NYT - Redskins Cheerleaders Describe Trip to Costa Rica that Crossed the Line

[goskins10]

5 hours ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

 

Nope.  We don't get rid of actresses because Harvey molests them, or researchers because Matt Lauer harasses them and that is because it would be punishing the victims.  This is the same thing, really not hard to understand people. 

 

That is not the same thing to me at all. While getting rid of the cheerleaders may get rid of some of these issues, for me the reason I want them gone is they are not value added to the game. It's not a punishment. It's that I see no value in having cheerleaders in the first place. 

 

In HS and college they lead cheers and are into the games. They actually provide a lift to the crowd and get them involved. I do not see that in pro-sports.

 

I just do not see them as value added to the game. This is totally independent of the current issue. 

[WelshSkinsFan]

@goskins10 I take your point but as you say that is independent of the current issue whilst I was referring specifically to this issue.  In the larger conversation that now seems to be taking place then I agree they don't add much but again they certainly are not hurting anyone so I am at a loss as to why people seem to be so hell bent on getting rid of them.  If they truly add no value then they will ultimately be phased out, the NFL is about bottom lines and nothing more.

[LaRonDontLikeUgly]

What a lot of you cats are missing is what cheerleading for the Redskins (or any professional sports franchise) does in terms of opportunity for other avenues.

 

Up until last year, the referees (Yeah, you too Hochuli) weren't even full-time employees.  That's the REAL issue that is happening now.  These girls have high demands and are getting paid squirrel **** for the amount of work they put in.  

 

The NFL has truckloads of money and it's a proven fact they won't give it to you unless you PRY it from them.  Cheerleaders PUT IN WORK-- they are truly inspired by the brotherhood that football provides and THEY create their own sisterhood from it.

 

You think your 7-year old daughter gives a **** what play the Redskins run on 3rd and 4?  Prolly not.  You think they see the choreography between quarters and want to replicate it through gymnastics/other sports?  Maybe.  (Better than staring an iPad and wanting to live someone else's life.)  

 

A lot of y'all (way more than I expected) need to get your heads out of your asses and understand that these women don't become cheerleaders for YOU.  

[bakedtater1]

So where are we with the situation?..can anyone fill me in with what's next/what's happening now?

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

33 minutes ago, LaRonDontLikeUgly said:

A lot of y'all (way more than I expected) need to get your heads out of your asses and understand that these women don't become cheerleaders for YOU.  

I'm not sure that anyone here thinks their motivation is to please us.  But that's what their role is whether that's what motivates them or not.  I'd imagine a lot of the motivation is the clout that comes with being a cheerleader and the potential avenues of opportunity that opens for them.

 

I think what most of us are saying is that their role is insignificant to the actual football team.  Their only real purpose from the teams standpoint is to sell their sexy bodies.  Like I said earlier, I'm sure some of these girls are great and probably bring a lot more to life than being good looking, but at the end of the day their role is merely to be good looking and sell calendars.

[Llevron]

I feel like getting rid of the cheerleaders is just covering up the problem instead of addressing it. 

 

And I'm conflicted cause I have only really seen them as hot chicks with less clothes on than other hot chicks. And I never thought that was wrong or gave a second thought to it honestly. And i dont now. 

 

But i feel like there is a problem here and just pretending like it's not once we get rid of the girls is messed up. I think that reflects on us pretty poorly as a people. 

[goskins10]

13 minutes ago, Llevron said:

I feel like getting rid of the cheerleaders is just covering up the problem instead of addressing it. 

 

And I'm conflicted cause I have only really seen them as hot chicks with less clothes on than other hot chicks. And I never thought that was wrong or gave a second thought to it honestly. And i dont now. 

 

But i feel like there is a problem here and just pretending like it's not once we get rid of the girls is messed up. I think that reflects on us pretty poorly as a people. 

 

 

They are two completely different issues. No one (At least no one that I have seen) who wants to get rid of the cheerleaders is saying to do that in response to this issue and call it done, or that getting rid of them will solve the problem of exploitation. I have not seen one person say that. But yet that keeps being the assumption here. 

