Miscellaneous

I Mean, Hooters is Sexist. Why Shouldn't Men Sue?

TMZ.com is making a big hullaballoo over the fact that a few guys are filing suit against Hooters because of gender discrimation -- they weren't hired because they are men. TMZ puts it this way:

These dumbasses -- led by some d-bag named Nikolai Grushevski -- have filed a class-action suit in Texas alleging they were each "denied a waiter's position because of ... gender." No s**t?!!?!!

It's not the first gender discrimination suit brought against Hooters by men -- 11 years ago, a similar suit was brought, and after a $3.75 million settlement, Hooters agreed to create neutral positions (bartenders, hosts, cooks, etc.) so that the restaurant would still be able to hire men while limiting the Hooters Girls (or the waitstaff) strictly to women.

But you know what? I'm not so sure that the lawsuit can be written off as a joke. Is there not some merit to it? In this economy, where jobs are hard enough to come by, if there are waitstaff positions available at a Hooters, can men not serve food just as well? Can a Hooters Dude not do the hula hoop equally as well? Besides, I think that Hooters is missing out on an entire gender demographic: You hire some shirtless dudes to compete with the large-chested women in their establishments, and you're bound to sell twice as many wings. Am I right?

And if I'm not mistaken, those Hooters refer to the Owl mascots. Isn't that how they manage to avoid sexual harassment litigation? No reason a guy can't do a little Hoot Hooting himself.

Fun Fact: Every order of Hooters fries comes with ketchup and Hep B!

Full post as published by Quiz Law on January 13, 2009 (boomark / email).