear myself, but I hardly consider it to be X rated.

Spacers's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4104

"ethanwinfield" wrote:

This doesn't sound like a business catering to families. Perhaps Hooters should decide which it wants to be and stop trying to be both.

It's not a business catering to families. It's a business that caters primarily to immature men, and that accomodates children at approximately 1/10 of their tables. It's not a strip club or den of prostitution; the servers are properly covered & they stay that way. Men who don't behave themselves get escorted out. Are the men allowed to behave a bit more crudely than they could at Red Robin? Yes, and that's not a problem for me since everyone's an adult & agrees to the behavior code. I just don't buy that Hooters creates a rape culture or that an hour-long dinner at Hooters is going to damage kids for life or any of that.

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

I also don't buy the idea that all men are hormonal pigs dying to grope, rape or harass any woman they see in thick nude tights and gym shorts. Thank goodness I don't know any men like that. Lets give our men a little more credit, eh?

daniellevmt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 6 months ago
Joined: 07/25/06
Posts: 213

I honestly don't have an opinion of Hooters either way, but I'm sitting here giggling at the comments like "it's a sports bar!" or "you'd see that same outfit down the street/in a club/at the beach". Yes, you may. But the establishment's name is HOOTERS. HOOTERS! Let's not pretend that 95% of the customers go there for the sports bar atmosphere and the food, LOL! Smile

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

"daniellevmt" wrote:

I honestly don't have an opinion of Hooters either way, but I'm sitting here giggling at the comments like "it's a sports bar!" or "you'd see that same outfit down the street/in a club/at the beach". Yes, you may. But the establishment's name is HOOTERS. HOOTERS! Let's not pretend that 95% of the customers go there for the sports bar atmosphere and the food, LOL! Smile

I love giggles! They make me so happy in a debate. Yay! Super SQUEE!!!! I've seen Mothers with children post much more scantily clad bikini or underwearish pictures on the internet for free, yet those same people might begrudge someone making a tip off of their bodies while they serve some food? That seems silly.

Have you been to one?

My kids can't read. I'm not worried about the name.

If 10% of their customers are children/families according to the suit, where are you getting your numbers?

KimPossible's picture
Offline
Last seen: 8 min 35 sec ago
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3471

Hooters doesn't even try to hide the whole sex appeal environment when describing themselves...they talk about it openly, and defend it endlessly...the discussion takes up about 70% of their company description, with another 20% dedicated to polishing their image. (community service blah blah women's rights blah blah)

I don't think i'd be so concerned about bringing small children to a place like that, the issues at hand are so far off their radar. But i think i would be concerned about bringing my older kids to a place like that. I think they can be easily influenced and I don't want to endorse environments that over emphasize sex appeal. I don't want my kids to over-estimate the importance of sex appeal, especially the canned commercial type....and that is totally what this is.

I've been trying to figure out what it is that bugs me about the place...and I think thats what it is. I see no need to sue them, or get them in trouble or whatever. Just not a place I think i should be bringing my children.

mommytoMR.FACE's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 2 months ago
Joined: 04/10/09
Posts: 781

My dysfunctional aunt and uncle took my little cousin to Hooters for his bday - I think he was about 6 years old or something.

Do I think it's family friendly? Sure... it has high chairs, booster seats, and I'm guessing crayons and a kid's menu. That's pretty friendly to me. But at the same time, I know a lot of people that are friendly but I wouldn't want them around my kid.

The outfits are tight and sexual, because sex sells. Even at regular restaurants like TGIFridays, you will see a male or female server flirt with a table of bachelor's or single giggly women for a nice tip in return.

If someone wants to take their family there, including their kids, so be it. I do categorize it as more of an adult environment, though. Just like bars. But I don't think either of them is greatly inappropriate that children will need therapy as an adult.

daniellevmt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 6 months ago
Joined: 07/25/06
Posts: 213

"Potter75" wrote:

I love giggles! They make me so happy in a debate. Yay! Super SQUEE!!!! I've seen Mothers with children post much more scantily clad bikini or underwearish pictures on the internet for free, yet those same people might begrudge someone making a tip off of their bodies while they serve some food? That seems silly.

Have you been to one?

