The issue is the gender disparity in _software_engineering_, which is actually made worse by this, because hiring someone because they look pretty (they're not asking agencies for, like, conversationalists with master's degree, and if they were, they'd still have to be attractive) is straight-up objectification, which is bad for women everywhere - and men.
The other part is that I don't think it's wrong to allow the GUI of a person to be the initial draw towards someone else. If that's all someone wants, then they're shallow and objectifying someone.
But for as many guys in SV who are pervs only out for one thing, I'm willing to wager that there are just as many, if not more, introverted SE's who actually don't mind a more personal connection, however momentary, than to just get their rocks off. Sometimes it's nice to have a short, if meaningful, or at least interesting conversation with someone so far out of your league in traditional social contexts.
I'm not trying to be an apologist for this practice, I just feel that while it has its own innocent value, it could be implemented in a way that is a bit more transparent and helpful long-term to what is behind some of the motivations for this.
> " made them sign nondisclosure agreements, and given them names of employees to pretend they’re friends with, in case anyone asks why he’s never seen them around the foosball table. > “The companies don’t want their staff to be talking to someone and think, Oh, this person was hired to socialize with me,” says Kermaani, who’s sending models to seven tech parties in the same weekend.
They are pretenders and I would feel betrayed. By my company. They hire people to betray me. Really? No. They shall just be honest about it and I can deal with it. But this? No. I don't want to waste my time with those pretenders.
For me, I don't mind anyone being hired or contracted for skills in guest relations, marketing or any position or work need. This bothers me though, because it's a contrivance being used to not only help their employees have fun, but to mask a systemic flaw, which is just too much in the SV culture of always killing it, everything is amazing, fake it till you make it, false value creation and other cultural negatives that prevent true growth and benefits to the part of their society they are primarily responsible for: their work force.
This is really generalized, though, but it would apply to more than a handful of SV companies.
But I do think that they're living up to the letter of what you're saying, but definitely not the spirit of it.