 

Item 1: There were several young ladies that fairly or not felt intimidated and exploited during a trip to Costa Rico with the Redskins. This needs to be investigated fully and all those responsible be help accountable. I will add that regardless of it was the intention to make them feel this way, they did and that means something was broken. It makes no difference if they keep the cheerleaders or get rid of them. This needs to be done, period. Let's find out what happened and hold those responsible accountable and put processes in place to prevent it from happening again to anyone, cheerleader or not.  

 

Item 2. A totally different conversation is are cheerleaders value added to the game of football? I do not think they are and as such would like to them removed from the game. And it's not a: "the Redskins should get rid of cheerleaders thing." I think all professional football teams should get rid of cheerleaders. Just to go a step further, if has to be a league wide decision. I would be against one team getting rid of cheerleaders, especially if it's their response to the articles (there were I think 2 other teams highlighted in other articles by the NYT.) 

 

 

 

[Llevron]

I wasnt saying anyone was saying that. If I was I would have quoted you. I'm direct like that. 

 

I was just giving my opinion/thoughts on the subject. Dont be so defensive @goskins10

[WelshSkinsFan]

If the yardstick for determining whether to get rid of something is does it add to the game of football then 90% of what goes on at games can be dispensed with.  Not sure that food and drink sold at the game adds to the game of football, the product on the field is neither enhanced nor diminished by the availability of Mountain Dew and polish sausage.  Some people like to buy food and drink at the game and some don't just as some like to watch the cheerleaders and some don't.  The fact that there are people who don't see the appeal in having the cheerleaders is hardly justification for scrapping cheerleaders from pro football altogether.  You don't like something so therefore everybody should bend to your desires.

 

In reality the cheerleaders are not going anywhere, with the total action in a 3 hour broadcast clocking in at around 15 minutes per game the tv networks require a certain amount of additional fluff to fill the time between commercials and scantily clad ladies shaking their thing tests very well with their audiences. 

 

If you dislike cheerleading as it exists in the NFL today then maybe join the efforts to reform the role of the cheerleaders, starting with insisting the league get involved in their working arrangements and making sure they are treated as human beings.  I still cannot understand the desire of those of you who dislike the cheerleaders and want to cheerleading removed from the league though.  I don't pay any attention to cheerleaders and I cannot recall any time that they were forced upon me or I was made to feel uncomfortable.  It is an aspect of the NFL package I don't care for so I ignore it, it is very easy to do.  If the ladies want to do it and there are people who enjoy the show then more power to them, I lack the arrogance to think that what I want should interfere with other peoples enjoyment but maybe that is just me. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

2 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

If the ladies want to do it and there are people who enjoy the show then more power to them, I lack the arrogance to think that what I want should interfere with other peoples enjoyment but maybe that is just me. 

I don't think anyone is saying that they should get rid of the cheerleaders merely to satisfy their own personal preferences or to avoid potential abuse of power in the future.

 

I think this story was merely a launching pad to discuss how folks feel about the role of NFL cheerleaders in general.  There are quite a few of us that think it's really stupid primarily because they don't actually cheer.  Over the last 20 years, they've really upped the sex appeal thus making their presence merely about satisfying pervs that get off on that sort of thing.  I for one could care less whether they do or don't have cheerleaders at NFL games, but can totally understand why folks see their role as absolutely pointless.

[goskins10]

41 minutes ago, Llevron said:

I wasnt saying anyone was saying that. If I was I would have quoted you. I'm direct like that. 

 

I was just giving my opinion/thoughts on the subject. Dont be so defensive @goskins10

 

You were definitely implying that but if that was not your intent - fair enough. And no one is being defensive but you. I was explaining my position that they are two different topics. I was very specific because I had done so already so I was making sure it was clear. You apparently took it personal. Was not my intent. 

 

19 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

If the yardstick for determining whether to get rid of something is does it add to the game of football then 90% of what goes on at games can be dispensed with.  Not sure that food and drink sold at the game adds to the game of football, the product on the field is neither enhanced nor diminished by the availability of Mountain Dew and polish sausage.  Some people like to buy food and drink at the game and some don't just as some like to watch the cheerleaders and some don't.  The fact that there are people who don't see the appeal in having the cheerleaders is hardly justification for scrapping cheerleaders from pro football altogether.  You don't like something so therefore everybody should bend to your desires.