My kids can't read. I'm not worried about the name.

If 10% of their customers are children/families according to the suit, where are you getting your numbers?

Yeah....that was a 100% lighthearted post, Melissa. Wanna strip your way through college? I love that women are so "wonderfully made" (snerk) that they can make money off it! Makin' bank working at Hooters? I think that's awesome, and if you've got it and aren't afraid to flaunt it, do it girl! (general you, to show my feelings on the subject)
So yeah, you totally took my post out of context. I wasn't being a smarta$$ at all...I just think it's funny that we are sitting around here making excuses because you COULD see scantily clad women here and here and here, but we are forgetting that it's called HOOTERS! And I totally pulled that number outta my a$$, which supports the fact that I was just joking around. And I was truly giggling! I wasn't making fun of or putting anyone down. But you are more than welcome to think the worst of everything I say. It doesn't even surprise me anymore. Wink Have a good night!

daniellevmt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 6 months ago
Joined: 07/25/06
Posts: 213

"Potter75" wrote:

I love giggles! They make me so happy in a debate. Yay! Super SQUEE!!!! I've seen Mothers with children post much more scantily clad bikini or underwearish pictures on the internet for free, yet those same people might begrudge someone making a tip off of their bodies while they serve some food? That seems silly.

Let's cut the passive aggressive crap now, Melissa. I'm too old for that. Who are you talking about here?? If it's me, WHERE did I say I begrudged someone making a tip off of their bodies to serve food? Where? So yes, I could see what you said above as being silly, but if it was directed at me, then no, it's not silly....just completely FASLE.

And I don't know where you live, I don't know that I or anyone else I know would consider my bikini "scant". We must have WAAAAY different opinions on what bikini deserves a "scantily clad" sticker slapped on her. I mean, are you trying to embrass me over the fact that I hae pictures on my FB page from vacations of me in a bikini? Really?
Seriously?

Offline
Last seen: 2 years 11 months ago
Joined: 05/31/06
Posts: 4780

Okay, Danielle. Two posts to me? And none about the topic? I feel special.

If you want to PM me, have at it, silly.

All lighthearted and giggly up in here, girlfriend! You seem to be taking something personally about your bikini or something ~ I can't see your facebook page by choice, so if you are defensive about something you have posted on it, take it to therapy or PM, not the debate board. That is weird.

What is a snerk? Are they painful?

Why don't you just stick to the debate? Since I don't know what a snerk is, I can't tell if you are being serious or not, but I totally agree with you that women are wonderfully made, and have the right to choose what they do with their body. I also think that paying customers have the right to determine where they eat. And I think that that this lawsuit is ridiculous, as stated above. If you want to debate, do it. If you want to giggle, tickle yourself.

culturedmom's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 3 weeks ago
Joined: 09/30/06
Posts: 1131

"Alissa_Sal" wrote:

I agree. I would have a different opinion if the servers were topless or wearing pasties and a g string, but we're talking about short shorts (with hose underneath no less) and tight t shirts. Call me jaded, but I'm not really scandalized by short shorts and tight tops. It's not a look that I would wear myself, but I hardly consider it to be X rated.

See but the reason it is so covert and under the radar is that it isn't about extremes. The outfits are not extremely sexual. The management doesn't ask the girls to take on an extreme amount of harrassment. The theme is not extremely played out. It's not X rated at all. But to em, that makes it more dangerous. Because when things are overt adn extreme, you know what to expect.you know the messages you will get. It's clear. But in a place like this, where it is just on that line, you don't realize when that line is crossed as easily. and when I say you, I mean customers, the waitresses, and society. Which I think is proven considering we talk about the possibility of a place created to cater to men, is now trying to cater to children and families.

Also, I do want post a little snippet of the hiring practices of Hooters. Yes it's from Wiki but I have to get my kids ready in a few and I didn't have time to go through links and articles. My SIL did tellme about this so,I know it's factual.

