RSA Conference Bans "Booth Babes" 326
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.
Bummer (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Interesting)
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. ;-)
Some of the Feds are easy to spot (Score:3)
They're the ones over in the NSA booth, showing off the cool Enigma machine, and handing out other spook agency trinkets. Sometimes other groups of Feds are there (Homeland Security or whoever), and they don't understand that, unlike the NSA who are evil but cool, they're evil but not cool.
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Bummer (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't prescribe, I described.
Re: (Score:3)
Congrats, you are officially overly PC. It's people like you that prolong gender in equality. There are societally accepted standards of dress and you damn well know that. You just choose to pick on words which YOU prescribe a stigma and try to brow beat everyone into thinking like you. A man can dress slutty. So can a women. It doesn't make them sluts. It doesn't make they ANYTHING but dressed slutty, in so far as the locally accepted definition of that word. In America it means something different than sa
Re:Bummer (Score:4)
Your position is idiotic for any functioning society.
This argument reduces to the assertion that any dress code is immoral, and that people should be able to wear anything they like, including nothing. You then use the absurd leap to liken such a society that has a dress code to an oppressive muslim regime.
I hope the next person who sits beside you on a bus thinks like you do.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
How dare you put a negative connotation on "slutty".
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Funny)
How dare you oppress me and my right as a man to be slutty.
Re: (Score:2)
You do understand it's because they're jealous?
Re: (Score:2)
No, I don't.
Re: (Score:3)
I've done that. CeBit in Hanover. I didn't get to wear chaps though.
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
I know you mean well, but you're completely missing the point.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
I know you mean well, but you're completely missing the point.
He missed the point, but he did not mean well. That's why we can't have nice things.
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Bummer (Score:4, Interesting)
He's missing the point and still explaining an issue.
RSA doesn't want to promote the objectification of women any more.
Vendors are still willing to objectify women to have a chance at winning business.
So, let's say that hire and train those who would otherwise be hired as booth babes so that they're useful temporary representatives of products and companies. Let's say they show up dressed in business or business casual attire. And let's say a man goes to one of these conferences, see a beautiful woman, finds out she's a knowledgeable associate in the industry, and continues to ogle her for her secondary sexual characteristics while she convinces him to try some products.
Is any wrong done? If so, are you saying that attractive women are not allowed to represent a company or product?
Re: (Score:2)
So, let's say that hire and train those who would otherwise be hired as booth babes so that they're useful temporary representatives of products and companies. Let's say they show up dressed in business or business casual attire.
Blasphemy!
Seriously, when you first went to one of these conferences, wasn't your first assumption to walk up to them and ask about the vendor's product; and then when they didn't know anything about it, say to yourself, "Why would they just come here and hang around at a vendor's booth when they can't talk to people about the product? Couldn't they get paid just as well doing something less stultifying?"
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe he thinks he can change human nature. Women don't really even have to be all that attractive to have an effect on men. Just the right personality and a sweet smile can do wonders to a man. Yes, I know she is not going to blow me but really I'm happy just to be in the same room with someone who's very presence works on the pleasure centers of my brain. I doubt it would cause me to buy a product but it will cause me to listen to what she has to say.
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
... If women en masse knew that they could manipulate most men with a sweet smile and some relevant conversation, many of us would be doomed.
Don't worry, they already know and we are doomed.
Re: (Score:2)
> Vendors are still willing to objectify women to have a chance at winning business.
> If so, are you saying that attractive women are not allowed to represent a company or product?
That appears to be the case, yes. No fun allowed here.
Re: (Score:3)
I got the point but....men are men and most men are turned on by women. I've worked with beautiful or even just not ugly women and I was never once unaware that they were women. I treated them with respect and acted professional but often it took some real self control. People selling or promoting things are aware of this fact and will take advantage of it. Some men have less self control and their brain will almost totally shut down which does make this practice worthwhile.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a cynical sales trick that shows a vendor is not taking the visitors seriously.
Yes, they may be cute, but if you are going there to see cute girls instead of elsewhere then something is screwed up.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
I know you mean well, but you're completely missing the point.
You beat me to it. I was going to ask "What part of 'turn on' did you not understand?"
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally a beautiful woman tastefully dressed is more of a turn on than the slutty look anyway.
I guess it's different because I pay for conferences out of my own pocket, but I'm not going to go to all the hassle and expense of attending an Expo to waste my time at a vendor booth which spends its marketing dollars on objectifying women. The women may be there of their own free will and the whole arrangement may be perfectly morally straight (for the sake of argument), but the vendor is clearly disrespecting its customers' intelligence, and that itself makes me feel uncomfortable and want to avoid their booth.
