NOW vs. Hooters

NOW, the National Organization for (a certain kind of) Women, better known as NAG, is trying to remind people they exist. They're going after Hooters, and the basis of their attack is laughable. Michael Mello of the Orange County Register has the story.

A well-known feminist organization has filed a complaint with Orange County officials, alleging two local Hooters restaurants exposed children to sexual entertainment.

On Thursday, the California chapter of the National Organization for Women sent a letter to District Attorney Tony Rackauckas saying Hooters restaurants don't comply with state and local laws that regulate sexual entertainment. NOW said Hooters should have an age requirement, much the same way strip clubs can only legally admit patrons 18 and older.

I'm sorry, but an organization that does everything it can to make sure that thirteen-year-old girls can have sex, contraception, and abortions without their parents even knowing is in no position to talk about this.

What about the choices and the rights of Hooters girls?

Hooters says it has 455 restaurants in 44 states in the U.S. and 28 countries worldwide. The company's website also says a third of its managers and corporate staff are women.

I wonder how many are members of NAG?

The letter specifies the Hooters locations in Anaheim and Costa Mesa. It omitted the newest Orange County location, in Lake Forest.

That's because one of the NOW's local members volunteered to visit the restaurants herself, and only went to the Anaheim and Costa Mesa locations.

What, did the women working at the restaurants not flirt enough with her?

"Members physically went and brought their children to see the children to see the children's menu and the items sold," said Patricia Bellasalma, president of NOW's California chapter. "They took them to see whether they would serve them."

Bellasalma said the group targeted Hooters restaurants because they offer "sexual entertainment," but choose to have locations near popular tourist spots or in shopping malls.

"Sexual entertainment" of this sort is a problem for NAG because it is largely heterosexual and enjoyed by men. It is interesting that shorts and tank tops = "sexual entertainment". Maybe it is the shaved legs, too.

NOW plans to ask state Attorney General Jerry Brown to conduct his own investigation.

Can I conduct one?

NAG doesn't want men having fun. It is that simple. But Hooters is so tame that this is ridiculous. Perhaps this is a trial balloon for NAG before moving on to other entertainment? Or, maybe it is just a cry for attention by a bunch of bitter women who are jealous of women who can make a living for a while on their looks and personalities. But the way, I've been to Hooters exactly once in my life.