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 ?
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 …
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.
"...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.
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.
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.
"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.
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?
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.
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.
"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.
"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.
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.
"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?
"£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.
"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.
"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.
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.
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...
"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.
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.
"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.
"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.
"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.
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.
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.
I am no virgin, I have a girlfriend and regular sex, I also enjoy striptease.
Labeling it 'nerdy' makes no favor, just accept it for what it is. I suppose F1 is pretty nerdy as well and much are all auto-shows.
So having young beautiful girls who like to show off their bodies is a plus to the tech. exhibition. Of course, the girls featuring the products won't be able to answer any question but you can't have it all.
Paris, coz she doesn't like nerds either.
"So having young beautiful girls who like to show off their bodies is a plus to the tech. exhibition."
Don't know many models, do you?
Most of them don't enjoy standing around while ugly people stare at them, committing their curves to memory for a good wank later. They hate it, and they hate the punters. The ones I know often come back from shoots and shows in tears.
But it's money. And money talks. It's an exploitative market, that most people who are involved with deeply dislike and would probably prefer not to exist.
What you are doing by feeding the market is -essentially- making people deeply unhappy. Yes; you can smarmily say "well they shouldn't do it, then", but if someone offered you -as a struggling student- a hundred quid or more to stand around for 4 hours degrading yourself when the rent was due, you and I would both be tempted to take it. And even if we weren't, someone else would be desperate enough to. It's exploitation and degradation.
Don't ever kid yourself that modelling is glamorous and that you're actually doing them a favour by staring at their tits. If staring at strippers is your thing, then at least comes to terms with the fact that the girl you're staring at probably wouldn't be there, given a real choice.
Most of them don't enjoy standing around while ugly people stare at them, committing their curves to memory for a good wank later. They hate it, and they hate the punters. The ones I know often come back from shoots and shows in tears.
.. which is why they enjoy a normal chat with someone who has less problems focusing on their eyes than their assets (provided it doesn't get in the way of their work - after all, they are paid to draw attention to the product). If you are interested in people as a whole rather than just the decorative part you do get a lot better interaction.
Having said that, I agree that there are an awful lot of people around these days with Repetitive Stain Injury (no, that "r" is deliberately left out). What puzzles me is where they come from - wasn't Darwin supposed to take care of that?
".. which is why they enjoy a normal chat "
Assuming that you're normal. Most people who try to have a "friendly chat" with the models are also creepy pervs. Or certainly generally assumed to be.
And if you are chatting to them for more than thirty seconds, half the time they get in trouble for it, because they get told to parade around showing their ass more.
The best thing that can happen for them and the industry (both the game industry and to drive a stake through the heart of the modelling and marketing agencies responsible) is to just walk by, don't look twice, and make a point of only stopping at stands that don't hire half-naked models.
If staring at strippers is your thing, then at least comes to terms with the fact that the girl you're staring at probably wouldn't be there, given a real choice.
That's way too bold of a statement. Different people enjoy different stuff. While I do not claim all strippers enjoy their job, many do. Do you seriously believe all girls working in the industry do it for the money solely?
Also what do you define as "real choice": many people despise the idea of working as 'developer'?
you're actually doing them a favour by staring at their tits.
Again that's what you say: have I mentioned I like staring at their boobs? Like I told it's not possible to speak about technical stuff with/to them (sometimes it's not even possible w/ speakers on a conference but it's beyond the point). However, they would rarely decline informal chat.
Strippers also chat but that's also beyond the point.
"While I do not claim all strippers enjoy their job, many do."
A minority, if we're honest.
And they enjoy it because of the screwed-up ass-about-face world we live in, where they feel somehow vaguely empowered and valued by reducing men to drooling flabheaps with bulging trousers. That's not really a good reason.
If I'm totally and brutally honest, the only women who I've ever met in that kind of work who ever enjoyed it were as thick as pigsh**, and have had the wool totally pulled over their eyes by a world and industry that is totally exploiting them.
"Again that's what you say: have I mentioned I like staring at their boobs?"
Sorry; that was a general 'You're' as in 'any bloke'; not specifically you.
"So we're trying to claim that models don't like it when their attractiveness is used to 'attract' someone to the goods or services that they're advertising?
Can I ask exactly what the purpose of modelling is then?"
Is that even a serious question?
The purpose of modelling is to sell us sh*t. It's not an industry that exists so that pretty girls can feel great about 'using their attractiveness'. That's a very blinkered view.
