Formula One CEO Chase Carey said the sport could not continue to ignore criticism of the practice of having grid girls at races.
In an interview with The Telegraph, Carey said he was not surprised by the reaction to the decision to drop grid girls, which was announced last week.
“If you just left it up to me, personally, I like the grid girls,” said Carey. “But it’s not a decision for me, it’s a decision for fans.”
Carey’s predecessor Bernie Ecclestone has criticised the decision to replace grid girls, saying “the drivers like them, the audience like them and no one cares”.
A poll of F1 Fanatic readers conducted in 2015 found a majority were in favour of dropping grid girls or using men as well as women on on the grid.
Carey acknowledged that some grid girls opposed the decision. “I recognise that many of the grid girls were proud to do it and I think that’s great, and again, if you left it to me, I liked it.”
“But I think when you have as many people as I found who really felt it was outdated and who felt it didn’t belong in the sport today, you have to be cognisant of that. The number that were passionately positive on the other side were much smaller.”
“We’re going to maintain glamour,” he added. “We’re going to continue to have pretty girls at races. I think it’s a part of life, and it’s a part of what makes our sport special. It is a sport of glamour and of mystique. But I think you have to continue to evolve.”
Liberty Media announced on Monday a new ‘grid kids’ scheme is being introduced for this season.
2018 F1 season
- McLaren staff told us we were “totally crazy” to take Honda engines in 2018 – Tost
- ‘It doesn’t matter if we start last’: How Red Bull’s junior team aided Honda’s leap forward
- Honda’s jet division helped F1 engineers solve power unit problem
- McLaren Racing losses rise after Honda split
- Ricciardo: Baku “s***show” was Red Bull’s fault
mateuss (@mateuss)
9th February 2018, 11:56
Strong opposition – tiny minority of shrieking marxists. What a whimp.
Kali (@elkali)
9th February 2018, 12:28
I would much appreciate you explaining where does exactly Marxism say nothing about grid girls. Or girls in general. Don’t be a troll
Gary
9th February 2018, 12:44
Leftists are Marxists, leftists are against “grid girls”; see the connection?
Loen (@loen)
9th February 2018, 14:34
If only it was all as simple as that, eh Gary ?
Grid Girls should have gone out in the same
era as when the BBC stopped producing that
other embarrassing monstrosity called …….
‘The Black and White Minstrel Show.’
Both perversions were a clear statement about
how predominantly white and predominantly
male directors and producers viewed certain
sectors of society. Talk about subconscious,
latent, ugly Victorian values……!
In our household the females vent their fury
on us mere males for actually watching such
scenes. And they are dead right too !
The Last Pope (@the-last-pope)
9th February 2018, 16:47
@loen…You are being sarcastic, right? I seriously hope you are.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
9th February 2018, 16:43
Not all left-wing people are Marxists* or against grid girls.
Not all Marxists are left-wing** or are necessarily against grid girls.
Not all people against grid girls are left-wing or Marxist.
* – It may help to remember that neither “Marxist” or “communist” is a subset of the other, though some overlap exists, and that many (these days, probably most) left-wing people are neither.
** – Some reject the concept of wings altogether, and (long story) some are centrist or right-wing.
Loen (@loen)
9th February 2018, 18:23
@alianora-la-canta.
Some of us just see ourselves as properly civilised
human beings who regard the exploitation of the human
form ( of either sex ) for the mild sexual gratification
of either sex is just that ‘exploitation’. In 2018 it should
properly have died of total disgrace several years ago
but it’s ugly pretentions still disfigure some of the worlds
best sporting occasions.
I haven’t the slightest doubt that other contributors to this
blog will strongly disagree with my views. That is their
privilege as this text is mine. And to other contributors
who wish to know if I am being sarcastic, the answer is
a very precise ‘NO’ !
Michael Brown (@)
9th February 2018, 19:47
@loen It’s not exploitation if they do it of their own free will
erikje
9th February 2018, 21:38
@ MIchael… the ultimate foolish thought is that’s not their free will.
In 2018 only political correct thoughts are allowed all other sexist abominations are wrong.
Welcome in brave new world part 2.
( a combined series with 1984 the book)
Philip (@philipgb)
10th February 2018, 13:26
@elkali
The Marxism comes in as an oppressor/oppressed narrative rather than the financial theorems of Marxism.
You have an oppressed group, in this case, women which you can think of as the proletariat and the oppressor which is typically referred to as the patriarchy which fulfils the Bourgeoisie role in the ideology.
You also have the resentment of capitalising on beauty which is seen as an unearned privilege.
Althasil (@althasil)
9th February 2018, 12:32
Are you saying only a small, but loud, minority opposed grid girls? Do you have figures or a source for this?
FlatSix (@)
9th February 2018, 13:28
@althasil There’s a difference between being against them and not being bothered by their presence.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
9th February 2018, 16:46
“Not bothered” tends not to affect bottom line the way that passionately favouring or opposing something does. Make no mistake, this will ultimately be about what helps, or is believed to help, Liberty’s bottom line.
faulty (@faulty)
9th February 2018, 22:50
Ding, ding, ding!
GS (@gsagostinho)
9th February 2018, 12:44
Must be difficult to properly see the outside world from your cave!
erikje
9th February 2018, 21:39
just poke the fire…
Sven (@crammond)
9th February 2018, 13:22
I’d really appreciate it if the failed communication between the sexes and the strange hyperpartisan divide on all topics that the US (or the anglophone areas?) have would not be exported to or projected on all F1-viewers. There’s no marxists left in most parts of the world, and we don’t have anyone shrieking in roundabout any conversation either. People didn’t campaign against grid girls, but when asked, they would say “well, yes, that’s a bit awkward, they should drop it”. And that reaction would come from males and females alike, from race-fans and non-race fans, from left and right.
Michael
9th February 2018, 22:16
Excellent comment.
Sergey Martyn
10th February 2018, 7:49
Why should I care about non-race fans? I don’t watch some sports and I don’t care nor complain what are they wearing and what rituals they perform before the matches. Let me remind you that spotrswomen in some sports like swimming, gymnastics, volleyball, handball, tennis, beach volleyball etc. wear far more sexier and revealing attires and no one came to idea to ask an opinion of jihadists about that. In turn do they ask your advice whether their numerous wives should wear paranja or sexy lingerie in public? If bleeding hearts want to talk about exploitation, “failed communication between the sexes” and other issues like that, there are a lot of countries where females are circumcised, shot to death on arenas for adultery, have to wear paranjas and can’t even drive a car (not a race car, just an ordinary one) etc. Because of their free will?
