PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Redskins sexist?


Status
Not open for further replies.
Sexist and Racist....what an orginization.:D
 
That's a good rule IMO. It's a PROFESSIONAL football team, and those type of relationships can stir up negative press about the player, team and the cheerleaders. And as Chris said, getting fired from a cheerleading gig isn't the end of the world if the relationship has a future.
 
I know someone who has been a cheerleader for two NFL teams and both of them (neither the Skins) have that same rule about not interacting with the players. It doesn't seem that far off. However, we did grow up with someone who was drafted by a team that she cheered for. He was there first and she didn't realize he was on the roster. They were friendly off of the field but did not have any kind of "relationship", so they were ok. Though I guess they did, on more than one occasion, have to explain that they knew each other prior to either's involvement with an NFL team.
 
There is no salary cap for cheerleaders.
 
I think this is standard operating procedure for the NFL.

why you ask


it allows Hooters to hire better looking women
 
Yes, the practice is sexist (though the policy exists everywhere), and I'm guessing a cheerleader somewhere down the line is going to get a big payout because of it.
 
Yes, the practice is sexist (though the policy exists everywhere), and I'm guessing a cheerleader somewhere down the line is going to get a big payout because of it.

I doubt it. Neither of them are employees and both are under contracts. If
they don't agree with the terms of their contract they shouldn't sign it. Simple
as that, otherwise suck it up. Players have lots of money to screw around with
their contracts, cheerleaders are a dime a dozen, and don't have any ability
to screw around with theirs (pun intended!). :D
 
Yes, the practice is sexist (though the policy exists everywhere), and I'm guessing a cheerleader somewhere down the line is going to get a big payout because of it.
even after knowing it is part of her contract to not date the players



says nothing about ownership though
 
I doubt it. Neither of them are employees and both are under contracts. If
they don't agree with the terms of their contract they shouldn't sign it. Simple
as that, otherwise suck it up. Players have lots of money to screw around with
their contracts, cheerleaders are a dime a dozen, and don't have any ability
to screw around with theirs (pun intended!). :D
You can't bargain away civil rights, including equal treatment, via a contract. Of course you can sign anything, but later you might be able to persuade a judge that certain sections of the contract are unconsciencious or contrary to law, and they may be struck down as unenforcable.
 
I think if the cheerleaders didn't know going into their job that they weren't allowed to date the players, and then did date a player and then got fired for it, then they could have a lawsuit. But knowing, going in that A. You can't date players, and B. If you do, you will lose your job, they have no legal recourse. They can date the players, they just can't work as a cheerleader for the organization and date the player.

And they can't fire the players, I mean, they can but the investment loss would be so bad and the backlash by fans against the cheerleader (cause fans would blame her and not him) for having one of their favorite players fired would be intense.

Fans don't wear the jerseys of cheerleaders.
 
I don't think this rule only applies to the Redskins either, I think other teams have the same rule in regards to their Cheerleader Player relationships.
 
This is standard operating procedure.
 
I think if the cheerleaders didn't know going into their job that they weren't allowed to date the players, and then did date a player and then got fired for it, then they could have a lawsuit. But knowing, going in that A. You can't date players, and B. If you do, you will lose your job, they have no legal recourse. They can date the players, they just can't work as a cheerleader for the organization and date the player.

And they can't fire the players, I mean, they can but the investment loss would be so bad and the backlash by fans against the cheerleader (cause fans would blame her and not him) for having one of their favorite players fired would be intense.

Fans don't wear the jerseys of cheerleaders.
But investment loss and backlash by fans doesn't trump federal law on equal treatment for men and women. I agree the NFL is between a rock and a hard place here, firing players is not the solution, and not having the policy could also put the teams at risk of sexual harassment lawsuits. But I think one of these days a judge is going to find the policy discriminatory, and when he does it's not going to matter that they signed the policy.
 
Football players' salary: Oodles

Cheerleaders' salary: peanuts

Football players: the main event and the reason people attend games

Cheerleaders: a pleasant diversion during lulls in the game


There's nothing inherently sexist about firing only the cheerleader. If the WNBA was sporting male cheerleaders and the same policies were in place, that wouldn't be sexist either.
 
Cheerleaders don't care. Being an NFL cheerleader is a privilege, not a right, and they know this.

It's not even like it's their primary job (or it better not be). They get paid nothing.

Non-issue.
 
I think this is standard operating procedure for the NFL.

why you ask


it allows Hooters to hire better looking women

This is a little OT, but I don't think Hooter's waitresses are that good looking. Some of them are, but none of them look natural at all. Plus, I can't stand it when a girl has 15 lbs. of make-up on her face.
 
Football players' salary: Oodles

Cheerleaders' salary: peanuts

Football players: the main event and the reason people attend games

Cheerleaders: a pleasant diversion during lulls in the game


There's nothing inherently sexist about firing only the cheerleader. If the WNBA was sporting male cheerleaders and the same policies were in place, that wouldn't be sexist either.


Exactly, plus the prohibition isn't in the player contract. They likely do this to avoid a boatload of OTHER uglier suits somehow incorporating the team...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-14, Mock Draft 3.0, Gilmore, Law Rally For Bill 
Potential Patriot: Boston Globe’s Price Talks to Georgia WR McConkey
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/12: News and Notes
Not a First Round Pick? Hoge Doubles Down on Maye
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/11: News and Notes
MORSE: Patriots Mock Draft #5 and Thoughts About Dugger Signing
Matthew Slater Set For New Role With Patriots
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/10: News and Notes
Patriots Draft Rumors: Teams Facing ‘Historic’ Price For Club to Trade Down
Back
Top