Features

The_Rorschach · #1

I was trid skipping today, and crossing the Fox News Channel, I lingered long enough to notice they had a panel discussion over the topic of female news casters and their appearance. There was absolutely nothing on, and I watched my sole DVD -For a Few Dollars More- the day before, so I lapsed into a stupified silence and readied myself for what would doubtless be a morbid spectical.

In this I was not disappointed.

They all seemed to agree that, in the words of the sole female representative, females presented were "always" adherent of a set standard for age and beauty, appearing to be "the news anchor's other wife." I couldn't care less really, regarding her inferences, but her ignorance was appalling to say the least.

Allow me an analogy real quick. Here in America, we have Basketball, The short, fast guys are like are six feet five inches tall, six feet four, six feet three. Thats short. And they're incredibly fast. In football, those speedy little quarterbacks we see are brickbuildings, and those linemen are giants and run faster than you could believe. And thats just American sports, because today, with all the millions of dollars we put into it -they have to be. Sure, there are little guys who are quick, but they get passed over in favour of the people whom are bigger, and just as good.

I mean, sure, you can find some crusty cunt to play the mouth parrot for the nightly news if you want, but why settle for that when one can just as easily acquire someone of model calibre? The Entertainment industry is just as expansive as the Sports industry. Noone has a de facto right to work, its a claim right -or a liberty- therefore I see no reason why fat/ugly women should recieve special treatment when being considered for new caster occupations.

Just curious if anyone agrees with me I guess.

Vibecrewangel · #2

As a woman who has been both heavy (well over 200lbs), disgustingly thin (105lbs at 5'8") and every weight in between....I totally agree.

This is right up there with men "waitressing" at Hooters.

It just ain't right.

Ninjavenom · #3

Howcome everyone wants rights now?

Vibecrewangel · #4

I don't consider being a newscaster or serving drinks at Hooters a right.

If you want the job then you should have the qualifications. And if one of the qualifications is being attractive or having oh say HOOTERS....and you aren't or don't then too f'n bad. Find another place to work. Or have the surgery to fix it.

As far as I am concerned you can't be an accountant if you can't do basic math, and if you are going to be a newscaster you should be reasonable attractive. It keep people from changing the chanel. It isn't predjudice, or an "ist" of any kind. It is simple marketing.

I hate this whole damn entitlement attitude.

JesusFishSticks · #5

entitlementist

george · #6

i would give my left arm to see you in a hooters outfit young lady.

how have you been?

WorthlessLiar · #7

Perhaps this is why one should just read the paper instead of watching a channel that has to market its news with hot ancors.

Quote:

I mean, sure, you can find some crusty cunt to play the mouth parrot for the nightly news if you want

I agree that we shouldn't see affirmative action for the less attractive, but it never fails to astound me just how big of a perspective-lacking, condescending fuckhole you are, Ror. It does kind of suck when thousands of doors are closed to you for something you can't help. I don't think that makes someone a "crusty cunt". I honestly don't think you've ever thought about what it's like to be someone else.

And that you had to give an explanation for watching it... you're such a pathetic, pretentious ass.

george · #8

i dont know if i should pick on ou or agree, but i think you are just a little too sensitive about this ugly thing.

i bet you are a crusty cunt.

why the hell should i have to look at ugly anchors when i get to hear the pretend news? you would not want me doing brain surgery on you if there were not enough fat surgeons and they needed a place filler.

JesusFishSticks · #9

crusty cunt makes me think of those sugar coated candy orange slices...

WorthlessLiar · #10

Quote:

i bet you are a crusty cunt.

Actually, I'm a reasonably hygenic prick. But thanks for assuming stuff.

Quote:

why the hell should i have to look at ugly anchors when i get to hear the pretend news?

I did say I didn't agree with giving people job's because they're ugly. You're being redundant. The fact is, Rorschach is the Royal Tennenbaum of this thread (Vinth's stupidity has no equivilent) and one can't help but point that out.

The_Rorschach · #11

Well Worthless. . .I'm not entirely sure where you see any pretense in my post, so I can't exactly address your grievances. I rather thought my conclusions were logically grounded (owing my frame of thought to John Finnis {Finnis laboured long on the difference between a “‘Claim’ Right” or “Right in the ‘Strict Sense’” and a “Liberty” or “Liberty Right” in his book "Natural Law and Natural Rights" New York/Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980. Finnis begins his analysis of this difference by calling attention to the discussion of rights provided by W. N. Hohfeld in an early twentieth-century work in jurisprudence [Finnis refers to W.N. Hohfeld’s "Fundamental Legal Conceptions" New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1919]}). The right to work would quite clearly be a claim right, a liberty, as opposed to say the right to life, which is a de facto right, or right stricto sensu.

As for the crusty cunt reference, well, that was singular. You could find SOME crusty cunt (not cunts, which would denote plurality), like say Judy Woodruff from CNN for instance. It is possible. I wasn't saying all ugly people were crusty cunts. You are probably just mildly unattractive for instance. I wouldn't make such a broad generalization without justification. It would be rather presumptuous of me.

