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

[goskins10]

30 minutes ago, grego said:

 

Where does one keep a passport when they are doing an essentially naked photo shoot? 

 

Having one person secure them seems to be better than having them leave them in the hotel room from a practical standpoint. 

 

I understands there could be a sinister angle, but I don't really think that's actually the case here. 

 

Interesting that the article says 'several' of the girls decided to not return the following year. I would think all five who participated in the story would have chosen to not return given what is alleged. 

 

This is part of what we do not know. Were they gathered for convenience but readily available if requested? Or were they taken and used to intimidate? As for all of them not returning - as far as we know, those 5 could be part of "several of the girls". In the end I hope this drives a full investigation. I would think above all we want the truth. 

 

I do agree assuming Dan S was intimately involved and asking for his head is a bit premature. But in fairness he has done enough **** head things that you really do not need this specific incident to even be true for it to still be the right thing for him to sell the team. 

 

Agian, not trying to start a Dan thread here. If anyone would like to discuss details - and I have plenty - I would be glad to do so in another thread. 

[Dan T.]

Maybe the Redskins should go back to having the wives of the Redskins band members be the cheerleaders.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

11 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

Maybe the Redskins should go back to having the wives of the Redskins band members be the cheerleaders.

 

I say we make it a requirement that all cheerleaders must also be Waffle House waitresses...

[Renegade7]

1 hour ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

The passports thing is not as unusual as some people are making it seem.  Not a commentary on any of the other stuff that happened but it is not uncommon in some countries for hotels to require the passports of overseas guests and added to that I have done some travelling with large groups where the organizer has kept the passports together with tickets and travel documents to facilitate easy check ins at airports, hotels etc.  This part at least seems to be less sinister than the article tried to make it.

I'm starting to realize that as well.  Was talking to some family members that work overseas, they don't have to do that, but sometimes they do so if you lose your passport, its taken, or you're taken, the company has an official doc they can use to help get you out of it.

 

Saying if they want to leave they lose their job without telling them what they were getting into first is not cool (that's why countries like Germany don't allow companies to do that, its gets abused to much in some other countries).  At the end of the day, NFL has to decide what they want their cheerleaders to be (Wizards don't call there's cheerleaders anymore because they aren't pretending to be anymore), have everyone on the same page, because if some of them are saying they didn't want to do that, it should've been made clear to them what they were doing before they went down there.  

 

Again, I'm not down with saying Snyder should sell the team without confirming what he knew or how common this is.  This really boils down to not that they were doing it, but did the women not want to do something they didn't think they were going to be asked to do and forced to do it anyway unless they would lose their job.  

 

If you go to Redskins.com right now, you can see a picture of a topless cheerleader.  Her nipples are not exposed, but they've already gone further then I realized they were going, so now I'm 100% certain we've gone too far with what a Cheerleader is now.  I don't want my favorite team associated with softcore porn.

[thebluefood]

2 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

And that's a fair question. There is a possibility this is all just BS. However, the bigger problem for me is the general attitude towards the issue in looking for all the reasons it is not true instead of understanding how horrific this is if even just half or it's true. 

 

For every Duke incident there are 1000s or real incidents. 

 

 

 

This, this, this, all of this forever. Yes, fake allegations happen but not nearly as often as sexual assault cases aren't perused by the authorities or brought to trial at all.

 

With other differences between the Duke Lacrosse incident aside (i.e. that it was the press that uncovered inconsistencies with the story - they weren't the ones that broke it) you're taking more of a gamble coming forward about this than not. That's why it can take years, decades even, for people to come forward with allegations, especially if the people involved are rich, powerful, and/or well known.

 

1 hour ago, JSSkinz said:

 

I think we should just take a step back and let this play out, we now have several ex-cheerleaders on record as saying there wasn't an issue and the ones who say there was an issue are anonymous.

