Women not allowed to serve food at Hague summitt

[General Zod]

Because it might distract the men-folk.

Women are not allowed to serve food at the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague because they might distract the men. No it's not April 1st yet.

Apparently the world leaders from 53 countries couldn't possibly concentrate in the presence of a female, according to the company providing the catering, so only men have been given the great honour of dishing up the grub.

The director of the catering company, Hans van der Linde, was apparently keen to create a “uniform” look amongst his staff, and women quite simply did not fit in.

Speaking to the Dutch national newspaper the Algemeen Dagblad he argued: “If 20 gentlemen are serving and three platinum blonde ladies, then that spoils the image."

"The personnel needs to act in as reserved a manner as possible, and you can’t achieve that by adding a couple of pretty, conspicuous ladies to the mix,” he added.

Whatever you say, Hans...

As his comments, unsurprisingly, sparked fury on social media sites, van der Linde justified his decision to Radio 1.

Perhaps digging himself into a hole slighty, he said he had initially come up with “the creative idea to only employ ladies to serve the world leaders, and to have them do that in little Delft Blue dresses.”

The idea was rejected by the ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Van der Linde added: “We also have to go up a very steep flight of stairs, so little dresses wouldn’t be practical, as you wouldn’t be able to lift your legs high enough”.

Many took to Twitter to voice their outrage at such "gender bias" in the 21st Century.

Another commented: "Putin must be laughing his socks off."

Jean-Paul Weijers, director of the Protocolbureau told The Independent that the decision not to employ women could have been made to prevent the world leaders from getting distracted.

So, apparently the men the world trusts with the future of nuclear weapons, can be thrown by a couple of blondes.

He added that world leaders from the Muslim world present may have influenced the decision making.

“They understand that in the West there are different standards, but The Netherlands is a small country that is used to adapting quickly to bigger countries.”

Instead of being outraged over Coffee telling a tacky joke or someone using the word cunt offhandedly, I thought it might be helpful to remind people that we have more serious problems to be concerned with out there.

[Ralin]

I for one applaud the Dutch for looking beyond their Eurocentric biases and showing respect for the culture of the Muslim leaders attending this summit. We should all take their example to heart by being aware of our own privilege. Who are we to say that the victims of white colonialism and imperialism should be forced to accept the presence of female caterers as if they were fully-fledged human beings entitled to the same rights as everyone else?

[Lolpah]

I for one applaud the Dutch for looking beyond their Eurocentric biases and showing respect for the culture of the Muslim leaders attending this summit. We should all take their example to heart by being aware of our own privilege. Who are we to say that the victims of white colonialism and imperialism should be forced to accept the presence of female caterers as if they were fully-fledged human beings entitled to the same rights as everyone else?

Yeah. Strawman arguments against those "evul liberals". Could we please at least wait a bit before deteriorating to this level?

That said, this is fucking bullshit.

[LaCroix]

Should female caterers be an issue? No.

But actually, I think the idea to not unnecessarily piss off Muslim leaders you want to agree to nuclear security stuff by disrespecting their culture is to be recommended, and trumps gender issues in this particular case.

[General Zod]

Should female caterers be an issue? No.

But actually, I think the idea to not unnecessarily piss off Muslim leaders you want to agree to nuclear security stuff by disrespecting their culture is to be recommended, and trumps gender issues in this particular case.

Given several of the leaders attending the conference are women I have to wonder how legitimate that concern is.

[Elheru Aran]

I for one applaud the Dutch for looking beyond their Eurocentric biases and showing respect for the culture of the Muslim leaders attending this summit. We should all take their example to heart by being aware of our own privilege. Who are we to say that the victims of white colonialism and imperialism should be forced to accept the presence of female caterers as if they were fully-fledged human beings entitled to the same rights as everyone else?

Yeah. Strawman arguments against those "evul liberals". Could we please at least wait a bit before deteriorating to this level?

That said, this is fucking bullshit.

Methinks your sarcasm detector is broken.

On topic: Does this demonstrate a trend in Western culture of bias against women, or, is it an individual with an underlying bias? That, I think, is a fairly significant question. If it's the one person, then write it off as a single fuckhead; if it's the whole culture, then it's more serious. It's possible it's a combination of both. The counter-argument to cultural sensitivity is that the "When in Rome" rule could be applied to the situation.

[Lagmonster]

I think that if we're talking about nuclear weapons, and one of the people with nuclear weapons was a woman-hating asshole, for the sake of getting him to the negotiating table I might think that having my event planner cater to his prejudices was a wise idea. Because 'not blowing up in a nuclear fireball' has to happen before 'cure all misogyny forever' can.

However, this guy doesn't seem to be defending himself in the context of carefully-considered diplomatic event planning; instead, he seems to be in agreement with the woman-hating asshole that men can't out-think their penises even when nuclear holocaust is on the line.

