Feeds

back to article Booth babes banned by Chinese gaming expo

Chinese gaming fans got a little less than they bargained for last week when one of the country’s biggest digital entertainment expos, ChinaJoy 2012, kicked off without the obligatory bikini-clad “booth babes” that have become virtually ubiquitous at consumer tech shows. Organisers of the Shanghai-based conference said they …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Gimp

Why does the indusrty...

Hate booth babes so much?

There seems to be this crusade across the gaming industry to stamp out booth babes.

Has the last castle of maleness, the gaming industry, been ruined by feminists too ?

8
44

Re: Why does the indusrty...

Not everyone goes to these shows to stare at half naked women. Some of us are interested in the content of the shows instead.

17
4
Silver badge
Happy

Re: Why does the indusrty...

Yes. Half-naked (and wholely naked) women is what the internet is for.

10
1
Silver badge

Re: Why does the indusrty...

Has the last castle of maleness, the gaming industry, been ruined by feminists too ?

The last castle o-....?

Just fuck off, will you? Most men have a hard enough time convincing the opposite sex that they're not drooling neanderthals without actual drooling neanderthals turning up.

Personally, I'm tired of the gaming industry treating me like a penis with a wallet. "Play Soul Calibur V, it's got tits in it!" No thanks. Let me know when its got content in it instead.

57
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: Why does the indusrty...

"Has the last castle of maleness, the gaming industry, been ruined by feminists too ?"

Sorry; I couldn't hear you over all the misogyny.

It's not 'feminist' to not want half-naked women draped all over everything that I want to buy.

Personally, it alienates me. I feel it akin to there being Christians thrown to the lions, and other barbaric entertainments of the past rolled out for my pleasure. Granted; it might ensure that sweaty unsexed lechers attend, but - if I had any kids - I wouldn't want them there, getting drooled on by them. And it makes our hobby a punchbag for criticism, and makes us look even more adolescent.

18
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: @Greg

Most men have a hard enough time convincing the opposite sex that they're not drooling neanderthals without actual drooling neanderthals turning up.

OK, but you don't learn those skills by walking away from the problem either. Just as an aside, you may want to look up "PUA" - I looked at this when I was studying psychology. A substantial percentage of geeks have mild tendencies towards Aspergers (hence the analytical talents) and pay for that with less developed social skills. But analytical also means you can absorb new information quickly - which is what such courses offer.

Another fun one to go to is Ian Rowland's Advanced Cold Reading classes - he does one every month and they're seriously good fun for a lot of reasons.

Just some well intended help - and by that I'm not focusing on you personally, but for every geek who feels a bit shy in that department.

4
4
Anonymous Coward

Re: Why does the indusrty...

First off, since the term feminist gets applied to such a vast group of entirely unrelated individuals, you're better off not using it as a perjorative, since you'll inevitably fit one of the definitions yourself.

That aside, If removing boothbabes means there are more women there who will talk to you in spite of not being paid for it, I call that a win. Don't want boothbabes, do want chix. Questions?

5
4
Anonymous Coward

Re: Why does the indusrty...

Well I like looking at the girls but also like the fact that they put so much effort into their outfits (well the cosplayers anyway), you often get a good few quality male cosplays too. Most of these folks have more talent in their little pinky than the people that complain about them have in their miserable boring lives.

As to normal "booth babes" blah whatever.

5
0
Childcatcher

Re: Why does...

I was just thinking this about the woman Olympic competitors. I'm reminded of a surfing competition where the 'ladies' wore functional, and if I may say dignified, board-shoarts and halter tops, not G-strings or micro bikinis like the female swimmers, divers, and volleyballers. Woman want to be taken seriously, not be treated as objects, so what's with all the ornamentation and advertisement: "come and get it boys!". And finally, when they get themselves into a pinch, they cry foul. What gives.

0
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: Why does...

"...not G-strings or micro bikinis like the female swimmers, divers, and volleyballers. Woman want to be taken seriously, not be treated as objects, so what's with all the ornamentation and advertisement: "come and get it boys!". And finally, when they get themselves into a pinch, they cry foul. What gives."

That's an opinion formed in a vacuum of facts.

