[mnw.pm] Re: Booth Babe rant

[Peter Scott]

At 04:16 PM 7/7/00 -0400, Chris Nandor wrote:
>At 15.01 -0500 2000.07.07, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
>
> >I can always appreciate the fact that tactics over 2000 years old, still
> >work today. However, one can always lament how slow the industry is to
> >realise that a good chunk of gamers, SAs, programmers, etc. are in fact
> >women who may or may not appreciate said 'sexploitation'. I know quite a
> >few men in the industry who don't appreciate it either so I'm not really
> >certain who the target audience is for these marketing schemes.
> >
> >Besides, at $400-$600 per day for such services, I'm obviously on the
> >wrong side of the business. Understanding how something works doesn't mean
> >that it will lead to appreciation.
>
>What bothers me is that we are saying it is OK to objectify people, to
>focus on appearance instead of substance.  It annoys me greatly.  I am sure
>many people don't feel as I do, but I think this kind of focus on the
>external is a seriously damaging force in our society, and I don't like it.

What bothers me just as much - I have written lengthy tirades on trade show 
brain damage in the past - is the lack of credit the vendor is giving to my 
intelligence.  Why anyone would think that I would be more likely to shell 
out large amounts of cash for a product because of the women at the booth, 
or because they gave me a free T-shirt, is beyond me; but so many people do 
it that there must be a sizeable population that it works on.  It bothers 
me that these vendors look at me and think I must be part of that population.

I've practice what I call trade show kung fu... like turning your badge 
around once you get in so some stuffed shirt who's never seen you in his 
life can't call you by your first name and say, "So, how are things over 
there in <insert company name here> these days?"

--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies