Slashdot Mirror
RSA Conference Bans "Booth Babes"
netbuzz writes In what may be a first for the technology industry, RSA Conference 2015 next month apparently will be bereft of a long-controversial trade-show attraction: "booth babes." New language in its exhibitor contract, while not using the term 'booth babe," leaves no doubt as to what type of salesmanship RSA wants left out of its event. Says a conference spokeswoman: "We thought this was an important step towards making all security professionals feel comfortable and equally respected during the show." Easier at a venue like RSA; the annual Consumer Electronics Show, not so much.
The conclusion was that Booth Babes brings traffic - who don't end up buying, while blocking the people that are actually interested in your product.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Well, playing spot the fed can still be fun, as would setting up fake hotspots and phishing people.
It's a security conference, which means tons of targets with no clue about security. ;-)
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Actually they can still have booth babes they just need to look professional. Personally a beautiful woman tastefully dressed is more of a turn on than the slutty look anyway.
While I think they're unprofessional, but to call them "sexist" is diluting the word to mean "anything you don't like."
I feel like this is going in the opposite direction. Instead of getting rid of booth babes, why not just convince a few vendors to also have cut men in muscle t-shirts and tight spandex pants. Then you provide candy to both men and women; straight and gay.
Convention News
RSA Conference Fades Away
Lede: RSA conference shutters undertakings after attendance at most recent gathering only attracted gay males with business suit fetishes.
An RSA conference official is quoted as saying "We don't have anything at all against gays, and we know they need security products too, but they only make up a relatively small proportion of the population. We just couldn't pay our bills." Executives at the company were insulated by their golden parachutes, but the rank and file workers were let go with only 4 days official notice and no termination pay. "I knew something was going on when I saw my boss carrying out his golf clubs", one unnamed source told this reporter. Another ex-employee told me she had early warning when by a week before the conference, they only had 21 advance signups, and all of them were from San Francisco. "I'm going to go to work as a stripper" she said. "I can make more and make people happy that way, too. Customer service was a nightmare of unhappiness and depression. I'm glad to be out of there, though I didn't plan it this way."
Vegas Adult Conferences see Record Attendance
Lede: In Las Vegas, the libido rules as adult conferences draw larger and larger crowds.
Sex sells, as any experiencing marketing exec will tell you; and looks matter, as Hollywood demonstrates every day of the year. Beautiful, scantily clad women populate the kiosks at all the adult conferences, and men flock en masse to the show floors in order to get a closer look and take snapshots with them; all the while being well exposed to the products and services being marketed their way. Women, too, crowd the convention room floor as they take careful note of the latest trends in sexuality and sex toys, making sure they maintain their "leg up" over the Birkenstock-wearing, makeup-free adherents of the now critically derailed feminist movement. A great time is clearly had by all. I asked a paired couple of showgoers if they had kids; "Yes, we do" was the answer. I asked where the kids were right them, and got this response: "Since the government deported all the immigrants, we've been hiring ex-programmers and ex-engineers as babysitters. Off-shoring and the H1B visa programs have made picking up a desperate tech person very easy. And they're so much better at caring for the kids. You should see the LEGO creation we came home to yesterday!"
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Well, I guess it is a result of selecting differently based on personal preferences, parties and companies that need bought women, vs those who don't.
This weird taboo attitude towards sex confuses me.
Compare it to say, food. How much sense would it make if someone was proudly proclaiming their social and masculine prowess because they flew into a foreign town and then managed to track down a random stranger and after several hours of conversation and work, they convinced this stranger to cook them dinner. Might not even be a good dinner, but by golly they cooked it.
You'd consider them half crazy for not just going to a restaurant and ordering something - that would have probably been more enjoyable. As crazy as it sounds though, we attach that same thought process to sex. A guy who spends 4 hours worth of time and $200 in drinks and dinner to bed some random girl is seen as awesome while a guy who cuts to the chase with a $300 prostitute is shunned.
