Hers me thinking the YES, YES, YEAHHHHH. was the crowd appreciating a 180, when on fact it's just the sounds if many old men coming in unison.

Straight men look at women
Straight men look at beautiful women for longer or take several looks
I’m sorry but I’m not going to look at the floor if I see a beautiful woman

The seniors darts isnt even on tv, so there are no dirty old gammony perverts watching. @Quantum Boy.

My younger son loves the darts :laugh:

Yeah I'm aware that was anecdotal :laugh: the only one in my house into darts is Gav, his brother and sister watch too

…surely it isn’t about the sport of Darts itself or the audience/fans because as has been seen since 2018, the sport has thrived without the addition of the walk on girls….its about whether it’s a fine or regressive thing for the girls to walk back on after 6 years….im a bit conflicted on this atm because I can see feminism should give females that right to decide if they want to earn an income in that way….anyway, while I’m pondering more… (…I think this is quite a good article and worthy of a read…)….

Is Banning Walk-On Girls From Darts An Own-Goal For Feminism?…

The Professional Darts Corporation has decided that walk-on girls are bad and, effective immediately, they’ve cancelled the whole idea. Darts players will just have to walk onto the stage in their big shirts all on their own. “We regularly review all aspects of our events and this move has been made following feedback from our host broadcasters,” said a PDC spokesperson. The Women’s Sport Trust applauded the move. “Motor Racing, Boxing and Cycling... your move,” they said.

It sounds good: the mute girls standing there in pretty dresses are a relic from our sexist past that should be deleted from our lives, like powerful movie producers wanking into pot plants, like actresses trading bleak sex for roles. But maybe not. In an interview with BBC Radio 5 Live soon after the announcement, PDC walk-on girl and model Charlotte Wood said that the darts made up 60% of her income. “I have chosen to do this job. I go to work. I put on a nice dress. I escort darts players to the stage. I smile and that is it.” She doesn’t see what the problem is. It’s an easy gig. She chose to do it.

It’s not inherently anti-feminist to choose to do a job that uses your body and your looks. Some of the most outspoken feminists I know stripped in bars because the money was better than working behind one. They used the cash they earned with their body to fund their art, their degree, to pay the rent for whatever cheap dive they were living in so they could buy time to do the thing they wanted to do. They exploited a system set up to exploit them. They chose to.

Semi-naked models parade on catwalks in front of fashion week crowds every year
Removing a choice, enforcing a lack of one as a PR move: how is that good, and how is that feminist? It’s patronising and controlling to take away the option for the sake of the PDC looking virtuous in the eyes of their broadcasters. The need to abolish this kind of work also seems like classist snobbery about girls and darts in general. It could be argued that working class women, regardless of their personal politics, are losing out on a source of income they rely on just to satisfy another class of women’s idea of feminism and the context in which they believe the female body should be viewed. Twitter rejoiced when ZOO magazine closed, but no one said anything about nude black and white spreads in glossier magazines. Semi-naked models parade on catwalks in front of fashion week crowds, to a huge hive of male photographers, every year. Barely covered nipples in that context is risqué — it’s art — just like the semi-naked women in Vogue. Contextually these images are entirely different, but they’re all paid gigs to models.


Pointlessly escorting some large dad onto a stage may be kind of gross, but so many of the jobs we have when we’re young and hot are worse. Having a job where you’re not explicitly objectified does not protect you from being objectified. From my own file of minor grievances: I had my apron strings yanked while taking food orders from a table of middle-aged businessmen in a nice restaurant in Mayfair. I had my arse slapped when I stepped out from behind the bar to collect the empty pints. I had a man literally breathe down my neck as I searched the DVD overstock for the sad cheap porno he requested and claimed he couldn’t find, but was right there on top of the pile. And I got paid far less for it than the walk-on girl.

At least for her there’s a barrier: her job is televised. It’s not a President’s Club situation, it’s not a private room filled with rich men who think they own the girls like they own everything else. I’ve been to countless boxing matches and — though stories will always vary from decade to decade and room to room — in my experience in those halls filled with physically overpowering men, those ring-girls are given a wide berth. At most, they’re helped through the ropes by giant security guards. They are distant, untouchable attractions.

There is never a feminist consensus on these things because women are people, complete with all our invisible clashing hierarchies of context and personal prejudices. Which is why we’ll continue to argue about where the lines are, to blunt our knives on benign bullshit like walk-on girls at a darts show. But loathe though I am to side with the kind of dudes who sign this petition to reinstate the girls and type “it’s PC gone mad” in the comments box, I think, in the world of feminism, this is an own goal.