What gives, is that men are the ones making those choices. Beach volleyball sportswear HAS to look like that, according to the rules. Rules that men wrote, so other men would go "Pwooor: Beach volleyball: Let's go watch it!"

Women ornament themselves often because it's the only way they will get a look-in, or treated reasonably. That's OUR doing, not theirs.

2
0
Bronze badge
Coat

Re: Why does the indusrty... @Oliver Mayes

His wife must read El Reg too.

Mines the one with my walking papers in the pocket....

0
0
Go

The Answer?

Playmobil, of course! Get to it, El Reg!

2
0

Why emphasize on "single"?

Being single or not shall not prevent a man enjoying the view. I just can't see the relation between "single" male gamers and the booth babes. Removing single pertains the same meaning.

10
1
Gold badge
Coat

Re: Why emphasize on "single"?

Being single or not shall not prevent a man enjoying the view

You're evidently single :)

Joking aside, I would have let it be. This sort of regulates itself - go too far and you won't get the girls to stand there either..

1
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: Why emphasize on "single"?

"go too far and you won't get the girls to stand there either.."

Sadly, that's the problem: You will.

Maybe not *that* girl, but that one over there perhaps, who is desperate enough to do it.

That's pretty much how the sex industry and 'modelling' works.

4
2
Anonymous Coward

Utterly ridiculous.

There are large numbers of women, for which being young and pretty, is their only asset.

To deny them the ability to make money for this, is ridiculous. Perhaps the Chinese wants them only to be cleaners, and/or waitresses.

8
22
Anonymous Coward

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

Bob Vistakin, is that you?

3
0
Thumb Down

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

You forgot to advocate prostitution as an alternative.

15
2
Silver badge

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

What's so fundamentally wrong with prostitution? How is it different from, say, professional swimming or wrestling, i.e. where a person earns income solely for physical performance of his/her own body?

17
12
Anonymous Coward

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

"There are large numbers of women, for which being young and pretty, is their only asset."

Toss. One could argue that there are plenty of men whose only asset is to be able to masturbate frequently. Maybe they should be paid to stand in the street doing it. Some men are only useful for random thuggery. Maybe we should bring back gladiatorial combat. Cocks don't lay eggs usefully, so let's strap on the spurs and watch them kill each other. A gap in the market for exploitative use of people doesn't mean that the gap should indeed be exploited.

Truth is that half the girls are probably paying their way through university and have more braincells than the sad bastards perving at them.

22
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

It was all going well as a commentary until you called it "gap in the market" and I lost focus. Snigger.

1
0
Bronze badge

Cocks don't lay eggs usefully, so let's strap on the spurs and watch them kill each other.

Well at the moment they get killed a few days after hatching so it'd certainly increase their lifespans.

As for the difference between young pretty women and masturbating men, you'll probably find it's not possible to make a living as the latter because not many people will pay to watch it.

Men only capable of random thuggery? I believe boxing and professional football take care of that.

There's a difference between people being exploited and a gap in the market being exploited. Which you partially admit in your last sentence.

8
1
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

What's fundamentally wrong with paying twenty quid to a tramp to kick the crap out of him? I mean: If they really need the cash for heroin, then you're doing them a favour, right?

It exploits vulnerable people; that's the problem. The majority of prostitutes aren't doing it to realise their life's ambitions. They are doing it because they are in a shitty place in life and people are willing to exploit that, and pay them enough to feed their habits or feed their kid.

6
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: Cocks don't lay eggs usefully, so let's strap on the spurs and watch them kill each other.

"Well at the moment they get killed a few days after hatching so it'd certainly increase their lifespans."

Yay: Keeping something alive in order to brutally kill it in forced bloodsport. Way to go! I don't see how you are possibly selling that as a decent option.

"As for the difference between young pretty women and masturbating men, you'll probably find it's not possible to make a living as the latter because not many people will pay to watch it."

Which rather indicates that women are either more decent or smarter than most men. Or both.

"Men only capable of random thuggery? I believe boxing and professional football take care of that."

