L.A. shoots down ‘Hooters for Neuters’

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13597837/?GT1=8297

Bikini contest fund-raiser for pet spaying, neutering program raises hackles

LOS ANGELES - The city of Los Angeles' Animal Services Department will not accept money from a planned bikini contest fund-raiser called "Hooters for Neuters."

Animal Services Director Ed Boks reconsidered Tuesday after city officials said the event was degrading to women. He said the department will bow out of the July 13 fund-raiser at a Hollywood nightclub hosted by the Hooters restaurant chain. The money was slated for the department's spay and neuter programs.

"It certainly was not my intention to offend anyone," Boks said in a statement.

< snip >

"Are we going backward here?" City Controller Laura Chick said. "We are a city with all kinds of progressive programs that empower women and end discrimination in the workplace, and now we're being connected with a Hooters bikini contest. It isn't right."

"Are we going backward here?" City Controller Laura Chick said.

Yes, Laura, we are going backward. Political correctness has it's limits.

really should change her last name.

I didn't even catch that! :rofl: Irony is a hoot!

Ed Boks.

Like the things they keep the animals in.

Not quite as ironically compelling as Laura Chick, but it still well within the limits for self-descriptive names. (By the way, does anyone know the literary/academic term for that?)

That's two more entries for the Book of Remarkable Names.

--p!

they tried to advertise themselves at the same time. Repukes will probably have a field day with this one, immature and sex-ed deprived as they are. But selling sex, which is so bad according to many Repukes, then defending Hooters will be so fucking like the lying GOP.

to 80% of all corporate donations would fall under your definition of "they tried to advertise themselves at the same time." That is the reality of why most corps do it.... well, that and the tax write-offs... which is all good with me.

I don't see Hooters selling sex, they are capitalizing on and celebrating the beauty of the female form and marketing it at a segment of the population that happens to appreciate it as well. No harm, no foul.

Take their damn money and smile and shake their hands!

I would have thought that a city of progressive programs (like humane "fixing" for animals to avoid bad over breeding problems) might feel differently about the offered fund raising of a local vendor for a "good" cause. The use of a business's actual name (Hooters) with a clever slogan as a basis for turning away their help seems thin, and like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face. Who wins in this?

But maybe I'm just provincial?

down a $million from The Dixie Chicks.

Think of the Victims it will help not your own fucking agenda!

*sigh*

REPUBLICANS.

I could have gotten behind that effort, despite my view towards the entire Hooters franchise.

turn away legitimate money.

It seems stranger to me to have a fundraiser for animals at a place that's famous for chicken wings than having a flap about the other thing Hooters is famous for. :shrug:

even traditionally non-AR people can get behind. :shrug:

The combination just strikes me as odd. :)

it absolutely worries me that something like this will make a ton of money, but a bake sale, or bottle drive will raise next to nothing (comparatively speaking).

I'm not naive. I know that sex sells and sex always sells.

I just wish it were not so.

an orgasm. To some it is as strong or stronger I suppose but to most sex is the primal urge. That was built into us so that there would be more of us. If we were not so opposed to sex or so puritanical toward it maybe it would not get such a financial backing.

In may countries hooters would be a good thing to use to raise money for a good cause and people would enjoy and get a laugh out of it.

well, not in and of itself.

What a tough stand!!
and Safe, too.

It's not like the ultimate recipients of the 'charity' have any say in all this to voice their objectives, so it will just end up being joke fodder for late night talk shows and another example of 'left' inspired intolerance--when in fact it's merely rightwing moralistic prudishness masquarading as a social cause.

Is 'empowering women' or anyone else REALLY the job of local city government?

Couldn't they have used money they stole from the Katrina clean-up efforts to make people's pets sterile?

With Katrina?

It eats away brain cells and you often think things are there, when they are not. He has found a couple of 'nouns' in my post that spoke to him:

Hooters Chief Says He'll Give FEMA $200 for Fraudulent Bottle of Dom

WASHINGTON — The Hooters restaurant chain has a $200 check ready for FEMA, reimbursement for a bottle of Dom Perignon champagne bought with Hurricane Katrina relief money.

FEMA will be happy to have the money back.

The champagne, purchased in San Antonio, was among numerous examples of improper spending of hurricane relief money cited earlier this week by Congress' Government Accountability Office. The bogus spending could be as high as $1.4 billion, the GAO said.
...

from the fellow's fav news source Faux

Their minds work on a much higher level, I suppose ;-)

It's legal, right? It's a popular restaurant, right? They need the money, right?

What the hell is this woman's problem?

but the important thing is that no women will show thier chests off voluntarily. Priorities, you know.

fear of sexuality > animal lives

:grr:

nt