Eurogamer Expo Bans Booth Babes

[Sonic Doctor]

A woman who gets paid to put on a costume is being exploited by the patriarchy.

So who is a man being exploited by when they get paid to put on costumes that appeal to the sexual fantasies of women?

Because that happens as well, maybe not with gaming as much, but with other products.

A woman who chooses to put on a costume for fun suffers from internalized misogyny.

Yes because women that like dressing up in costume suffer from some big bad thing. --sarcasm--

You know, it couldn't be because she actually finds if fun....could it?

Oh no, she couldn't be doing it for fun or that she likes the character she is dressing up as. She has to secretly hate her sex or herself.

Ugh, seriously, there are too many people that look at these matters like they are some absolute black and white subject.

 

[Andy Chalk]

That's a load, Andy, and you know it. One group is there because they want to show off their costumes, and the work that went into them, and their dedication to their favorite franchises. One group is there because some marketing genius realized that sex sells. Entirely different.

But you're not answering the question. Is it okay for her to attend as an independent cosplayer with the intent of promoting and advancing her own career and business?

So many of you guys want to paint this as a simple, black-and-white issue, and yet what you're really trying to do is set the terms under which people can and cannot flash cleavage at game shows. How do you argue that that's not a completely arbitrary distinction?

 

[nexus]

Some people clearly don't understand.

Apparently, most folks think the only thing at stake here is whether or not you find the booth babes appealing.

"I'm not sexist, so I'm okay with this."
"I like booth babes, so I'm not okay with this."

Some people touched on the glaring breech of rights and how these are not children but adults making a decision. Not many people here considering the civil rights and controversy in that...

"First they came for the booth babes, but I wasn't a booth babe, so I didn't speak up." etc

 

[Sonic Doctor]

News flash: Not all gamers are the same.

well done for noticing.

now tell the marketing men and explain to them why using sexual advertising via "babes" at a trade show that is open to and hopes to attract all gamers including children, familys and women is dumb.

when you pander to a stereotype it reinforces it.

reinforcing the stereotype that gamers are all men that like to ogle women like they have never seen one before harms the gaming industries growth and wider public acceptance.

and its not "just me". E3 got slated on this very site by staff articles saying the exact same thing: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/firstperson/9741-Lets-Stop-Pretending-E3-Is-A-Professional-Event

Your first point:

On children: They said they had a 18+ section. So that point is moot, because it would be the parents own damn fault for letting the kids go in that section.

On women: Really, so what?

I'm offended by people wearing big fuzzy bunny costumes, but you wouldn't see me raising a stink at a store that had one there for the little kids that like such things.

I would have the same mentality with a game that was aimed at women and had suggestively outfitted guys at the booth. If the company is doing it to attract those types of people to buy their product, more power to them.

Short of doing anything illegal, if I ran a company that sold some-kind or multiple products, I would do anything to get more people to buy my product. I would be looking to make as much money as possible. Of course I would way the amount of people I turned away with the advertising, but seriously, the number of people those companies offended are a whole lot less then the number of people they attracted.

On your second point:

Stereotypes: The reason stereotypes are a big problem or even seen as a big problem is because people make such big stinks over them. Those booth babes are choosing to do what they do, they want to make money. If a girl wants to use her looks as an asset to make money, we should be standing there saying she can't.

That article says nothing to me, because I for one think that people have no business dictating how a company can and can't advertise with legal tactics.

There is way too much pushing towards controlling people and their messages and actions these days, probably more then ever before. Things will be better with more freedom, not less.

 

[jackinmydaniels]

Normally I'd probably say to let them do whatever the hell they want, but really, I just can't. I always feel insulted when companies think that they can spark my interest in their product by flashing some tits in my face, after all we are just stupid fat neckbeards in our mother's basements that will never touch a vagina in our lives.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Some people clearly don't understand.

Apparently, most folks think the only thing at stake here is whether or not you find the booth babes appealing.

"I'm not sexist, so I'm okay with this."
"I like booth babes, so I'm not okay with this."

Some people touched on the glaring breech of rights and how these are not children but adults making a decision. Not many people here considering the civil rights and controversy in that...

"First they came for the booth babes, but I wasn't a booth babe, so I didn't speak up." etc

Of course I'm in the category of your second quotation marked line, but I also agree with that last point you made at the end.

I also am looking at it from a the freedom of a company aspect as well. My play on it would be, "First they came for the booth babe advertising style, but since my company doesn't use that style of advertising, I didn't speak up."

What's next? Companies aren't allowed to attract kids to cereal with cartoon characters, because some adults don't like that the company is pandering to kids to get them to like a cereal that said adults like.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

the 18+ section was separated off from the main show and the women were moved there until they covered up.

a private company running an event in a private arena can make any restrictions on who gets in it wants.

i know: i used to run raves and man the door.

so quit using the "freedom" argument.

or better still try it out when a bouncer stops you getting in a club...

The freedom argument is a part of this, but I will drop it because you just don't understand right now.

I understand that it is a private company doing this expo, but the point they run it is to make money from the traffic(admission prices and booth space charges as well). Running off companies and most likely attendees with there new rule will hurt them big time in the wallet.

There the main show was made up of many parts, and the 18+ section was a part of that.