And furthermore, I do think about what it would be like to be other people. The other night I thought I would sick up, so I took myself into the alley (as not to puke in the pub) and after I noticed I had emptied my stomach on a homeless person -and not the bundle of rubbish he appeared to be- I immediately thought about how it must suck to be him for a good couple minutes before going to back to the bar.[/i]

Helm · #12

A football player's physique serves a clear and distinct set of purposes (although the purposes of those purposes seem kind of pointless), whereas an anchorwoman's physique does not. A crusty cunt most probably has an equally operational mouth, equally operational memory and equally operational whatever else one needs to talk for an hour or so.

The distinction which is of importance between the two sides of the original analogy blot test made is that the reason we put beautiful people in the daily media is aesthetic and not functional. We like to see nice tits and sparkly smiles and that's that. This practise misleads people in numerous ways, the most important of which in that they raise the scale of what the physical norm is supposed to be. If one watches tv for a while, he'd come to believe most people are the beautiful. This is essentially same as with the supermodel-type kind of woman which has recieved oversaturation in the media consistently for the last 40 years or so, it distorts public perception as to what actually exists. Also it manufactures aspirations to reach this higher model in the mass uneducated populance, with various social neuroses as the outcome.

The original double standard discussed in this thread, indeed can be taken as some sort of aesthetic racism or whatnot, although I do not care to debate this aspect of a much larger matter to itself at all, because the same quasi-racism is inherently instinctual, and not so much of a social issue. The social issues are the biproducts of this inherent behaviour. But that's a different discussion.

JesusFishSticks · #13

This thread has really made no sense to me, I have no clue why I've stayed in it so long. Its just that were I live, all we have is ass ugly news anchors. This stuff all seems kinda dumb.

AChimp · #14

Helm, you are just saying that because you are HOT HOT HOT.

Anonymous · #15

Maria Bartiromo has nothing on Mark Haines or Bob Pisani.
And Ann Curry next to Al Roker... man.. could she get any uglier? Really - woof woof! What a dog
News men are HOT HOT HOT

O71394658 · #16

Quote:

They all seemed to agree that, in the words of the sole female representative, females presented were "always" adherent of a set standard for age and beauty, appearing to be "the news anchor's other wife."

Well, you weren't listening very well then. After she said that, the guy asked eveyone, "who's the most popular newscaster on TV?" When they answered Bill O'Reilly, he said that Bill O'Reilly is a balding, middle-aged man. The public isn't the determinant of how women are supposed to look on TV. Personally, I don't really care, and I'm sure a lot of other people don't either. They decide to look their best on their own, not because of some intense media pressure that every newswomen is hot (you must not watch the news if you think this).

Not all of them are good looking. Hell, look at the lady on the show you watched. She was nearying her 60s. But when normal, middle-aged women are viewed by millions of people everyday, it's no surprise that they try to look their best.

camacazio · #17

They're only hired if they can look good. Just look at John Stewart. It's all about the executives and what their marketing men say. There's obvious exceptions, but for the most part it holds true.

Emu · #18

"Maybe that's just her excuse for being incompetent." --Zap Brannigan, referring to the Single Female Lawyer TV show

The_Rorschach · #19

"Well, you weren't listening very well then. "

Actually, I was. I simply didn't add the rebuttal as it wasn't pertinant. Bill O'Reilly isn't a news anchor, nor is his show a news program. No more than the MacLaughlin Group was a news show. Discussing political and current events is not enough of a qualifier to substantiate a program as 'news,' else the aforementioned John Stewart could be considered a news anchor as well.

Really, it is embarassing that I need to correct you on something so obvious. Please don't make me do so again.

Abcdxxxx · #20

So you want your news anchors aethetically pleasing AND to deliver quality intensive reporting??? Get a grip. Anyways I personally find frosted hair, and capped teeth a little revulting....and I mean that in the same way men in Hooters shorts are revulting.

I worked at a small cable network for a short time, and almost broke down in tears the first day when I walked in on some freakish man putting on clown makeup in the mens rooms. Turned out he was our anchor. He liked to do his own makeup. A lot. The guys on the crew liked him because he used to have "tie day". He had a thing that he could only wear a tie on air once, and then it was ruined. So we got his hand me down, once worn silk ties. He's at Fox News now, and he's every bit as vain as any female anchors. So there are some odd standards for on air talent regardless of gender.

I think working in journalism, or news reporting of any sort should be about charisma and personality above short skirts and hair parts. Then again, there might be some people on the planet who didn't think Naked News was the most retarded concept ever.

Supafly345 · #21

I am young, attractive, and healthey. And it is only because of this reason that I totally agree that old, fat, ugly people shouldn't be seen. Thats what the radio's for.

ziggytrix · #22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quoth the Helm

A football player's physique serves a clear and distinct set of purposes (although the purposes of those purposes seem kind of pointless), whereas an anchorwoman's physique does not.

Bullshit. Media in a capitalist environment is a product more than a service. It sells advertising. If Joe Schmoe has a choice between 3 channels for the news, and one of them has an anchorwoman that he has the hots for, which one is he going to watch?

At the same time, they aren't going to give you the news via the sluttiest looking girl they can find either, because it still has to come from a face you feel you can trust.

Point is, in visual media, appearance serves a very clear and distinct purpose.

Miss Modular · #23

Lots of overweight people are photogenic.

When I was an overweight kid growing up, I never thought I was pretty by anyone's standards. As I got older, people would compliment me on how photogenic I was. As I said, I never thought I was attractive by anyone's standards, and a compliment like that meant a lot to me.