Actually when you realize that cheerleading is a sport and the cheerleaders are athletes, it's one of the few sports that white students seem to be competitive. Not everyone can be a 350# left tackle.01Bear said:sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
Just consider the number of young ladies and the size of each group, cheerleaders, Tiger girls, and Golden Girls.
And the Golden Girls probably have the sexier costumes
even if not everyone is impressed
they even have a bell tower
and their tryouts are well publicized
but out of costume they just look like college girls
it just seems like more than eighteen
If you're arguing that white beauty standards are more prevalent in the South and bias the cheerleaders at Southern universities leading to over representation of white cheerleaders (relative to cheerleaders of color), I doubt anyone would disagree. If you're argument is that there is racial animus involved in the selecting of cheerleaders, that would be a bridge too far absent more evidence.
cheerleaders
22,815 Views |
155 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by Bear19
sp4149 said:Actually when you realize that cheerleading is a sport and the cheerleaders are athletes, it's one of the few sports that01Bear said:sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
Just consider the number of young ladies and the size of each group, cheerleaders, Tiger girls, and Golden Girls.
And the Golden Girls probably have the sexier costumes
even if not everyone is impressed
they even have a bell tower
and their tryouts are well publicized
but out of costume they just look like college girls
it just seems like more than eighteen
If you're arguing thatwhitebeauty standards are more prevalent in the South and bias the cheerleaders at Southern universities leading to over representation ofwhitecheerleaders (relative to cheerleaders of color),I doubt anyone would disagree.[I disagree] If you're argument is that there is racial animus involved in the selecting of cheerleaders, that would be a bridge too far absent more evidence.whitestudents seem to be competitive. Not everyone can be a 350# left tackle.
Aside from the sad racist views . . .
I've been to high school football games where the dance/cheer squad outnumbered the football team by a considerable margin.
TCU's athletes are definitely worth viewing during a game. The shampoo & conditioner concessions/sponsorships must be indeed major league.
blungld said:
I find it really odd when men find the phony, plastic fake tan, bleached white teeth, big hair and over done make up attractive. It looks so cheap and ditzy to me.
...and I can't help but notice that it has been many of the "conservative" posters on the OT boards that have been touting this look as hot. Not sure what it means...but it is interesting.
Please. Political preferences have nothing to do with this. I am pretty far from conservative politically (though in SF/Berkeley, I guess I could be considered a moderate or even a moderate conservative). Yet, I found the TCU cheerleaders attractive. Sure, their attractiveness is subjective and based on each person's preferences. But my preferences happen to run to finding young, fit, fresh-faced women attractive. If that's not your cup of tea so be it. That doesn't mean that your preferences are right or better than another's.
As for your suggestion that the TCU cheerleaders are all fake tanned, big heared, big teethed, I'm not even sure at what you're driving. Big teeth? Seriously? Are you a dentist that you can recognize the size of each cheerleader's dentition as being above average from camera shots from far away?
Also if you think the TCU cheerleaders had big hair, what must you think of Farrah Fawcett's hair from her Charlie's Angels days? The TCU cheerleaders weren't actually sporting big hair. Sure, their hair wasn't limp and flat, but neither was it big.
As for the fake tan comment, do you know for a fact that they had fake tans? How do you know they either (1) didn't tan naturally or (2) weren't born with their akin tones? Or are you merely speculating, and maybe throwing in your own personal prejudices to somehow knock the TCU cheerleaders a little more (much like how a homophobe will call someone "gay" because the homophobe considers being gay to be inferior or wrong, but to everyone else being gay is a non-issue)?
Regardless, your attempted attacks on the TCU cheerleaders' attractiveness was unnecessary. I can't even begin to guess as to why you felt compelled to do so.
OK, seriously, here's to LSU. And Bama, Auburn, and the rest of the SEC, plus other non-SEC schools like Clemson, FSU, and Texas who are also good at doing this thing quite well. (I'll admit it, I LOL'd at the pic with the security guard).sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
I'm sure all these girls are nice people and damn hard workers, because it's not easy to pull this off. Getting a bunch of girls to be all perfectly clone-y and uniform is probably just as hard as passing that Organic Chem final at Cal. And if people there genuinely like the result, hats off.
I just hope this thread doesn't have some horrible dog-whistle message: "I'm pissed Cal had 99 INTs and lost a bowl game. Dammit, why can't we have some kind of hot blonde LSU fembot girl force on our sideline so we can attract better players?" It'd be great if we won more games, but we should do it while being Cal, instead of trying to be someone else, you know?