And the best (or I guess worst) excuse I've heard - from women - as to why prostitution shouldn't be legalized? Because if men had access to sex that easily they'd lose too much power in the relationship. That's the honest to goodness answer I've heard from quite a few of them.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Me neither.
The new solution is still sexist.
It's just that this is the kind of sexism that is culturally acceptable at the moment.
A situation where one person can get a job based on a genetic flip of a coin, followed by a genetic role of the dice that lands one with a fashionable appearance - while others are disregarded based on the genetic flip of the coin alone.
You know... When sex of the person is a disqualifying trait on a job application - and it is not a job opening in a strip-bar.
It's the same exact thing that makes "housewife" an acceptable "career choice" for a woman, while the same "career" choice for a man doesn't even have a noun of its own.
It is instead described with pejorative terms ranging from "henpecked" and "timid" to "pussywhipped".
It's culturally acceptable sexism.
No different than a burka - for women who consider that a part of their culture.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
In rebuttal to your rebuttal:
1) If women perceive your "kind and friendly" behavior as "creepy," then you are not behaving "kind and friendly." You are, in fact, behaving like a "creep."
The LIKELY problem is "kind and friendly" for you probably still involves a lot of white-knight-friendly phrases like:
"you're so beautiful!"
"i can't imagine any guy not wanting to spend time with you!"
"i can't believe how beautiful you are!"
Which is both off-putting to the woman, and serves to make you look creepy. Want to come across as "kind and friendly"? Treat them like you would any other friend who is not female. When you meet them, say "Hey, it's nice to meet you, how are you today?" And don't say anything about their appearance, their luminous blue eyes, their gorgeous smile, their presumed model boyfriend, or their presumed life of ease and luxury... "nice and friendly" involves observing and staying within acceptable social boundaries - and presuming to know too much about the woman, or focusing like a laser on her good looks, or just getting too pushy in terms of trying to learn her life story will all put you into the creep zone.
Oh, and for god's sake: don't tip your fucking fedora and say "m'lady."
He missed the point, but he did not mean well. That's why we can't have nice things.
I think the response unintentionally betrays sexism but at its root merits a direct response. At least to me, the whole "booth babes" thing is pretty simple.
Human beings like the "OOOOH SHINY." It distracts and engages us, even if it is not necessarily going to lead us to buy something as a result, but it does cause us to want to stop and engage our attention. The same is true whether it's a person, a free popcorn machine, a magic show or a huge display TV.
If you are a heterosexual male, an attractive woman is OOOOH SHINY. This is regardless of the state of her (un)dress, technical acumen, or anything else. It could be a stripper draped around a pole or Marissa Mayer in a smart business suit. You will have an involuntary response and may be "turned on." But the real question of how people react to this is one of intent.
Nobody seriously objects to the presence of attractive humans in almost any context. The objection comes from those who are made uncomfortable with the presence of people who are there (and dressed so as to make this obvious) solely for the purpose of eliciting that OOOOH SHINY MUST STARE AT BREASTS reaction.
Some men will ask, so "what is wrong with that?" which, unlike what many progressive/feminist-minded men think, is not an inherently offensive question to ask. To me, the first answer of course is that it is unprofessional unless you are at a swimwear or porn conference. But the issue most people will react to - knee-jerk, positively or negatively - is one of sexism.
Is this something to be offended about or not? For me, the simple test for me is for you - assuming you are a heterosexual male - to imagine walking around a tradeshow where most of the exhibits had buff, oiled-up dudes in speedos standing in front of the booths in Speedos. Would this make you in any way uncomfortable, want to avert your eyes or not want to stand next to them in that booth? If yes, then you need to put yourself in women's shoes and understand the objection to booth babes. If no, then, okay, you can make a straight-faced argument that there's nothing to be offended about. But that still will not prevent others from having a different reaction.
"95% of all Slashdot