Lyri said:
Care to elaborate on your first point because I'm not sure they're mutually exclusive as you're making it sound?
I'm not sure proposing something between "ban booth babes" and "they're fine as is" is portraying anything as mutually exclusive.
Sure you can have them dress in a different way but they're just female representatives of gaming companies and may as well be a pretty lady holding a clipboard in a turtle neck sweater.
And I'm not sure where the problem is there, either. However, at that point, you're still going to extremes.
He didn't regard the moving of them or asking them to point clothes on as dehumanising but embarrassing for them, he likened that to the way people speak about them as if we have a right to choose if they like their chosen job or not.
But that's still the same sort of external treatment. In fact, in Eurogamer's case, the one led directly to the other.
In a way it's no different to how people think of strippers or porn stars because of the fact they exist "they're damaging the status quo of women", yet a lot of porn actresses and strippers like their jobs.
I'm just going to point out that a lot of slaves were happy.
Moving on, it is pretty different from how people think of strippers, at least inasmuch as how the actual dialogue about these scenarios has gone. Most of the talk has been about proper attire in public expos where children and families go and about conduct in private forums.
Molly McHugh: "I'm not sure if it's degrading so much as it is uncomfortable and confusing."
Regarding CES in Nevada this year. I think it sums up a lot of the issues brought up. People making this about "objectification" are largely missing the point here. The backlash came at the thought of banning booth babes for conduct issues in many cases, not because of a backlash that they existed.
Eurogamer, specifically, breaks down to a case of "this is why we can't have nice things." No pun intended.
The way people talk about booth babes is that we know whats best for them and that they're incapable of making their own decisions as a grown adult, obviously a woman can't like wearing skimpy clothes, being surrounded by virgin males in a room for a few days.
That is the dehumanizing part.
I honestly don't care if they can handle it. I don't think it's proper to be doing this within the context that people have been doing it. The only legit concern I can see is that of employment and even then, you hardly see people complaining that there's no market for lamplighters and telegraph operators. Does anyone really lament when other jobs are reduced solely because they are not necessary, appropriate, or useful? Does anyone really care that email has virtually eliminated the need for copy boys?
Also:
being surrounded by virgin males in a room for a few days.
Not sure if serious. Part of the problem here is that gaming is no longer just for basement dwelling virgins in the first place.
I mean, Whats the difference? [http://www.butlersinthebuff.co.uk/]
Depends. Are these people hired by the party planner, or are they hired by a third party, while the people behind the party are against it (or even have an existing policy about it)?
Here's a secret. I don't care what people do at home. I like porn. I watch a lot of porn. Porn porn porn. I love boobies. Boobies and vagina. Hell, I like penis, too. Ask my girlfriend, she'll back me up on that. There's no secret here; even most of my rl friends know this, because while I don't go around screaming I LOVE TITTIES!!!!!! I don't hide it, either.
But there is a difference between what you do at your own party and what you do at someone else's. And there is an issue of knowing the outcome.
If the companies that set the precedent at Eurogamer want to throw their own con, they can. With blackjack. And hookers. But they did it at Eurogamer. And you'll probably see more of this as more women enter gaming. There is a certain level of discomfort.
And it also fosters some pretty crude behaviour from the audience. Those "virgins" have been known to bother girls who are attendees, costumed or not. But hey, we wouldn't want to stop pandering to that demographic just because they're troublemakers, would we?
Finally, since 'm talking about discomfort, I'm just going to say that Jim is REALLY addressing the wrong crowd if he's looking for empathy for anyone involved. Booth babes, convention goers, anyone.
