×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Sexism Still a Problem At E3

Soulskill posted about 10 months ago | from the let-your-project-succeed-or-fail-on-its-own-merit dept.

E3 737

An anonymous reader writes "Now that E3 has wound down and the big product announcements are out of the way, its time to take a step back and look at the culture represented by the giant gaming show. 'The presence of scantily clad women hawking games and gizmos seemed in particular contrast to a report released this week by the Entertainment Software Association, which organizes the gaming industry's annual trade show. It found that 45 percent of the entire gaming population is now women, and women make up 46 percent of the most frequent game buyers.' While there are fewer 'booth babes' than in earlier shows (and while some are trying to bring balance by adding 'booth bros'), the conference organizers are happy to let exhibitors make their own policy. By contrast, the Penny Arcade Expo forbids 'booth babes,' a controversial but widely lauded stance. A recent article in Kotaku about this year's E3 notes, 'For every confident cosplayer who might do the job at a con, I am seeing dozens of companies trying to sell me hundreds of women. They are not drawing my attention to the content of their games, or to their tactics or techniques. They are drawing my attention to thigh-high boots, to low-cut shirts, and, frankly, to the hard work of a really expensive bra. So much of what I see here at E3 is aimed directly at the lizard hindbrain of a 13-year-old boy. But you have to be 18 to get into the show, and it's nominally for industry professionals. Perhaps someday we—men and women alike—can all be treated like the grown-ups we theoretically are, and be trusted to judge a game by its content... not its double-D cover.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

737 comments

doesn't help people take games seriously either (5, Insightful)

Trepidity (597) | about 10 months ago | (#44015815)

If the industry's most prominent trade show looks like it was organized by teenage boys, it's not going to do much to dispel the stereotype that games are just something for teenage boys.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (5, Insightful)

Xenx (2211586) | about 10 months ago | (#44015891)

Lets be realistic... Be it 13 or 30... most guys would still be interested in attractive women. Most at 30 are just smart enough to act otherwise.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (5, Insightful)

fyngyrz (762201) | about 10 months ago | (#44016059)

Most at 30 are just smart enough to act otherwise.

Most at 30 are just smart enough to pretend otherwise to avoid arousing politically correct morons.

FTFY

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (5, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 10 months ago | (#44016101)

Ooh, 'politically correct'. How about "Most at 30 are just smart enough to handle the concept of 'situational relevance'"

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016137)

Indeed. The worst kind of politically correct moron is an aroused one.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016167)

So? This still doesn't help people take the games seriously.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015955)

If women bitch and moan out of their thinly-veiled jealousy of tight Japanese cunts in bikinis, it's not going to do much to dispel the stereotype that all women are bitchy Nazi-feminist cunt Adria Richards with an axe to grind and no sense of humor.

Yeah, that Asian in the bikini has a tighter pussy, slimmer waist, and cute features. She is desirable. You(women), the smelly butch-dykes with pit-hair or angry domineering bitches with emasculated husbands, who thinks that jokes are "sexual harassment" and that a slap on the ass is "sexual battery," are not.
 
...and here's the kicker - I have a girlfriend who not only knows that I post this shit on Slashdot, but also likes that I do. She has a sense of humor. You do not. Get one or get the fuck out. It's a man's world, baby! James Brown said so.

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (4, Insightful)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about 10 months ago | (#44015967)

Perhaps some day we - men and women alike - can act like the grown-ups we theoretically are and not get offended by the sight of the human body. The US had a shit fit over the sight of a tasselled nipple at a sporting event but regularly enjoys media which features vagabond refugees shooting 'dead' people in the face. The endgame of extremist feminists looks very like that of extremist religions, with women chastely covered up and seperated from the lecherous menfolk for fear they will be overcome by their urges.

These backwards puritans are why US society is as demented as it is. Sort yourselves out.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016071)

Yep. One can't even look down anymore while talking without a woman claiming looking too long at her shoes. Then they report it HR if it's in the workplace.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (4, Informative)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 10 months ago | (#44016015)

If the industry's most prominent trade show looks like it was organized by teenage boys, it's not going to do much to dispel the stereotype that games are just something for teenage boys.

