Should any EMPLOYEE hired for tasks unrelated to modelling model company underwear?

[Electricity Taster]

3 minutes ago, RadeonChan said:

Then I have a legitimate question. At what point does it then cross the line into "unable to give consent", and is anyone even allowed to make that decision on someone else's behalf barring obvious examples?

The problem with this argument is the implication of power structures being 100% influential in the ability for women in the workplace to make unbiased decisions about their own choices eventually leads all the way back to men now telling women that they're not allowed to consent to anything in the workplace.

When there is asymetrical power. You are hired for X and asked to do Y, Y being something that includes exposing your body, then the line has been crossed. 

If women want to model, then they will look for modelling jobs. Nothing wrong there because there is no asymetrical power structure. It's their stated desire from the get go, not one that arises given the asymetrical power structure and implicit incentives. I'm not saying women can't model. In fact I'm asking LMG hires models to model rather than using employees they hired for unrelated tasks.

[ISuckAtDebating]

1 hour ago, Electricity Taster said:

For example, let's imagine you employ female X as a graphic designer. Is it OK for it to even be an option for her to model your company underwear? If so, doesn't that create an informal expectation for other female staff? When you know you will model along side one of the owners, is there an unspoken advantage due to the opportunity to mingle with an owner and gain the trust and approval needed to advance?

 

I won't be linking to any specific examples, but just search the underwear section on https://www.lttstore.com/ 

 

I am not saying this is intentional or that there isn't clear communication that employees aren't expected to model, and express consent by those who agree to do it. What I am debating here is that the mere possibility existing creates incentives and unspoken advantages that you cannot control no matter how hard you try. And from the outside looking in, especially for a woman looking to work at LTT, it's icky.
 

And yes, this is precisely the time to talk about this issue because this is when the community is most receptive to considering these issues. Debating these topics when fanboys are in full force is impossible.

I read through the whole thread and tried to follow your train of thought, but it just seems like you're more focused on forcing a discussion on this hypothetical. I also searched through the site's clothing section with no filters (except you know, the filter to show just clothing) and the only revealing pictures really is the underwear section, of which only 1 is not the owners, and the swimsuit section which is just 1 male also not an owner.

 

You said you wouldn't link any specific examples, but trying to find any myself that supports your hypothetical, I came up short.

 

I'm not even sure why there should be any time dedicated to talking about this. It's not related to anything LMG is going through.

 

I'm sure you'll find some way to twist my words/post to fit your argument as to why this is an issue/something to be discussed. But all I'm wondering is, why should it be discussed? It's not relevant or can be linked to anything real that has happened this week. The thing is, anyone can come up with any number of hypothetical situations and force it all day and make it sound like something that could be seriously happening. Coming up with a hypothetical like this doesn't help anyone involved with the situation and only makes the situation more tense because people are now arguing over something that isn't even tied to a real life example.

 

Make it something real and I'm sure more people would be more receptive to having an actual discussion. Until then, it's really just a waste of time.

[Electricity Taster]

6 minutes ago, TylerD321 said:

I do not. At all. Whatsoever.

 

It does not appear that I am going to be able to convince you to think of women as people rather than feeble beings though.

That is not OK and I am offended by what you've just said about me. It's a complete mischaracterization based on your inability to comprehend my argument. As I've said many times, I have no problem with women modelling underwear, so long as they are employed specifically for that job. Otherwise, asymmetrical power structures undermine consent. If you disagree, fine. You don't have to participate in this discussion and you are free to leave.

[Erioch]

19 minutes ago, Electricity Taster said:

 

 

 It is clear that you do not want to contribute to this discussion. You are free to leave.

Are you trying to force me to do something against my will?

[Electricity Taster]

6 minutes ago, Thepyrodex said:

So if we can’t know, we MUST assume it’s bad and that all people are taken advantage of regardless of evidence or lack there of because it Could have happened maybe possibly

 

right?

If your bridge is not 100% certified to be structurally sound that does not mean it will collapse. But should you drive over it?

[Vexenar]

1 hour ago, Electricity Taster said:

I am not saying this is intentional or that there isn't clear communication that employees aren't expected to model, and express consent by those who agree to do it. What I am debating here is that the mere possibility existing creates incentives and unspoken advantages that you cannot control no matter how hard you try. And from the outside looking in, especially for a woman looking to work at LTT, it's icky.

Considering there is only one person who is not an owner on their store wearing anything remotely revealing I don't really think there are any unspoken advantages to speak of. 
Both owners and James are in their underwear, besides that there is not one female employee wearing anything remotely revealing. 

[Thepyrodex]

26 minutes ago, Electricity Taster said:

If your bridge is not 100% certified to be structurally sound that does not mean it will collapse. But should you drive over it?

this isn’t a bridge.  This is you making up lies to fit some twisted fake story you have in your head.

 

seek help

[Electricity Taster]

3 minutes ago, ISuckAtDebating said:

I also searched through the site's clothing section with no filters (except you know, the filter to show just clothing) and the only revealing pictures really is the underwear section, of which only 1 is not the owners, and the swimsuit section which is just 1 male also not an owner

So it's ok because it's only one person? I don't quite get what your argument is here.

