On Dongles

[stabnex]

I think that last panel jumped her into Awkward Zone Omega.

OT: BUTTSLOL.

S(ERIOUSLY)OT: I thought of throwing the word "uptight" in somewhere, but honestly I think comedy puts our concerns into much better, and more socially acceptable terms than I ever could

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Why should a company not hire dancers to dance at a party?

Because it's crass. If the people at a party want to dance, then they should dance. What's the purpose of hiring someone to dance as a spectacle in such a situation (regardless of gender)?

But regarding gender, strippers or not, why is it always females who get hired as such dancers? Even if they are fully-clothed, it's pretty creepy that they are parading a bunch of women in front of the crowd for some reason that has nothing to do with the topics of the conference.

 

[wulf3n]

But, again for the sake of accuraccy, no one hired dancer. The company hired spokes models who were invited to get up on stage & dance.

Again, how do you know they were "spokes models" other than "discuss games" we don't know why they were there, or what intent YetiZen had for them.

An again, i'll point out that the scenario you & other people are presenting did not happen. A group of spokes models were circulating at a party/rave at a night club & were asked if they wanted to dance on stage.

You're countering a fabricated scenario with another fabricated scenario.

Do you see why this is getting confusing.

 

[xorinite]

We've gone back in circles again. This isn't about a generic rave/party, this is about an event organised by industry professionals for industry professionals.

Well actually we look like we're discussing a bunch of things at once. A conference and two distinct parties, one a rave run by wargaming, and one a party run by YetiZen. I am going to go to pains to make a distinction because its going to be nightmarish to follow our conversation for anyone else if we don't.

that having been said I don't see how that is relevant to the specifics of the effect of the presence of people you find attractive on the amount you enjoy something which is what this is in responce to.

Don't believe anything something tells you as "fact" when they can't provide a source.

e.g.

Source [http://yetizen.com/2013/03/30/official-statement-by-the-yetizen-ceo-on-the-yetizen-igda-gdc-party/2/]
"Fact 5: YetiZen did not hire dancers. We hired avid gamers, who happened to be models, to discuss gaming with the invited guests."

I don't neccesarily believe things even when someone can provide me a source. It depends on the quality of the source and the nature of the claim.
However you may notice I did ask for a source and I thank you for providing one.

Although, a little bit of irony telling me not to believe anything presented as a fact unsourced, then linking me to a list of things stated as facts some of which unsourced don't you think?

YetiZen state that they hired no dancers. When I look up a youtube event promo video, there appear to be stage dancers, stilt walkers, and women in YetiZen t-shirts which I would presume are there as some sort of event functionaries. Press releases from Kate Edwards, indicate there were 'performers'. Which isn't to say these statements are neccecarily in contradiction.

To be frank, I find myself losing interest in this topic. Especially since I cannot even be sure as to what actually occured in the first place. Were there hired dancers or not, it looks like there were. However its' certainly not like the comic strip.

 

[wulf3n]

Well actually we look like we're discussing a bunch of things at once. A conference and two distinct parties, one a rave run by wargaming, and one a party run by YetiZen. I am going to go to pains to make a distinction because its going to be nightmarish to follow our conversation for anyone else if we don't.

that having been said I don't see how that is relevant to the specifics of the effect of the presence of people you find attractive on the amount you enjoy something which is what this is in responce to.

For point of reference I'm only really talking about the YetiZen party, not the wargaming party.

What I'm trying to discern is the points/goals of an "after-party" organised by Industry Professionals for Industry Professionals that is associated with a Conference [YetiZen acquiring the approval of the IGDA to proceed indicates this party is a part of the conference], and whether or not the issue being discussed is necessary to those goals, to idnetify if we can remove said issue without detracting from the overall point of the party, as such making it more inclusive.

Although, a little bit of irony telling me not to believe anything presented as a fact unsourced, then linking me to a list of things stated as facts some of which unsourced don't you think?