Most trade shows look like this. There's an old adage in marketing: Sex sells. It doesn't matter if 46, or 48%, or even 51% of the population is women buying video games. We have a culture that endorses the objectification of women, to the point that women aren't making purchasing decisions based on the endorsement of a scantily clad woman -- but they aren't not making a purchasing decision on that basis either. And that's the crux of the matter. Sex sells games to men.. and for women, well... as long as it isn't driving them away, who cares?

Yes, the 600,000 polygon "realistic boob bounce" graphics are in many games... but we'll play them anyway because hey, if we can't escape the blatant sexism everywhere else... why would video games be different? Not to say I wouldn't appreciate a knob or switch in the options to say "Disable 13 Year Old Boy Mode", but I'm not going to go all "Achievement Unlocked: Raging Bitch Mode" because of it either. And that's what we inevitably are labelled should we ask for realistic looking women, heroes, etc., rather than the "armor bikinis" and the boobs bigger than their heads...

Again, not to say it's right, just that, as a woman gamer... I pick and choose my battles. And if I had one wish I could cast upon the entire video game industry, it wouldn't be "and make girls in games realistic and playable"... but to bomb Square Enix and it's peripheral companies into oblivion because if ever there was a plague of locusts to descend upon everything we love and enjoy in the world... it's Square Enix. x_x

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (2, Funny)

loufoque (1400831) | about 10 months ago | (#44016095)

Not all women are feminists.
A lot of women understand their place in society.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016145)

As someone who was married to a woman with boobs bigger than her head, I object to you calling her not realistic looking.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016193)

Was married

You dun fucked up.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (0)

artor3 (1344997) | about 10 months ago | (#44016147)

We have a culture that endorses the objectification of women

Yup, and it won't improve unless we challenge it every now and then.

Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (3, Informative)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#44016109)

If the industry's most prominent trade show looks like it was organized by teenage boys, it's not going to do much to dispel the stereotype that games are just something for teenage boys.

Lets face it, teen age boys don't have the attention span to organize much of anything.

Contrary to the rantings in the summary above (as well as yours), it is the demographics of the attendees that determine the character of the show.
When there start to be 45% females in the attendance the situation will change.

All you need do is fire up Google image search and look for E3 show floor images and you will find it looks surprisingly
like a Muslim street scene, with hardly any women in sight.

I'd say the show knows its audience very well.

Besides, the whole rant is based on the assumption that most women disapprove of having scantily clad women
running around, and there is almost no place other than a church service where there is any evidence
of this.

This is bullshit. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015829)

Every industry does the same thing, it's just the gaming industry folk live in caves and don't have any clue what happens outside their cave.

No anonymous writer (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015833)

The gaming industry is responding to its largest demographic, men 18-35 much like the entertainment industry responds with annoying anti male characters for television shows with their key demographic women aged 18-35. Let the tired gender argument go to rest.

This is stupid (4, Insightful)

Squiddie (1942230) | about 10 months ago | (#44015835)

They are just pandering to the target audience. Maybe you are very mature, but let's face it, most gamers do act like 13 year old boys. It's all in good fun. E3 exists to show off games and try to get people into the idea of buying them, not to pander to feminist sensibilities.

Agreed, it's stupid (1, Insightful)

overshoot (39700) | about 10 months ago | (#44015941)

E3 exists to show off games and try to get people into the idea of buying them, not to pander to feminist sensibilities.

It so absolutely makes business sense to repel half of your target market (and more than that of your potential target market) in order to pursue a small marginal edge in your existing customer base.

Well, that or maybe the corporate management are indulging themselves at the expense of the business itself. But we know that that never happens.

Re:Agreed, it's stupid (1)

Squiddie (1942230) | about 10 months ago | (#44015997)

Women aren't half the market. Don't fool yourself. Women aren't suddenly going to start buying more games because E3 stopped using booth babes. I fail to see how that would actually stop anyone from buying games. It's not like you have to fondle a booth babe to get the damn things.