[Siege]

There's some seriously selective quoting going on in that article. I particularly like how Huffington Post let out the bit from the original source (the article in the Algemeen Dagblad newspaper) where summit spokesperson Daphne Kerremans confirmed that part of the catering contract was to provide a "uniform look", saying that "the choice was up to the caterer: pick only men or women."

I'm all for rooting out sexism wherever it is encountered, but I'm also very much in favour of balanced reporting. I suspect Huffington Post is simply ripping its information from the article in the Independent published several hours earlier, and adding a sprinkling of faux-editorial outrage on top. That's some classy reporting right there, and by "classy reporting" I mean really shit reporting.

The summit wants its catering to be as invisible as humanly possible. The caterer decided the best way to accomplish this task was to only put bland looking dudes in the room. You're free to think of that what you want, but I'd recommend that next time you check a primary news source. Preferably one more into neutral reporting and less into righteous condemnation, too, instead of something as utterly absymal as that Huffington Post article.

[Broomstick]

Oh, so many problems - why the assumption female caterers have to be in teeny dresses? Here, in the Chicago area, typically caterers at an event are all dressed in the same uniform whether male or female. The size and some minor tailoring might differ, but if they men are in pants, shirt, and jacket then so are the women. Makes them look much more...well, uniform and cuts down on the sex appeal. Which is what he's really saying, that Teh Sexxy would distract the poor men. Employ middle-aged women who are non-platinum blonde, or request they keep their hair under hats (hardly an unknown custom among food servers) and that should likewise diminish the distraction factor. The combination of covering everything but hands from the neck down, and covering the hair, would also satisfy the vast majority of the world's Muslims, most of whom don't really expect non-Muslims to adhere rigidly to their dress codes anyhow.

It's also seriously insulting to the men, implying they can't control themselves. Poor dears. World leaders mastered by their own dicks.

[PKRudeBoy]

To be fair, there is some evidence that being around attractive women does in fact make straight men stupider to a degree, while the reverse isn't true. And just because someone is the head of state, it doesn't mean that they're above thinking with their dick, as Clinton and Berlusconi show.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... women.html
(Sorry about the undressed link, posting from my phone)

[General Zod]

There's some seriously selective quoting going on in that article. I particularly like how Huffington Post let out the bit from the original source (the article in the Algemeen Dagblad newspaper) where summit spokesperson Daphne Kerremans confirmed that part of the catering contract was to provide a "uniform look", saying that "the choice was up to the caterer: pick only men or women."

I'm all for rooting out sexism wherever it is encountered, but I'm also very much in favour of balanced reporting. I suspect Huffington Post is simply ripping its information from the article in the Independent published several hours earlier, and adding a sprinkling of faux-editorial outrage on top. That's some classy reporting right there, and by "classy reporting" I mean really shit reporting.

The summit wants its catering to be as invisible as humanly possible. The caterer decided the best way to accomplish this task was to only put bland looking dudes in the room. You're free to think of that what you want, but I'd recommend that next time you check a primary news source. Preferably one more into neutral reporting and less into righteous condemnation, too, instead of something as utterly absymal as that Huffington Post article.

Really?

In an attempt to clarify himself, van der Linde spoke to Radio 1 about keeping his female employees out of the plenary sessions. He denied ever mentioning hair colour, and told the station that he had initially come up with “the creative idea to only employ ladies to serve the world leaders, and to have them do that in little Delft Blue dresses.” His idea was apparently rejected by the ministry of Foreign Affairs, who made it clear that a more sober appearance would be appropriate. Van der Linde added: “We also have to go up a very steep flight of stairs, so little dresses wouldn’t be practical, as you wouldn’t be able to lift your legs high enough”

I honestly don't see how this makes it any better. I guess female servers can't wear pants and jackets?

[Siege]

I honestly don't see how this makes it any better. I guess female servers can't wear pants and jackets?

That's not what anybody actually suggested. Van der Linde in his radio interview says he came up with the idea to have women in "little Delft Blue dresses" serve the event. That's the sort of thing caterers do at bigshot events: they put attractive women in tight dresses. It it classy? Hell no, and that's why the Foreign Ministry shot it down. And then gave Van der Linde's business the choice to either employ men or women, because - like I said - they want the catering to be as invisble as possible. The caterer then made the choice to have only men serve.

What's the big deal here again? That a caterer has some crass ideas about what constitutes attractive catering? Whoop dee fucking doo, is that really newsworthy?

[PKRudeBoy]

Also, the Delft Blue pattern, which is quintessentially Dutch, can look quite nice on a dress, while looking absolutely horrid on a suit.

[General Zod]

I honestly don't see how this makes it any better. I guess female servers can't wear pants and jackets?