 

 

With a story like this - where rich, powerful, and possibly well known men (or people associated with them) are being accused of this kind of behavior - it's more than reasonable to remain anonymous. It isn't Joe Schmoes like most of us that can afford to go on trips like these and have this sort of "access." With some legwork and the right sources, they could pretty easily be identified.

 

Along those lines, these women put themselves out there by talking to the press at all and can also be pretty easily IDed. It's not as if the 'Skins cheerleading team was a cast of thousands in 2013. Once again, with some legwork and process of elimination, you could probably figure out who's bringing these allegations to light. 

 

Now, if you're sticking up for an institution like the Redskins - one that has a lot of money and a lot of clout - you really don't have much of a reason to remain anonymous because there's really not that much the opposition can do to you in comparison to the institution you're defending. Oh sure, you'll probably catch  hell from those "SJWs" online - you're probably gonna get some unfair potshots, too - but it is nothing compared to the material, professional, and social harm the Redskins or those those sponsors/stadium suite holders could do to them. Anything from blacklisting to financially crippling lawsuits could very well follow.  

 

And hey, maybe for those particular women, their experience was fine. Maybe they didn't feel coerced into doing anything and, indeed, maybe they weren't. That's not an uncommon scenario in workplace situations but that doesn't invalidate the stories those women told NYT. 

 

Once again: who do you all think can afford these sponsorships? Who do you think can afford these suite seats at FedEx? This is the D.C. area we're talking about. Not only are they gonna be high rollers but they're probably gonna know the law like the back of their hand (or know people who do) and find a way to destroy these women. 

 

If you wanna read more on anonymous sources, here's a few helpful links:

https://blog.ap.org/behind-the-news/when-is-it-ok-to-use-anonymous-sources

This is from the Associated Press (the one I'm most familiar with)

 

Here's NPR's (I kinda-sorta worked with their policy while I was in public radio)

http://ethics.npr.org/tag/anonymity/

 

This one's from the NYT - where they implemented even stricter policies two years ago to help prevent anonymous "hatchet jobs" from happening:

https://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/03/15/new-york-times-anoymous-sources-policy-public-editor/

[Califan007 The Constipated]

5 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

If you go to Redskins.com right now, you can see a picture of a topless cheerleader.  Her nipples are not exposed, but they've already gone further then I realized they were going, so now I'm 100% certain we've gone too far with what a Cheerleader is now.  I don't want my favorite team associated with softcore porn.

 

 

 

You're just now realizing this?...where have you been for the last 15 years? lol...

 

And this ain't softcore porn...softcore porn shows all sorts of nipple (and damn near everything else).

[Bang]

From Redskins.com cheerleader section, these are photos from the recent auditions.

 

This is the "The dollars go in these strings, kid" pose.

 

 

We need to see how much team spirit you have..   well, maybe show us more. And a little more.

 

 

Is my ass OK? Bikinis and stilettos..  now that says "football" to me.

 

Work it ladies!  "Go Redskins! Score and we will untie these strings!"

 

 

 

yay for team spirit. Go on and take a look at the 'audition'. One after another. Arms up, show those tits. Do a turn, stick your ass out. Walk on those heels.

All of them are basically the same. i do believe fans could attend to watch this.. uh.. audition.

 

Get rid of cheerleaders in the NFL. Softcore porn, nothing but. And, apparently, another way to be exploited, and to show us all how scummy the people who run these things really are.

 

~Bang

[XtremeFan55]

Wow.  It appears like there is a shift in sentiment in here.  Redskins FO must be working overtime to change the narrative rather than investigating the testimony of these 5 cheerleaders by making them look like liars.  And some of you are getting sucked in.