Each time I've experienced the 'booth babe' phenomenon, never once did any of them know what an ARP reply was or how many key exchanges TLS modes use. This isn't a matter of nerd-quiz, it's that talking to them serves no purpose for why I go to an expo.
While several I've encountered have been both nice and pretty, I never once imagined that I was going to scurry off to a corner to make out with one or that they might suddenly provide useful product information, so a polite smile, the briefest of small-talk to let them know that I value them as a human being, and a thank-you and I was on to the next booth to talk to a sales engineer. Did the booth-babe vendor have something useful to sell me? Maybe, but I only have so much time, and this wasn't why I was there. I don't care if the sales engineer has a spare tire and a scraggly mustache, because I'm not there to make out with him (or her) either.
That booth babes is a thing tells me a few things: 1) target customers don't get to talk to pretty women much unless they're being paid (Jesus people, try being kind and friendly for a change) 2) target customers are mostly there blowing their employers' budgets on a half-assed vacation and don't really care about the cost or value, and 3) they probably play the Lottery and go to strip clubs too, for all their investment is worth (but I guess they have nothing better to do).
There would be no booth babes if they didn't provide value, and that they do is an indictment of the crowd attending. RSA might be putting up a roadblock, but the industry only needs to look itself in the mirror if it wants to find someone to blame. Stop being creepy and get a girlfriend, people.
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
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."
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
All you get is overweight, butch lesbians in flannel shirts, sweatpants and Birkenstocks!
But that triggers me.
Sorry, should have put up a warning first. But that leads to another question: is it the actual overweight, butch lesbians in flannel shirts, sweatpants and Birkenstocks that trigger you, or seeing the phrase "overweight, butch lesbians in flannel shirts, sweatpants and Birkenstocks" in writing that triggers you. And if so, how would you give a trigger warning for that?
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously what they'd need to do is take a poll of attendees ahead of time, and then revise the rules to something that doesn't turn anyone on.
To prevent lying on the poll, a polygraph would have to be involved.
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Funny)
they'll switch over to information kiosks narrated by an asexual monotone computer. And if that turns you on, well, I don't know what they'll do.
If that happens, you'll have passed Turing's other test.
Re: (Score:3)
The point is not to get rid of anything that might be too exciting or alluring. The point is that sales and marketing people should be professional at a professional conference. There are plenty of auxillary magazines available if you are missing the cleavage.
Re:Bummer (Score:5, Insightful)
For the conference? If you only go for the women, then you should visit other venues which are better suited for staring at women.
In Other News... (Score:5, Funny)
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!"
Devil's advocate: (Score:5, Interesting)
I dunno, I usually like going to conventions so people can try to sell me things.
Thing is, these 'booth babes' acting as total sex objects *do* sell things...
I'll explain in detail for those who disagree: the ladies grab the typical convention-goer's attention long enough for the sales-critters to suck the guy in and start making the pitch. Our victim is now too damned busy trying to steal glances so that he can lick every inch of her body with his eyeballs. This in turn means that his attention and concentration are now shitty enough to keep cynicism at bay, but still present enough to suck in any buzzword and pretty chart that gets shoved in front of him.
It's a salesman's dream: a horny distracted dimwit with access to purchase order numbers.
Now let's remove the barely-dressed ladies, and what do you get? People that *pay attention* to your sales pitch. People that will start asking hard questions. People who will have their cynic shields on full-power. People that take way more time to work on. Fewer prospects that even bother paying attention to your booth in the first place.
I suspect that after a year or two of "empowerment" (or whatever they want to call it), it won't be attendance that drops, but vendor participation. When vendors see lower sales numbers off the convention, they can no longer credibly justify the expense and time of going.
Me, I couldn't care either way - I usually bring my wife along (at personal expense), so that we can spend off-hours playing tourist and eating at nice places (and she goes off to museums and such during the day). On the other hand, I know exactly what a younger version of me would want... and the evil salesman I keep locked up in my brain knows just how effective sex is to get what he wants by using it.
Booth Babes never made sense at RSA (Score:4, Informative)
They were a really clear indicator that the occasional companies that hired them seriously didn't understand their audience, and hadn't brought anybody who knew anything technical to their booth, probably not even any marketing people who understood the product, so you could pretty much skip them, because they were pretty much always useless as well as unprofessional.
On the other hand, you can totally bribe us with chocolate or especially coffee, and we might sit through your silly magician act for a raffle ticket for an iThing as long as there was technical content at your booth, and we'll pick up blinky tchotchkes with your logo on them. The woman I'd rather talk to at your booth is the one who developed the cool product, or can explain it well.