Legal statusMain article: Bona fide occupational qualifications
In employment discrimination law in the United States, employers are generally allowed to consider characteristics that would otherwise be discriminatory if they are bona fide occupational qualifications (BFOQ). For example, a manufacturer of men's clothing may lawfully advertise for male models. Hooters has argued a BFOQ defense, which applies when the “essence of the business operation would be undermined if the business eliminated its discriminatory policy”.[18]

[edit] Employee handbook requirementsAn older version of the Hooters Employee Handbook (prior to October 2006), published in The Smoking Gun reads:[21] which notes that:

Customers can go to many places for wings and beer, but it is our Hooters Girls who make our concept unique. Hooters offers its customers the look of the "All American Cheerleader, Surfer, Girl Next Door."
Female employees are required to sign that they "acknowledge and affirm" the following:

1.My job duties require I wear the designated Hooters Girl uniform.
2.My job duties require that I interact with and entertain the customers.
3.The Hooters concept is based on female sex appeal and the work environment is one in which joking and entertaining conversations are commonplace.
4.I do not find my job duties, uniform requirements, or work environment to be offensive, intimidating, hostile, or unwelcome.

See, when you skim it, it may not seem that bad. But I think it fosters an enviroment where things that are generally unacceptable, become harder to distinguish and easier to cross that line and accept it. I hate to keep sayign it, but it's allabout the covert sexism. the sexism that is harder to point your finger at. That is the kind of message that I think children do absorb but don't realize and the more that it is seen as OK, the harder it is to erase from ones conscious.

I don't see the point in suing them for what is ultimately a choice. However, I don't fault NOW for doing what they do. I am grateful for their work and if anything, it puts the issue out there and maybe peopel will think a little harder about it instead of just over looking it, which is what usually happens with this covert kind of discrimination.

Alissa_Sal's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 06/29/06
Posts: 6427

Danielle and Melissa -
Tone is a hard thing to read over the internet. I know that in the past when I have read that something on the debate board is making someone laugh or giggle, sometimes I have assumed that the poster is implying that what someone has said is "laughable." Heck, I think I may have used that phrase myself to imply that someone has said something "laughable" when I was feeling less than charitable. On the other hand, I think that there are times when something that someone has said truly does tickle your funny bone and it's not meant to be mean. I'll never forget one time Lillie said something along the lines of "Eating your children is unacceptable" and I lost it - not because I was making fun of Lillie, I *like* Lillie a lot, it was just such an understatement that it totally tickled me. So, point being, tone is everything, but it is sometimes hard to get over the internet.

To further compound the "hard to get over the internet" situation - I can't tell if Melissa was talking in general or about Dani specifically with the "bikini" comment. It's true, I've seen tons of moms that think nothing of wearing bikinis but that might be uncomfortable with the Hooters gear. I don't think that "wearing bikinis" was meant to be a slam against anyone though - I happen to know for a fact that Melissa wears bikinis *wiggles eyebrows* - I think it was just meant to point out that if it is socially acceptable to bare a little flesh on the beach, why not a little less in a restaurant for tips. Again, tone is everything.

What I'm trying to say is - try to give each other the benefit of the doubt. Remember that like 70% of communication is non-verbal, but that we lose most of that in a written form, so it's quite easy to take something the wrong way. Try to give each other the benefit of the doubt when possible.

Thanks!

Alissa_Sal's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 5 months ago
Joined: 06/29/06
Posts: 6427

Lana - I get what you are saying, I do. The problem that I have with it is that I think that the underlying assumptions are actually based in a patriarchal value system.

I'm guessing that the root of your problem with Hooters is that (as it states in the handbook) their concept is based in female sexuality. So that must be exploitive to women, right? The problem that I have with this is the underlying assumptions that women's sexuality is something that needs to be controlled and kept under wraps. A woman who revels in her sexuality must not be a "good girl" or have any "self respect" right? Probably, she is also not smart enough to really understand the implications of her actions, but is instead being manipulated by men for their own pleasure, right? But I think that so much of that attitude is historically based in men trying to control women's sexuality and has much more to do with inheritance rights (i.e. how can a man make sure that the children he is passing his land on to are biologically "his" if his woman can sleep with whoever she wants?) I think it's also based in the assumption that women are by default powerless, hapless, and victims. I reject that. I think that women are smart enough and powerful enough to have control over their own sexuality, and thus able to choose to use their bodies and sexuality as they see fit without being victims.

Pages