It is very much relevant to what LMG is going through, as it points to asymmetrical power structures not being properly acknowledged. This is VERY relevant, but If I mention how then this thread will be removed because "we have another thread for that", even though this is a distinct issue pointing to the same underlying problem, for which no thread exists yet.

If I were a private investigator investigating recent serious allegations against LMG, the LTT store is where I'd start. It's the smoking gun, and I would be interviewing the people who modelled about the consent they gave and if they felt pressured in any way, and not just women, but especially women due to how they are objectified and treated in our society, especially the tech world.

[Electricity Taster]

11 minutes ago, Thepyrodex said:

 

You are not okay.

 

Suicide/Crisis Hotlines Phone/Web

US

Contra Costa Crisis Center | Crisis & Suicide: 800-833-2900 | Live Chat

Common Ground | Call: 800 231 1127 | Web Chat
Mental health services for youth offering phone & web crisis lines - help with suicide, bullying, depression, anxiety, and other issues. Hours: M-F 4pm-10pm EST

Lifeline Crisis Chat | Online Crisis Chat
Hours: 2pm to 2am EST 7 days a week

Suicide Prevention & Crisis Line | Call: 800 273 TALK | Online Option** Hours: M-F 6pm to 9pm EST

Iowa Crisis Support | 24/7 Crisis Line: 319 351 0140 OR 855 325 4296 | Crisis Chat | Youth Crisis Chat Chat services in both English and Mandarin. Crisis chat hours: English: 2pm - 2am EST Everyday | Mandarin: M-F 8pm to 10pm EST

Australia

SuicideLine |  1300 651 251
Suicide Call-Back Service | 1300 659 467
Lifeline: 24/7 Hotline: 13 11 14 | Live Crisis Chat
Kid’s Help | Call: 1800 55 1800

Canada

Crisis Support Centre | 24/7 Distress Line 780-482-HELP (4357) | Rural Distress Line: 1-800-232-7288 | Live Crisis Chat

Distress Centre | 24/7 Hotline: (403)266-HELP | IM Chatfor adults | Connecteen for teens

Kid's Help Phone | 1-800-668-6868 (English Version) A Canadian site for youth up to age 20, offering crisis counselling via phone hotline, or IM Chat

Jeunessee J'ecoute | 1-800-668-6868 | Youth Crisis Line (French-Canadian Version)

Manitoba Support Services | Toll-Free Stress Line: 1-866-367-3276 | Online Chat Telephone & Online counseling for Farmers, Rural and Northern Manitobians.

Tel-Jeunes | Tel: 1-800-263-2266 | Text: 514-600-1002
French-Canadian phone hotline, text hotline, and online chat as well as forums for youth (18 and under)

United Kingdom

The CALM Zone | Nationwide: 0800 58 58 58 | London: 0808 802 58 58 | Web Chat London based crisis site for men in the UK - crisis support is 5pm-midnight 265 days a year.

Childline | Call: 0800 1111 | Online Chat A 24/7 helpline for children and youth who live in the UK. Includes a phone hotline, message boards, email, and web chat services. Also features an "Explore" area with mental health info, and a "Play" section with games.

Get Connected | Phone: 0808 808 4994 | Web Chat UK based crisis services offering phone, email, text, and live chat for 25 years and younger.

Leeds Nightline | Listening Service: 0113 380 1281 | Information Service: 0113 380 1380 Web Chat A peer support service run by and for Leeds students, during term time in the UK. Offers a phone hotline and IM chat. Hours: 8pm to midnight GMT currently closed for summer to open back in a month or so

Leeds Survivor Led Crisis Services | Helpline: 0808 800 1212 | Chat Line Crisis respite home & help line with live chat available. Hours: IM available 6pm - 1:30pm BST

Strathclyde & Caledonia Nightline | Phone: 0141 55 22 555 | Chat Service
Confidential phone & online hotline/info service run by trained students of the Glasgow Caedonian & Strathclyde Universities. Hours: 7pm-7am M-F GMT

International

Mexico SAPTEL | 800 472 7835

Brazil - more than I would have thought

China
Life Line Shanghai | Call: (021) 6279-8990 Provides free confidential & anonymous information and emotional support via phone 10am to 10pm daily

Beijing Suicide Research & Prevention Centre | 24/7 Crisis Line: 800-810-1117 Phone/IP/User Extension: 010-8295-1332

Hong Kong Suicide Prevention Services | Call: 2382 0000In Chinese, website offers suicide prevention & crisis helpline

India Maithri | + 0484 2540530 Operates in Kochi in the state of Kerala, south-west India offering crisis support via phone, letter, and face to face contact.

Save India Family Foundation | +91 9243473794 Crisis support for Bangalore - browse to discover helplines throughout India

Lifeline Foundation | Helpline: 24637401 / 7432 Lifeline India has email & phone support for people around Kolkata.

Or feel free to look at the larger list here

I know I left out a number of them, and have more detailed for the US as far as state by state somewhere but the point is - the resources are out there if you're feeling like you need to talk to someone please try one of these out.