 

In reality the cheerleaders are not going anywhere, with the total action in a 3 hour broadcast clocking in at around 15 minutes per game the tv networks require a certain amount of additional fluff to fill the time between commercials and scantily clad ladies shaking their thing tests very well with their audiences. 

 

If you dislike cheerleading as it exists in the NFL today then maybe join the efforts to reform the role of the cheerleaders, starting with insisting the league get involved in their working arrangements and making sure they are treated as human beings.  I still cannot understand the desire of those of you who dislike the cheerleaders and want to cheerleading removed from the league though.  I don't pay any attention to cheerleaders and I cannot recall any time that they were forced upon me or I was made to feel uncomfortable.  It is an aspect of the NFL package I don't care for so I ignore it, it is very easy to do.  If the ladies want to do it and there are people who enjoy the show then more power to them, I lack the arrogance to think that what I want should interfere with other peoples enjoyment but maybe that is just me. 

 

I think you had it right in your previous response. I was just clarifying that it's two different topics. I am not getting into the specifics above as there is no value added to the discussion. It will send us down a rabbit hole. Suffice it to say that I get it that for some people cheerleaders is part of the game experience. For me they do not add much if at all - and maybe that's what I should say instead of no value added. Maybe that was too harsh. But more importantly this is nothing against the women. I happen to know they work very hard and for very little money - to the point that some are almost paying to be a cheerleader. 

 

I do agree they are not going anywhere so I am done with this. I was simply expressing that I would not be devastated if the removed them. I knew I was in the minority and that's OK. Will not be the first or last time. What I was making sure of is that my indifference to cheerleading not be confused with my concerns about the article and how many of the women in cheerleading and other similar type activities are treated.

 

It felt like based on the comments that the perception was that if you want to get rid of cheerleading you want to do it to sweep this under the carpet and just make it go away. That could not be further from the truth. I want the Redskins - and the other teams to do a full investigation. Whoever is responsible needs to be held accountable, period. 

 

 

[Llevron]

4 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

You were definitely implying that

 

Why are you like this? I literally just told you want trying to imply that. Not sure why you find this difficult. 

 

 

[goskins10]

4 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

Why are you like this? I literally just told you want trying to imply that. Not sure why you find this difficult. 

 

 

 

Ok, last response here. Not worth it after this. 

 

There is nothing difficult for me here at all. Sometimes what we think and what we write are different. I made the point that the way you wrote it appeared as if you were implying the two were the same. And then immediately followed with if that was not the intent, then fair enough. Just for clarification I was accepting your statement that it was not your intent.  

[Llevron]

"My bad" is way easier 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

1 hour ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

If the yardstick for determining whether to get rid of something is does it add to the game of football then 90% of what goes on at games can be dispensed with.  Not sure that food and drink sold at the game adds to the game of football, the product on the field is neither enhanced nor diminished by the availability of Mountain Dew and polish sausage.  Some people like to buy food and drink at the game and some don't just as some like to watch the cheerleaders and some don't.  The fact that there are people who don't see the appeal in having the cheerleaders is hardly justification for scrapping cheerleaders from pro football altogether.  You don't like something so therefore everybody should bend to your desires.

 

I think when we can compare cheerleaders shaking their asses to a nice polish sausage or a cold beer, existing for the pleasure and consumption of others, we can accurately say something is wrong with this picture. 

 

1 hour ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

In reality the cheerleaders are not going anywhere, with the total action in a 3 hour broadcast clocking in at around 15 minutes per game the tv networks require a certain amount of additional fluff to fill the time between commercials and scantily clad ladies shaking their thing tests very well with their audiences. 

 

Which speaks pretty poorly about their audience imo that they need to have this as part of the game. But when the target market is the "drunk, red-blooded raw steak eating MAN and I want to see that tits and ass" we can't really be surprised. We should expect more though. We should be better than that.

 

1 hour ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

I don't pay any attention to cheerleaders and I cannot recall any time that they were forced upon me or I was made to feel uncomfortable.  It is an aspect of the NFL package I don't care for so I ignore it, it is very easy to do.