 

Rightfully so...because just think for a minute.  High profile Redskin sponsors who own those expensive suites go on a pleasure trip to Costa Rica most likely without their wives...probably told their wives it was a ‘business trip’....to party for a week with 3 dozen cheerleaders who also happen to be there for a swim suit calendar photo shoot.  Costa Rica. Foreign country known for anything goes.  Far from home and wife.   Adult-only resort.  Lots of beautiful cheerleaders in bathing suits and nude.   Wealthy men.   Anyone not getting it is naive.  I have been to some of these functions and even sat next to Snyder once.  Not my kind of people because they are usually drunk and obnoxious.

 

Redskins have a major crisis and the ‘investigation’ was just put out there as a bone for the wolves.  What they are really doing is damage control because if this goes too far then those wealthy sponsors are going to get exposed.  Then all the secret and dirty laundry will be public which will embarrass a lot of prominent men and maybe even lead to some marital strife when wives find out what really happens on these ‘business’ trips.

 

The fact that five cheerleaders decided it was time to expose what happened on that trip should be telling.  They have a lot to lose if exposed as liars.  I tend to think that they held it in for 5 years but now feel emboldened to come forth because of the #metoo movement and the fact that their conscience dictated that they speak out.

 

Hopefully the Redskins PR machine that slandered Mike Shanahan...Scot McCloughan...’Kurt’ Cousins....etc.  doesn’t manipulate the fans in here into believing their spin because they have a long track record of sleaziness working against them.

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

 

You're just now realizing this?...where have you been for the last 15 years? lol...

 

And this ain't softcore porn...softcore porn shows all sorts of nipple (and damn near everything else).

 

I knew they were doing the swimsuit thing, either I missed or forget that they were putting out pictures of them topless.  I make the softcore porn reference because my dad and sister said that's where its heading (they will show nipples at some point) because our society is starting to become more open to the idea, but I don't believe we should be doing that.  Not a Sports Franchise.

4 minutes ago, Bang said:

From Redskins.com cheerleader section, these are photos from the recent auditions.

 

This is the "The dollars go in these strings, kid" pose.

 

 

 

We need to see how much team spirit you have..   well, maybe show us more. And a little more.

 

 

 

Is my ass OK? Bikinis and stilettos..  now that says "football" to me.

 

Work it ladies!  "Go Redskins! Score and we will untie these strings!"

 

 

 

yay for team spirit. Go on and take a look at the 'audition'. One after another. Arms up, show those tits. Do a turn, stick your ass out. Walk on those heels.

All of them are basically the same. i do believe fans could attend to watch this.. uh.. audition.

 

Get rid of cheerleaders in the NFL. Softcore porn, nothing but. And, apparently, another way to be exploited, and to show us all how scummy the people who run these things really are.

 

~Bang

 

Agreed, they aren't cheerleaders anymore, we need to stop calling them that.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

 

I knew they were doing the swimsuit thing, either I missed or forget that they were putting out pictures of them topless.  I make the softcore porn reference because my dad and sister said that's where its heading (they will show nipples at some point) because our society is starting to become more open to the idea, but I don't believe we should be doing that.  Not a Sports Franchise.

 

Body paint and strategically-placed arms, hands and plant leaves have been part of the process for awhile now lol...and of course not just with the Redskins cheerleader calendars. SI swimsuit issues have been featuring body painted models in their swimsuit issues, ESPN has those "body" issues where athletes--men and women--pose completely nude--again, with arms and legs in just the right position to make sure nothing is shown...but it's beyond obvious that they're naked. There is actually history in naked athletes, of course, with roman Olympic athletes thousands of years ago training and competing completely in the buff.

 

There is some exquisite body paint photos where the women are nude but who cares when it's so artistic. I think the nudity thing is overblown in terms of what is shown and what isn't. It's more about the way it's shown in my eyes.

[Renegade7]

6 minutes ago, XtremeFan55 said:

Wow.  It appears like there is a shift in sentiment in here.

 

The sentiment is changing because the shock of it all has died down. 

 

The passport thing is a being one, people lost their minds about it (I did, too), but its actually a grey area because some employeers do that to protect their employees.  It's grey because some countries passed laws because this was being abused and its clear if one of the cheerleaders asked for it back and left, they'd lose their job.