As much as I dislike football, I can't agree that it is a sport of brain-dead violent thugs. But I do see most of boxing as highly exploitative. Especially amateur bouts, with paying, braying fans watching someone getting the crap beaten out of them in exchange for sweet FA. I don't think we'd be missing too much by consigning that to the dustbin of history, as it's barely a step up from bear baiting. You just have to fool someone stupid that they're doing it 'for glory' and that they 'can be a contender'.

Smart guys don't step into the ring for free. Stupid ones shouldn't be allowed to be fooled into it.

"There's a difference between people being exploited and a gap in the market being exploited. Which you partially admit in your last sentence."

In a Venn Diagram, model agencies are in both areas.

3
1

Re: Cocks don't lay eggs usefully, so let's strap on the spurs and watch them kill each other.

> "I don't see how you are possibly selling that as a decent option."

He wasn't. Your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired.

1
1
Silver badge

Re: Utterly ridiculous. @Psyx

"The majority of prostitutes aren't doing it to realise their life's ambitions. They are doing it because they are in a shitty place in life and people are willing to exploit that, and pay them enough to feed their habits or feed their kid."

Yeah, sure. I can say much the same about anyone on a minimum wage job... Except in the case of prostitution it does not need to be. Most of the abuse is happening because prostitution is kept outlawed and underground by bigots who claim that it's in the women's best interest.

"What's fundamentally wrong with paying twenty quid to a tramp to kick the crap out of him?"

I don't know what you're talking about.

6
0
Anonymous Coward

@Vladimir Plouzhnikov

"What's so fundamentally wrong with prostitution? "

Just because your mother met your father that way doesn't make it right.

1
6
Anonymous Coward

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

"Truth is that half the girls are probably paying their way through university and have more braincells than the sad bastards perving at them."

Do you have -any- basis for making this statement? I mean, any basis -whatsoever- other than perhaps being in possession of just a tad too much bourgeois indignation?

I thought not.

1
2
Silver badge
Joke

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

" Some men are only useful for random thuggery. Maybe we should bring back gladiatorial combat."

I think you will find they can find ample employment with the TSG

0
0
Silver badge

@AC @12:23GMT

On the other hand me meeting your mother this way on a regular basis does not make it wrong either.

Have balls to show your name if you resort to insults, you schmuck.

8
0
Silver badge

Re: Maybe we should bring back gladiatorial combat.

It never went away. Only these days it goes by names like "boxing" and "Ulimited Street Fighting" and "Ultimate Fighter". None of which are to be confused with "professional wrestling" which is much more akin to an actual Booth Babe performance.

0
0
WTF?

@AC :12:23GMT

Ariel view of your mum's house.

http://5.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8392frLNF1r8brruo1_500.jpg

Don't get upset, if you can dish it then you should be able to take it.

0
0
Silver badge

Re: @AC :12:23GMT

Never saw this place before. You sure it's not your sister's? ;-P

0
0
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Utterly ridiculous. @Psyx

"Yeah, sure. I can say much the same about anyone on a minimum wage job... Except in the case of prostitution it does not need to be. Most of the abuse is happening because prostitution is kept outlawed and underground by bigots who claim that it's in the women's best interest."

So there's nothing crap and demeaning about being shagging fat sweaty men for a living? It's a lifestyle that many people would want a slice of, given a choice?

"I don't know what you're talking about."

It's abuse. And if you can't see that paying someone a tiny sliver of cash to totally debase themselves for your pleasure is morally wrong and grossly misusing other human beings, then you are part of the problem.

Perhaps try selling your ass on the docks for £30 and see how you feel afterwards. I'd actually respect your opinions more after that.

2
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

"Do you have -any- basis for making this statement? I mean, any basis -whatsoever- other than perhaps being in possession of just a tad too much bourgeois indignation?

I thought not."

Yes. I do, actually. Personal experience with friends and the business. I wouldn't have said it otherwise.

Duh.

1
2
Silver badge

Re: Utterly ridiculous. @Psyx

Well, you see, you seem to think that having sex is demeaning to a woman. In my eyes it isn't and my respect for her as for human being does not diminish in any way.

Everything else you say applies equally to any number of human occupations and jobs, which may have different degrees of attractiveness for different people.

The problem is that in your view, if a woman gets paid for a shag she has somehow debased herself, while if she was paid for sweeping dog shit off the street, she hasn't.