When my company's been at trade shows in the area, about half their staff are booth-running professionals, rather than product-related, from the people who set the thing up and make sure all the marketing content is there to the people who herd customers in, figure out what they're interested in (even if it's just at the buzzword level), bring them over to the right part of the booth or find the right person if they need to, scan your contact info, get the speakers on and off the stage, etc., and about half are either main-office or local people who know something about whatever we're trying to sell. They seem to do a good job on the mechanics of it (I've occasionally ended up as local booth staff), and they're seriously good at respecting the audience.
Ugly women ruin everything. (Score:2, Insightful)
It's sad when ugly women are allowed to take jobs away from pretty women simply because they are pretty.
Re:Ugly women ruin everything. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's sad when ugly women are allowed to take jobs away from pretty women simply because they are pretty.
There's no ban against attractive women, just guidelines on appropriate dress. Pretty women are still pretty even in business attire.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But, the intent is to get rid of women, in particular the most attraction ones.
Re: (Score:2)
So.... you're OK with slut shaming. Sad. really.
I don't understand how that relates to what I just wrote?
Good! (Score:2, Insightful)
"Booth Babes" are sexist (against both men and women, might I add), and is completely inappropriate.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed!
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Unprofessional ? You mean they don't get paid to stand there ?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Hopefully RSA carries this over to their booths at other conferences. They were often among the worst offenders at Blackhat.
Min
Re:Good! (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: Good! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ever heard of "booth boys"? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
The real booth babes ain't on the floor at RSA... (Score:5, Informative)
The real booth babes aren't on the floor at RSA. Go to the vendors' afterparties, or check out around in one of the creepy "party busses" prowling the city during RSA and you'll see where vendors have diverted their "women for hire" budgets.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have to put it in such negative terms? That really drains the fun from my visits there ... I mean my friend's visit.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The real booth babes aren't on the floor at RSA. Go to the vendors' afterparties, or check out around in one of the creepy "party busses" prowling the city during RSA and you'll see where vendors have diverted their "women for hire" budgets.
I've been to a good number of vendor after parties at RSA, and have not experienced what you imply here.
Re:The real booth babes ain't on the floor at RSA. (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Well of course the second guy is going to be shunned! That idiot paid $300 for sex alone while the first guy only paid 200$ and had four hours of good time with the girl and also had sex with her!
Re: (Score:2)
You make the assumption that everyone finds the social process of "wooing" someone to be enjoyable. To some its fun - to others its absolute tedious and unenjoyable work. Time is money, and personally 4 hours of time is worth far more than $100.
Re:The real booth babes ain't on the floor at RSA. (Score:4, Insightful)
A prostitute may put on a good act, but in reality they just want to get it over with so they can turn the next trick or go home for the night. It is NOT at all the same. The BIGGEST turn on as far as I'm concerned is knowing that the person you are with is as filled with lust as you are.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"Creepy". Isn't that one of those sexist words that misandrists use to describe male sexuality?
The shaming here is particularly amazing because it seems to be coming from men. Good boy. You're going to make your mistress a good little houseboy. Now get back to work and earn her some money. And leave the masculinity to the "creepy" guys.
Re: (Score:2)
"Creepy". Isn't that one of those sexist words that misandrists use to describe male sexuality?
they aren't misandrists, they're misanthropes. They hate everyone, including themselves.
RSA has booth babes? (Score:2, Funny)
What, were they wearing nothing but a key-pair? I'd factor that modulus, if you know what I mean.
I mean, I'd steal her keys.
Re: (Score:2)
He does. He only has a value of two but uses eight bits to store it anyway.
Wasn't there a study that proved this was good? (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Wasn't there a study that proved this was good? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the main purpose was to help you remember the company, not to produce sales then and there. Nobody really expects to do much "real" business at conventions.
Conventions are a "notion" system and bragging tool: bigger booth = bigger company, to help separate you from little guys. And for a little guy, demonstrate that your company exists and has enough money to at least afford a (small) booth.
Re: (Score:2)
Only idiots buy products based on how much a company can waste money instead of how good the products are.
You can fool people once with good marketing but you can only keep customers with good products.
make way for... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they'd get more callbacks with this approach [dilbert.com].
Lots of places have banned both babes already (Score:3)
How is this a first? The most recent PAX banned booth babes. Also MacWorld did a while ago... I'm pretty sure there are other examples, including lots of smaller technical conferences.
The surprise to me is that an RSA conference even HAD booth babes.
I have mixed feeling about this, it seems discriminatory against the good looking... however it always was kind of pointless, and annoying to have people at a booth that didn't know much about whatever the booth was promoting.