That's not what anybody actually suggested. Van der Linde in his radio interview says he came up with the idea to have women in "little Delft Blue dresses" serve the event. That's the sort of thing caterers do at bigshot events: they put attractive women in tight dresses. It it classy? Hell no, and that's why the Foreign Ministry shot it down. And then gave Van der Linde's business the choice to either employ men or women, because - like I said - they want the catering to be as invisble as possible. The caterer then made the choice to have only men serve.

What's the big deal here again? That a caterer has some crass ideas about what constitutes attractive catering? Whoop dee fucking doo, is that really newsworthy?

About as newsworthy as anything Sarah Palin says these days. I just think people need a little more focus on what they choose to get outraged over.

[Siege]

That's fair, and actually pretty much my point. I don't believe this Van der Linde character is a shining beacon of feminism by any stretch, and I'll happily question the assumption that a mixed catering staff is somehow more conspicuous, but at the end of the day this isn't the blatant case of heinous sexism that Huffington Post apparently would like its readers to believe. It is, in fact, only a case of terrible reporting on the epitome of a storm in a teacup.

[General Zod]

That's fair, and actually pretty much my point. I don't believe this Van der Linde character is a shining beacon of feminism by any stretch, and I'll happily question the assumption that a mixed catering staff is somehow more conspicuous, but at the end of the day this isn't the blatant case of heinous sexism that Huffington Post apparently would like its readers to believe. It is, in fact, only a case of terrible reporting on the epitome of a storm in a teacup.

The actions themselves are really less of an issue as where it's happening. Given how many women the leaders are going to have to interact with on their way to the conference anyway the whole thing smacks of a really bad rationalization and it can reflect badly on the Netherlands in general.

[Broomstick]

What's the big deal here again? That a caterer has some crass ideas about what constitutes attractive catering?

The problem is denying people employment based solely on characteristic irrelevant to the job at hand. What do you think the reaction would be if the caterer had said "no blacks or Asians need apply - they wouldn't be consistent with the look I want and someone might get offended"?

There are times when gender is an appropriate criteria for a job. Cooking and/or serving food is not one of those jobs.

[Simon_Jester]

Are there circumstances where it is appropriate to say "for the sake of a uniform presentation, we need an all-male/all-female group, and we don't much care which?"

[General Zod]

Are there circumstances where it is appropriate to say "for the sake of a uniform presentation, we need an all-male/all-female group, and we don't much care which?"

The only thing that comes to mind is Hollywood or theater.

[Simon_Jester]

But not food service?

[General Zod]

But not food service?

Maybe a titty bar?

[Siege]

The problem is denying people employment based solely on characteristic irrelevant to the job at hand. What do you think the reaction would be if the caterer had said "no blacks or Asians need apply - they wouldn't be consistent with the look I want and someone might get offended"?

It wasn't the caterer's decision to employ only one sex. The summit organization forced the caterer to pick either only men, or only women.

The decision to do that was based on the desire for a "uniform look" that would make the catering staff as invisible as possible. If having only one sex serve food and drinks furthers that invisibility that characteristic is not in fact irrelevant. It's fine to be sceptical of whether it actually does; I'm not entirely convinced myself, but I can see where they're coming from.

The 'someone might get offended' part is nothing but third-party guesswork and therefore best treated that way.

Incidentally, the caterer's website has a picture of their staff's usual uniforms plastered over its front page. It's pretty much the "same uniform whether male or female" that you yourself described.

[Elheru Aran]

Even in such a venue there's room for men. It might be argued that *especially* at such venues male wait staff are necessary, to provide additional security.

One situation I can think of is a religious function. Say there's going to be a conclave at a monastery. There aren't enough monks there to cater, so they bring in an outside caterer. If the particular monastery prohibits women upon its grounds for religious reasons, then what can you do.

The point is that the contexts where a single-gender wait staff is required are very limited.

[General Zod]

The problem is denying people employment based solely on characteristic irrelevant to the job at hand. What do you think the reaction would be if the caterer had said "no blacks or Asians need apply - they wouldn't be consistent with the look I want and someone might get offended"?

It wasn't the caterer's decision to employ only one sex. The summit organization forced the caterer to pick either only men, or only women.

That actually makes it slightly worse, since the summit organization should have realized that it would have reflected poorly on the Netherlands.

[Siege]

To be honest I think they, being the organizers of a major international nuclear summit, have more pressing things to worry about than the impression given of them by such luminaries of the press as that Huffington Post writer.

From my perspective this is one of those not-a-big-deal things that blow up out of left field so the Internet can get its two minutes of hate on. Then it'll go back to not being a big deal and if anyone's perception of The Netherlands (like, as a whole, the entire bloody nation) is negatively affected by a non-issue like this then, well, I suppose that can't be helped.