4
1
Thumb Down

@AC 12.23

Tosser

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

This post has been deleted by its author

Anonymous Coward

@Vladimir Plouzhnikov

VP: "What's so fundamentally wrong with prostitution? "

AC: "Just because your mother met your father that way doesn't make it right."

VP: "Have balls to show your name if you resort to insults, you schmuck."

Here's what to do:

First, ask yourself if it would be an "insult" for someone to say that your mother is a physician, or an engineer, or waitress or a factory hand. Then ask yourself why you would consider it an "insult" to say that your mother is a prostitute, and then use the answer to that question as the basis for an answer to the original question, "What's so fundamentally wrong with prostitution?".

It should be a pretty easy exercise, really. With the added bonus of making you a little less of a hypocrite.

1
0
Silver badge

@AC 06:36 GMT Re: @Vladimir Plouzhnikov

Oh, you are trying too hard to overcomplicate something that is quite simple.

If I call you a "wanker" you will not ask yourself whether masturbation is really that different from combing your hair or brushing your teeth or taking a leak and whether or not there is an underlying suggestion that your social skills do not allow you to form a physical relationship with a woman and if so, then anyway people should accept you for who you are and not judge by stereotypes and in general it's all just peace and love, peace and love.

No, you will know straight away that it was meant, plain and simply, as an insult. You won't even need to think what is the actual meaning of that word is, you just know that this combination of sounds is used primarily as an insult.

For the record, this is a hypothetical example and I have not called you "wanker", nor do I feel any desire to do so...

0
0
Silver badge
Stop

Re: Utterly ridiculous. @Psyx

"Well, you see, you seem to think that having sex is demeaning to a woman. In my eyes it isn't and my respect for her as for human being does not diminish in any way."

Ok... firstly 'having sex' is an entirely different subject. You've just twisted the entire conversation. Having sex is not demeaning, and nothing to do with the subject at all. You can't legitimise your opinion by comparing apples to oranges. Having sex with someone you are attracted to and want to is a TOTALLY different thing.

Having sex with a fat, sweaty, stinking bloke smelling of lager, just so you can feed your kids because there's no other viable way of doing so, for £50 *is* demeaning. If you can't see that, then I can't help you: Please go and speak to a hundred women about it, and see what they think. I mean that earnestly and in all honestly. Don't mince words or play word games with them about hypothetical high-end prostitutes doing it through choice, but instead by example of the reality of 99% of the trade: £50 or whatever to shag some wierdo, out of financial desperation, with a chance of ending up dead in a ditch far greater than the average person.

It's a buyer's market. £50 is not a fair price: That's humiliation on a stick. Which means it's exploitation.

How about the woman in question gives the guy a quick once-over, and then sets a price based on his appearance and BO... say £1,000 for afore-mentioned bloke? Then he takes it or leaves it. Or she just says "You stink: No". Then she has a choice in the matter and is setting the price, rather than being exploited quite so much. In a hypothetical world, that's a much fairer and far less debasing situation. And if a John can't take a hooker saying "no" to a crumpled £20 note or two, then he's the problem. What do you think of that, as a solution?

"The problem is that in your view, if a woman gets paid for a shag she has somehow debased herself, while if she was paid for sweeping dog shit off the street, she hasn't."

My view is surely not a "problem" to anyone, save perhaps if I aired it to Johns who were somehow trying to kid themselves that they were not exploiting other human beings, and wanted to continue lying to themselves about it.

Please -and I genuinely mean this- do the afore-mentioned straw-poll. This is really not a subject that you should form an opinion about without speaking to the gender involved and gathering a little evidence. In all honesty, I think it is the only fair way to form an opinion. See what the other half of the planet thinks before deciding what is debasing for women as an entire gender. It's their call; not yours. Maybe actually ask a few council-estate style prostitutes with mouths to feed if they see their career as financially fair, morally white, or would proudly tell others what they do?

And You've just erected a straw man. I never compared sweeping shit with prostitution, so how do you know what my opinion of it is, as a profession?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Utterly ridiculous. @Psyx

"£50 is not a fair price: That's humiliation on a stick. Which means it's exploitation.