The funny(?) thing is that as this movement ratchets down into conferences everywhere, it will probably mean a rise in the number of women turning to literal, instead of figurative, prostitution to make a living.
Re: (Score:2)
I have mixed feeling about this, it seems discriminatory against the good looking...
How so? Good looking people can still sell from a booth, they just need to be appropriately dressed.
Re: (Score:3)
A dress code? Okay.
Frankly Booth Babes never worked for me.
Whenever I see one I just think, "We both know I am not going to sleep with you so why are you flirting with me... Oh to scam me...."
Not the same people (Score:2)
How so? Good looking people can still sell from a booth
Good looking people can of course be in any role.
However at least some former booth babes are models that really can't do things other than look good. Since they would not be good in an informational role, they would not be hired.
Like I said, better for attendees in some ways as at least you can talk to someone more about the product. But not as good for the women (and men) now out of work.
Re: (Score:2)
Not everyone at a booth needs to know about the product. I was at a conference years ago where some network-security firm was hawking some box, and they had a huge booth with a tent where they had people come in and watch some little video-enhanced skit involving a dragon. They had a couple of booth babes somewhat scantily-clad, in keeping with the castles-and-dragons theme, but they were only really there to be ushers while people waited in line to go in and watch the next show. Ushers don't need to kno
Cosplay is a valid reason to have them though (Score:3)
The exceptions at PAX are from people cosplaying representations of game characters. I don't see anything wrong with that. I also don't think it's reasonable to ban people who want to show up in cosplay outfits that may be sexy.
Some people like expressing sexuality, to deny them the ability to do so is just as repressive as any other kind of censorship.
Science Says this Change is Overdue (Score:4, Informative)
Like many of you out there, I never personally experienced these issues (being a white male). And I actually like looking at pretty girls. But at what cost? Folks should recognize that there's a vast literature out there about the impacts of both conscious and unconscious bias in testing, hiring and performance of minorities and women in STEM fields. Things like Booth Babes drive people away. For those of you interested, it is illuminating to read about the weird ways in which the human brain internalizes various societal cues about how women and minorities fit into STEM. Anyone who wants to comment on this topic seriously should at least read through this research:
* Book - "Whistling Vivaldi," written by Claude Steele . Professor Steele isn't the best writer in the world, but the experiments he describes are just fascinating. I challenge anyone to look at his results and not refine their views on these issue. Nice mix of pop-psychology and scientific research. http://www.amazon.com/Whistlin... [amazon.com]
* Planet Money Podcast - "When Women Stopped Coding", very much pop-psychology, but thoroughly entertaining and I certainly found some basic truth in their theory. http://www.npr.org/blogs/money... [npr.org]
* Article in the journal "Nature" on what the GRE test actually measures, http://www.nature.com/naturejo... [nature.com] Also see a partial refutation of the initial (which I found less convincing, but I put it out there anyway): http://www.nature.com/nature/j... [nature.com]
* Recent pop-science article citing a meta-analysis about "Genius" in male and female professors (interesting, if somewhat anecdotal): http://www.vox.com/2015/2/12/8... [vox.com]
Reading this research (even at the cursory level pop-science perspective) certainly got me thinking about women (and minorities) in STEM. Personally, it turned me from a skeptic of the type of program Intel is purposing into .... well, I'm not entirely sure. Read the research and I think you'll see what I mean.
Apologies for bringing actual science to what I'm sure will turn into a flame war..... (Complete disclosure: I posed something similar a few weeks ago, but it's such interesting stuff, I posted it again!)
Easy workaround (Score:3)
The purpose of 'Booth Babes' is to attract customers, presumably men to the booth. Whether this is an effective strategy is a separate discussion.
It's human nature, and attempts to circumvent it are trivially overcome.
Exhibitors that are currently using this approach can hire the same models and dress them in 'Business-appropriate' attire. The end result is you will still have beautiful women (who may know nothing about the product) staffing a booth and bringing in men.
If anything, this will provide more plausible deniability for more image-conscious men who don't wish to be seen chatting up some lyra- and latex- clad contractor at a booth.
I suppose if that become too troublesome, they can always ban makeup or attractive staffers (of both sexes). Or require that contractors be able to talk knowledgeably about the product.
I'm not criticizing their approach, per se, but I suspect even after these changes there will be continued outrage about the disproportionally attractive women staffing some booths and being paid to be chatty or even flirty.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I suppose if that become too troublesome, they can ... require that contractors be able to talk knowledgeably about the product.
