Letters

Letters 09-15-2014

Stop The Games On Campus

Four head coaches – two at U of M and two at MSU – get a total of $13 million of your taxpayer dollars each year. Their staffs get another $11 million...

The Truth About Fatbikes

While we appreciate the fatbike trail coverage, the quote from the article below is exactly what we demonstrated not to be true in most cases last season...

Man Has Environmental Responsibility

I tend to agree with Thomas Kachadurian (“Playing God,” Sept. 8) that we should not interfere with the power of nature by deciding what is “native” and what is not. Man usually does what is better for man (or so we believe), hence the survival and population growth of our species...

The Bush & Obama Facts

Don Turner’s letter to the editor on 8/25/14 stated that there has never been a more corrupt, dishonest, etc. set of politicians in the White House. He states no facts, but here are a few...

Ban Pesticides

I grew up downstate in a neighborhood without pesticides. I was always very healthy. Living here, I have become ill. So I did my research and found out a lot about these poison agents called pesticides (herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, chemical fertilizers, etc) that are being spread throughout this community, accumulating in our air, water and soil...

Respect for Presidents?

Recently we read the Letter to the Editor that encouraged us to stop characterizing President Obama as anything other than an upstanding, moral, inspiring “first Black President”. The author would have us think that the rancor in the press, media and public is misguided. And, believe it or not, this rancor is a “glaring exception to … unwritten patriotic rule” of historically supporting all previous presidents...


Home · Articles · News · Random Thoughts · Who Gives a Hoot?
. . . .

Who Gives a Hoot?

Robert Downes - February 6th, 2003
Lately I‘ve noticed that the mere mention of the proposed Hooter‘s restaurant in Traverse City is enough to send quite a number of my female friends into a fire-breathing rage. To get men this mad, you have to talk about something just as crass and trashy, like the Lions.
It‘s not hard to imagine why a restaurant that celebrates the mammary glands with a little wink-wink, sugar & spice attitude for its clientele of frat boy types would set women off. I don‘t think I‘d care to dine at a joint called Dickie‘s where the waiters wore codpieces, after all.
Although Hooter‘s is no longer considering the site of the former Pepper‘s Grill at the doorstep of downtown TC, it is reportedly questing around for another location.
So get ready for another controversy fraught with all the fluff & feathers of the giant power poles near downtown. The last time Hooter‘s came sniffing around a couple of years ago, folks hereabouts got their underpants in quite a bunch over it, and there’s nothing tighter than the knot in a Northern Michigander’s outraged briefs.
Fortunately, my own underwear will remain unbunched because I‘ve been to a couple of Hooter’s restaurants, and failed to discover what the big deal is all about.
At least, I think I went to two of them. The first, in Baltimore, made such a slight impression that it‘s possible I just walked by the place. There were some college girl waitresses in orange hot pants and tight white tee-shirts, but they didn‘t look all that lascivious. If anything, they had that ho-hum, well-scrubbed, Britney Spears-in-a-Pepsi-commercial look. And the young male customers in the place weren‘t leering at their “hooters“ in the over-the-top manner that some females imagine; although they did cast furtive glances in the waitresses‘ direction when they thought the ladies weren‘t looking -- the same as in any restaurant or bar you can imagine from Manistee to Mackinaw City.
My second run-in with Hooter‘s was in Anchorage, Alaska, which is a wilderness of chain stores and parking lots. After driving around for an eternity looking for a place to eat other than McDonald‘s, I reluctantly dined at a Hooter‘s in a shopping mall.
Maybe it was an off day, but the food was as so-so as the scenery. It was your typical deep-fried chain restaurant fare, and my chicken sandwich tasted like the owl on Hooter‘s logo (though I‘ve heard their quesadilla is quite good). And although I would never disparage a lady‘s looks (considering my own unfortunate appearance), I must confess in the spirit of investigative journalism that the waitresses apparently weren‘t selected for their you-know-what‘s. They were just regular people of the female persuasion.
What ticks many women off, however, is the idea of sexual objectification. That would certainly make me mad if it ever happened to me -- but fortunately, no such luck there. Newspaper editors don‘t get objectified like rock stars: the popular image of an editor is that of a Clark Kent, only geekier and scrawnier and nerdier -- we don‘t suffer the pain of being objectified, except as a pair of floating specs, perhaps.
Still, I think there are probably worse things in the world than fantasizing about someone‘s breasts while eating a french dip sandwich and fries (Saddam Hussein, perhaps), but am willing to agree that there should be an element of tit-for-tat in our glandular restaurant choices.
For instance, I have noticed that certain ladies of my acquaintance (who shall remain nameless) have admired George Clooney‘s buns in the new film, “Solaris“ (Clooney‘s are way too round in my opinion -- like the foothills of the Rockies). And Mel Gibson‘s buns, and Ben Affleck‘s sad sack ass and even Kevin Costner‘s flat flanks, ad nauseum. Nothing makes me angrier than the thought of these exploited males having their buns objectified, or the idea that some crass female is enjoying a giggle and tiny moment of sexy fun.
But fair‘s fair. So why not a restaurant called Buns where the male waiters walk around in cowboy chaps with their posteriors displayed au naturale? Just don‘t make me eat there, because I‘m already losing my lunch just thinking about it.
The worst thing I‘ve heard about Hooter‘s is that it exploits young women who bombed out of high school and are forced to rely on what they‘ve got at a chest level instead of what‘s between their ears. If it weren‘t for the exploitive influence of Hooter‘s, these gals could be doing work with dignity, like scrubbing floors or squirting ketchup on burgers. Or they could make a dramatic turnaround in their lives, undoing years of scholastic laziness and dumb moves to become oceanographers or neurosurgeons.
What? You say there are some waitresses at Hooter‘s who attend college, get good grades, have high self-esteem, think the job is kind of fun, and have no shame about exploiting shmucks to get bigger tips by flaunting their appearance? That sort of talk smacks of empowerment and self-determination, and has no place in a column blasting Hooter‘s, so keep it to yourself.
Bottom line, Hooter‘s is like a lot of controversial things with an ick factor: Madonna‘s latest film, a cold bath in lumpy gravy, US 131 during rush hour, and Michael Jackson‘s choice of nose jobs: If you don‘t like it, just don‘t go there.
 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 

 

 
 
 
Close
Close
Close