 

I still don't have enough info to say who should be destroyed for this, I just know somebody had to pay, and if Snyder knew who already, they'd be gone to get ahead of this from a PR standpoint.  Something is off about this whole thing, NFL needs to investigate this and somebody needs to investigate the NFL.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

12 minutes ago, Bang said:

yay for team spirit. Go on and take a look at the 'audition'. One after another. Arms up, show those tits. Do a turn, stick your ass out. Walk on those heels.

All of them are basically the same. i do believe fans could attend to watch this.. uh.. audition.

 

Get rid of cheerleaders in the NFL. Softcore porn, nothing but. And, apparently, another way to be exploited, and to show us all how scummy the people who run these things really are.

 

~Bang

2

 

Um, I don't think posting those photos is helping you make your point lol...unless that was your point? In which case, well done, sir.

[XtremeFan55]

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

 

This is part of what we do not know. Were they gathered for convenience but readily available if requested? Or were they taken and used to intimidate? As for all of them not returning - as far as we know, those 5 could be part of "several of the girls". In the end I hope this drives a full investigation. I would think above all we want the truth. 

 

I do agree assuming Dan S was intimately involved and asking for his head is a bit premature. But in fairness he has done enough **** head things that you really do not need this specific incident to even be true for it to still be the right thing for him to sell the team. 

 

Agian, not trying to start a Dan thread here. If anyone would like to discuss details - and I have plenty - I would be glad to do so in another thread. 

You have a good point there.   The 5 who came forward could have been part of the 9 chosen as escorts.  

 

They escorted some men to a night club and for all we know the men may have been aggressive even though no sex happened.

 

They could have experienced more trauma than the others who are now speaking out who also probably were not ‘chosen’ as good enough that night.

 

 

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

There is some exquisite body paint photos where the women are nude but who cares when it's so artistic. I think the nudity thing is overblown in terms of what is shown and what isn't. It's more about the way it's shown in my eyes.

 

Agreed, nudity does not equal porn, not at all.  Like I said to Bang, they aren't cheerleaders anymore, they are borderline strippers now.  There are people that want to argue that since that is the case, these women need to be more understanding of what comes with the territory concerning that.  I don't like that argument at all, we've gone to far with this and setting up to go even further.

Just now, XtremeFan55 said:

They could have experienced more trauma than the others who are now speaking out who also probably were not ‘chosen’ as good enough that night.

 

Ya, we likely took the ones the guys thought they might have the best chance with and it sounds like it was done in the interests of keeping these guy's money flowing into the organization, one already worth $3 Billion.  We absolutely should NOT be doing that.  It has nothing to do with "cheering", it has nothing to do with a "calendar".

[Califan007 The Constipated]

]

2 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Agreed, nudity does not equal porn, not at all.  Like I said to Bang, they aren't cheerleaders anymore, they are borderline strippers now.  There are people that want to argue that since that is the case, these women need to be more understanding of what comes with the territory concerning that.  I don't like that argument at all, we've gone to far with this and setting up to go even further.

2

 

yep, they really are...which is sad, because when you see them at a hospital visiting children no part of you says "stripper". There is a much better way to utilize cheerleaders than giving them outfits so skimpy and dance poses so provocative you have to tell them how to care for their vaginas to make sure nothing goes wrong...

[Roger.Staubach]

24 minutes ago, Bang said:

Get rid of cheerleaders in the NFL. Softcore porn, nothing but. And, apparently, another way to be exploited, and to show us all how scummy the people who run these things really are.

 

~Bang

 

And if they WANT to do it?  I know plenty of men/women that are proud of their bodies and the hard work that they put into them.  They want to show them off.  So, if they want to show them off, via cheer-leading, fitness competitions, body building, or whatever, let them.  If the industry isn't for them they can move on a do something else.