 

When every time we come back from commercial we got either the 1) low camera shot looking up at the looks, **** and ass of a cheerleader while they dance or 2) we get the higher cleavage shot while they dance and smile...its not so easy to avoid. Basically, every time they are being forced upon us and I also feel uncomfortable about it. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

24 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

I think when we can compare cheerleaders shaking their asses to a nice polish sausage or a cold beer, existing for the pleasure and consumption of others, we can accurately say something is wrong with this picture.

 

 

 

You just described all of sports there.

 

 

3 hours ago, bakedtater1 said:

So where are we with the situation?..can anyone fill me in with what's next/what's happening now?

 

Waiting for the next shoe to drop or for the whole thing to fizzle out while the Skins put together a response from their investigation that will be automatically laughed off and dismissed no matter what it says, and in all honestly will probably deserve it lol...

[Koolblue13]

Shouldn't this be a tailgate thing by now? 

 

NFL is corrupt af and we all know it. Date rape and **** like that is rampant in college and we know it. A ton around football is crap. 

[JSSkinz]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

Shouldn't this be a tailgate thing by now? 

 

1

AMEN!

[Spaceman Spiff]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

Shouldn't this be a tailgate thing by now? 

 

NFL is corrupt af and we all know it. Date rape and **** like that is rampant in college and we know it. A ton around football is crap. 

 

No, keep it out, please.

 

17 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

That is not the same thing to me at all. While getting rid of the cheerleaders may get rid of some of these issues, for me the reason I want them gone is they are not value added to the game. It's not a punishment. It's that I see no value in having cheerleaders in the first place. 

 

In HS and college they lead cheers and are into the games. They actually provide a lift to the crowd and get them involved. I do not see that in pro-sports.

 

I just do not see them as value added to the game. This is totally independent of the current issue. 

 

If they're not value added, that doesn't automatically mean they are value subtracted.  If you truly viewed them as an even value you wouldn't care if they were there or not.  But no, you want them gone.  Which must mean you not value them at all.  

 

It's cool if you want them gone to cover up and get rid of issues like this instead of addressing issues.  Not what I'd prefer but to each their own.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

15 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

It's cool if you want them gone to cover up and get rid of issues like this instead of addressing issues.  Not what I'd prefer but to each their own.

I literally haven't seen anyone say that they want the cheerleaders gone to get rid of issues like these allegations.  I think most of the folks that don't care for the cheerleaders also believe this matter should be investigated, not covered up. 

 

It's entirely possible to think the cheerleaders are merely an inch or two of clothing short of pole dancers that serve no purpose whatsoever for the gameday experience and still believe this situation deserves to be investigated thoroughly.

[Renegade7]

3 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

Shouldn't this be a tailgate thing by now? 

 

NFL is corrupt af and we all know it. Date rape and **** like that is rampant in college and we know it. A ton around football is crap. 

Agreed with you like 20 pages ago, totally agree with you now. If the Name Thread is in the Tailgate, so should this.  

[Califan007 The Constipated]

24 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Agreed with you like 20 pages ago, totally agree with you now. If the Name Thread is in the Tailgate, so should this.  

 

Agree except for one aspect: if this somehow turns out really bad, it has the possibility of leading to a change of ownership and/or team president. The name issue wasn't going to have that effect. But topics like this and the name issue due end up being rather political in one form or another, which fits in Tailgate.

[Koolblue13]

1 minute ago, Califan007 said:

 

Agree except for one aspect: if this somehow turns out really bad, it has the possibility of leading to a change of ownership and/or team president. The name issue wasn't going to have that effect. But topics like this and the name issue due end up being rather political in one form or another, which fits in Tailgate.

Good. Change the name, change the owners, change Bruce. It's all crap, but get it out of the stadium. This is for on the field stuff. 

[Xameil]

5 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Agree except for one aspect: if this somehow turns out really bad, it has the possibility of leading to a change of ownership and/or team president. The name issue wasn't going to have that effect. But topics like this and the name issue due end up being rather political in one form or another, which fits in Tailgate.

Unless you have people saying Dan Snyder was one of the people who requested an escort, and touched her inappropriately, you wont have a forced ownership change

[Llevron]

12 minutes ago, Xameil said:

Unless you have people saying Dan Snyder was one of the people who requested an escort, and touched her inappropriately, you wont have a forced ownership change

 

Taking the wind out of my sails man