Do you genuinely believe that low-end £50 a day / per shoot models do it because they get all happy and hot under the collar that sweaty geeks perv at them as they 'use their attractiveness'. At the other end of the scale, supermodels most certainly do not give a flying feck what blokes think, and are just seeing that big dollar sign. And even if you are examining the motives of the pure narcissists, then they are motivated by looking good *to themselves*, not for the sake of others.
Normally it's pretty direct and obvious what modelling is selling us: Fashion, computer games, cars... or just to grab our attention for long enough to give us whatever the message the person hiring the model wants us to hear.
Even if no product is involved and it's a 'Tog's portfolio shot, then the 'Tog is selling themselves by it, and furthering their own careers.
99% of people in the business are being exploited and underpaid, and either don't really enjoy their work, or are fooled by highly manipulative people.
Let's not label it "nerdy", because that implies lack of social skills but enhanced intellect. Let's just label it "misogynistic", "degrading", "moronic" and "juvenile".
And yes, that does apply to all the people involved in the souped-up-hatchback side of motorsport.
If attendances dwindle because there are no booth babes then doesn't that simply mean that there's no worthwhile content at the show in the first place? Why go to a show about video games if all you want to do is oggle women? There are plenty of strip bars you can go to if you must have that sort of thing
Why go to a show about video games if all you want to do is oggle women?
It may be because you can *download* the video game - gets a tad harder for the Real Life damsels.
If you go there *solely* for the eye candy, it still means you're at the show, have paid your entrance fee, drink some beverages and possibly buy product. WHich is what this is all about. Some even have fun there.
Personally, I don't have anything against booth babes. As far as I have been able to work out, you're allowed to ignore them too..
I don't see any benefit in these "booth babes". I think the Chinese are doing the right thing. Who would have imagined the Chinese teaching us something?
This sort of carry on is demeaning to women. I used to buy PCFormat magazine and that went through a spell of having a model in a swimsuit pouting with a piece of tech on each cover. If I want to find out about tech stuff I don't want a "booth babe" getting in the way. It just insults my intelligence.
I'll take that on.
If it was just that there was no benefit, then sure, let it go. But when the result is actively bad for everyone, then it's time to plant the stake through its rotting heart.
Usually I wouldn't piss on the Chinese gov if they were on fire, given their usual disregard for human rights; but in this one case they're ahead of the rest of the world.
i like the booth babes they create an interesting juckturposition between the technologies and the human nature my only complaint is theirs not more of them so i went to an expo and i complained to the organiser man about the booth babes were wearing too much clothes i said why not some of them more naked? i have a good eye for technologies and i see where you could make your expos better by having more naked babes everywhere but he said no it was not a good idea but he could respect my point of view but later i got kicked out of the expo because i forgot you are not allowed to touch the booth babes
I think it's a bit unfair.
For most of the flabby,malodorous, pizza-guzzling, coke-swigging, light-avoiding virginal bedroom-dwellers who attend these kind of shows, booth babes might be the only chance they get to see a flesh & blood female in any sort of state of undress, apart from when they walk in on their mum in the shower.
[you will let me know if I accidentally omitted any of the stereotypes, won't you]
Yup, I think you missed "masturbating", but I guess you left that out because they don't do that in public unless they sing and are called George Michael, but I digress.
I prefer to express malodorous as "Having missed their annual bath. Twice", but that's a personal preference (and the few who know me personally now know who is behind the alias :) ). As far as I can tell, the rest is more or less correct. Maybe a sideways reference to inflatables, but that would possibly be overdoing things.
Thanks for the summation. However, let's not forget that sex sells. Even for charities.
It's arguable that the show organisers were a little too inflexible--should they have made allowances for game characters? But that raises the obvious question of character design. This area doesn't need a prudish backlash, but it is depressing to see the way that women are depicted in computer games. And superhero comics can be as bad. It's not just the exaggerated anatomy, it's the apparent ignorance of the artists as the characters stand in implausible poses,
And, while I can appreciate the view, I do feel a little insulted that the companies think that this is what is needed to sell the product. In the end, I don't think that either the game companies or the show organisers are treating women with respect. To both, they are just a visual trigger for a sexual reaction.
