Symbolism is inherently subjective (I'll touch on that farther down), and I suppose that's one reason I don't understand the viewpoint of anyone feels this is a necessary decision.
I feel I have been singled out by some in this thread as part of the group that is 'extremist' or 'taking things too far' with my views, which I don't think is fair given the context of the discussion. Apparently it's okay to name some extreme examples of men behaving lewdly at races, but then offering a comment or perspective that counter-balances that extreme example (suggesting that not all men automatically become pigs around women dressed a certain way) is somehow not conducive to the discussion whatsoever. Why do I get this impression? Merely offering that opinion is enough for me to get blasted for creating a 'false argument'--even though I'm not really arguing!
Perhaps I haven't made myself clear: I'm not opposed to this decision on the grounds that the WEC has every right to project themselves as they wish and give a reasoning for selecting a certain image with which to associate themselves. They have every right to make their decision, however much I agree or disagree with it, and I don't challenge their right to do that. However, my 'issue', as it were, is with their reasoning.
Firstly, I don't agree that their decision does much to cast them in a light that is somehow more 'modern', 'gender-neutral', or 'family-friendly'. I specifically offered an IMSA commercial as an example of why I feel the presence of grid girls does little to detract from the atmosphere of a race being 'family-friendly' (and later realised that's not the most recent version of that commercial--the newest one does an even better job of it but isn't on YouTube). You can watch it and tell me you disagree--that's fine, it's a difference of opinion.
Change in attitudes happens slowly if at all. If the goal here is to move forward as a society, I simply don't feel that band-aid solutions such as 'ban this' are good enough. They address a symptom of the problem rather than the problem itself (a la "don't confuse the evidence of the thing with the thing itself"). Here, the problem is an apparently subjugating attitude towards women. Banning grid girls does not change that attitude, it merely removes an outlet for that attitude to manifest itself--addressing a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself.
If you want to curb crass behaviour at races, call someone out the next time you see him behaving crudely. Write a distasteful post about it on the internet. Bring it up to those around you or get security. Do whatever you've got to do to take it up the chain, make your opinion heard and make sure the a#$hole or those like him are aware that his behaviour is uncalled for in such an environment--bad behaviour deserves to be punished. Force him to stop doing what he's doing--it's as simple as "this thing sucks, don't do it anymore". As the saying goes, "the only thing necessary for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing". Have you ever done anything more to make a difference than sit behind a keyboard and preach about how you think it should be? No? Join the club. That's why the problem is still there. Motivating those around you to make a difference by addressing the problem is what causes real change to happen. I'll make a deal with you: you do it next time you see it, and I will too. Let's get the ball rolling.
I'd agree that a decision like the one the WEC makes has the potential to cause a change in attitudes--to make people reflect and think, 'their intent is to look more modern, we should strive to be as well'. But I feel this effect is also potential at best. Placing the burden of change in the hands of those with power (e.g. the WEC--or politicians, if you prefer) and then expecting them to make a difference is a lazy way out. Even lazier is assuming they'll take care of it and then complaining when they don't--the reason they aren't bothering to do anything is the same reason you (presumably) aren't or won't. I despise the attitude of waiting for the people in control to do something and then hoping it works. Take control yourself--nothing is stopping you.
Make your voice heard. I'm pretty sure it was Thoreau who said 'When will the world learn that a million men are of no importance compared to one man?' Be that one person that makes the difference. Sometimes all it takes is one voice. (Or I suppose you could quibble about Thoreau being sexist by arguably implying that only a man could make the difference, if you prefer. I moved on a long time ago.)
So yeah, I guess that's why I'm a little confused and I suppose in disagreement with the majority here about how the WEC is doing this amazing thing by banning grid girls. To change the attitude towards women, we don't need to get rid of the grid girls, we need to get rid of the attitudes--and the source of those attitudes isn't the grid girls, it's the tolerance of said attitudes. Because I don't want to have to come back to this thread, consider this: if the significantly prevailing attitude for men around provocatively-dressed women (or vice versa, if you prefer) in a public setting was to behave cordially, respectfully, and otherwise nonchalantly, there wouldn't be as strong a link between provocatively-dressed women and sexism, no? It goes back to that thing about how we, of our own making, assign symbolism to certain things. Something to think about.
All I see is yet another corporate entity exercising the rights it obviously has in an attempt to make itself look better while the real problem still exists and will continue to exist because all we're doing is sitting around and ultimately congratulating them for chasing more of our money rather than perhaps doing anything ourselves to change the attitude we all agree we despise. Wish it didn't have to come to that, but it does. Maybe that's why I feel the way I do.
Over and out. Have fun bickering about it, guys.
Thanks, that's an excellent post. If I did lump you into the category of those who are senselessly decrying the change just because they want to stare at pretty girls, I apologize, your rationale is the most coherent thing against this change that has been written and it's hard to argue with any of your points. I don't think it's an amazing thing to ban the grid girls as if it's a silver bullet, but I do think that in conjunction with a discussion about the appropriate role for women both on and off the racetrack doesn't hurt matters, even if it is just something pulled out of a hat for marketing differentiation. Sometimes even the most cynical marketing ploys end up actually helping things, but that remains to be seen here.
I was thinking..you kidding me! rocket science is advanced stuff. Push to MEKO.
Yes. This. 