Before crusading onto grid girls and starting to exploit grid kids, think about the fate of millions of women who can’t even voice their opinion.
Girls are a perfect prelude to man’s fight, from ancient Troy to modern boxing etc.
F1 is a pinnacle of the racing and the very idea of grid kids just diminishes the value of racing on the edge.
Grid girls are great – everybody knows they aren’t going to race (like the ring girls don’t go boxing), this is the great show, a carnival, a perfect way to warm up the public before the racing.
One of the things I like most in DTM is the grid girls photo session before the race start when every fan can make a shot with the beautiful girls – I talked with some of them and they say they like their job and proud of it – and their smiles aren’t fake.
matt
11th February 2018, 13:22
It´s cultural marxism and it has made a big comeback, the trouble is that most of the people wanting marxist ideals to be implemented do not realise that it is marxism that they are demanding.
Gender ¨equality¨ being a prime example, they do not want equality, they want affirmative action to by law, elevate women above or equal to men in the workplace in all areas, giving women opportunities that are not available to men and demanding more pay for women regardless of skill, experience, time served or risk.
Women do have equality already, by law and by practise. There is no gender pay gap only a pay discrepancy due to the above factors and the simple fact that women have a biological necessity to reproduce and nuture their young. It seems that the extremely loud minority are making great gains in their quest for a distopian future for us all.
Sven (@crammond)
11th February 2018, 16:30
matt, you are still projecting a local phenomenon onto the world. I do see that happening especially in the US, but e.g. in Germany any major debate about affirmative-action alike laws has very much died down nearly a decade ago.
John H (@john-h)
9th February 2018, 13:55
We’re not all either on the far right or far left you know. I’m sorry if that’s hard for you to understand.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
9th February 2018, 16:39
@mateuss Apparently the data Liberty was getting said otherwise.
fast
11th February 2018, 5:03
After all the malarkey from Liberty about equality etc. (when all they wanted was to exploit children for the sake of US TV ratings) I would like to point out that in case anybody else noticed yet the Olympics still use ‘grid-girls’ ahead of the all teams and their official flag bearer.
My Left Eye (@blik)
9th February 2018, 12:12
Well the majority on this site were against Grid Girls. Sorry no job for you here off you go! Not surprising when the majority don’t like Halo, don’t like fast but degradable tyres, don’t like advanced engines, don’t like quiet exhaust notes, don’t like DRS, probably don’t like F1 !
james2488 (@james2488)
9th February 2018, 13:06
So to comment on here you have be part of the Liberal club and say the same things as everyone else so you fit in!
There is plenty of support for ‘Grid Girls’ out there. Its just PC to take the anti grid girl view.
nase
9th February 2018, 13:43
Unsurprisingly, the message of the post you replied to went way over your head.
Frasier (@frasier)
9th February 2018, 12:30
The two categories you chose to conflate in your ‘majority’ above are completely different propositions, the truth is that less than half voted to eliminate grid girls.
As Mateuss pointed out, this is a movement to grey wash all of our society.
Where will it end? No attractive people in adverts, all film ‘stars’ to be banned because they body shame those who can’t be bothered to look after theirs? The list is endless, it’s intellectuals devaluing the work these people [note, not just girls!] put into maintaining their appearance for the value it gains them in the real world of marketing.
It’s their job, and those who deny them that opportunity are simply virtue signalling, and worse the final decisions are being made by, you guessed it, men.
Euro Brun (@eurobrun)
9th February 2018, 12:33
Less than half of Americans voted Trump…
Gabriel (@rethla)
9th February 2018, 12:39
Why is it bad if men for once are taking the right decision?
Girls are welcome as gridkids so noone is being denied here.
Frasier (@frasier)
9th February 2018, 13:04
Because they are once again making a decision on behalf of women, who BTW seem to disagree. That’s the very definition of the ‘patriarchy’ that feminists keep going on about.
Gabriel (@rethla)
9th February 2018, 16:26
I mostly men who claims women disagrees.
erikje
9th February 2018, 21:41
There are several interviews to the contrary
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
9th February 2018, 15:02
@frasier
No they aren’t; both favour equal treatment of the sexes.
Frasier (@frasier)
9th February 2018, 15:48
@keithcollantine
Banning only one sex isn’t equal treatment. It’s the embodiment of patriarchy, as if those in control, men typically, get to choose whether women can do a particular job.
Instead the job should be open to both men and women. That’s called equal opportunity, and is the preference of all women I’ve spoken to on the related subject of careers in general.
Gabriel (@rethla)
9th February 2018, 16:27
This job was never gonna be “open to both men and women” because noone wants gridboys.
Frasier (@frasier)
9th February 2018, 17:14
Right now that’s certainly the case in most peoples minds, but I wonder if they got the right ‘calibre’ of man there might be a commercial opportunity? Honestly don’t know, it’s not my field.
Gabriel (@rethla)
9th February 2018, 17:24
Sure if you put Justin bieber out there as a grid boy it would be popular but realistic thinking has always been left out by lefties.
erikje
9th February 2018, 21:42
Thinking for everyone now?
The ultimate arrogance
Gabriel (@rethla)
10th February 2018, 11:49
“Thinking for everyone now?
The ultimate arrogance”
No its business.
Robbie (@robbie)
9th February 2018, 16:50
@frasier I think it is Liberty’s prerogative to do what they want with their own business entity. They see a business that uses women (and as it turns out men too) as perceived eye candy as outdated now that we are in 2018. I doubt Liberty has the global pull to ‘grey wash all of our society.’ And you claim women disagree with Liberty’s decision, but that realistically should be ‘some’ women disagree, and a formal poll has not been taken that I’m aware of so responses have been pretty spotty and anecdotal for now.
One could argue that in a fairer world such a thing as grid girls would never have existed to begin with, as we shouldn’t be ‘using’ people just for their looks, so now they have altered the position to use not men nor women, but grid kids.
You are arguing that one sex has been banned, when in fact both sexes have been banned, and they’ve been banned from something that needn’t have existed from the getgo but for ‘typically men’ as you would say, creating the position to begin with.
Men started this, and society has now decided after however many years that times are different now. Saying this is wrong because women (grid girls) have now been banned by men (Liberty-who likely have many female employees too) is like saying a man should not be allowed to close up a strip club nor do something more wholesome with it. Or maybe you’d be fine as long as he turned it into a Hooters restaurant?