 

**Don't take this to mean that I support the exploitation that was purported on this trip, but to imply that this is 'softcore porn' is just laughable.  If the food at Hooters didn't suck so bad you might see more of this.

[NewCliche21]

What I think some people are missing is that it really doesn't matter, at all, if they would have lost their jobs/been in danger had they said "no."  It's the pressure and, again, the implied or explicit coercion, that matters.  If it puts them in a position to feel pressured to do something, then management ****ed up.  If they didn't know all of the circumstances beforehand to allow them to make the most informed decision possible, then management ****ed up.

When crimes occur (no, I'm not saying this is a crime), which hold a much higher burden of proof, intent to follow through only matters so much.  It's in statutes themselves that a person has to fear for her/his life in order for it to be a crime, same **** when it comes to self defense.  There doesn't have to be a threat, just a perceived one.  And that's when a 98% degree of certainty (beyond a reasonable doubt) is required to make that judgement.  That's not how it is in employment situations.

And to those of you saying that it's no big deal even if it happened, god damn.  If it were your mother, daughter, sister, and/or wife who actually experienced this, then I'd hate to have you as a support.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

38 minutes ago, Bang said:

From Redskins.com cheerleader section, these are photos 

 

yay for team spirit. Go on and take a look at the 'audition'. One after another. Arms up, show those tits. Do a turn, stick your ass out. Walk on those heels.

All of them are basically the same. i do believe fans could attend to watch this.. uh.. audition.

 

Get rid of cheerleaders in the NFL. Softcore porn, nothing but. And, apparently, another way to be exploited, and to show us all how scummy the people who run these things really are.

 

~Bang

 

 

Cheerleading is not exploitive. There is a difference between them deciding to show up, try out, and show some skin vs having their passports taken, walk around topless in front of sponsors, and then be forced to escort  vips at a bar. The difference is choice. Is that hard to understand?

[NewCliche21]

Just now, Roger.Staubach said:

 

And if they WANT to do it?  I know plenty of men/women that are proud of their bodies and the hard work that they put into them.  They want to show them off.  So, if they want to show them off, via cheer-leading, fitness competitions, body building, or whatever, let them.  If the industry isn't for them they can move on a do something else.

 

**Don't take this to mean that I support the exploitation that was purported on this trip, but to imply that this is 'softcore porn' is just laughable.  If the food at Hooters didn't suck so bad you might see more of this.

 

This is almost right but still flawed.  Cheerleading involves dancing to cheer for your team.  It's reasonable to expect them to know that they'll be in skimpy outfits and likely objectified.  It's not reasonable to know that people will be there while they are changing, that they will be in a foreign country being told to dress with way less on, that they will be on display to the suite owners, that they will be offered/encouraged/voluntold to escort those people.

Some women want to do that, and more power to them.  It's your body, do what you want.  It's not ever okay to coerce someone into doing so.  None of this is in the cheerleading job description.  Is this really what parents sign their children up for in youth cheerleading?  High school?  Is this what they sign up for in college?  Is this in the contract?  Nah.

2 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

It it is not exploitive. There is a difference between them deciding to show up, try out, and show some skin, and having their passports taken, walk around topless in front of sponcors, and then be forced to escort  vips at a bar. The difference is choice. Is that hard to understand?

 

Wait, are you saying cheerleading isn't exploitative or the non-cheerleading parts of this story?

[Renegade7]

6 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

]

 

yep, they really are...which is sad, because when you see them at a hospital visiting children no part of you says "stripper". There is a much better way to utilize cheerleaders than giving them outfits so skimpy and dance poses so provocative you have to tell them how to care for their vaginas to make sure nothing goes wrong...

 

A lot of good people are strippers as well, the association some people just can't handle.

 

I can see this thread getting moved to ATN at some point and eventually Tailgate more we find out about this.  This is absolutely a big picture discussion that we just got "caught" with our hands deepest in the cookie jar on (emphasize "caught"). 