Haha, yeah. It's not a "fact" by any stretch of the imagination, but short of actually being there, we have to take some things at face value, for the discussion to move forward. It's really up to personal preference as to what you accept.

To be frank, I find myself losing interest in this topic. Especially since I cannot even be sure as to what actually occured in the first place. Were there hired dancers or not, it looks like there were. However its' certainly not like the comic strip.

That's fair enough. The comic strip did cause a lot of issue to begin with, as it had everyone lumping Strippers, Dancers, Attendees, the YetiZen Party, the Wargaming party, all in the one bag.

 

[wulf3n]

@wulf3n: Mate i gave you time to relax & unclench, but i'm not addressing any further replies to you. You've been given abundant chances to be civil, but instead you've just degenrated into childishness & derailing tactics. As such I'm not planning on further enabling your negative behaviour.

Civility goes both ways. It's hard to be civil to a person who attacks you from the get go with a cherry picked statement taken out of context, and makes grand assumptions about ones[my] position.

If you're willing to start fresh, I'd be happy to undertake a civil discussion.

 

[SacremPyrobolum]

As for that little incident I think that women was way out of line with reporting it. She got a guy fired because he was telling a in no way misogynist but sexually charge joke to his friend and coworker beside him.

She wasn't out of line, I mean she's hypocritical and an attention seeker for doing it when she makes the same kind of jokes, but all she did was ***** about it on twitter. The guys bosses were way the fuck out of line for firing him, and the people who attacked her work because of it were way out of line. (I'm not sure about her company, I haven't quite figured out the protocol for how to handle an employee that pisses off Anonymous).

How is publicly shaming people in front of their peers for something they did not do (make a sexist joke) not out of line? Why does she get to feel like an offended party and attack two random people who she never met over what amounts to a little joke said in a private conversation between friends?

 

[Aardvaarkman]

...snip...

Wait a minute... matthew_lane... that rings a bell. Weren't you one of the people in the "fake geek girls" thread attacking such "fake geeks" and saying how geeks need to be tested on their credibility? Yet here you are, defending total fakery.

I'm sorry if I have the wrong person, but I don't think so, and this reeks of hypocrisy. Here we have companies dressing up models and proclaiming them as gamers, and having them dance for male arousal. How is that not exactly like those "fake geek girls" you despise?

 

[wulf3n]

demand it be changed for my benefit?

Who has demanded change? Source?

This year, Brenda Romero just resigned from her position at the IGDA, last year she went to the mentors, advisors, and investors of YetiZen to tell them to quit their support of YetiZen [admittedly worse however still not demanding change].

Because offensive is not a synonym for offended. People need to stop conflating the two.

Then what is offensive? [serious question]

By the logic you present nothing is offensive, implying both "offensive" and "offended" have no meaning.

and FYI Offensive is a synonym for offended.

Offensive being the act of causing displeasure or resentment, Offended being the result of receiving displeasure.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Because it's crass. If the people at a party want to dance, then they should dance. What's the purpose of hiring someone to dance as a spectacle in such a situation (regardless of gender)?

So musical theatre is now crass?

Try reading what I wrote. I said "in such a situation". This situation is not a performance of musical theatre - that's a completely different scenario.

Its not always women who are hired as either dancers or spokes models. Male spokes models are actually quite common place.

Sure, but not in this particular case, which is the point you are missing. We aren't talking about "jobs people have" in general, we are talking about these specific events.

it's pretty creepy that they are parading a bunch of women in front of the crowd for some reason that has nothing to do with the topics of the conference.

An again, i'll point out that the scenario you & other people are presenting did not happen. A group of spokes models were circulating at a party/rave at a night club & were asked if they wanted to dance on stage.

How is that not parading women in front of a crowd? Even if they didn't dance, they were still paid to perform for the crowd. I think just being paid to dance would be less creepy than them being paid to "circulate" or "socialise" - that's just damn weird. It assumes that the audience can't handle real interactions with people and need these hired escorts to boost their egos.