Frasier (@frasier)
9th February 2018, 17:25
I don’t think you’re on my wavelength for this one. It’s not about grid girls per se, but a movement that says it’s looking after the interests of women but actually serves to close down opportunities that at present are only realistically open to women.
The reason liberty chose to go with the flow was much more likely to be to avoid the rent-a-mob that social media can summon. Good business doesn’t need this and it’s much easier to ban the girls, they are the losers in all this.
Where does this all end? For certain F1 is not the end game for those pushing this agenda.
Robbie (@robbie)
9th February 2018, 18:20
@frasier I think that is a fair comment.
I do agree that when you hear some of the grid girls speak, they really enjoyed the experience and do feel like something they were ready, willing, and able to do has been taken away.
I know you have been emphasizing men have decided to take this away from these women, but overall might there not be a lot of female F1 fans who are glad for this change, or girlfriends and wives of male F1 fans who will now have a healthier outlook on F1 if indeed they saw the grid girls as having been exploited by it, or just simply only there for eye candy even if they enjoyed doing it?
I’ll assume that for every woman who has lost out with Liberty’s decision, other women will gain empowerment by looking at is as these women lost a job that shouldn’t have been offered to them to begin with. They’ll find something else to do. So some will look at this as you do, as women losing jobs, while others will find positives in that that kind of job isn’t what women should aspire to. Perhaps Liberty themselves will hire more women. They no doubt already have many employed now.
Where does it all end? Such a huge question and I hesitate to take a pessimistic outlook on it and rather would like to think in terms of another issue for women…unequal pay compared to males for doing exactly the same job. If that could be addressed more and more that would be great too.
Michael Brown (@)
9th February 2018, 20:32
@frasier
I agree on this. They don’t want a social media controversy like what Lewis Hamilton had about a month ago.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
9th February 2018, 16:52
@frasier If grid girls were banned but grid boys were permitted, then yout objection would hold water.
Instead, grid kids, taken from every child with a karting license in the national sporting authority’s territory, will do the role. That is a form of equality, even if, as Dieter Rencken noted last week, there are second-order inequalities that need to be handled there.
Frasier (@frasier)
9th February 2018, 17:36
I think it comes down to the point others have made, currently these opportunities have traditionally only been open to girls, hence it’s not necessary to have a man ban, indeed that wasn’t even an option on the 2015 survey quoted, hence my point about banning only one sex.
Grid kids is a cop out that does indeed carry a few problems, that have been covered at length already.
BasCB (@bascb)
12th February 2018, 7:04
“traditionally” @frasier? a tradition that harks back to approximately the mid 1970s. Moreover traditions change over time to suit changes in society around them.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
9th February 2018, 17:27
@frasier
This comment is a bit of a lightbulb moment for me. Do many supporters of grid girls think they’ve been banned?
Because they haven’t. F1 has decided not to use them any more. Big difference.
It’s not as if they’ve said “we’re going to ban women from bring grid girls but men can still be grid guys” is it?
Gabriel (@rethla)
9th February 2018, 17:53
Its the same thing but different wording. I think you understand each other perfectly.
Frasier (@frasier)
9th February 2018, 17:53
Banning, stop using, OK they are different words, but the end result is the same.
Like I’ve said in other replies, it isn’t about grid girls, it’s about who gets to decide what other people do for a living. Right now, it’s the fear of a hate mob ruining the image of your business rather than the shame of allowing a few marketing professionals do their job.
Usual disclaimer, find the whole pre-race TV experience too toe curling on so many levels to watch and it gets fast forwarded…
Aleš Norský (@gpfacts)
9th February 2018, 19:05
Isn’t starting grid protocol subject to pretty strict rules? I suppose teams and sponsors can introduce (for lack of better term) all-female-troop to their hospitality areas, etc…if it suited their purpose, but I doubt they would be allowed on the grid. So it seems to me that grid-girls were essentially banned and to be replaced by grid-kids…simple as that.
Egonovi
9th February 2018, 19:24
@frasier.
1) ‘banning’ & ‘stop using’ are 2 quite different concepts!
and I agree with the ‘lightbulb moment’ of @KeithCollantine.
Banning is all about telling other people what others can and cannot do. And that’s what you are so upset about (I can even agree with you that banning is not right or required).
‘Stop Using’ on the other hand is a concious choice what you do yourself. You are not determining anything about what others can or cannot do.
erikje
9th February 2018, 21:44
The word “use” sounds very wrong here.
grat
9th February 2018, 22:16
They haven’t been “banned” any more than cavalry officers have been “banned” from military units. They’ve been disposed of, “for their own good”. Between WEC and F1 dropping them, it’s likely the other series will as well– at the moment, their only real opportunity for global exposure is MotoGP, and that will almost certainly go away by demand of the emboldened mob.
For the models who participated in Formula 1 to gain wider exposure for their careers, this is a serious blow, and with no women being involved in the decision, is hard not to see as “Old white guys fire women from jobs they enjoyed”.
Further, I’m still trying to wrap my brain around the idea that having “grid girls” is exploitative, but somehow, having “grid kids” isn’t. The women were there of their own choosing– these kids are going to be volunteered by adults, and I genuinely can’t see how it’s a great opportunity for the kids. If you want to give them paddock access, and let them meet drivers and ask questions about racing, THAT would be a fantastic way to get kids, both male and female, interested in the sport.
Having them stand around as some kind of decoration on the grid sounds like torture to my 10 year old self– but like the women they’re supposed to be replacing, it’ll be “for their own good”.
This is truly a case of perception trumping reality– and this site participated, because any headline in favor of banning grid girls got it’s own article, and any article featuring complaints from the actual grid girls whose jobs were on the line, was just a one-liner in the round-ups.
BasCB (@bascb)
12th February 2018, 7:08
This is not a “serious blow” for models at all @grat, and yeah @gpfacts, I am pretty sure that most brands have a crew of mostly female PR people in the VIP areaa, around the team etc that deal with their hosts. These are probably better paid jobs, because they usually are more tied to the brand (often on a longer term relationship), and know enough about the brand they represent to actually have a meaningful conversation about them.
That is a trend that has been going on for some while already.
Euro Brun (@eurobrun)
9th February 2018, 12:32
I’m utterly bored of the whole grid girls thing now. Roll on car launches. Testing is still too far away, never mind actual racing!