Re:Agreed, it's stupid (5, Interesting)

misexistentialist (1537887) | about 10 months ago | (#44016189)

Judging by women's magazines, women like looking at pretty women too. There also an element of schadenfreude, criticizing celebrities' "plastic surgery" and "anorexia", playing to women's envy. Which is what is really going on here. The women aren't demanding the addition of "booth studs" or appearances by Justin Bieber, they want the women who look better than them to lose their jobs.

Re:Agreed, it's stupid (4, Interesting)

Aranykai (1053846) | about 10 months ago | (#44016041)

Pardon my ignorance, by why is it repulsive to see attractive people at product promotion booths? As a man, I buy products all the time with attractive, often partially clad men advertising them all the time. Personal grooming products, cars, clothing, sports equipment etc.. all promoted by over idealized men. Why are women so offended when they see over idealized, attractive women advertising products?

I don't hear cries of sexist when Wendy's advertises their latest salad offering with a shirtless man at poolside on national TV. Pick one ladies, you cant be both "equal" and more-than-equal at the same time.

Barbie is quite surprised (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016129)

It so absolutely makes business sense to repel half of your target market (and more than that of your potential target market) in order to pursue a small marginal edge in your existing customer base.

Tell that to Mattel or any other gender centric brand.

As long as society introduces gender roles starting with birth you will have a hard time convincing anyone that they alienate a noticeable amount of their market let alone 50% of it - girls playing soldier are quite rare, growing up into women wont suddenly make them interrested in boy/man games.

Re:This is stupid (-1, Troll)

Hentes (2461350) | about 10 months ago | (#44015953)

So why don't they show off their games instead of some whores?

Re:This is stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016019)

the same reason Budweiser doesn't show off their beer instead of some whores. 13 year old or not, sex sells. There's a new commercial for Zesta brand crackers (uh, yeah, white crackers) that features a naked man on a picnic blanket with just a corner of the blanket covering his junk. I have no idea why that would sell crackers, but Nabisco/Keebler/Kraft (one of those) thought it would.

Re:This is stupid (4, Insightful)

Squiddie (1942230) | about 10 months ago | (#44016023)

I find your comment quite misogynist. These girls are just working. They aren't whores.

Re:This is stupid (4, Insightful)

anagama (611277) | about 10 months ago | (#44016121)

Not to mention that all kinds of people sell their bodies. Carpenters sell they're spines, factory assembler's their carpal tunnels, firefighters their lungs. We just happen to live in a prudish society that demeans renting out one's sexual bits, even though it is probably easier to keep them from getting damaged than it is to prevent the other types of physical problems people accept money for on a daily basis.

Re:This is stupid (-1, Flamebait)

Hentes (2461350) | about 10 months ago | (#44016205)

I have the same opinion about male hosts. I don't hate women, only women without morals.

Re:This is stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016165)

So women are whores when they dress up in socially accepted but revealing clothing? You are part of the problem! Congratulations.

Re:This is stupid (4, Insightful)

_xeno_ (155264) | about 10 months ago | (#44015969)

Not to mention that the PAX ban doesn't, well, work. There are still booth babes in the expo hall. As far as I know, they have to be able to answer questions about the game/games being demoed at the booth, and then they "aren't a booth babe" any more.

So you wind up with a whole bunch of costumed female presenters who "aren't booth babes" in the PAX expo hall, and PAX can act all self-righteous.

Re:This is stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015975)

Maybe gamers act like 13 year old boys because the game publishers make games for 13 year old boys and market the games to them?

Also, way to miss the bit in the summary, "women make up 46 percent of the most frequent game buyers."

Re:This is stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016173)

Also, way to miss the bit in the summary, "women make up 46 percent of the most frequent game buyers."

But who are they buying the games for? Themselves, or their (male) children? It wouldn't surprise me at all to discover that moms make up a huge chunk of that 46%.