This would be a great idea! Just make the requirement be that anyone staffing a booth be able to describe the contents of the material they're presenting. This wouldn't prevent really smart contracted booth babes, but it would prevent what I've encountered a few times... when I go up to a booth and ask a technical detail and get a panicked look followed by a "let me go find Ted...." or a blank smile and a "I think you'll find the information you need in one of these brochures...."
all booth staff, regardless of gender (Score:2)
TFA quotes the RSA test which states: "These guidelines are applicable to all booth staff, regardless of gender"
I wonder why they didn't include Cowboy chaps and codpieces, but maybe that's not a big issue on the floor.
No Shorts?! (Score:2)
I know it's wrong: (Score:3)
But I can't resist a flashback to a 1980s Wendy's commercial:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Very nice...
Well, fine then! (Score:2)
Oh yeah? Fine! I'll just have to boycott this year's RSA conference, for taking away my eye candy! Boooooycott! Boooooycott! Boooooycott!
What's that? Have I ever attended one before? Well... no, but what's that got to do with anything?
</snark>
Why not CES? (Score:3)
Good news/Bad news (Score:2)
tomorrow's email from management:
"The good news is removing attractive models from the event is positive progress for our society. The bad new is that we already bought the skimpy outfits for the models, so now you have to wear them."
Re: (Score:2)
tomorrow's email from management:
"The good news is removing attractive models from the event is positive progress for our society. The bad new is that we already bought the skimpy outfits for the models, so now you have to wear them."
If there is one truth in the world, it's this: Nobody wants to see me in hot pants.
Now the REAL STEM shortage begins (Score:2)
As everyone dumps CS education in favor of marketing and MBAs. And selling used cars.
Yeah that conference you want to send me to? (Score:2)
Never mind, I'll just read the literature and save myself a plane ride.
Its hard to be a booth babe.... (Score:2)
There are fewer and fewer places they can seek out employment now!
Now that they're banned from game companies, security companies, electronics companies, where can a dedicated, professional booth babe find employment?
Won't someone please think of the babes?
Babes are people too!
Company will just hire attractive salespeople (Score:3)
This won't change. Sex sells.
How sad. (Score:5, Funny)
I have this friend. She's blond, six foot, blue eyes, loves wearing five inch heels, and is a bit of an exhibitionist. Gorgeous. Loves dressing up. She also has a BS in computer science and a master's degree in mathematcs. She works conventions as a 'booth babe' for fun. Her stories about tearing into some dork who thinks she's just some dumb blonde are priceless. Shame to spoil her fun.
Reminds me of NAMM. (Score:3)
When I went to Winter NAMM back in 2010 or 2011 (can't remember any more), very few booths had "booth babes". There were plenty of women there who knew what they were selling, and some of them dressed up for the occasion while others did not. (Some of the guys wore suits while others wore cutoffs and sandals, too.) Nobody had a problem with this.
That would be my simple defining line. If they know enough to answer questions helpfully, they're legitimate employees no matter how they're dressed or which gender they are. If they don't, then they're hangers-on in some capacity. This is not necessarily a problem, but hangers-on should not be used as eyecandy. If the vendor's kids are milling around, and dressed up in an eye-catching way, this is not a problem. It makes some level of sense that they'd be there, even if they don't really know the business aspect. What should be deemed a problem is hiring random people specifically for the event solely because they're good looking. If they're both good looking and adequately trainable as to be decent sales reps, more power to them.
It's the clothing. (Score:4, Interesting)
She was clad in: a very tight-fitting (and extremely stretched) t-shirt, disco shorts, socks and roller-skates.
Competitors complained and show management advised the exhibitor that:
A) She had to stop roller-skating around the show and
B) She had to add an item of clothing.
Next day, she showed up in the identical outfit more clearly outlined by a set of suspenders!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the cliche says, "Sex sells", but do they actually generate significant sales? I mainly see them being made fun of and criticized.
The people who are attracted by the booth babes are likely not the same set of people that are making fun of them.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, the cliche says, "Sex sells", but do they actually generate significant sales? I mainly see them being made fun of and criticized.
Sex sells if you sell Axe, if you want your security solutions to be taken seriously by professionals, not so much. I've gone to an ungodly amount of trade fairs for several decades. My impression is that booth babes do indeed catch the eye of many men, absolutely, but in a way that is not helping the company messaging, at all. If I see a gang of very sexy booth babes I will indeed notice it, and avoid visiting the booth for any serious considerations, and leave wondering why their real message is so bad th
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I'd love to see a booth with ponies [deviantart.net]!
Re: (Score:2)
It does for Playboy and other magazines, even if people only read those for the articles.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Attendance isn't the only thing that's going to be down.
Re: (Score:2)
The article is called "Apology follows bikini backlash" but there's not a single photo of a girl in a bikini.