 

Thank you for your concern. 

[TylerD321]

This topic is quickly devolving into chaos and I will not be shocked if it gets locked soon. Get it together guys.

[Electricity Taster]

Please stay on-topic instead of attacking the messenger. This is an important issue and you should not make light of it.

[Electricity Taster]

1 minute ago, DataStorm said:

So there it is. You being here to troll/disseminate due to an controversy, seeking some point in.

I joined LTT forums before these latest controversies. Please stop attacking the messenger.

[ISuckAtDebating]

Quote

So it's ok because it's only one person? I don't quite get what your argument is here.

I'm not arguing anything. I was asking you for clarification because in your original post, your hypothetical starts with:

 

"For example, let's imagine you employ female X as a graphic designer. Is it OK for it to even be an option for her to model your company underwear? If so, doesn't that create an informal expectation for other female staff? When you know you will model along side one of the owners, is there an unspoken advantage due to the opportunity to mingle with an owner and gain the trust and approval needed to advance?

 

I won't be linking to any specific examples, but just search the underwear section on https://www.lttstore.com/ "

 

So instead of asking you to give us some examples since you specifically stated (and possibly insinuated that there might be by stating you will not be linking any) that you wouldn't, I tried to look on my own and couldn't find any. I'm not arguing anything. I'm simply pointing out I came up short and would like to see some that supports your hypothetical.

 

Quote

It is very much relevant to what LMG is going through, as it points to asymmetrical power structures not being properly acknowledged. This is VERY relevant, but If I mention how then this thread will be removed because "we have another thread for that", even though this is a distinct issue pointing to the same underlying problem, for which no thread exists yet.

Again, how is it relevant. And by "how", I don't mean that "it points to asymmetrical power structures not being properly acknowledged." Because yes of course your hypothetical can be very relevant to asymmetrical power structures not being acknowledged. It fits very neatly into the fold of LMGs issues today.

 

It's like I said in my first reply, anyone can sit and come up with hypothetical issues all day and make it work. What I mean by how is what do you have or can point to that supports your theory.

 

That's all I'm asking here.

[Thepyrodex]

3 minutes ago, Electricity Taster said:

Please stay on-topic instead of attacking the messenger. This is an important issue and you should not make light of it.

We are, the topic is how you are lying.

[Electricity Taster]

Just now, Thepyrodex said:

can you point to where she was asked/forced/made to model?  
 

Can you try any harder to troll?  This ain’t reddit bud

As I've argued multiple times already, asymmetrical power structures undermine consent. As I've already stated, I do believe express written consent exists. What I put into question is the validity of that consent given the context. You are not understanding my position.

[Dedayog]

7 minutes ago, Electricity Taster said:

Please stay on-topic instead of attacking the messenger. This is an important issue and you should not make light of it.

This is NOT an issue, nor is it important.

 

If Everyone but Madison (may as well just use her, since this is your true issue), wore lingerie at work or had sex in their offices... I can definitely understand the perceived peer pressure to do so too.

 

it's how we got roped into smoking cigarettes and having sex with farm animals in college, after all.

 

But this isn't that, nor is it about Madison being so weak willed as to succumb to something like that.

 

So simply stop.  It's not an issue at LTT.  Itmay be at Penthouse Ranch but not LTT.  

 

You're reaching, and not even building a decent case.  Though your use of calling out ad hominin attacks is neat, childish but neat.

[Electricity Taster]

1 minute ago, ISuckAtDebating said:

Because yes of course your hypothetical can be very relevant to asymmetrical power structures not being acknowledged.

It's not enough to acknowledge the problems. We all know how that's working out with the climate disaster.

We seem to agree that the problem exists, but you disregard it as hypothetically true. So in your opinion, why is it hypothetically true but not true in practice? And I am not claiming something is happening, but rather that we cannot certify that it is not.

[Erioch]

1 minute ago, Dedayog said:

it's how we got roped into smoking cigarettes and having sex with farm animals in college, after all.

You're college experience is radically different than mine!  Not judging.

[Alex T88]

3 minutes ago, Electricity Taster said:

I joined LTT forums before these latest controversies.

Then why try to make something out of nothing, at the "perfect" time for LTT ?! Those lady employees have been modelling for years. Why now? (as if it's not obvious). Why do you want to create a pseudodebate and make all sorts of innuendos. Why the ill will ?

[Thepyrodex]

Just now, Electricity Taster said:

As I've argued multiple times already, asymmetrical power structures undermine consent. As I've already stated, I do believe express written consent exists. What I put into question is the validity of that consent given the context. You are not understanding my position.

Your position is one that you made up based on nothing.  
 

they (and I) have responded to the actual question but you believe that there is not a single form of consent that is acceptable.

 

So you position is “I’m right because I said so” that’s not a position.

if it is

 

I say you’re wrong and you MUST understand my position and you must understand my position.

[TVwazhere]

-Topic locked-

 

This is quickly devolving into arguments and bickering, and can only get worse if it's allowed to continue.