As I said before, the only fault of the companies is that they didn't keep those girls in that section. That's the only place they would truly be useful any way. Though the expo people are downright stupid for banning booth babes altogether.

(typical boo-hoo, think of the children picture here)

 

[hentropy]

To be fair, I think there should be some regulations on how people should cosplay at conventions. It used to be that you had a certain level of class with it that kept conventions family-friendly, now I wouldn't even take a kid to a Comic Con and would have to think about it for an anime convention. It's not that uncommon for people to just use it as an excuse to be dumb, like I saw a "raver" going around shirtless and in a diaper with a bunch of rave accessories at an anime convention, not playing a character but it's okay because there are other cosplayers who skimpily. It wasn't the only example, of course, and it seems like more and more conventions are more get-togethers for fetish and other carnal sub-cultures. And hey, there's nothing wrong with that, but there has to be some amount of consideration, at least before a certain time of day when kids are around.

I just think it's wrong to let it get too out of hand to the point where a convention like that starts to become an 18+ event by default. There are plenty of anime characters that aren't dressed in impractically revealing clothing.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

snip

do you have any idea what a false equivalence is ?

Yes I do, and I know the comment of mine you quoted embodies no such thing.

What the people putting on the expo did was try to set a precedent on how game companies can and can't advertise.

That was my relation to the saying that nexus quoted, and it makes perfect sense. If you regulate one kind of advertising, how long until the other ways are jeopardized too.

Just as one job market was denied in this ban, how long is it until other ones are jeopardized too.

 

[Something Amyss]

Yep it's official, the video game industry now has a religious right enforcing their morality.

I think we're jumping the gun here. Kind of like how the religious right thinks video games cause rape and murder.

I'm just saying, when hunting monsters....

 

[Something Amyss]

Some people clearly don't understand.

Apparently, most folks think the only thing at stake here is whether or not you find the booth babes appealing.

"I'm not sexist, so I'm okay with this."
"I like booth babes, so I'm not okay with this."

Some people touched on the glaring breech of rights and how these are not children but adults making a decision. Not many people here considering the civil rights and controversy in that...

"First they came for the booth babes, but I wasn't a booth babe, so I didn't speak up." etc

Exactly. This is just like the holocaust. I mean, people who pay money and agree to certain terms to appear at a private expo are exactly the same as religious and political minorities being taken away to be executed.

This isn't about "civil rights." There has, to my knowledge, never been a right in Europe to show up at a private event dressed how you want regardless of terms of conduct. Maybe France. It's certainly not guaranteed in our country, brother.

 

[Alar]

Well booth-babes are very different to cosplayers in the respect that they are not affiliated in any professional sense with the product. Paying people to get their goods out in order to shift produce is a bit dubious. Cosplayers getting their goods out because they want to? totally different.

**Looks at picture**... How old are these booth-babes? 0_o Jesus i've got to start ID-ing, keep a 'Think 21' policy like Tesco does.

Yes, but these women might want to put their goods out in order to make money. Think of the booth babes! Their income will drop! She's just doing it to get through college! Single mother! Sad story!

In all seriousness, I do feel a little bad for the booth babes losing the work, but it is only one convention. Hopefully it isn't that big a deal.

Also, where did you get your avatar? :3

 

[Something Amyss]

In all seriousness, I do feel a little bad for the booth babes losing the work, but it is only one convention. Hopefully it isn't that big a deal.

I'm pretty sure they're not limited to "booth babe" as a career choice. I mean, there are plenty of other venues for scantily clad women to make money off the male head closer to the wallet.

It's also really worth noting that they didn't actually ban them until someone crossed the line. It's been a discouraged thing, but it wasn't until they reached a certain T&A saturation that it's an issue. While it's hard to blame the booth babes, perhaps people concerned should spread more vitriol towards those who scoffed at the rules and "ruined it for everyone."

 

[Something Amyss]

If you regulate one kind of advertising, how long until the other ways are jeopardized too.

And when the world doesn't come to an end, and it turns out no damage was really done and no fucks were given?

What then?

 

[Terrible Opinions]

Some people clearly don't understand.

Apparently, most folks think the only thing at stake here is whether or not you find the booth babes appealing.

"I'm not sexist, so I'm okay with this."
"I like booth babes, so I'm not okay with this."

Some people touched on the glaring breech of rights and how these are not children but adults making a decision. Not many people here considering the civil rights and controversy in that...

"First they came for the booth babes, but I wasn't a booth babe, so I didn't speak up." etc

I don't think there's any violation of civil rights in saying "you can't advertise in this manner in our space". Or was this a hyperbolic joke?

That's a load, Andy, and you know it. One group is there because they want to show off their costumes, and the work that went into them, and their dedication to their favorite franchises. One group is there because some marketing genius realized that sex sells. Entirely different.

But you're not answering the question. Is it okay for her to attend as an independent cosplayer with the intent of promoting and advancing her own career and business?

So many of you guys want to paint this as a simple, black-and-white issue, and yet what you're really trying to do is set the terms under which people can and cannot flash cleavage at game shows. How do you argue that that's not a completely arbitrary distinction?

I'm still not seeing the big complication here.

Done independently: good. Paid for by a marketing department: bad. Walks on two legs but has wings: still good.

Which one of those categories does the woman you brought up earlier fall in to?