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
9th February 2018, 16:53
@eurobrun Agreed! We need something substantive to talk about that isn’t based on wild speculation…
Philip (@philipgb)
9th February 2018, 12:32
That’s a very selective interpretation of the data. You could just as easily and I would argue more honestly say that more people were in favour of keeping grid girls or using grid boys in addition than supported ending grid girls altogether.
Frasier (@frasier)
9th February 2018, 12:59
Exactly, it smacks of a desperate attempt by Keith to defend his virtue signalling position.
No-one is going to be able to overcome our basic instinct to look at an attractive person, though some are desperate to try. Make the situation more balanced with male and female grid people who know what they are supposed to do and carry it out in a professional manner.
Once again, this kind of promotional work is their job.
Christopher (@twiinzspeed)
9th February 2018, 21:39
Men have liked looking at pretty women since the beginning of time. To let a pop culture ideology think that they can change that is just silly. I say grid girls were eye candy for guys watching the race just like my wife thinks several of the drivers are nice to look at. This is normal and acceptable. I don’t understand people getting all worked up about it. I think many people who say they agree with the change do so so they appear enlightened to others. And I also bet many people would like the girls to stay but don’t dare say so for fear of backlash. Social media has created a bully culture allowing people to attack with anonymity.
BasCB (@bascb)
12th February 2018, 7:25
When you say
@frasier, you have to also look at the WORK i.e. business Liberty is running.
Since they bought the sport they have started evaluating what they do right (i.e. grows their fanbase, direct revenue, bottom line) and what hinders (puts off fans, costs money but does not add anything towards the first part).
If you look at it economically, and compare what gridgirls bring (with a focus on “girls losing their jobs”):
For Gridgirls
– the older males we invite as VIPs like oggling them
– they get a few minutes of TV time before the race (as a background to interviews/gridwalks) and can show off how great the drivers going aroundthem to the podium are – part of our viewers like to see them
– it’s been part of the sport for the last 3 decades (tradition)
– we offer models a job for 20 weekends a year
Against Grid girls:
– we hear a loud minority being very much apposing them
– marketing research shows that having them turns off potential fans (mostly female, but also a growing portion of younger males) from the sport
– they cost money to employ them
– it poses a risk of potential scandal/negative publicity – see things like MeToo and compare the Bankers Club thing where women come out with complaints of harrassment.
Now compare the alternative – “grid kids”
– Kids get on the grid – positive signal, potential to get more young fans interested in motorsport
– works towards the FIA goal of growing grassrouts motorsport
– in principle this is gender neutral
– we do not have to pay them, just make available tickets to have them (+family) there.
– these kids all are in racing, which means they know grid protokol
Negatives of Grid kids
– potential risk of having kids on the grid?
Compare them, and you see that the alternative offers far more interesting positives and offers far less negatives. This is an easy business desicion for Liberty.
Sven (@crammond)
9th February 2018, 13:36
@philipgb
45% said F1 should stop using grid girls vs. 36% who said F1 should just go on as is. That is a 9% difference, visible without lumping the “use boys and girls”-group anywhere.
Philip (@philipgb)
9th February 2018, 13:55
@crammond
Also true, but it sounds a weaker argument than being able to twist the data to use the word ‘majority’
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
9th February 2018, 15:04
@philipgb That’s not the case as you could just as accurately write “a majority favoured not having grid girls” as the single largest group voted for that. A majority is simply the greater number, not necessarily more than half.
Philip (@philipgb)
9th February 2018, 15:20
@keithcollantine
You can’t claim a majority favoured not having grid girls because there are two options which include having grid girls (F1 should not stop using grid girls & F1 should use grid guys as well as grid girls) and the total votes for those options was 47%. So the majority voted in favour of F1 keeping grid girls.
Mark Zastrow (@markzastrow)
9th February 2018, 16:34
Unless I’m very much mistaken, 45% is not a majority, it’s a plurality.
Mark Zastrow (@markzastrow)
9th February 2018, 16:53
Having said that, if your argument for keeping something that harms a minority of people is that a majority of people are not harmed, you’re going to wind up on precarious ground in lots of debates throughout world history.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
9th February 2018, 16:55
@philipgp It means a majority did not want to contine the situation as it was. This is relevant, given that the alternative to barring grid girls cited in the poll was tried (both before and after the cited poll) and failed to get in-paddock acceptance (taking that option off the table).
Philip (@philipgb)
10th February 2018, 14:06
@alianora-la-canta
We can all offer a subjective interpretation of how the voting options intersect with one another. But I don’t believe you can link a vote to end altogether with an addition to the practice as strongly as you can a vote to stay as it is and a vote to add to how it is.
It’s also inaccurate to claim a majority voted to end the practice when the largest percentage of voters chose options that would continue using grid girls.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
12th February 2018, 18:24
If fewer people picked “stay as it is” than any of the other options (which is what happened), then the notion of “the majority wanted change” is right there in the statistics and not an disputable interpretation.
I think Keith may have been looking for “plurality” rather than “majority” when talking about the single-most-selected option (“plurality” is whichever option was most often selected, “majority” is something over 50% of people selected). So a plurality wanted to ban grid girls, a majority wanted change and a majority wanted some sort of grid people on the grid.
Gary
9th February 2018, 12:56
This is becoming ridiculous. Liberty Media and F1 have far more important issues to address; “grid girls” doesn’t even crack the top 50.
Here’s an issue to think about, although it’s perhaps too late: what are the implications of buying F1 for $8 billion, thus turning CVC’s and Bernie’s aspirational valuation into a hard, financial obligation, backed by fiduciary duty, and thus encumbering the sport with this financial obligation in perpetuity?
Robbie (@robbie)
9th February 2018, 15:29
I don’t think it has ‘become ridiculous’ just because Carey has now spoken about the issue and their decision. And who knows but it may be a move that will help grow the audience.
As to your concern over Liberty buying F1, I’m not sure I get the issue. They agreed a price and Liberty who are a multi-billion dollar entity on their own, will pay for it while attempting to grow the sport and do even better than BE and CVC but while having a more balanced approach for the teams and the fans. What exactly is the problem?