I attended a consumer electronics show a couple of years ago, one of many I attend in a year, and the stand next to ours had a girl being body painted on stage. There was no relevance to their business, it was just to get the hordes of sweating men standing around their stand, what made it more horrific was the number of men videoing the process clearly for their later fulfilment. Now, I have nothing against having attractive hostesses on stands, my company often has two women (and one man), but it is poor form to promote your wares just with titillation.
All organised by Sales types. They don't give a rat's arse about anything other than what's most likely to draw a crowd and give 'em an opportunity to push their gear. The fact that they got your attention puts in a tick in their "win" box.
You should thank your lucky stars that Sales droids publicly taking it up the arse from anyone passing who fancies a bit doesn't sell stuff.
Did I fall asleep and wake up on a different planet? What the hell is wrong with having the booth babes? Seriously?? WTF? Pretty girls get paid to stand around wearing stuff that they would wear on a beach or a night out anyway. Are you all so deliriously puritanical that you can't handle seeing a girl in shorts without having a trouser accident or rushing off to touch them or yourself? Should we ban all pop videos and Strictly Come Dancing now too? Honestly, get a grip.
Having said that, the girl with her fanjita out has taken it a bit far but if a bloke walked around there with a mankini on I'm sure it would get the same press attention.........aye right. This girl wanted publicity and she's got it. I love the epic Photoshop fails in the link BTW, down the bottom where you've got an arm that's incredibly long and thin then in another one her leg just disappears after her bum. Funny.
Google "I see your camel toe" on YouTube if you haven't heard it yet. "Looks like a big taco, I see your camel toe"
Booth babes, generally, use outfits they're given. Cosplayers make their own stuff for the most part and put a lot of time and effort into it. As a result they enjoy showing it off by wearing it to conventions and events. I'm sure most will be used to (note: used to, not accepting of) people staring at them.
Does it give the wrong impression? I can't say for sure but I'd lean towards no. Teens will always drool over scantily clad women but I'd put that down to hormones more than anything else. Kids will see about the same on a beach on a hot day, perhaps less. Do people go to beaches to protest bikinis or demand people put more clothes on?*
I honestly don't care what anyone thinks of me and I make up my own mind. I know it's a radical idea to think I should be allowed to make up my own mind, I live life on the edge!
*Some should perhaps avoid bikinis on the beach but protesting that would be called a hate crime despite the pain it causes my eyes being dismissed.
I cautiously agree with the move made by the organizers. Sort of.
Yes, sex sells and it's a little prudish to stop them from using it. Also, I don't doubt there are a lot of people at these conventions who like this and there is nothing wrong with that.
However, I don't think it helps the image of the gaming or technology industries and, as much as some people attending the conference might like having the "booth babes" there, there will be plenty of people who are, at best, uncomfortable with it or, at worst, alienated by it.
As with most things, I would say moderation is the key. Let those companies that have booths there have their booth babes if they must but encourage/force them to keep it to a sensible level and to keep it relevant to what they are selling/showing.
Obviously there would be some lines that need to be drawn there and debates on where to draw them.
If all else fails, make them employ an equal number of "booth blokes" dressed in the equivalent male attire and keep it equal. I wonder what that would do to the attendance figures...
This appears to be a symptom of the Chinese Communist Party's conservative attitudes toward sex.
Thanks to their 'one child' policy and the preference for at least one male heir, there is now an over supply of single males in China. And the implications for a stable society have not escaped the authorities. That said, I think they are going to make their problems worse rather then better. Banning on-line (and other forms of) porn and cracking down on prostitution may backfire. It might be better to legalize and regulate prostitution that to expect a bunch of single males to sit at home and think party approved thoughts. In the mean time, creating scarcity of any commodity will increase its price (not necessarily just monetary) and a certain segment of society will step over the legal boundaries to posses it.
"The white knights, and feminized men! No wonder the industry is phasing out booth babes, because they have the army of ball-less white knights to do it for them."
I would never call myself a feminist. I like pretty girls, straight liqueur, driving fast cars, the smell of engine oil, and farting loudly.
And because I like pretty girls, I date them. And some of them work in the modelling industry, which rather opened my eyes to the sordid truth of it all.
Some of the opinions voiced and sexist twaddle spouted on this thread is just prehistoric.
And as for 'ball-less', I'd gladly stand in front of you and tell you what I thought of your idiot opinions. It's you who's sad, mate. Sad that you want to slag off people who would like to see a fairer world, and it's really pathetic that you want to continue viewing half the planet as somehow inferior to you.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019