Gothamist: Hawaiian Tropic Zone "A Sexual Playground," Suit Says

stackmaster

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 18:29:37 -0500

No, it revolves around women who either (1) were too stupid to know what they were getting into being employed solely for their looks (2) were opportunistic & waited until they had enough "evidence" of impropriety to take their employers to court.

Amanda Harlech

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:28:03 -0500

like the men in the story were not exemplar displayer of machismo, or the comment of "They dance around shaking their fun bags for a living, get free housing & don't think someone will come to collect one day?" are not in deed a display of machismo? kind of clear to me there is a perfect opportunity for using the word. In fact, this whole posting revolves around machismo.

stackmaster

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:43:43 -0500

There is a considerable difference between being afraid of multicultural references & having no use for them.

Amanda Harlech

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:15:35 -0500

Machismo Machismo is a prominently exhibited or excessive masculinity. As an attitude, machismo ranges from a personal sense of virility to a more extreme masculism. In many cultures, machismo is acceptable and even expected. The trait may be seen as the product of runaway evolution, as Frits Staal notes,The peacock's tail, the grotesquely enlarged claw of the male fiddler crab and the machismo of members of the human species are all exaggerated features that may cause injury to individuals that display them but attract females. Machist is man displaying machismo. If you were to be less afraid of multi cultural references maybe you could know what it means.

stillshot

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:53:48 -0500

let's not forget that fraternizing with management after your shift ends is frowned upon (if you're not hot) plus, that amplifies your chances of getting better shifts and working high paying private parties...

S.D.

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:02:03 -0500

Actually, Stores like the GAP (and J. Crew) certainly DO hire based on looks... "PG strip club"? Hardly. More like a higher end Hooters but it looks like H.T. wasn't smart enough to prevent some managers from trying crap like this.

stackmaster

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:02:53 -0500

@ Amanda Harlech: No idea what "machist" is supposed to mean, but if they work in what's basically a PG strip club, it's hardly like working at the Gap. Gap employees don't get hired for their looks, wear bikinis & given free housing, do they? As Pete wrote, the job is harassment almost by definition & while they probably went along with it while it suited them, the potential for a big settlement check is probably more motivational than anything.

breaknight

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:29:39 -0500

A restaurant/bar with women dressed in bikinis a sexual playground? REALLY!?! I'm shocked.

Amanda Harlech

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:50:53 -0500

"They dance around shaking their fun bags for a living, get free housing & don't think someone will come to collect one day?" Very machist, how said dancing removes women's rights? The dudes get a salary, and profit from the business, so how is that this entitles them to harass their employees? Is not like the dudes are working for free. The argument of self-entitlement will put any of these sleaze bags in jail in a second.

stackmaster

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:01:19 -0500

Ok, there's no justifying rape if these allegations are true, but isn't it fairly safe to assume that these types of "office hijinks" are more likely to occur than office field trips to church? They dance around shaking their fun bags for a living, get free housing & don't think someone will come to collect one day?

The Edge

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:53:23 -0500

#8- But.. it isn't a strip club. Not technically, anyway.

pete

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:47:24 -0500

If you work in a strip club, its obvious what happens there. Don't complain when the obvious happens, and you probably went along with it. The job is sexual harassment by feminist definition. This is more about the $ and fat settlement check (this is a civil case remember) than any justice. This ***** knew what the job description is.

JenChungsBra

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:33:39 -0500

Good luck with that criminal rape investigation. Seems like it's he said she said, and she's only saying it now that she's part of a $600 million lawsuit.

mocanlagunas

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:17:52 -0500

Sexual playground? Duh! Again, I really would like to know what these women have on their minds...

Wza

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:50:54 -0500

Sexual playgrounds? Times Square?

matty

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:48:41 -0500

circumstantial

matty

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:48:28 -0500

I'm wondering the same thing as JCB. Sounds like a lot of circumstantion dirt is being brought up to support the lawsuit. The rape on the other hand deserves criminal investigation.

sidenote

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:42:32 -0500

This happened in a cab? Wtf was the driver doing?

JenChungsBra

Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:13:10 -0500

So are any of these claims for acts that supposedly took place after 2006? Why wait so long? Did the men not give in to the extortion and threats?