 

We're talking about a lot of different things now, including #MeToo officially finding its way to the sports world.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

I am saying that them showing some skin for cheerleading tryouts is not exploitative because that chose to do that.  Obviously the stuff presented in the article is wrong and exploitative. Because that stuff is outside the realm of their job descriptions and obviously they did not feel comfortable doing it.

 

bang is suggesting there is no difference.

[NewCliche21]

1 minute ago, Renegade7 said:

 

A lot of good people are strippers as well, the association some people just can't handle.

 

I can see this thread getting moved to ATN at some point and eventually Tailgate more we find out about this.  This is absolutely a big picture discussion that we just got "caught" with our hands deepest in the cookie jar on (emphasize "caught"). 

 

We're talking about a lot of different things now, including #MeToo officially finding its way to the sports world.

 

Who said strippers are bad people?  I signed up for a job with the understanding that it was X, and then my job turned into Y.  That's bull**** no matter what.  It has nothing to do with strippers.

And this is literally not a degree of separation from the team.  I would be very disappointed if this got moved.  All of this matters because all of it will affect the team, its personnel, its structure, everything.  You don't move it just because it also falls into another category.

1 minute ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

I am saying that them showing some skin for cheerleading tryouts is not exploitative because that chose to do that.  Obviously the stuff presented in the article is wrong and exploitative.

 

Got it.  They go to the tryouts and do the job knowing what it is.  Not exploitative.  They're asked/pressured/forced to do something else, that's exploitation.  I'm with you.

[Roger.Staubach]

10 minutes ago, NewCliche21 said:

 

It's not reasonable to know that people will be there while they are changing, that they will be in a foreign country being told to dress with way less on, that they will be on display to the suite owners, that they will be offered/encouraged/voluntold to escort those people.
 

Agreed.  If people are watching them change or if they are being told to escort *without them expecting it* to, then it is terrible.  If they knew/know that those were prerequisites of the positions, then that is another thing entirely.

 

Kind of similar to reporters, both male and female, being in the locker room after athletic events while the athletes are still showering/changing.

[NewCliche21]

2 minutes ago, Roger.Staubach said:

Agreed.  If people are watching them change or if they are being told to escort *without them expecting it* to, then it is terrible.  If they knew/know that those were prerequisites of the positions, then that is another thing entirely.

 

Kind of similar to reporters, both male and female, being in the locker room after athletic events while the athletes are still showering/changing.

 

Absolutely.  This isn't a women's issue by any stretch; it just happens WAY more often with them.  There's no reason for any of these women to have expected this scenario when they signed up, or even to be asked to be placed in the scenario which is pressure in and of itself.

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, NewCliche21 said:

 

Who said strippers are bad people?  I signed up for a job with the understanding that it was X, and then my job turned into Y.  That's bull**** no matter what.  It has nothing to do with strippers.

And this is literally not a degree of separation from the team.  I would be very disappointed if this got moved.  All of this matters because all of it will affect the team, its personnel, its structure, everything.  You don't move it just because it also falls into another category.

 

You asking that question is why this is going to get moved at some point.  This is bigger then the Redskins, no one in this thread that I've seen have said strippers are bad people, but you know damn well there are plenty of people that feel that way.  That goes to the point I was agreeing with @Califan007 on, these women do so much for the community that it sucks they are looked at a certain way.  That's what leads some to negate or ignore everything they do right for because of what they perceive these women as now (which is something they shouldn't be in the first place).

 

The stripper comment is perception versus reality, okay, these "cheerleaders" are damn near at that level now.  There are people that are saying "well, we're treating like something that isn't a cheerleader anyway", these women went in to be cheerleaders, not what happened in Costa Rica with that escort crap (that's why some of them were supposedly crying).

 

There are a lot of moving parts here, the Redskins name thread is in the Tailgate, its really not that big of a deal to me if its gets moved.