And if that doesn't convince you, try and picture us with 20 heavily makeup-covered and costumed baton twirlers like the SEC schools have, sitting in the sun in the east-side stands at CMS waiting for halftime. Yeah....no.
No wonder the SEC recruits such good football players.510 Bear said:OK, seriously, here's to LSU. And Bama, Auburn, and the rest of the SEC, plus other non-SEC schools like Clemson, FSU, and Texas who are also good at doing this thing quite well. (I'll admit it, I LOL'd at the pic with the security guard).sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
I'm sure all these girls are nice people and damn hard workers, because it's not easy to pull this off. Getting a bunch of girls to be all perfectly clone-y and uniform is probably just as hard as passing that Organic Chem final at Cal. And if people there genuinely like the result, hats off.
I just hope this thread doesn't have some horrible dog-whistle message: "I'm pissed Cal had 99 INTs and lost a bowl game. Dammit, why can't we have some kind of hot blonde LSU fembot girl force on our sideline so we can attract better players?" It'd be great if we won more games, but we should do it while being Cal, instead of trying to be someone else, you know?
And if that doesn't convince you, try and picture us with 20 heavily makeup-covered and costumed baton twirlers like the SEC schools have, sitting in the sun in the east-side stands at CMS waiting for halftime. Yeah....no.
Just remember boys you are gawking at someone's daughter.........
510 Bear said:OK, seriously, here's to LSU. And Bama, Auburn, and the rest of the SEC, plus other non-SEC schools like Clemson, FSU, and Texas who are also good at doing this thing quite well. (I'll admit it, I LOL'd at the pic with the security guard).sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
I'm sure all these girls are nice people and damn hard workers, because it's not easy to pull this off. Getting a bunch of girls to be all perfectly clone-y and uniform is probably just as hard as passing that Organic Chem final at Cal. And if people there genuinely like the result, hats off.
I just hope this thread doesn't have some horrible dog-whistle message: "I'm pissed Cal had 99 INTs and lost a bowl game. Dammit, why can't we have some kind of hot blonde LSU fembot girl force on our sideline so we can attract better players?" It'd be great if we won more games, but we should do it while being Cal, instead of trying to be someone else, you know?
And if that doesn't convince you, try and picture us with 20 heavily makeup-covered and costumed baton twirlers like the SEC schools have, sitting in the sun in the east-side stands at CMS waiting for halftime. Yeah....no.
You realize your comments about heavy makeup also applies to all female cheerleaders, including Cal's right? I happen to have a (male) cousin who was a cheerleader at UCLA. I met up with him and some of his teammates right after a Cal v UCLA game one year. All of the girls were in heavy makeup.
Similarly, the Cal cheerleaders I happened to meet at the games also wore heavy makeup.
The use of lots of makeup is not just a Southern thing.
Also, the comment about fembots is beyond insulting and sexist. It suggests that women (especially cheerleaders) can't be anything more than arm candy. I went in a date with a former college cheerleader when I was in law school. I'll happily admit she was way out of my league in every way, not just looks. She was in med school (and wound up becoming an anasthesiologist) at one of the best med schools in the Midweat (if not the country). She was smart, kind, a talented dancer, and beautiful (she even won a beauty pageant for Taiwanese-Americans some years later).
If you don't happen to find cheerleaders attractive, that's fine. But to insult them as a group is not. Let alone to suggest that they are made for nothing more than men's pleasure.
If there is any correlation between cheerleading skills and football skill then give me some hot girls in skimpy outfits that can twirl a baboon and be thrown in the jar acrobatically.510 Bear said:OK, seriously, here's to LSU. And Bama, Auburn, and the rest of the SEC, plus other non-SEC schools like Clemson, FSU, and Texas who are also good at doing this thing quite well. (I'll admit it, I LOL'd at the pic with the security guard).sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
I'm sure all these girls are nice people and damn hard workers, because it's not easy to pull this off. Getting a bunch of girls to be all perfectly clone-y and uniform is probably just as hard as passing that Organic Chem final at Cal. And if people there genuinely like the result, hats off.
I just hope this thread doesn't have some horrible dog-whistle message: "I'm pissed Cal had 99 INTs and lost a bowl game. Dammit, why can't we have some kind of hot blonde LSU fembot girl force on our sideline so we can attract better players?" It'd be great if we won more games, but we should do it while being Cal, instead of trying to be someone else, you know?