Gary
9th February 2018, 16:51
The issue is that a contingent obligation has now become a firm financial obligation that F1 must generate revenues to provide a cost of capital return. Until Liberty purchased F1 from Bernie and CVC, there could have been hope, however vanishingly small, that the right thing could have been done for the sport. CVC had already received an above-fund-target return on their F1 investment through dividends, and Bernie, of course had made billions off a very low cost basis. But with the sale, F1 must now generate after tax operating profit of almost $900 million annually to cover the cost of that capital, and it is Liberty Media’s fiduciary duty to do so. That $900 million must be earned in addition to whatever they agree to provide the teams. You have to remember that Liberty/F1 has no tangible assets other than the TV feed equipment and the Paddock Club tents and place settings. The entire balance sheet is goodwill and whatever marked trademarks and other BS they could get past the accountants. In other words, it takes very little real capital to run this sport, excluding the teams, and yet the sport must provide a return on an enormous capital base.
Robbie (@robbie)
9th February 2018, 17:14
Ok Gary but isn’t that normal big business? Are you suggesting Liberty has been caught out somehow, or did they not do their due diligence with this purchase? Did they not go into this deal eyes wide open? I would think it was always going to be their plan to grow the sport and grow the revenues at the same time.
BasCB (@bascb)
12th February 2018, 7:29
GAry, seriously. Go and have a look at the what the records of CVC are with the sport.
They regularly INCREASED loans to payout dividends to themselves. Loans that off course now have to be paid for (interest) and payed back from F1 revenue. A strategy that leads nowhere but to a downturn over time.
Liberty has already said they they want to LOWER the amount of loans taken out and invest in F1 to make the total revenue grow. That is a positive and growth based strategy, something F1 badly needs.
BasCB (@bascb)
12th February 2018, 7:31
Oh, and it is not just goodwill in those contracts.
Liberty have long term binding contracts with race venues that obliges those venues to pay the fees. On the other side, there are the obligations to pay the teams off course, but those run “only” till 2020
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
9th February 2018, 16:57
@Gary Probably the same as when CVC bought F1 at the valuation Bernie set for it, based on previous would-be-owner’s hypothetical valuation of F1, using venture capital loans.
rob91
9th February 2018, 12:59
How many of the people who were campaigning for the abolition of grid girls even watch F1? Probably not very many but even so, this doesn’t mean that people will start to watch F1 now if they weren’t before. To make this change is one thing but there was no need to make a big announcement out of it, that is just an attempt to be seen as “keeping with the times” which I find to be quite obnoxious for these women who now have to find work elsewhere, after all they are innocent victims of this.
Michael Brown (@)
9th February 2018, 20:00
It’s 2018. That means that attractive women are haram.
Michael (@freelittlebirds)
9th February 2018, 13:03
Wait a second – a poll in 2015 found a majority were in favour of dropping grid girls or using men as well as women on the grid?
Really??? Have they even seen the grid? They voted for more men??? That’s like voting for fewer women on the team at Real Madrid or the New England Patriots … We have to deal with it – before you know it the quarterback will be Gisele Bundchen and Ronaldo will be surrounded by Victoria’s Secret models, not hairy monstrosities like Bale and Benzema:-)
It’s a thing!!!
AliceD (@aliced)
9th February 2018, 14:04
So it is exploitative to have women standing on the grid, but not exploitative when you use men, or even children? Oh the hypocricy!!!
Robbie (@robbie)
9th February 2018, 16:06
But realistically it is women who throughout the years have been treated as eye candy moreso than men, and who for one example still get underpaid on average compared to their male counterparts doing the same job etc etc. I’m speaking in general and not just about F1. Men simply have not been exploited the same way, and, well, children on the grid will have a totally different spirit to it…much more of a family feel than one of objects as eye candy.
This reminds me of Gay Pride parades. Those against them claim heterosexuals don’t have a parade so why should the LGBTQ community? Answer: Because heterosexuals have not been marginalized and persecuted in the past such that they need to fight for equality now.
ruliemaulana (@ruliemaulana)
9th February 2018, 14:15
The fact that we still arguing about grid girls is a clear indication that not much hope any discussion on the real F1 issue would be accommodated. Letting the peasant fight a minor issue is the best consolidation could any governing body give to acutely dissatisfied fans.
Robbie (@robbie)
9th February 2018, 16:09
I see nothing stopping anyone from discussing any issue surrounding F1 and I’m sure the grid girl one will peter out soon.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
9th February 2018, 17:02
All it means is that F1 has not managed to find anything more substantial to let us talk about. This is one of the worst-managed off-seasons ever.
Sonics (@sonicslv)
9th February 2018, 14:47
@keithcollantine I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the worst F1F article is when you make a poll. More specifically the relation between the article title (if it worded as a question sentence), the actual poll question, and the answer options in the poll. At best it can be called ambiguous, and at worst it can be called misleading. I believe you’ve been called about this many times in the past too. Heck, there’s already at least 2 people in this article disagreeing with your poll result “conclusion”.
For the F1 grid girls poll, I could also say the results of the very same poll in the very same article is majority of the readers in favor of not stopping using the grid girls or having a combination of grid girls and grid guys.
FYI, I pick having grid girls and boys in that poll but I refuse to be lumped together with group that saying stopping the use of grid girls. If you want to make a hard divide between grid girls or no grid girls, I’ll lean more on still having grid girls side. I already explain myself in the comments of that article.
For other people, please read the article, the poll question and answers carefully, read the comments discussion and form your own conclusion.
Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine)
9th February 2018, 15:05
@sonicslv
Which is exactly what I intend for people to do which is why I consistently link back to it.
Sonics (@sonicslv)
9th February 2018, 15:52
@keithcollantine That would be nice if you could use more neutral language like “read the F1F reader poll” or something like that instead of using sentences that sounds like the conclusion of the poll when it -again- at best is misleading.
Aleš Norský (@gpfacts)
9th February 2018, 15:05
One cannot argue against Grid Kids of course, but the Grid Girls ban is just one more move that takes the edge off (not just) Formula 1 and contributes to the gradual uniformity and conformity of the world. I think that that there was nothing wrong with grid girls being around and I bet that they themselves would strongly object to being dismissed as scantily clad ladies fit for girly magazines…as they are sometimes referred to. But if I remember correctly the grid girls started in the sport by evolving from the girls introduced to the scene by sponsors. And sponsorship promotion was still their primary function until 2017…they were not necessarily there for the TV audience, but interacted with the people ‘on the ground’. It is also interesting to realize that Liberty Media are owners of Atlanta Braves, and apparently have no problem with maintaining an all-girl cheerleading squad there (https://www.mlb.com/braves/fans/entertainment-teams/tomahawk-team). So F1 seems to have been somewhat targeted for this for whatever reason and Liberty Media caved in on it. And the issue continues to have amazing amount of traction on both sides of the opinion…as this and many other discussions on other forums prove.