You didn't actually refute my argument here, you just confirmed it.

 

[Knight Templar]

snip

If nobody is offended, something cannot be offensive.
So are you rejecting the very concept of something being offensive here?

snip

Hang on, if you don't actually go to Qantm, how do you know what the men to women ratio is?

 

[Karadalis]

Where those women forced to dance? No

Where their rights violated because they belong to the female gender? No

Where they made fun of because of their gender or somehow not taken serious? No

There was no sexism involved in this. So people should stop using that word.

This was an after conference party that was off work hours so to speak.

Any other rave/night club party will have eyecandy depending on the demographic.

No one was surpressed, no one was excluded, there whas some hired eye candy as is normal for EVERY OTHER INDUSTRY, including the car industry, fashion industry, movie industry, spcial industry etc etc.

I do not hear the outcries about half naked guys/girls in the fasion industry for example.

Hell if you feel that offended by females on stage that wear sexy revealing clothing you should actually take a close look at the fashion industry because THAT industry is sexist as hell and sees especialy women as nothing more as something you put clothing on. The thinner the better because god knows the models themselves should not outshine the clothing they wear.

This here? This is some female "promotors" to get people in the mood to party. And no.. it absolutely does not matter that most of the attendees of the party are part of the same industry.

Theres nothing wrong with dancers/spokespersons/promotors on a rave.

There would have been a problem if it had been on the conference itselfe but it wasnt.

 

[wulf3n]

There would have been a problem if it had been on the conference itselfe but it wasnt.

Why?

What is the difference between the Conference organised by the IGDA and the After Party organised by YetiZen which required the approval of the IGDA to go ahead?

 

[Aardvaarkman]

There was no sexism involved in this. So people should stop using that word.

If there was no sexism, then why did they only hire females?

No one was surpressed, no one was excluded, there whas some hired eye candy as is normal for EVERY OTHER INDUSTRY, including the car industry, fashion industry, movie industry, spcial industry etc etc.

Even if it's "normal" in other industries, doesn't make it right.

I do not hear the outcries about half naked guys/girls in the fasion industry for example.

Then you haven't been looking very hard. There are plenty of people who protest the fashion industry.

Hell if you feel that offended by females on stage that wear sexy revealing clothing you should actually take a close look at the fashion industry because THAT industry is sexist as hell and sees especialy women as nothing more as something you put clothing on. The thinner the better because god knows the models themselves should not outshine the clothing they wear.

So, that's not something other industries should emulate, I suppose?

Theres nothing wrong with dancers/spokespersons/promotors on a rave.

Actually, I think there is. Commercialism has ruined raves. I grew up with raves where it was about community, equality, love and respect. Bringing promoters and hired models in to "party" at the rave just cheapens the whole thing. A rave should be something created by the participants, not a marketing vehicle.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Better question, how is it parading anyone.

Seriously? You admit - they paid women to go out into the crowd to please the attendees. How is that not a form of "parading"?

I don't see how, since its not any different the store attendents, floor staff or any other tertiary service industry. Seriously folks what world do you live in, that you are so sheltered from reality? Are you like 12 years old or have just never held down a job before?

I'm probably a lot older than you and have had plenty of jobs. If you don't see how it's different, then that's pretty sad. If what you say about these people being paid to "mingle" or whatever is true, that's very different to floor staff or salespeople. It's supposed to be a party. You don't want somebody selling you something at a party. People usually know their relationship to a salesperson. But it sounds like these are people paid to fake a relationship. Like those liquor sales-girls who pretend to be interested in guys so they buy more alcohol. A totally scummy business.

It assumes nothing of the sort... Thats like saying "oh why have a car sales person, these people will obviously sell themselves a car."