And if that doesn't convince you, try and picture us with 20 heavily makeup-covered and costumed baton twirlers like the SEC schools have, sitting in the sun in the east-side stands at CMS waiting for halftime. Yeah....no.
Regarding the bleached white teeth....did anyone else notice that the TCU cheerleaders teeth were GLOWING during one shot of them during the game. I mean glowing like they left the bleaching agent on too long. Like a blacklight was shining on them. Very freaky.
Everyone in Mississippi views the folks in Oxford as knee jerking liberals. Seriously, Ole Miss no longer has that image. Now TCU fits the stereotype more.okaydo said:
I have a controversial take....but I'm not going to go there.
All I'll day is that Ole Miss and TCU have something in common that is the total opposite of Cal...besides conservative Christian values.
Oregon must then have some lookers with their recruiting success.Bear19 said:No wonder the SEC recruits such good football players.510 Bear said:OK, seriously, here's to LSU. And Bama, Auburn, and the rest of the SEC, plus other non-SEC schools like Clemson, FSU, and Texas who are also good at doing this thing quite well. (I'll admit it, I LOL'd at the pic with the security guard).sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
I'm sure all these girls are nice people and damn hard workers, because it's not easy to pull this off. Getting a bunch of girls to be all perfectly clone-y and uniform is probably just as hard as passing that Organic Chem final at Cal. And if people there genuinely like the result, hats off.
I just hope this thread doesn't have some horrible dog-whistle message: "I'm pissed Cal had 99 INTs and lost a bowl game. Dammit, why can't we have some kind of hot blonde LSU fembot girl force on our sideline so we can attract better players?" It'd be great if we won more games, but we should do it while being Cal, instead of trying to be someone else, you know?
And if that doesn't convince you, try and picture us with 20 heavily makeup-covered and costumed baton twirlers like the SEC schools have, sitting in the sun in the east-side stands at CMS waiting for halftime. Yeah....no.
Fun facts? - there are more catastrophic injuries in cheerleading than football each year and at many levels cheerleading is a more expensive sport than football (source for latter - me; coached pee wee fb)
I noticed it and that's why I called it fluorescent teeth and said they all use the same dentist or teeth whitening system, same hairdresser too.MilleniaBear said:
Regarding the bleached white teeth....did anyone else notice that the TCU cheerleaders teeth were GLOWING during one shot of them during the game. I mean glowing like they left the bleaching agent on too long. Like a blacklight was shining on them. Very freaky.
Peanut Gallery Consultant
That makes sense. Twins also can have that effect, so more looking alike makes sense. I'd guess uniforms do the same or similar. I'm sure there's an art term related to it, or repetition and duplication. In any case, TCU tried to clone the look. I do believe most of their cheerleaders would be more attractive if the enhancements were individual rather than by group.01Bear said:Another Bear said:
Here's the thang about cheerleading in the South...it's as BIG as football and it pairs with football and it's just as freakin' weird because it's basically a religion. Them there Southern gal love the BIG HAIR AND BIG TEETH (or is it the Southern gent/colonel?). And it appears cheer squads down there all emptoy the same dentist/whitening gear, hair stylists and spray tan.
There is something enticing about symmetry/uniformity across gal types in formation and grouping (Art History majors, name that phenomenon) but by the same token, the fakeness or over production of that look shows through...like fluorescent teeth.
But let me be clear...I'm sure all those gals are attractive on their own in their own way...but when you try and make everyone look the same, well it just gets weird. Conversely a place like U$C uses a casting agent to get those results, so it's not a product design question.
Dunno if there's an art term for it, but at least in the popular lexicon (and apparently, psychology), the term is "the cheerleader effect."
https://psych2go.net/cheerleader-effect-met-mother-dating-theory-scientifically-verified/
Peanut Gallery Consultant
At some point I'm going to do a survey on all of the cheerleader threads we've had over the years. Pretty sure they all read exactly the same. Except for the debate on tooth size - must admit that is new.
Re: Cynthia Marshal
Love it. Go Bears!
Love it. Go Bears!
wifeisafurd said:Everyone in Mississippi views the folks in Oxford as knee jerking liberals. Seriously, Ole Miss no longer has that image. Now TCU fits the stereotype more.okaydo said:
I have a controversial take....but I'm not going to go there.
