The NFL’s plan to protect America from witches
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
Great writing by Kareem. I always found the NFL control of players in the offseason, especially when it relates to marijuana use, extremely repressive and controlling. Lots of players and former players are waking up to it [1]
Noone in the private industry, besides sports figures, would put up with the after hours and offseason controls the NFL puts on players. These are also young players that just got out of college and partying, they just came into lots of money, and they treat most like children or their own property. NFL and other sports owners, for one reason or another, really seem to believe they are OWNERS not just the boss.
[1] http://thelab.bleacherreport.com/jake-plummer-s-pot-crusade/
Similarly, given the choice between telling Gal Gadot she has to leave a restaurant, and telling a male extra from the set of Wonder Woman, which do you choose?
Both of those options are asinine. The right answer is the obvious one: neither.
I've heard the pay for NFL cheerleaders is ridiculously low. So I wonder what the benefits of being one are.
I've heard the pay for NFL cheerleaders is ridiculously
low. So I wonder what the benefits of being one are.
Just because a job has low pay, limited opportunities for advancement and poor job security, doesn't mean there won't be people willing to do it.I mean, if you've got a choice between being a shop clerk for minimum wage or being a cheerleader for 2% above minimum wage, you might choose the latter even though it's low-paid.
NFL teams have been accused of not paying minimum wage.
I have friends who tried out for NFL cheerleading. The amount of effort, skills, and genetics required is high. It's incredibly competitive for a job that seems to lack wage and autonomy.
I just don't see how a cheerleader having to leave a restaurant that a Saints player walks into is equivalent to a black player having to leave if another white player came in to eat. Why bring race into it? It's not even an analogous situation, and it's obvious the rule - same with the one only allowing them to say "hello" and "great game" to players - is to prevent the bad optics that would undoubtedly arise from both situations. I can just see TMZ making a huge deal about seeing a player and a cheerleader in the same restaurant, and then it spreads all over Twitter, and then whenever we see player X or cheerleader Y on screen, everyone is thinking "yeah, he's doing cheerleader Y" or "ha, she's doing player X". Of course, lots of people already wonder, but having a little more situational evidence makes it a different story because there's at least some basis to it now.
Furthermore, I think it's totally stupid she got fired over the photo she got fired for - if that's truly the only reason - but on the other hand, rules are rules, and there are differences between that photo and the typical cheerleading outfit or photoshoot. It may show less skin, but it's also bedroom lingerie rather than a cheerleading outfit or bikini. And whereas every time I see an NFL cheerleader she's smiling, in this particular photo, she's not smiling at all, and has more of a "come hither" expression. [0]
I mean, looking at her other Instagram photos, I'm seeing dozens of "sexy" pictures where she shows lots of skin, so clearly it's not like she was being forced to be ultra-conservative and was being micromanaged by her team. It sounds like they just basically said "don't wear bedroom attire" and "if you're wearing something sexy, please just smile", and she violated that rule.
Finally, if these cheerleaders supposedly don't get paid enough, shouldn't it be a good thing she got fired anyway? Now she has the exposure from being a cheerleader of an NFL team - even prior to this situation - and is freed from the shackles and can pursue better career options.
But yeah, I'm all for just getting rid of cheerleaders altogether, or at least giving them better outfits.
[0] https://www.instagram.com/p/BeZGvLuF5va/?hl=en&taken-by=jaca...
If it is to protect them then why make them pay the price?