Zim
9th February 2018, 16:37
You do remember putting those pics up, don’t you Keith?
markp
9th February 2018, 17:00
This is Liberty supplied grid girls. If teams want it I see no rules that say teams cannot employ their own grid girls, even if there were they can get round those by giving them a job title, Driver Weathering Protection Technician. If teams really want it they can do it…. I hope a team does.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
9th February 2018, 17:04
@markp They could, but then they’d have to have two fewer people doing actual productive work on the car (since guests can’t work for the people they’re guests of).
Markp
9th February 2018, 20:23
Are the number of team members restricted? If so my idea would not work but then they could be guests who just happen to be holding their “own” umbrellas? Would be funny for me to see someone try just as an up yours to the Pc brigade, would be so F1 in the vein of oil burning or flexible wings…..oily grid girls with flexi body parts, imagine Carrey scampering about with overcoats trying to cover them up, we could watch it speeded up to the Benny Hill music.
erikje
9th February 2018, 21:51
Maybe the teams should hire their own cheerleader teams like Liberty does.
praxis (@praxis)
9th February 2018, 18:25
I am still amazed by the fact that this many people are so worked up about the ban of grid girls in F1.
Markp
9th February 2018, 20:26
No one is angry just confused why they just banned them rather than make them wear a halo to protect them from exploitation. A halo would of meant they could continue improving the look of the grid in safety.
Gabriel (@rethla)
10th February 2018, 12:01
Perfect!
james2488 (@james2488)
9th February 2018, 18:33
The funny thing is the FIA controlled Formula E are still using grid girls, along with BTCC, Indy car and so on. It’s just F1 that has decided to come over all liberal. Why are the other series not following F1?
Gabriel (@rethla)
10th February 2018, 12:00
@james2488 F1 is not the first with this and wont be the last. This is more a liberty mediamove than an FIA move.
bull mello (@bullmello)
9th February 2018, 18:50
Fascinating debate that is tending to be most descriptive of those weighing in defending grid girls while being oblivious to the obvious objectification of women and why that is hurtful to society in general, women in particular.
Celebrating the human form (male & female) in art is one thing. However, in Formula 1 the celebration is of speed, technology, teamwork, human endurance and endeavor. Throwing gratuitous (at best) female exploitation into a male dominated sport is a case study bonanza for any halfway competent sociologist.
How does not having grid girls detract from the F1 racing experience? Will it cause you to stop watching F1 racing?
Markp
9th February 2018, 20:32
3 grid girls who don’t want you but you get them by chasing them then paying them in Bitcoin for a few hours of……. That’s speed, technology, teamwork and human endurance right there.
Michael Brown (@)
9th February 2018, 19:56
Strong opposition from feminists who complain about women making choices that they disapprove of.
So to compensate, Liberty introduces “grid kids,” and I’m sure Hollywood loves the idea.
A few years later, grid kids will be removed because of child exploitation complaints. It’s about as bad as working in a sweatshop.
So only men will be allowed on the grid because women and children lack the agency to make their own choices.
Finally, somebody will get the idea to have models on the grid again.
Rinse and repeat.
Ubazze
9th February 2018, 19:59
Feminazis putting women out of work. The irony. The girls had no problem. Loss for peoplekind, I guess.
Alan
9th February 2018, 21:07
All I know is this is fact……rich men sacked women and replaced them with rich kids
Maciek (@maciek)
10th February 2018, 0:20
This is what I would like someone to explain to me: I’m assuming that no one would seriously argue (but if so, I would love to hear the argumentation) for hiring sexy people for no other purpose than to stand around semi-dressed smiling vapidly holding up signs at say, business meetings or at the grocer’s or at the cinema or pretty much anywhere else that has some semblance of just basic taste. So why then do you think that somehow it should be an inalienable part of F1? I mean, if like American wrestling fans got all up in arms about it and called it glamour I’d understand, in the sense that it would live down to my expectations, but seriously? What exactly did their presence contribute to motorsport? If you need to get your jollies from grid girls, then perhaps it’s time to reevaluate your sources of satisfaction in life.
Sonics (@sonicslv)
10th February 2018, 3:52
@maciek OK, let’s have a discussion. Here are my arguments:
1. You say sexy people. Have you tried to research what F1 grid girls wears in last few years? I know you might not be interested, but research the topic before making uninformed statement. Yes you can see cleavages or thighs. But they wear no where near body tight or swimsuit or underwear costumes anymore. You can see girls in sexier outfit in your local mall I bet. Pretty and attractive yes, but sexy is not.
2. Why it must be inalienable part of F1? No. Most people defending the existence grid girls that I read never said F1 must have grid girls. The problem is they suddenly told to stop by a group of people who probably not even like F1. Liberty doesn’t even try to hide the fact that the decision of removing grid girls is because outside pressure.
3. What their contribution to motorsport? The same as any other promotion media. You know like driver interviews, pre-race shows, national anthem, jet flying over the circuit, concert, night race, after party, etc. Directly contributing? No. Removeable? Yes. Can the same be said with other parts of F1 weekend? Also yes.
4. I don’t think anyone who defend the grid girls do it because we “need to get jollies”. Seriously, are people who against grid girls want them removed because they’re “getting jollies” and get distracted from racing when they seen one?
Maciek (@maciek)
10th February 2018, 15:13
@sonicslv sorry man, I don’t have the patience to unpick your points one by one, so I’ll just mention one that’s particularly telling:
…see, if you’re describing girls as ‘promotion media’ perhaps there’s a clue there as to why many people felt grid girls were an outdated relic of another time.
Look, here’s a universal truth: whenever change comes around, the group that’s had the run of the place for a while will get up in arms about it and tend to see that change as somehow an attack on the fundamental values of ‘how things ought to be’. Now I don’t wanna get too far off the track here, but my point is that having sexy girls standing around before a race with nothing to do but be sexy is done. Fuggetaboutit, that ship has sailed, ciao, sayonara. If it’s still around elsewhere, you can bet it’s on its way out, certainly in the wider ‘western world’ anyways. I don’t understand why some people are up in arms about that, but I do know that you can either be angry at the world and society for changing, or you can take a longer view. Whether some men want to admit it or not, the way our society worked for a long, long time was skewed in ways that benefitted men and their sense of superiority over women (not to mention political and economic power). The balance is shifting and that makes some insecure men more insecure. Now, you can either lash out at change and feel impotent to stop it, or you can take a look at yourself and ask why it is that a racing series not using girls to stand around and be sexy for men anymore seems to rile you so badly. What is it exactly about having grid girls that was so important to your sense of what F1 is about? Personally, I watch it for the cars and the racing and the drama, and in recent years, partly so I can complain about how DRS and current aero designs have killed proper racing, but hey that’s just crazy old me.