All I'll day is that Ole Miss and TCU have something in common that is the total opposite of Cal...besides conservative Christian values.
https://blog.prepscholar.com/most-conservative-colleges
wifeisafurd said:Oregon must then have some lookers with their recruiting success.Bear19 said:No wonder the SEC recruits such good football players.510 Bear said:OK, seriously, here's to LSU. And Bama, Auburn, and the rest of the SEC, plus other non-SEC schools like Clemson, FSU, and Texas who are also good at doing this thing quite well. (I'll admit it, I LOL'd at the pic with the security guard).sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
I'm sure all these girls are nice people and damn hard workers, because it's not easy to pull this off. Getting a bunch of girls to be all perfectly clone-y and uniform is probably just as hard as passing that Organic Chem final at Cal. And if people there genuinely like the result, hats off.
I just hope this thread doesn't have some horrible dog-whistle message: "I'm pissed Cal had 99 INTs and lost a bowl game. Dammit, why can't we have some kind of hot blonde LSU fembot girl force on our sideline so we can attract better players?" It'd be great if we won more games, but we should do it while being Cal, instead of trying to be someone else, you know?
And if that doesn't convince you, try and picture us with 20 heavily makeup-covered and costumed baton twirlers like the SEC schools have, sitting in the sun in the east-side stands at CMS waiting for halftime. Yeah....no.
More weed....
Are you suggesting that if Cal decided to go conservative and Christian, then we might be become blessed with beautiful cheerleaders?okaydo said:
I have a controversial take....but I'm not going to go there.
All I'll day is that Ole Miss and TCU have something in common that is the total opposite of Cal...besides conservative Christian values.
If so, I'm all for it. Where do I go to vote?
SFCityBear
Badass.
Fresh faced to me is not made up to look like a doll.01Bear said:blungld said:
I find it really odd when men find the phony, plastic fake tan, bleached white teeth, big hair and over done make up attractive. It looks so cheap and ditzy to me.
...and I can't help but notice that it has been many of the "conservative" posters on the OT boards that have been touting this look as hot. Not sure what it means...but it is interesting.
Please. Political preferences have nothing to do with this. I am pretty far from conservative politically (though in SF/Berkeley, I guess I could be considered a moderate or even a moderate conservative). Yet, I found the TCU cheerleaders attractive. Sure, their attractiveness is subjective and based on each person's preferences. But my preferences happen to run to finding young, fit, fresh-faced women attractive. If that's not your cup of tea so be it. That doesn't mean that your preferences are right or better than another's.
As for your suggestion that the TCU cheerleaders are all fake tanned, big heared, big teethed, I'm not even sure at what you're driving. Big teeth? Seriously? Are you a dentist that you can recognize the size of each cheerleader's dentition as being above average from camera shots from far away?
Also if you think the TCU cheerleaders had big hair, what must you think of Farrah Fawcett's hair from her Charlie's Angels days? The TCU cheerleaders weren't actually sporting big hair. Sure, their hair wasn't limp and flat, but neither was it big.
As for the fake tan comment, do you know for a fact that they had fake tans? How do you know they either (1) didn't tan naturally or (2) weren't born with their akin tones? Or are you merely speculating, and maybe throwing in your own personal prejudices to somehow knock the TCU cheerleaders a little more (much like how a homophobe will call someone "gay" because the homophobe considers being gay to be inferior or wrong, but to everyone else being gay is a non-issue)?
Regardless, your attempted attacks on the TCU cheerleaders' attractiveness was unnecessary. I can't even begin to guess as to why you felt compelled to do so.
Some guys think that a wife beater shirt and a gold chain is masculine and cool.
And some think Trump is rich and high class.
I am conflating a lot, but there is a definite tawdry look that many guys call "hot" that I find to be Barbie Doll phony, boring, superficial. Give me the natural looking brainy librarian type any day of the week...or even an athletic natural looking cheerleader.
I have nothing against cheerleaders or make up...just not attracted to a type of make up and type of cheerleader. And don't understand how some men find it "hot." I can speculate--I assume it codes some cultural messages, one perhaps being that this is a woman who is there to please her man. That appeals to a a certain demographic and type of man.
The Bear will not quilt, the Bear will not dye!
I guess I missed out in my time at Cal. I never really appreciated the inner beauty of the girls of the Free Speech Movement in the 1960s. Scraggly hair, braless, no makeup whatsoever, plenty of body hair, shower once in a while, and a copy of Mao's Little Red Book in their pocket. Fortunately, they were not the only girls on campus.blungld said:
I find it really odd when men find the phony, plastic fake tan, bleached white teeth, big hair and over done make up attractive. It looks so cheap and ditzy to me.
