Here’s an interesting discovery we made yesterday. We already knew of course that Hooters restaurant exploited the ‘sex appeal’ of its staff, dressing them in body hugging ‘uniforms’ and training them to treat sexist jokes and innuendo as just part of the job.
We already knew that even the AFL found Hooters sponsorship of a Queensland Under16 boys football club to be going too far and cancelled the arrangement.
But what was news, which emerged in stories about 15 year old X factor contestant Anthea Kaden having worked in a Hooters venue as a 14-year-old, was that the minimum age for Hooters staff is 13.
So when “Hooters bosses reckon their waitresses reinforce the sex appeal of the all-American cheerleader and the girl next door – a good double in anyone’s book”, do they mean to include 13 and 14 year old girls in that?
Also if Hooters is “too sexy to serve kids” in the words of the National Organisation for Women, then should under-age girls be doing the serving?
Ben Fordham asked me for my thoughts on his program yesterday:
One Response
I agree that 13-year-old girls simply should not be working in an environment such as Hooters. If the culture of the restaurant quite blatantly says that it’s okay to talk to and treat the waitresses like sex toys, what makes anyone think that they will treat young girls greeting patrons at the door any differently? It seems to me like it would be a very toxic, very oppressive environment for girls to be exposed to. Not that they don’t get enough of it in their day to day lives.