George (@george)
10th February 2018, 21:08
@maciek
I have to say I don’t really understand why grid girls exist, but I hardly think they’re some symptom of patriarchal oppression, unless you think that every woman who isn’t attending university or dressed like a librarian is being exploited (I get the feeling you do).
@sonicslv had some good points, you should have read his comment instead of going off on a rant.
Maciek (@maciek)
11th February 2018, 0:08
@george I never came close to saying anything like that. What I do say is that guys who get all angry at the change are deep down angry about something else missing in their lives and are obviously blind to the fact that girls standing around at sports events so that guys without enough sex in their lives have something to compensate with is becoming out of touch. I did read what @sonicslv had to say, but frankly I didn’t think that any of it made a dent in my original post (+I don’t understand what he means in his point 4.). And finally, can’t say i think that what I wrote in return qualifies as a rant. Just some thoughts, which I think I set out fairly clearly.
Sonics (@sonicslv)
11th February 2018, 5:55
@maciek You want someone to explain to you, but why don’t you actually try to understand what I wrote to explain my views?
Do you think using girls as promotion media is outdated relic? So now we should stop making commercial spots in TV, billboards, or any other events and media? And you still even called them “sexy girls standing around before a race with nothing to do” even though it’s the first point on my first reply that current grid girls is not “sexy” anymore. Do you actually read my reply or just refuse to read parts that break your arguments? At least I have @george that read it so I don’t write it all for nothing. Thanks @george.
Look, I’m fine with changes as long as it based on necessities. Horse carriage out, paper boy gone, worker replaced by machines, etc. I can only say tough luck and good luck in the future for them. But in this case, it’s not because of necessities. When they blatantly said it’s because outside pressure and even said there will still “pretty girls” in races, it’s obvious grid girls still have value for them. As an analogy, I hate receiving calls from telemarketers. Can I wish there’s no more telemarketers? Sure. Is it right for me to make a group to pressure call centers to be closed and celebrate when one does? Absolutely not.
P.S.: As for point 4, you make a ridiculous (a child level insult really) argument and I just reply with a bit of sarcasm to show how ridiculous it is. You also make another ridiculous argument along the lines of “deep down angry”. I hope you realized how ridiculous it is but let me know if you want a reply to that argument with a healthy dose of sarcasm :p.
Maciek (@maciek)
11th February 2018, 14:11
@sonicslv I read what you wrote and as I said right off at the beginning of my first reply I apologised for not having the patience to respond point by point; I don’t know why you feel insulted by this, I thought it was rather diplomatic. Obviously you think that your points make more sense and it’s vice versa for me; it’s not like we’re actually going to convince one another. And btw, just because @george mentioned that he liked your points doesn’t mean he actually read them any more attentively than I did, just saying.
As for the media thing, perhaps we’re having a bit of a disagreement over vocabulary here – people are not media, are they? That was my point. But as to your question, yes actually, I’d be very satisfied without billboards and TV ads. And as for your call center comparison, there’s all kinds of legislation limiting how and when telemarketers can call you, in Canada that’s the case anyways, precisely because people made a stink about it at some point.
As for your point 4, as I said I don’t understand what you mean by
– I don’t mean to be insulting, but you would need to reword it in clearer terms.
And whether you think grid girls are sexy or not is beside the point; the obvious reason for them to be there is to attract men and personally I think the whole concept of needing to attract men to sports events by having girls there whose only reason to be there is to attract men is pathetic and if it actually works then it’s even more pathetic that some men are so easily drawn to such obvious hooks. That’s my opinion and I don’t apologise for it. That has nothing to do with my personal appreciation of beauty or my stances on sexism, feminism or social equality. I just think that we could use a bit more class and less crass out there in general and when people equate grid girls with glamour, I can only roll my eyes; actually I can only roll my eyes at people’s need for shiny glamoury things in the first place, but hey I’m just crazy like that. Finally as for Carey’s comment on still ‘having pretty girls at races’ I think that’s pathetic too because he’s essentially trying for a middle road that pleases everyone, while pleasing no one, and still managing to be patronizing all at once, but it doesn’t change the fact that grid girls just don’t jive with social norms anymore. I don’t think I’m going out on a limb saying that, it’s just what it is.
Sonics (@sonicslv)
11th February 2018, 19:45
@maciek It feels insulting because you literally asked for explanation then ignoring it and put on something that half of it looks like a rant from a moral high horse. Do you get the explanation you want? Is it enough or it’s not clear yet? Are you conveniently ignoring parts that hard to support your view? @george may or may not pay more attention than you to what I write, but from his reply, it does seem he did.
For media, feel free to suggest a more correct term but lets not get into semantic. However, I’d argue people nowadays actually functioning more like media than ever before. Advertising now getting big on “influencers” like twitter, youtubers, Instagram celebs, etc. I’d say grid girls is the analog old school type of the same concept. You may think they’re useless for you but that doesn’t mean you can just remove them from the world. Just like those telemarketers, we can regulate them for hopefully happy middle ground but we can’t just force close them.
Now, being sexy or not is important in this discussion because many arguments against grid girls using phrases like and similar to:
– having girls there whose only reason to be there is to attract men
– hiring sexy people for no other purpose than to stand around semi-dressed smiling vapidly
– standing around before a race with nothing to do but be sexy
Which is wrong and sounds crazy when you replace topic from “sexy grid girls” to “attractive grid girls”. They are being attractive for the same reason actress or news anchor: to get the initial attention from idle people. And this works for both sexes too: just ask your female friends if they take second look on random attractive female they met on the street. Human brain is just wired to pay more attention to another attractive human. Today, advertisers just using science and we long gone past the era of rich men just want to see almost naked women, which is why they’re not sexy anymore.
For point 4, you really missing out the sarcasm. It’s because your original statement
And I reply, with sarcasm removed: No. We don’t getting jollies. Are you?