...and I can't help but notice that it has been many of the "conservative" posters on the OT boards that have been touting this look as hot. Not sure what it means...but it is interesting.
Maybe if our teams and athletes were better, the girls who are attracted to them would come to Cal.
SFCityBear
Some "dudes" think Pamela Anderson (trashy) is hot, other men think Keira Knightly (sophisticated) is hot.Troll said:blungld said:
I find it really odd when men find the phony, plastic fake tan, bleached white teeth, big hair and over done make up attractive. It looks so cheap and ditzy to me.
...and I can't help but notice that it has been many of the "conservative" posters on the OT boards that have been touting this look as hot. Not sure what it means...but it is interesting.
If it needs to be explained......then you're not a dude!
The Bear will not quilt, the Bear will not dye!
blungld said:Some "dudes" think Pamela Anderson (trashy) is hot, other men think Keira Knightly (sophisticated) is hot.Troll said:blungld said:
I find it really odd when men find the phony, plastic fake tan, bleached white teeth, big hair and over done make up attractive. It looks so cheap and ditzy to me.
...and I can't help but notice that it has been many of the "conservative" posters on the OT boards that have been touting this look as hot. Not sure what it means...but it is interesting.
If it needs to be explained......then you're not a dude!
Both are hot!
blungld said:Fresh faced to me is not made up to look like a doll.01Bear said:blungld said:
I find it really odd when men find the phony, plastic fake tan, bleached white teeth, big hair and over done make up attractive. It looks so cheap and ditzy to me.
...and I can't help but notice that it has been many of the "conservative" posters on the OT boards that have been touting this look as hot. Not sure what it means...but it is interesting.
Please. Political preferences have nothing to do with this. I am pretty far from conservative politically (though in SF/Berkeley, I guess I could be considered a moderate or even a moderate conservative). Yet, I found the TCU cheerleaders attractive. Sure, their attractiveness is subjective and based on each person's preferences. But my preferences happen to run to finding young, fit, fresh-faced women attractive. If that's not your cup of tea so be it. That doesn't mean that your preferences are right or better than another's.
As for your suggestion that the TCU cheerleaders are all fake tanned, big heared, big teethed, I'm not even sure at what you're driving. Big teeth? Seriously? Are you a dentist that you can recognize the size of each cheerleader's dentition as being above average from camera shots from far away?
Also if you think the TCU cheerleaders had big hair, what must you think of Farrah Fawcett's hair from her Charlie's Angels days? The TCU cheerleaders weren't actually sporting big hair. Sure, their hair wasn't limp and flat, but neither was it big.
As for the fake tan comment, do you know for a fact that they had fake tans? How do you know they either (1) didn't tan naturally or (2) weren't born with their akin tones? Or are you merely speculating, and maybe throwing in your own personal prejudices to somehow knock the TCU cheerleaders a little more (much like how a homophobe will call someone "gay" because the homophobe considers being gay to be inferior or wrong, but to everyone else being gay is a non-issue)?
Regardless, your attempted attacks on the TCU cheerleaders' attractiveness was unnecessary. I can't even begin to guess as to why you felt compelled to do so.
Some guys think that a wife beater shirt and a gold chain is masculine and cool.
And some think Trump is rich and high class.
I am conflating a lot, but there is a definite tawdry look that many guys call "hot" that I find to be Barbie Doll phony, boring, superficial. Give me the natural looking brainy librarian type any day of the week...or even an athletic natural looking cheerleader.
I have nothing against cheerleaders or make up...just not attracted to a type of make up and type of cheerleader. And don't understand how some men find it "hot." I can speculate--I assume it codes some cultural messages, one perhaps being that this is a woman who is there to please her man. That appeals to a a certain demographic and type of man.
Like I said before, it's okay if the TCU cheerleaders weren't your cup of tea, but there was no need to insult or attack them.
Additionally, just because something doesn't strike your fancy doesn't mean it can't strike someone else's. As the Romans said, de gustibus non est disputandum. As the Romans asserted, arguing that you don't understand someone else's preferences is foolish.
As for your assumption as to the coded language, I really wouldn't know anything about that, especially since you failed to elaborate that argument. That said, I'd caution you to base your arguments on evidence and logic, which excludes "I don't like X and I don't like Y. Since they like X, it must be because they like Y."
