This is the segment where I scour my favorite forums around the internet
and find some particularly interesting articles about current affairs
told in the words from some of my favorite human beings.
In this edition we have an obvious example of everyday sexism from that famous misogynist Lewis Hamilton, who objectifies the women he works with by spraying them with the brutal weapon of champagne. What a fucking monster.
_______________________________________________________________________________
http://www.womensagenda.com.au/talking-about/top-stories/lewis-hamiltons-champagne-celebration-why-are-some-sports-still-treating-women-as-objects/201504155605#.VTuWdZOAkl0
_______________________________________________________________________________
Oh my god, imagine being a girl who worked on the podium of Formula One races and then somehow being hit by champagne during the victory celebration. Just what are the chances of that? I blame that sexist pig Lewis Hamilton who obviously did this on purpose because this incident is proof that he objectifies women, as does the sport of motor racing. I honestly can't wait for this author to write about something else she has no clue about, because I would like to recommend to her the time when I got wet after visiting Sea World. Sure there may have also been women there who also got wet, but I was objectified in a place that there was a high chance of me getting wet. If that's not proof of sexism then I don't know what is. But that experience was nothing in comparisons to the horrors inflicted by Lewis Hamilton. I mean champagne, what a horrible man. God, I tipped some of that potent stuff on me earlier this year and I still haven't recovered. This is much worse than those women who suffer acid attacks in situations were gender oppression is a real situation, but at least they don't have to put up with being sprayed by champagne.
Seriously though, why the fuck are we making a fuss over what is an innocent situation? The lady herself has not pressed charges on Hamilton, and she even personally admitted that this really isn't a big issue, so I don't understand why we can't just leave it at that. Surely the podium girl must have realised that at some stage she probably is going to get wet considering that all Formula One podiums have champagne, or nearby equivalents in their celebrations. The woman in question must have understood this event was an inevitability, yet you don't bother finding out about what happens like maybe a journalist would, instead just seeing the situation from your personal perspective gained from a few images. You never bothered to find out whether she was 'shocked' or 'disgusted', and that's because if you did you'd discover that your article is total bollocks, and that actually your personal assumptions are factually incorrect. Face it, you have no evidence to suggest that spraying champagne is a sexist activity, especially considering you have just the single example to back it up; and even that's not reliable. If you actually watch Formula One on a regular basis then you will discover that the champagne celebrations are sprayed onto multiple people, including the many men who are standing below. They knew that standing there would get them soaking wet from a targeted stream of fizzy grapes, so are they also being objectified? They look pretty happy about being objectified to me, and being as more of them are affected don't they have a better argument to suggest that they're the ones being victimised?
Oh thank god, finally some sense. It seems Roz Hardie understands my growing concerns about the obvious danger of that highly presssurised champagne stream. I mean what would posses a man to do such a thing? It's almost like he's overcome with emotion after celebrating a victory, but that's no excuse to exclusively attack women like the vicious bastard he's become. I think this false accusation perfectly justifies my decision to whine about this harmless situation like the bellend that I am. Just because something is unpleasant doesn't mean it's instantly sexist. That's a point you've failed to address, as also have you failed at addressing the personal feelings of the woman herself, which would give an entirely different viewpoint on the matter. I don't honestly see the issue; she's getting paid a fuck load of money to stand there, yet somehow that's a reason to complain. I'm sure many men would love to be in the position she's in as let's face it, she doesn't have to do a fucking thing. Only a moron would think standing and clapping was a strenuous task. If Hardie doesn't like this favorable concept then I suggest she actually bothers to do something instead of just moaning about a point that simply isn't there. Hamilton has in no way abused his position, he just wants to share his joy of winning a hard fought victory. It was all done in good faith, and so I just can't understand how this is an act of misogyny, and judging by your poor explanation neither do you.
As if this argument couldn't get any more reliable, we now get some more sources, from the pointless opinions from random idiots on Twitter. Yes I'm confident this will add a lot of weight to your already flawed argument. It seems that actually you couldn't get any experts to back up your point, because let's face it there aren't any, but instead we get morons who think this makes Hamilton, the reigning Formula One world champion, an embarrassment to the UK. I think the irony is that this Twitter user is almost certainly a bigger embarrassment to the UK since all they do is spurt their worthless opinions over the internet like the pointless human being they've become. But at least it's not as idiotic as writing a hashtag for sexism despite backing that point up without any evidence. Yes, it's definitely just women that are violated during these champagne celebrations, and absolutely zero chance that it's completely unrelated to gender issues. #bellend. At least I actually provided stupidity as evidence for calling that person a bellend. One thing these commenters, and the author of this article, have failed to realise is that if she really was being victimised then why didn't she just fucking move? If I'm being mauled by a bear I don't just stand there and claim that I'm being violated, instead I get the fuck out of there using the power of walking. Surely human nature must be taken into account in such a situation, and so the fact that she just accepts the situation makes me think that there is yet further evidence to suggest that this argument is complete bullshit. I just can't comprehend why something hasn't registered in this author's brain, as at no point have we ever had a balanced debate.
So correct me if I'm wrong, but according to this feminist article Lewis Hamilton is no longer allowed to celebrate because somebody thinks it objectifies women. I have to ask myself that if this incident occurred with the man being the victim would any issue be raised at all. If that were the case then I'm sure this website would joyfully tell us that getting soaked by champagne whilst being on a Formula One PODIUM is most likely an occupational hazard, since as you quite rightfully point out the tradition has been in place for the last fifty years. I could understand the point of this argument if the women was punched in the face by Hamilton, or something else unexpected like being taken out by the Mafia, but these aren't events that are common knowledge to anyone who applies for a job in the industry. Even if Hamilton punched her in the face it still wouldn't be sexism as there is still no evidence to suggest that he is purposely targeting one gender. The obvious solution to this issue would be that if she doesn't like champagne being sprayed in her face then don't go into an industry where people get sprayed in the face with fucking champagne. That would be like me complaining about being shot in the leg during a tour of Afghanistan. What did I fucking expect? Have some common sense and stop whining about an issue that doesn't involve gender.
The bottom line is that this event in no way 'changes the nature of the celebration'. Hamilton didn't want to purposely harm the lady because of her gender, and him spraying her in the face is not remotely dangerous or misogynistic. If this was a such an offensive move then why do the drivers often drink the champagne that they've rightfully earned? Are you suggesting that the drivers are objectified by the sport of Formula One? To me it seems you've taken this issue completely out of context, and in the process shown a complete lack of respect for a sport that you clearly know very little about. Why don't you stick to writing about topics that you might actually have an insight on, and then at least your analysis might start to become at least a little reliable. if you had bothered to watch the situation for a few seconds more then you will realise that Hamilton also sprays Nico Rosberg in the face. That's Nico Rosberg, the male racing driver. In your own logic how can this champagne celebration possibly be sexist? Surely including her in the celebrations should be promoted since Hamilton has seen past the woman's status as just an object. But no, you have to make a mountain out of a molehill with your narrow minded and ignorant opinion. So you can take your single image and shove it up your ass along with this pathetic argument. I think it was one of the comments that perfectly summed up this article in a nutshell:
"So please to the individuals who saw this as sexist or demeaning, its
not. If you haven't experienced it yourself, or are not in the sport,
you would never understand that the pop of the cork and the flowing of
champagne is all our hard work wrapped in bubbles of happiness."
No comments:
Post a Comment