Oh, but it does. It assumes that the attendees aren't capable of partying on their own without these fake partiers to "get things started". What is the product they are demonstrating? It's the equivalent of hiring a scantily-clad woman to drape herself on the bonnet of a car, rather than explaining the features. That's the difference between the car salesperson and this situation.

If the attendees of the party are capable of normal interactions and enjoying the party unassisted, then what's the purpose of the hired females?

 

[wulf3n]

Actually, I think there is. Commercialism has ruined raves. I grew up with raves where it was about community, equality, love and respect.

Hahahahahahaha, no you didn't. You grew up in the same world the rest of us did, where raves where a placwe for terrible noise being passed off as music, so you go make up with random drunk chicks & pretend you were with it... Just like everyone else who ever went to a rave.

Seriously mate, grow up. All you're doing is spouting your opinion as fact and insulting anyone who disagrees with you.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Hahahahahahaha, no you didn't. You grew up in the same world the rest of us did, where raves where a placwe for terrible noise being passed off as music, so you go make up with random drunk chicks & pretend you were with it... Just like everyone else who ever went to a rave.

Well, you couldn't be more wrong. Before the raves got commercialised, they didn't even serve alcohol. Drunk people were usually not welcome at all. And it wasn't about "making out with chicks" - while that did happen, it was not how you describe it. At least, not until the marketing vultures swooped in. You're probably too young to have experienced any of those days. At its purest it was about dance. And women were far more empowered and equal in those raves than they were in typical pubs or nightclubs. It was a much safer, more inclusive space.

And if you think all electronic music is just "some terrible noise" then I don't know what to say - you clearly just have a narrow mind and have not experienced much outside of your little bubble.

 

[Karadalis]

There would have been a problem if it had been on the conference itselfe but it wasnt.

Why?

What is the difference between the Conference organised by the IGDA and the After Party organised by YetiZen which required the approval of the IGDA to go ahead?

Seriously? I cant believe you have to ask...


You can not understand the difference between a conference wich you where send from your company to attend to learn about the newest achievements in your field of work,and a private rave that is offered to you to unwind and relax after a long day of soaking up dry and perhaps boring information, that is also totaly optional and happens after work hours? You know.. in your private time?

Even people in the software industry might like to party now and then you know?

But how dare they! This party should have been a boring sausage fest.. because you know... people in "our" industry are forbidden to have some fun... for... reasons.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

... nor is is prejudice or discrimination based on a person's gender.

There is no sexism here...

So, if there was no sexism, why were no males hired?

Now you can personally dislike the practice of spokes models working at night clubs, thats okay, you can dislike them as much as you like... However its both legal & non discriminatory both as a business & as a practice.

But the argument is not about whether it is legal or not. The comic strip here is not making a legal argument, it's making social commentary.

For example: it's perfectly legal to be a "fake geek girl", yet that didn't stop you from voicing strong opinions on the topic. By your logic here, you shouldn't have commented, because it was perfectly legal. The thing is, this is a discussion board, and in the broader context, The Escapist discussed many things in its articles and videos. We're not talking about some kind of objective truth or legal argument here. We're discussing culture and stuff. So there's always plenty to be said.

It seems you always have something to say, but the moment something goes against your preconceived notions or ideology, you say there's nothing worth discussing. As if you are the final arbiter of truth, and your opinions are some kind of objective ideal.

 

[wulf3n]

Seriously? I cant believe you have to ask...

You can not understand the difference between a conference wich you where send from your company to attend to learn about the newest achievements in your field of work,and a private rave that is offered to you to unwind and relax after a long day of soaking up dry and perhaps boring information, that is also totaly optional and happens after work hours? You know.. in your private time?

Even people in the software industry might like to party now and then you know?

Both are professional events should they not hold themselves to professional standards?

But how dare they! This party should have been a boring sausage fest.. because you know... people in "our" industry are forbidden to have some fun... for... reasons.

Here I was thinking I was talking with a rational and mature individual. But please, wildly blow out an already fallacious interpretation of a simple question.