A much more interesting statistic would be percentage of female profiles on Xbox Live or Steam. I'll bet they barely make it into double digits percent-wise, let alone come anywhere near half.

Women just don't play video games and there's nothing wrong with that. Removing "booth babes" from E3 isn't going to magically change that.

This is like those stupid attempts to "bring women into engineering." Men and women are different and excel in different areas. You don't see a push to get men involved in teaching or nursing, why should there be a push to get women into video games?

Re:This is stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016067)

A lot of gamers *are* thirteen year old boys, but computer games have been in the home for almost forty years now, so most gamers are in fact mature adults with families at this stage. It's draping T&A all over the show floor that's pandering, and resisting that temptation would show respect for the entire audience. The industry's current habits tell women that they're not people, and men that they make all purchase decisions with their gonads.

Re:This is stupid (1)

darkstar949 (697933) | about 10 months ago | (#44016215)

Maybe you are very mature, but let's face it, most gamers do act like 13 year old boys.

Maybe the 13 year old boys are acting like 13 year old boys, but that just means they are acting their age. But for the rest of the people out there that play video games I doubt that statement is really that valid any more. Don't forget that the Atari 2600 came out in 1977 and that means that even if you were born the same year it came out, you would be roughly 36 years old. Those that grew up playing that console are likely in their mid-40's at this point!

I think the problem is that we really need a better definition of what a "gamer" is anyway. Sure there might be a limited market of hard core players, but the even the ESA [theesa.com] says that the average age of players these days is 35 years old.

Lets get past this whole idea of "gamers acting like 13 year old boys" and admit the fact that the vast majority of players are in fact adults and would like to be treated as such, thank you very much.

Female Gamers (0)

broward (416376) | about 10 months ago | (#44015839)

Maybe most of the women gamers are lesbian or bi
and like sexy female characters, too?

Maybe they like imagining they are those characters?

Maybe the teen-minded boys like imagining they are those characters, too?

Re:Female Gamers (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about 10 months ago | (#44016111)

Are you implying that adults do not self-insert in the protagonist of whatever novel/movie/game/tv show they're enjoying?

actually, women also like to look at women (3)

mozumder (178398) | about 10 months ago | (#44016239)

No need to prevent "booth babes" at all, since women, both gay & straight, enjoy looking at hot women just as much as men do.

You don't see women being sold beauty products with men in the ads. Marketers know this, with support of a lot of psychological research.

Sexism is something that should be accepted, and understood. It's not a cultural issue, it's biological.

Not just for men (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015851)

Many women like booth babes as well.

Problem? (4, Insightful)

theNetImp (190602) | about 10 months ago | (#44015853)

I have no problem with scantily clad women. I know many women who have no problem (and rather enjoy) scantily clad women. Just cause it's a problem to you doesn't mean it's a problem to everyone else.

Re:Problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015949)

This was more or less my thought. I think the term "sexist" might be out of place here. There is a difference, in my opinion, between being sexist and using sexuality. the description given certainly describes people using/showing their sexuality, but that doesn't automatically make it sexist. Sexism is a real and existing problem, but to label everything to do with sex as sexism doesn't help the cause. It just causes the term "sexist" to become watered down.

Re:Problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015965)

But whiny leftists disapprove!
Self-interested political grievance-mongers disapprove.
The new 21st century prudes disapprove.
The censors and the politically correct folks disapprove.
It's not progressive!

A woman's place is not on the show floor. Keep her behind the scenes. Or at least have her put some clothes on.

Re:Problem? (1, Insightful)

overshoot (39700) | about 10 months ago | (#44015985)

Just cause it's a problem to you doesn't mean it's a problem to everyone else.

Or alternately, just because it's fine with you doesn't mean that it's cool with others. I notice that you're stuck speculating because apparenlty you've never actually, like, talked with (or more to the point, listented to) women on the subject. Hmmmmm.

