17-06-2015, 19:52
Sod it... as my wishlist analysis in the other thread is being independently audited, I may as well have a go at this one while I wait for the results.
I've got a problem with this statement for starters. I am willing to bet that it takes no more than three or four shifts before this line of work stops being arousing and starts feeling like ... well ... work.
By your logic, there should be a disproportionate share of homosexual employment in any industry where the uncontrollable male libido is subject to titillation and distraction. Put differently, the gays should -- by this infallible logic -- be in charge of strip clubs, porn movies, fashion photography, lifeguarding, pimping, and the lingerie department at Selfridges. Basically, anywhere that a woman might conceivably get her kit off, a gay man must have a competitive advantage. (Makes you wonder why so many of them seem to be working as British Airways flight attendants?)
I have a competing hypothesis. On the basis that "Babeshow Cameraman" is not the type of occupation you proudly tell your Nan about at Christmas dinner, I am willing to bet that a man's sexual orientation is less influential to the industry's hiring practices than a general lack of aptitude in almost any other conceivable line of work. It is a peculiar combination of skills -- facility with a camera, some basic IT, and a total lack of dignity and self-worth.
You are assuming that there is a disproportionate likelihood of finding closeted homosexuals behind the camera of televised babseshows. I don't think that there is any reason to believe that. I do think that the business is likely to attract a disproportionate share of chavvy, bottom-feeding shitheads who were previously rejected by MacDonalds. So the real question is this: are chavvy, bottom-feeding shitheads more or less likely to be closeted homosexuals?
Have fun with that one...
(17-06-2015 17:53 )RUsure Wrote: [ -> ]How many cameramen on the Babeshows do you think are homosexuals? I really don’t know, but I suppose being able to focus and concentrate without being distracted by your own arousal is very important. So, I am guessing that there are quite a few in this particular profession…
I've got a problem with this statement for starters. I am willing to bet that it takes no more than three or four shifts before this line of work stops being arousing and starts feeling like ... well ... work.
By your logic, there should be a disproportionate share of homosexual employment in any industry where the uncontrollable male libido is subject to titillation and distraction. Put differently, the gays should -- by this infallible logic -- be in charge of strip clubs, porn movies, fashion photography, lifeguarding, pimping, and the lingerie department at Selfridges. Basically, anywhere that a woman might conceivably get her kit off, a gay man must have a competitive advantage. (Makes you wonder why so many of them seem to be working as British Airways flight attendants?)
I have a competing hypothesis. On the basis that "Babeshow Cameraman" is not the type of occupation you proudly tell your Nan about at Christmas dinner, I am willing to bet that a man's sexual orientation is less influential to the industry's hiring practices than a general lack of aptitude in almost any other conceivable line of work. It is a peculiar combination of skills -- facility with a camera, some basic IT, and a total lack of dignity and self-worth.
You are assuming that there is a disproportionate likelihood of finding closeted homosexuals behind the camera of televised babseshows. I don't think that there is any reason to believe that. I do think that the business is likely to attract a disproportionate share of chavvy, bottom-feeding shitheads who were previously rejected by MacDonalds. So the real question is this: are chavvy, bottom-feeding shitheads more or less likely to be closeted homosexuals?
Have fun with that one...