SFCityBear said:I guess I missed out in my time at Cal. I never really appreciated the inner beauty of the girls of the Free Speech Movement in the 1960s. Scraggly hair, braless, no makeup whatsoever, plenty of body hair, shower once in a while, and a copy of Mao's Little Red Book in their pocket. Fortunately, they were not the only girls on campus.blungld said:
I find it really odd when men find the phony, plastic fake tan, bleached white teeth, big hair and over done make up attractive. It looks so cheap and ditzy to me.
...and I can't help but notice that it has been many of the "conservative" posters on the OT boards that have been touting this look as hot. Not sure what it means...but it is interesting.
Maybe if our teams and athletes were better, the girls who are attracted to them would come to Cal.
SFCityBear, I hate to break it to you, but girls now attend school not just to meet boys. In fact, it wouldn't be surprising to find out that most Cal coeds actually attend Cal primarily to develop their minds in the pursuit of higher education, with developing skills for the job market as a close second. In fact, even during my college days, my female classmates were more interested in earning a B.A./B.S. than a Mrs.
Maybe things were different in your time. Maybe they weren't. Either way, to insinuate that girls now attend college (especially Cal!) to meet guys is misguided (if not downright sexist).
Or Granddaughter, My late wife attended LSU and graduated with an engineering degree and worked for the Navy as an Environmental Engineer. She spent over two hours a day putting on makeup. Drove me crazy, but it was the culture/environment where she grew up in a small town next to Baton Rouge. After twenty years of marriage we managed to get her make-up time down to 45 minutes and her 'tools' didn't need their own suitcase. Without makeup she was more attractive than any of the women I met in Cal's College of Engineering, there weren't that many back then and many of the Cal students were barely groomed and rarely clean. Until you have lived with one of these Southern girls you can get yourself in plenty of trouble suggesting their make-up is excessive.Troll said:
Just remember boys you are gawking at someone's daughter.........
Fast forward 20 years, all three granddaughters are semi-athletic and competitive. The oldest likes soccer but it is too much work and sweat. She inherited most of my wife's make-up and tools. Perfect make-up is not compatible with soccer, she preferred to be the most photographed girl in high school. The middle one was a bit more out of shape and decided to be a flag-twirler in high school and get good grades for college. Then LSU raised it's tuition to nearly $ 10,000 a year so after the first year she dropped out of LSU and she joined the Marines is now in much better shape to use that GI bill and now looks like she is twelve (makeup not a major part of a Marine's duty uniform). And then there is the youngest when her grandmother died she wasn't wearing make-up, but she started cheerleader training when she was ten and each year the squad she was on got better and eventually won a couple of national competitions and each years she wore more and more make-up. She now wears more than her sisters. Her mother had set her up to earn a college cheerleading scholarship. Problem was that she liked cheer better than school. So after graduating high school last year she's working odd jobs until she is old enough to become a stewardess.
Now I think the granddaughters are more attractive wearing less make-up. But Lord the rest of the family incessantly comments on Facebook how beautiful they are. it would be suicide to tell a well armed host of
trump worshipers that they are mistaken. "Too much make-up?" them's fightin' words...
I remember that during my Freshman year, after a cold Winter, one day in the early Spring the sun was warming the campus. And the winter gear (usually marked with winter jackets & bundling up against the cold) was replaced by light shirts & shorts worn by a lot of female students.
And as I walked to class, I said to myself "Where did all these gorgeous girls come from?" And yes, their beauty was only enhanced by their intelligence & academic prowess.
And as I walked to class, I said to myself "Where did all these gorgeous girls come from?" And yes, their beauty was only enhanced by their intelligence & academic prowess.
sp4149 said:Or Granddaughter, My late wife attended LSU and graduated with an engineering degree and worked for the Navy as an Environmental Engineer. She spent over two hours a day putting on makeup. Drove me crazy, but it was the culture/environment where she grew up in a small town next to Baton Rouge. After twenty years of marriage we managed to get her make-up time down to 45 minutes and her 'tools' didn't need their own suitcase. Without makeup she was more attractive than any of the women I met in Cal's College of Engineering, there weren't that many back then and many of the Cal students were barely groomed and rarely clean. Until you have lived with one of these Southern girls you can get yourself in plenty of trouble suggesting their make-up is excessive.Troll said:
Just remember boys you are gawking at someone's daughter.........