Re:Problem? (2)

Kohath (38547) | about 10 months ago | (#44016157)

Or alternately, just because it's fine with you doesn't mean that it's cool with others.

Why do their opinions matter more than those of anyone else? Why do naysayers get to decide?

Re:Problem? (2)

Arker (91948) | about 10 months ago | (#44016221)

"I notice that you're stuck speculating because apparenlty you've never actually, like, talked with (or more to the point, listented to) women on the subject. Hmmmmm."

Huh? He said specifically he knew many women that were fine with it. I do too. Yes, it's sexist if you want to look at it that way, but primarily against men (presuming that we are brainless idiots who will buy crap simply because there is a healthy young woman nearly nude associated with it.) The girls are getting paid outrageous amounts of money just to show up and look pretty. If that's a bad message (and I tend to agree it is) the fact is it's sent in every other area of society, singling out conventions over it is silly. Worrying about booth babes when people are starving strikes me as the drama of the overprivileged busybody.

Re:Problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015999)

no problem here.
would you entertain the though of purchasing a new game with pictures of disproportionately attractive young men, scantily-clad?
i took a picture of my ex, a double-d, and put it on facebook so "friends" might take an interest. then i logged in on another machine and saved the pic, only difference was, instead of keeping the original filename (which was arousing), it came back named "akamai-misinfo-something-about-the wtc".
instead of drawing more attention from friends, all the people who saw the pic now have problematic connections.

Re:Problem? (2, Interesting)

artor3 (1344997) | about 10 months ago | (#44016105)

Conversely, the fact that it's not a problem to you doesn't mean it's not a problem to everyone else.

But this is Slashdot, a website dominated by young, wealthy, white men. So of course sexism is NEVER a problem. Ditto racism or classism or any other -ism. No matter what happens, you can always explain it away and get modded insightful by your peers.

Re:Problem? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016233)

I have no problem with scantily clad women. I know many women who have no problem (and rather enjoy) scantily clad women. Just cause it's a problem to you doesn't mean it's a problem to everyone else.

So much THIS.

Dupe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015855)

I'm pretty sure we had the exact same whining last year.

Re: Dupe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015993)

... And it will happen again - until the feminists have full control over the behaviour and discourse of men and women attending these events.

You're posting this . . . on SLASHDOT? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015897)

You're posting this on Slashdot, land of 25- to 45-year-olds that live in their parents' basements and haven't grown past the mentality of 13-year-olds? And you expect to get sympathy?

Boo Fucking Hoo (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015899)

Sex sells. If you do not like the way women are portrayed I have several suggestions:

a) grow up / face reality
b) don't look at them
c) quit bitching

Re: Boo Fucking Hoo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016139)

Mod parent up!! ..the feminist downvote brigade is out in force today I see.

sell me a woman? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015901)

Id have to sleep on that before I decide (yeah yeah sexist , politically incorrect I dont care)

Oh geez! (2)

guygo (894298) | about 10 months ago | (#44015903)

"Perhaps someday we—men and women alike—can all be treated like the grown-ups we theoretically are." Men and women who spend enormous amounts of time living vicariously through a video screen. Grown up? Not my any definition I know of.

Re:Oh geez! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015937)

Stop liking things that I don't like!

Re:Oh geez! (1)

overshoot (39700) | about 10 months ago | (#44016055)

Men and women who spend enormous amounts of time living vicariously through a video screen. Grown up? Not my any definition I know of.

Fun as it can be to talk smack about /.ers, the reality is that there are plenty of adult (as in, actually socially functional, with families, outside social relationships, etc.) gamers.

Which is one reason why this kind of "marketing" is pretty damned stupid. When a fair bit of your target market is people who have the incomes to support a hobby like gaming that takes a fair bit of money -- especially if you're supporting your spouse, children, and even grandchildren doing it -- it's incredibly dumb to piss them off because they're not boys too young to vote (if they ever were!)