…one of the things of the article that I completely agree with is that female don’t have to ‘be objectified to be objectified…’…they’re objectified in so many different ways, as we know…does that make it right, no…but it’s still a truth, I think….we just have to look at people like Nigella Lawson preparing for her Christmas lunch and we know for many watching, it’s not about the cooking…but these walk on girls have turned it around to make an earnings they want to make and because they have the equal freedom to do so…

Exploitation with consent is not freedom Ammi, but I'm really not going to go into an entire semester's worth of political philosophy to explain that reasoning. You either understand it at a root level or you don't, and the groundwork needed to understand why it's the case is not for TiBB.

This is just the porn/onlyfans argument all over again so there's probably multiple threads out there where it's been gone over a lot more.

…ok, well…I’m not going to get completely focused on the watching audience so that the girls themselves and their freedoms to choose are taken from them because that really is just a different step backwards, I would say…anyway, I’m packing to move house tomorrow right now so I don’t have time for ‘all over again’ either…we’re definitely in agreement in that…

Indeed though I'll not confirm which of the bastards I worked for ;) however it does mean that I'm well aware of the following;

1) Gambling by nature if an exploitation of the "customers".

2) The industry as a whole treats staff as numbers-in-seats not as people and pays as little as possible.

3) They openly and blatantly thrive on the exploitation and misuse of horses and greyhounds.


So it's not a particular surprise thet they'll happily exploit women for profit.

Is the argument "it's OK because some big companies are making lots of money off it"? Is that the justification now? That might be even flimsier than it being for the ogling sleazeballs.

Sorry charlotte, you will have to starve because SB fi ds you too sexy and thinks everyone else who does wont be able to control themselves the way he does..

Andrew Tate would agree with you Ammi. The ladies in his "employment" are free to choose to be pimped out. They have a commodity, after all, it's in high demand, why shouldn't they sell it?

https://i.imgur.com/FCEQtrF.jpeg

Absolutely nothing to do with people being able to control themselves or otherwise.

1) Why are they there.

2) Who is it for.

You still haven't answered these very simple questions Parmy, I wonder why not?

I did answer..I said they are there for the sponsors, but after reading ammis post, they are also there for themselves.

How does them being there benefit the sponsors?

will the women be dressed up like they are working at hooters or will they be dressed like traditional presenters

Let me ask you a question first.

Do you find the ladies sexy?

That's just ludicrous. Men are men. Men of all ages appreciate a beautiful woman; appreciate the female form. It’s how we are made.
It doesn’t mean we get a hard on and drool and want to grab our cocks when an attractive woman appears onstage at a sports event. …..and do you need to be reminded that women are fully our equals (if not better, in my experience) and have a choice as to what they do without a big hot under the collar male thumping his chest on their behalf.
You doth protest too much.

…that’s one heck of a joining of dots to females choosing to be Darts Walk on Girls to being a gateway leading to Andrew Tate and being ‘pimped out’….so I’m just going to leave you to make that link, as that’s what you feel…as I said earlier, I’m distracted with packing atm so haven’t given this topic complete thought to have formed a definite opinion…it was really the article I wanted to post because I found that it prompted me to think more deeply about it all….I will say, though…to be really blunt…with your last comment to me…?…there are some days when it’s sadly impossible to have a grown up conversation with you…

Mustn't answer questions!

Do we have the demographic age ranges of people who commit the really bad perverted stuff like rapes and indecent assaults..cause I'm sure as **** it ain't the old beer swilling gammony fat old men over 55 committing those perversion.

Oh yes it's definitely me protesting too much :joker:

And to answer Parmy: no, I do not find it "sexy" when girls half my age are paraded around to be gawped at by dirty old blokes who think it's "normal". Are you really struggling to get your head around that?

No it isn't, it's an extreme version of EXACTLY the same mindset, and a normalisation of that mindset that excuses misogyny "lite". There is precisely nothing "empowering" about anyone selling this, in either form.

In fairness to QB, he has consistently held that view for years, so, agree with him or not, it's not just applicable to Dart assistants

No offense intended here QB, but the BIB I normally tend to hear from two groups of people.

1. Evangelicals who use the "think of the children" card and "traditional family values."

And 2. Extreme feminists who hate women being sexual or to be "pleasing" to men full stop.

And personally I don't believe that Darts needs it in a commercial sense or entertainment sense, but if some women are wanting to do the gig, and the Sport also wants them to be apart of the process then I don't see the issue.:shrug:

And again if 50+ year old men are into women in their twenties who cares? They're adults by that point.

Because are we saying that for example that Cheryl Cole's a creep for being into Liam Payne, when there was a 10 year age gap between them? Plus she knew him when he was a kid on The X Factor.