Fast forward 20 years, all three granddaughters are semi-athletic and competitive. The oldest likes soccer but it is too much work and sweat. She inherited most of my wife's make-up and tools. Perfect make-up is not compatible with soccer, she preferred to be the most photographed girl in high school. The middle one was a bit more out of shape and decided to be a flag-twirler in high school and get good grades for college. Then LSU raised it's tuition to nearly $ 10,000 a year so after the first year she dropped out of LSU and she joined the Marines is now in much better shape to use that GI bill and now looks like she is twelve (makeup not a major part of a Marine's duty uniform). And then there is the youngest when her grandmother died she wasn't wearing make-up, but she started cheerleader training when she was ten and each year the squad she was on got better and eventually won a couple of national competitions and each years she wore more and more make-up. She now wears more than her sisters. Her mother had set her up to earn a college cheerleading scholarship. Problem was that she liked cheer better than school. So after graduating high school last year she's working odd jobs until she is old enough to become a stewardess.
Now I think the granddaughters are more attractive wearing less make-up. But Lord the rest of the family incessantly comments on Facebook how beautiful they are. it would be suicide to tell a well armed host of
trump worshipers that they are mistaken. "Too much make-up?" them's fightin' words...
I enjoyed reading this.
ColoradoBear said:UCBerkGrad said:
Ours are smarter
That was hysterical! I'm still laughing.
its a parody, btw
01Bear said:510 Bear said:OK, seriously, here's to LSU. And Bama, Auburn, and the rest of the SEC, plus other non-SEC schools like Clemson, FSU, and Texas who are also good at doing this thing quite well. (I'll admit it, I LOL'd at the pic with the security guard).sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
I'm sure all these girls are nice people and damn hard workers, because it's not easy to pull this off. Getting a bunch of girls to be all perfectly clone-y and uniform is probably just as hard as passing that Organic Chem final at Cal. And if people there genuinely like the result, hats off.
I just hope this thread doesn't have some horrible dog-whistle message: "I'm pissed Cal had 99 INTs and lost a bowl game. Dammit, why can't we have some kind of hot blonde LSU fembot girl force on our sideline so we can attract better players?" It'd be great if we won more games, but we should do it while being Cal, instead of trying to be someone else, you know?
And if that doesn't convince you, try and picture us with 20 heavily makeup-covered and costumed baton twirlers like the SEC schools have, sitting in the sun in the east-side stands at CMS waiting for halftime. Yeah....no.
You realize your comments about heavy makeup also applies to all female cheerleaders, including Cal's right? I happen to have a (male) cousin who was a cheerleader at UCLA. I met up with him and some of his teammates right after a Cal v UCLA game one year. All of the girls were in heavy makeup.
Similarly, the Cal cheerleaders I happened to meet at the games also wore heavy makeup.
The use of lots of makeup is not just a Southern thing.
Also, the comment about fembots is beyond insulting and sexist. It suggests that women (especially cheerleaders) can't be anything more than arm candy. I went in a date with a former college cheerleader when I was in law school. I'll happily admit she was way out of my league in every way, not just looks. She was in med school (and wound up becoming an anasthesiologist) at one of the best med schools in the Midweat (if not the country). She was smart, kind, a talented dancer, and beautiful (she even won a beauty pageant for Taiwanese-Americans some years later).
If you don't happen to find cheerleaders attractive, that's fine. But to insult them as a group is not. Let alone to suggest that they are made for nothing more than men's pleasure.
Regardless of one's subjective opinions on what constitutes too much makeup and whether or not it's attractive, I think it needs to be said somewhere in this thread that the industry-wide heavy use of makeup on cheerleaders is so that their features can be easily seen at a distance. Stage actors do the same thing, so their facial expressions can be more easily seen by the folks in the cheap seats (and nobody talks about the attractiveness of their makeup).
I believe that 01 made a comment earlier about skepticism about a racial component to southern cheerleading. These two links might be of interest:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/05/22/how-beauty-pageants-reflect-the-same-changes-as-trumps-immigration-orders-do/?utm_term=.f888e38d545c
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1469629860?ie=UTF8&tag=thewaspos09-20&camp=1789&linkCode=xm2&creativeASIN=1469629860
More about beauty pageants than cheerleading, but I'd say that they're intertwined
BearsWiin said:01Bear said:510 Bear said:OK, seriously, here's to LSU. And Bama, Auburn, and the rest of the SEC, plus other non-SEC schools like Clemson, FSU, and Texas who are also good at doing this thing quite well. (I'll admit it, I LOL'd at the pic with the security guard).sp4149 said:
It's just different in the South, consider LSU's squads from a diverse population (it's an all comers university):
I'm sure all these girls are nice people and damn hard workers, because it's not easy to pull this off. Getting a bunch of girls to be all perfectly clone-y and uniform is probably just as hard as passing that Organic Chem final at Cal. And if people there genuinely like the result, hats off.