No more hot girls (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015921)

Absolutely. The first step is to legally ban nice looking women from working at gaming conferences (who is a booth babe? it's in the eye of the beholder). Once this has been achieved, representations of hot girls IN games should also be banned by law. Eventually, even descriptions of great-looking women would be banned from part of public discourse, and appropriately modest burlap bags should be draped over all existing depictions of women in art museums and public buildings. Finally, any reference whatsoever to spectacular babes will be actively erased in live telecom-mediated conversation using AI-supervised alteration of all communication, made possible by forward-thinking programs like PRISM.

You're welcome.

Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015927)

Sex sells. The adage holds because it's true. Often for men and sometimes for women as well.

Personally I'm more likely to notice something when it comes paired with an attractive female. That's not because I'm sexist, or lack respect for women, or can't see the value of a product beyond the spokesmodel that accompanies it. It's because I'm a human male and I'm wired that way. The former are largely the campaign slogans of those that didn't measure up, joined a social cult, or are otherwise pushing an agenda.

And I'm perfectly comfortable in my skin, thank you very much. Instead of advocating to deny human nature or ignore plain old economics, sir or madam please first try removing the stick from your ass.

 

Re:Meh. (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about 10 months ago | (#44016065)

Sex sells. The adage holds because it's true.

It's not always true. In something relevant, like deodorant, perfume, or alcohol; yes, sex definitely sells.

In something less relevant, like hotdogs, sex doesn't sell so well. It can actually be a turnoff. Advertising books have entire sections about this topic.

46% of game buyers are women? (2, Funny)

stevegee58 (1179505) | about 10 months ago | (#44015935)

They're just buying Fallout or Modern Warfare for their boyfriends.

Re:46% of game buyers are women? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016131)

It's true love to support a gamer without a job.

They should get booth dudes next year. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015939)

Make the place look like Cho Aniki and watch the complaints roll in.

what about my needs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44015957)

"i'm not just a pair of tits!" "and i'm not just a pair of ears."

More Booth Bros & Babes (3, Insightful)

Bob9113 (14996) | about 10 months ago | (#44016007)

While there are fewer 'booth babes' than in earlier shows (and while some are trying to bring balance by adding 'booth bros')

Now that is a solution I can get behind. I'm not a hot guy. But I'm not full of shit either -- I know that straight women like hot guys, just like straight men like hot women. There's a hundred thousand years of evolution behind it. Pretending it is not true is stupid. Women are naturally drawn to men with a pronounced V shape from their waist to their shoulders -- a trait I do not posess. And men are naturally drawn to big chests. That is reality.

You can argue that it is not sound economic policy, because it directs consumer spending in ways that are not reflective of product quality. Fine, let's talk about that, and maybe start by making advertising not count as a business expense for tax purposes. But if you are upset because it is objectification (or, more realistically, because you are, like me, not hot) -- you've got to get over it. Pretending it is not true is just lying to yourself. It will not change reality.

Sex Sells (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016013)

The entire article is trash. It's written by someone who doesn't want to accept the reality that sex sells. It's written like the gaming industry is some last bastion of a depraved 13-year-old-male mindset. Newsflash: Every. Single. Industry. Does. It.

There is sexism there. It's sexism against men. It implies we are easily duped in the presence of large breasts and other female assets. (And, in general, we *are* influenced by it.) But, of course, the display of beautiful women is somehow magically "treating women as objects" and sexist against women. Yet there is no indication that the author actually took the time to talk to any of these women about their thoughts on this issue. We are just supposed to accept it is sexist to have beautiful women around. And the fewer clothes, the more sexist it is against women.

(Yet there is seldom, if ever, outrage at things that actually DO exploit women. Things like Just Bieber and Lifetime movies that are designed to manipulate their emotions in the same way that beautiful women manipualte the male brain.)

Isn#t that rather a general problem ? (1)

aepervius (535155) | about 10 months ago | (#44016035)

I mean, look auto convention :

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/driveon/post/2010/01/sexism-fashion-models-start-returning-to-us-auto-shows/1 [usatoday.com]

Sexism at comic book convention :

http://everythingstheworst.wordpress.com/tag/sexism-at-comic-book-conventions/ [wordpress.com]

And tehre are similar stuff for gun convention (one of the weapomn show had sexy fashion model on their tank), I even saw it at downright other normal book convention.