But seriously, why you think you have the right to say what some people can’t do? You may not like them or feel any value from them. But why not just move along? You do you, let them do theirs? They’re happy doing it, they don’t feel exploited, I’ve put argument why its not exploitation (feel free to debate it if you want). Why not just enjoy the race weekend together?
Maciek (@maciek)
12th February 2018, 4:22
Look @sonicslv the reason I didn’t bother replying to your arguments one by one is because I just don’t think they hold water, which is exactly what you think of mine, so let’s just agree to disagree. I’ll say a couple things though: a) I certainly never said or even suggested that I have the right to decide what people can or can’t do (feel free to point out where I did); b) I don’t think I’m on a moral high horse, but I do have some strong opinions and I stick by them; c) I would like to point out that between the two of us I’m not the one who seems to feel the need to go in for personal attacks against the other; d) if you feel insulted by people ignoring what you say on the internet you’re gonna spend a lot of time feeling insulted and if you judge people’s attention to what you say by how much they agree with you, you’ll likely end up making wrong assumptions about why people disagree with you. I’m just a guy sharing my opinion on the internet, I never said anyone had to agree with me.
BasCB (@bascb)
12th February 2018, 8:03
look guys, @george @sonicslv @maciek to me this is just a very easy business desicion by Liberty.
After evaluating cost and benefits of a huge range of things they do in F1, they are now taking steps to 1) grow revenue and b) eliminate cost factors that don’t do no. 1.
It’s easy, grid girls cost a money to pay them and they do not bring in new race fans (on the contrary, market research show they are likely to hinder growth with female and younger potential audiences), and the alternative is more likely to do that (grid kids) as well as supporting grassroots motorsport (by offering young racers an extra motivation and potential to gain contacts in F1) as well as costing them hardly anything (just extra badges to be allowed in for the kids+family)
So as a sensible business, Liberty/FOM just decided to cut cost AND replace it with something with more potential. And at the same time they limited their risk of potential negative attention (someone pointing out the grid girls every time they critisize motorsport, just look at the yearly anti-aussie GP articles, as well as possible scandals i.e. Bankers Club harassment claims etc).
Maciek (@maciek)
12th February 2018, 15:30
Thank you for bringing us back down to earth @bascb you’ve pretty much nailed the essentials there I think
Sonics (@sonicslv)
12th February 2018, 16:10
@maciek Sure. For clarification I never intended to attack you as the person, I only attack your ideas or what you say in a debate. If you feel attacked as a person then I’m sorry. That being said, if there’s any silly statement, you can bet I’ll ridicule it.
Also the problem is not whether someone agree or disagree with me, but it’s because you ignoring the arguments. If you disagree just say so and put a rebuttal. If my arguments don’t hold water surely you can shot it down pretty quick. Arguing and rebutting is what makes healthy discussion, not ignoring what you don’t like.
@bascb I understand it’s business decision, but not easy one I think. If it’s easy, they don’t need to word it to shift the burden to outside pressure and then seemingly backtracking with statements like in this article. Also, judging from statements, FE fiasco and other series that still use grid girls, I think it’s safe to say from pure business perspective, grid girls still have value and maybe net profit. I don’t say F1 should always have grid girls, but they shouldn’t go away like this.
F1 performance (@patent)
10th February 2018, 10:33
I am sure the minority of F1 fans don’t want to ban grid girls so it is a very bad direction.
Why can’t we (fans) vote about grid girls? And why can’t we (fans) make decision about grid girls?
And when Chase Carey says “it’s a decision for fans” it’s simply a lie.
F1 performance (@patent)
10th February 2018, 10:47
*no minority but majority (sorry). So I think the majority of F1 fans don’t want to ban grid girls.
Gabriel (@rethla)
10th February 2018, 11:57
@patent Its not a lie its just empty pr words like everything he says.
They do it because they think it will get them more paying fans in the long run. Is it what the majority of current fans want? who cares.
BasCB (@bascb)
12th February 2018, 8:16
We are racing fans foremost, aren’t we? I want to see the cars, I want to hear those that drive them talk, like to hear from the people that make the cars fast, that help them achieve good setup etc. And i might pay extra for such access (if offered a reasonable deal).
I am sure that if there would be a significant portion of fans to pay serious money to keep the grid girls (i.e. voting with your wallet) they might have given keeping it more of a chance @patent, although that would make for quite a different focus of the sport (see Carmen Jorda being put in a car again etc?). But I know literally no one who would be interested in paying extra for the grid girls to be there, or would become a fan (or sponsor) because of them being on the grid.
But as @rethla points out, Liberty did this to cut off something that does not help them grow the audience and/or revenue (and saves them some money at the same time).
PT (@pt)
10th February 2018, 13:02
“We’re going to continue to have pretty girls at races.”
Does he mean the celebrity guests?
Sergey Martyn
10th February 2018, 14:44
Wat a self-righteous, stupid and senseless hogwash!
Wait some years before these grid kids will sue Chase Carey or his asociates for pinching their buttocks: “Oh dear, I prefer you – not those stupid grid girls!” like the Hollywood’s starlets now burying Harvey Weinstein after that many years.
Put the grid girls back – otherwise I’ll switch the TV on only during the formation lap just before the green lights.
Nathan Builder (@nathanbuilder)
10th February 2018, 17:00
Go on, switch the TV off, and good riddance. Blaming the victims is totally unacceptable, apart from being totally disgusting.
Sergey Martyn
10th February 2018, 14:47
Boo the grid kids you true F1 fans – I can only visit few races during the year.
Nathan Builder (@nathanbuilder)
10th February 2018, 16:58
Pretty girls are a part of life…
Hum…
I don’t know what to say about that. That’s objectifying, for sure. It’s also strangely demeaning, because it immediately makes me judge the girls I know on how pretty they are, so I can answer the unbidden question “are pretty girls a part of MY life?”.
Carey is a mouthpiece, though. But he’s wrong.
kartguy07 (@kartguy07)
11th February 2018, 22:14
Unfortunately the PC crowd win… they’ve forced their agenda into our sport and now we’re talking about it instead of our sport. So anyway, cars, teams, drivers … Not long to go until the car intros, if anyone is interested!
JettC
12th February 2018, 12:47
Done with F1. And I was the first to say don’t let the door hit you on the way out to others but this, coupled with the poor quality of raving, coupled with the poor standard of coverage from Sky (soon to be the only option) and I’m not seeing any other option than to put my free time into a more entertaining medium.
Shrieker (@shrieker)
13th February 2018, 20:35
Should read: We gave into feminazi propaganda.
Wimps.