I just hope this thread doesn't have some horrible dog-whistle message: "I'm pissed Cal had 99 INTs and lost a bowl game. Dammit, why can't we have some kind of hot blonde LSU fembot girl force on our sideline so we can attract better players?" It'd be great if we won more games, but we should do it while being Cal, instead of trying to be someone else, you know?
And if that doesn't convince you, try and picture us with 20 heavily makeup-covered and costumed baton twirlers like the SEC schools have, sitting in the sun in the east-side stands at CMS waiting for halftime. Yeah....no.
You realize your comments about heavy makeup also applies to all female cheerleaders, including Cal's right? I happen to have a (male) cousin who was a cheerleader at UCLA. I met up with him and some of his teammates right after a Cal v UCLA game one year. All of the girls were in heavy makeup.
Similarly, the Cal cheerleaders I happened to meet at the games also wore heavy makeup.
The use of lots of makeup is not just a Southern thing.
Also, the comment about fembots is beyond insulting and sexist. It suggests that women (especially cheerleaders) can't be anything more than arm candy. I went in a date with a former college cheerleader when I was in law school. I'll happily admit she was way out of my league in every way, not just looks. She was in med school (and wound up becoming an anasthesiologist) at one of the best med schools in the Midweat (if not the country). She was smart, kind, a talented dancer, and beautiful (she even won a beauty pageant for Taiwanese-Americans some years later).
If you don't happen to find cheerleaders attractive, that's fine. But to insult them as a group is not. Let alone to suggest that they are made for nothing more than men's pleasure.
Regardless of one's subjective opinions on what constitutes too much makeup and whether or not it's attractive, I think it needs to be said somewhere in this thread that the industry-wide heavy use of makeup on cheerleaders is so that their features can be easily seen at a distance. Stage actors do the same thing, so their facial expressions can be more easily seen by the folks in the cheap seats (and nobody talks about the attractiveness of their makeup).
I believe that 01 made a comment earlier about skepticism about a racial component to southern cheerleading. These two links might be of interest:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/05/22/how-beauty-pageants-reflect-the-same-changes-as-trumps-immigration-orders-do/?utm_term=.f888e38d545c
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1469629860?ie=UTF8&tag=thewaspos09-20&camp=1789&linkCode=xm2&creativeASIN=1469629860
More about beauty pageants than cheerleading, but I'd say that they're intertwined
Like I said earlier, I doubt anyone would disagree with the idea that there is a bias favoring white beauty standards in the South (or even in the U.S.). Similarly, I still maintain that racial animus in the selection of cheerleaders requires more evidence than just the preference of white beauty standards.
I'll leave it to the board lawyers to illuminate us all on the line between bias and animus. I would suggest, however, that in terms of cheerleader selection, beauty standards may prompt self-selecting behavior: a young lady who may not feel that she conforms to broader standards of female beauty may be less likely to go out for the cheerleading squad in the first place.
BearsWiin said:
I'll leave it to the board lawyers to illuminate us all on the line between bias and animus. I would suggest, however, that in terms of cheerleader selection, beauty standards may prompt self-selecting behavior: a young lady who may not feel that she conforms to broader standards of female beauty may be less likely to go out for the cheerleading squad in the first place.
I agree re the self-selection, and would even attribute some of the (non-self-)selection to preferences for white beauty standards. But I'm not sure that rises to racial animus. At best, there's an argument made for racial privilege. That being the case, something like affirmative action may be advisable as a remedial measure.
Featured Stories
See All
Cal Pulls Away For Second Straight Win
by Cal Athletics
Bears Bash Bengals 88-36
by Cal Athletics
Lema Named ACC Offensive Player Of The Year
by Cal Athletics
Ultimate Insider Podcast E97: Oregon State Wrap-up, Wake Forest Preview
by Mike Pawlawski
Bears Hold Off CSU Bakersfield in 86-73 Win in Opener
by Jim McGill