I am not saying it is good, It annoy me too, but game convention are not the only one it happens. but domain which are seen by publisher as populated by men, they misuse sex appeal as advertising. And before you says me "but but there is 50% women in gaming!", check it up : triple AAA is still sadly the province of the young man/male teenager where they dwell in majority.

Re:Isn#t that rather a general problem ? (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about 10 months ago | (#44016185)

That second link was quite funny.
It's basically "Stop making merchandise I do not want to buy!"

Politically correct nonsense (5, Insightful)

fyngyrz (762201) | about 10 months ago | (#44016039)

It's a perfect match. Tweaking the libido is entertainment. Games are entertainment. The age group here is largely young adult, sexually aware.

So, several things. First, the idea that the female psyche isn't tweaked by up front sexuality? That's dead at the door. It's a social thing right now to pretend that sexuality is "mommy magic" and shouldn't be in play, but that is, and has been for decades, just a toxic result of radical women's lib propaganda. Now that is not saying that women shouldn't have equal opportunity in jobs, salary, medical care, marriage, etc -- not at all. Equal opportunity in matters that are not themselves tied to one's sexuality is good (I don't need equal access to an obstetrician, women don't need equal access to a dick doctor. Few will hire a fellow to strip for other fellows, likewise few would hire women to strip for other women. Etc.) But it is saying that the sexes are different, and that's a good thing, and an interesting thing, and altogether something to be celebrated, elevated, emphasized and above all enjoyed.

Next, and standing all by itself, there's *nothing* wrong with marketing one's natural advantages. We do it with minds that are able to wrap around programming and engineering. Athletes do it with bodies that are able to excel under the stresses of sports, pro and amateur. Actors and models do it with looks that please the audience. And so on, ad infinitum. What's absolutely disgusting is when some idiot steps in and decides that some characteristic, sensuality and looks being perfect examples, isn't "appropriate" for someone to use, either personally, or by employing a third party to "bring" it.

Do people with natural advantages have an easier time going down various roads in life? Yes, they do. Do we have *any* right to say that they should not, or cannot, use those advantages to travel those roads? No, we don't -- there's nowhere to derive such a right from.

Here's an important tip on the term "liberation": When you find yourself saying "sure, you can choose to do that if you like", most probably, you're engaged in something along the lines of liberation. However, when you find yourself saying "you can't do that", you really need to look hard at what you're saying because most likely, what you're engaged in is repression, probably direct and senseless repression at that.

If there's something to question about the marketing here, it might be raised as, "Where are the handsome guys as marketing tweaks for the ladies"? If the buying audience is truly equally distributed between the sexes, then if the game companies have any sense (debatable, where's my new MechAssault?) then they'll hit the women in the same nerve centers. You think they don't enjoy interacting with hunky guys? Oh, silly, silly you. :)

And of course, if good looking people, highly sexual people, or people with moles offend ye, then avoid them, by all means. Just don't tell the rest of us what it is we can, should, or will enjoy.

I raise my glass to those who make personal, informed choices.

I raise my middle finger to those who would interfere with them.

Now, let the politically correct bunk commence.

Re:Politically correct nonsense (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about 10 months ago | (#44016219)

Next, and standing all by itself, there's *nothing* wrong with marketing one's natural advantages.

There is nothing wrong either with using one's natural advantages to make money with activities such as porn or prostitution.
Yet if you ask people around what they think of prostitution, they'll think it's disgusting and that those women are whores.

feckin-A drooling faggot (1)

noshellswill (598066) | about 10 months ago | (#44016045)

The male reptile brain never changes ... never ages ... never forgets ... how woman lured them away from the homosexual hunting-band leaders and into the drug dozed confines of a nest. Lured long before grain fields and herded sheep. Skinned then, and still nesting after two-million years.