How about the woman in question gives the guy a quick once-over, and then sets a price based on his appearance and BO... say £1,000 for afore-mentioned bloke? Then he takes it or leaves it. Or she just says "You stink: No". Then she has a choice in the matter and is setting the price, rather than being exploited quite so much. In a hypothetical world, that's a much fairer and far less debasing situation. And if a John can't take a hooker saying "no" to a crumpled £20 note or two, then he's the problem. What do you think of that, as a solution?"

FFS, Psyx. Of course, it's a solution. But it can only be achieved if prostitution becomes a recognised, legal profession. Which is what has been my point all along. I am sorry you missed it but I did not realise you did because you even quoted me saying that.

As long as the well-wishers continue to shout "won't someone please think of the women" while calling for more action to eradicate prostitution, drive it further underground and stigmatise prostitutes more and more, these council-estate women stand no chance.

0
0
Silver badge
Stop

Re: Utterly ridiculous. @Psyx

"But it can only be achieved if prostitution becomes a recognised, legal profession. Which is what has been my point all along."

The council estate women won't benefit from it being made legal, in any real way. They will always operate on the margins, and outside of social protection. The police already know who they are *and don't regularly arrest them* which essentially decriminalises it to a certain extent in that a crime that the authorities ignore is almost not a crime. They can't afford to set up shop somewhere static even if it's legalised. They can't afford to register for VAT. They can't afford to stop claiming child support/JSA. They can't afford to up the prices because someone working in the grey market outside the law will undercut them. Many would fail any of the invariable mandatory health and safety at work requirements which would be laid down. The solution simply does not work for those that need it to work the most. It just means that a few MPs can say "well, it's legal" when caught cheating on their wives. It only benefits the Johns.

Again, you seem to enjoy debating by telling me what my own thoughts are. Please stick to *your* own, instead of telling me what I have and have not realised, or my own opinions on sex.

Although we seem to have totally strayed onto legalising prostitution as a solution for the marketing industry exploiting women and continuing to promote sexism. Which speaks volumes about the industry, I guess.

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Utterly ridiculous. @Psyx

"The police already know who they are *and don't regularly arrest them* which essentially decriminalises it to a certain extent in that a crime that the authorities ignore is almost not a crime."

But that is not the same as it being fully legal. If a pimp extorts money from them they cannot complain to the police, they cannot sue him, there is no recourse. Plus, this must really be a fertile ground for police. Do the cops close their eyes because they can't be bothered or is it because they've been paid off by the same very pimp?

Of course, this is not an overnight solution either, but where there is gray legality, there will always be black market and abuse.

"Please stick to *your* own, instead of telling me what I have and have not realised"

OK, if that's upsetting you. I normally find stating what I *think* the opponent have said a useful way of clarifying positions of the arguing sides.

"we seem to have totally strayed onto legalising prostitution as a solution for the marketing industry exploiting women and continuing to promote sexism."

Well, someone mentioned prostitution, I responded with my thoughts on it, and so it went on and on.

I don't for a second think that legalisation of prostitution is a solution to the marketing industry. I think these are unrelated subjects. I personally, think that booth-babes is a seriously overrated and ineffective marketing tool and the companies realise it is not worth paying for, so they look for excuses to stop using it.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Utterly ridiculous.

I've known models too, and most of them had other occupations. Only a very few were part-time prostitutes, but there were some.

Are you really sure that your anecdotal evidence is not only better than mine, or anyone else's, or that it can be extrapolated across cultures to, in this instance, China?

Also, I am not sure why you label males who like to look at pretty women "pervs". It's a bizarre characterization.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

hot pants must worn below the hip

As opposed to on their heads?

5
0
Silver badge

Re: hot pants must worn below the hip

And what part of the hot pants below the hip?

The waistline? Sounds (a) difficult to walk in and (b) rude.

The bottom cuffs? Doesn't sound like hot pants.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Good

Much as I hate the morality police, booth babes are an embarrassment to the industry and just makes tech expos seem even more nerdy than they already are. What sort of pathetic virgin is really that entertained by a few tarts prancing around in tight clothes?

19
7
Anonymous Coward

Re: Good

errr, this one.

And I'm not a virgin.

As long as there are girls that want to do it, they should be allowed to

9
4

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.