Misleading with statistics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016051)

"45 percent of the entire gaming population is now women"? That may be true but it's almost certain that the vast majority of the people buying the AAA titles of the type being hawked at E3 are men.

Just sounds like another opportunity for some sourpusses to whine.

Submitter Is A Trollin' (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016057)

Subby is a fellow AC and is obviously trolling (and getting a good catch)

not to seem insensitive (1)

nimbius (983462) | about 10 months ago | (#44016061)

as ive personally seen, "Booth Babes" are ubuquitous at other trade shows as well. The north american international auto show for example employs a few hundred. the great american motorcycle show quite a few more. Cigar afficionado has a show in Las Vegas that has "babes" behind silhouettes and in front of customers. the reason? Sex sells.

A censorship policy prohibiting women who are not fully clothed to your standard is probably what youre asking for as it applies to both booth bunnies and scantilly clad cosplayers alike. The real question that needs to be asked is what constitutes a moral dress code, and should we enforce it when children are present at conventions? we certainly do not enforce the dress code at the local public swimming pool, and the beach is likely just as offensive.

sorry if this comes off a bit rough, im an LA native, but how did you make it into Los Angeles in one piece let alone the Staples Center? the billboards have sexy women, the strip clubs advertise them outside the venues, the homeless are prone to fits of total nudity and your average male or female angelino on flower street can show up in anything from a 3 piece suit to a pair of mens daisy dukes and a cutoff.

Stupid.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016079)

Sex sells.

These type of women tend to appear at most events, F1 has a large degree of them, car shows, they even have them at gaming expos..

It's not sexist, most of the women at these shows are making a lot of money and also not having to strip or f--k any of the participants of the show.

Perhaps try to ask the women to stop attending and see where you get before trying to set 'rules' to stop people hiring pretty women to sell things.

See also: pretty much every commercial ever made.

burkas then? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016081)

i thought we celebrate female beauty, oh well... bring on the burkas...

can someone explain? (3, Informative)

stenvar (2789879) | about 10 months ago | (#44016083)

Apparently, it's sexist when hired female sales staff ("booth babes") wear T-shirts, makeup, and big hair. But apparently it is OK to use your feminine wiles if you declare yourself a feminist and a female technologist [wordpress.com] (and apparently, you don't actually need to know much about technology to do so [linkedin.com]). Can someone who is well versed in the intricacies of sexism and political correctness please explain who is allowed to wear revealing clothes under what circumstances, and who is not?

Re:can someone explain? (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 10 months ago | (#44016243)

I almost got into an argument w/ a coffee shop owner over this. She wanted more male models on the Price is Right. For what? People, even women, like seeing attractive women pushing products they use. Don't believe me? Check out any magazine's advertisements.

Honestly, (1)

Azure Flash (2440904) | about 10 months ago | (#44016093)

I'd rather have them add scantily clad men than take out the scantily clad women. Then everyone's happy: companies get to tease our lizard hindbrains, men get to glance at some cute models' tits and ass, women get to glance at whatever the hell they glance at on handsome muscley gentlemen (abs, shoulders, Achille's heel, who the hell knows), everyone's being treated equally!

And then we'll be able to trade our photos of scantily clad men to female attendants of the expo in exchange of photos of scantily clad women, and it'll be a nice fun social thing, you'll get to meet girls and show them the photos you took for them and they'll go "awww, you really know a girl's tastes! That photo you took is spot on!" and they might even agree to go out on a date later, and they won't be so surprised to learn you're bisexual or something because you took photos of half-naked men at an expo to impress them.

Remind me again (1)

rrkaiser (676130) | about 10 months ago | (#44016115)

Remind me again... What's evil about using sex to sell your product? Oh yeah... How about the names of the companies - percentage would do - of the companies in the Fortune 500 that do NOT use sex to sell. Just wondering...

#1ReasonToBe GDC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#44016199)

http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1018080/
Jump to the chapter "Some don't understand why its bothersome..." its around the 53:20 mark.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...