News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by ekianjo on Tuesday July 16, 2019 @11:51PM (#20456266)
So they allow sex toys now but they dont want people wearing suggestive clothes because... it's sexually suggestive?
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by ineedasername on Tuesday July 16, 2019 @11:58PM (#20456307)
My guess is that banning them is less about being sexually suggestive-- given their history and now sex toy inclusion that's really not an issue-- and it's much more about sexual exploitation and objectification.
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by ekianjo on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @06:34AM (#20458046)
How is that sexual exploitation when the participants are adult and willing?
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by ineedasername on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @06:24PM (#20464656)
not just exploitation. You skipped my other conjunctive: objectification. Either alone is a good reason to avoid the practice.
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by on_and_off on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @01:00AM (#20456618)
people ? suggesting there were as many male booth babes as female ones ? or any at all ?

Honest question, I have not been at CES.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by gamblor956 on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @02:44AM (#20457097)
In the history of CES, spanning across decades, the number of male booth babes (guys wearing sexually revealing outfits like open vests and speedos or short shorts) would be in the low double digits. Usually, the use of booth dudes is a deliberate PR stunt because they're so rare.

The number of female booth babes was in the hundreds each year.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by microcolonel on Tuesday July 16, 2019 @11:58PM (#20456306)
Remember, in 2019 you can be sex positive, but you must not have fun or enjoy life in any way; especially if it involves women using their agency and natural gifts to make money.

No attractive people who are not experts allowed at your booth. You can only profit off of the approved set of genetic lottery traits.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by undoware on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @12:39AM (#20456518)
This point could have been phrased better, but I concur. This just eliminated a solid gig for a whole lot of women.

Unbanning sex toys was a big step forward, but creating morality bylaws will inevitably result in, eg, women engineers (like me) being potentially harrassed for showing "unacceptable" skin.

We have been here many times before. Rules that mandate appearance requirements for women in the name of protecting women in general inevitably hurt some women in particular, and create a schism between women who can make money with their noodles and women who make money with, ahem, various other assets.

Banning making money by being attractive amounts to yet another wealth transfer away from vulnerable, often marginalized, women.

I stand with sex workers, and booth babes are just that.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by gamblor956 on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @02:37AM (#20457063)
I stand with sex workers, and booth babes are just that.

Booth babes are not sex workers. They are generally actresses or models. The fact that people think they are sex workers is one of the reasons for banning them.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by dTal on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @08:00AM (#20458472)
I'd say they are, by any definition of "sex worker" that includes strippers. Their job is to attract (male, heterosexual) attention using visual sex appeal. They usually wear revealing clothes and frequently behave provocatively. It's not especially different from what a stripper does. Of course, there's a whole continuum here - you could argue that a flouncy woman whose job is to turn over tiles on a game show (wordlessly, naturally) is also a sex worker. Rule of thumb - could an ugly woman get the job? If not, it's sex work.

Of course, people should have every right to work in this way. But just because I don't judge a woman for being a stripper doesn't mean I wouldn't judge my employer for hiring one. It's unprofessional.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by gamblor956 on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @01:43PM (#20462082)
Booth babes are not strippers. Yes, they usually wear revealing clothing and may behave provocatively but that's not part of the job description and their goal is to bring attention to their employer's product, not titillate passers-by.

Of course, there's a whole continuum here - you could argue that a flouncy woman whose job is to turn over tiles on a game show (wordlessly, naturally) is also a sex worker. Rule of thumb - could an ugly woman get the job? If not, it's sex work.

Sex work is not a continuum. Sex work involves (a) sex or (b) deliberate titillation, which is what strippers do by removing their clothes and miming sexual acts. Booth babes and Vanna White do neither. To claim that they are even remotely similar to sex workers is, quite frankly, insulting to women because you're suggesting quite loudly that the mere act of performing activities in tight clothing constitutes sex work.

Comments like yours likening booth babes to strippers and sex workers is precisely why they are now banned from CES. Because too many people assume they are sex workers and not actresses/models who are just doing a marketing gig.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by thatguy0900 on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @02:03PM (#20462304)
"Yes, they usually wear revealing clothing and may behave provocatively but that's not part of the job description" I really can't help but think this is not true. Maybe it's not part of the literal job posting but its definetely implied when you hire a hot girl to attract guys to your booth that you want them to do this.
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by dragonwriter on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @07:41PM (#20465185)
> their goal is to bring attention to their employer's product, not titillate passers-by.

Their goal is to bring attention to their employer’s product by titillating passers-by.

That's the whole reason they are called “booth babes” and they are selected for their ability to succeed in that modality of attention-getting.

They don't generally wear revealing clothing and act provocatively just out of personal preference unconnected to their specific job duties.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by polotics on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @03:24AM (#20457272)
I propose a terminology compromise: booth babes are sex-appeal workers.
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by dragonwriter on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @07:39PM (#20465179)
> Booth babes are not sex workers.

They usually are (which is fairly specifically indicated by the label “babe” for the job) by common definitions of sex work (which include labor whose role is indirect, including visual, sexual stimulation as well as that involving direct sexual contact.)

> They are generally actresses or models.

Both acting and modeling overlap with sex work rather than excluding it.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by undoware on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @01:27PM (#20461915)
many women actors ("actresses"?! 1995 called) and models are indeed sex workers. The term "sex worker" is in fact a term of art engineered in part specifically to capture this reality. I encourage you to read up about sex worker activism and third wave feminism more generally.
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by gamblor956 on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @01:46PM (#20462120)
I encourage you not to conflate the 1% adult models and adult video actresses with the 99% population of models and actresses that are not sex workers.
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by undoware on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @07:31PM (#20465108)
No such conflation occurred ~ for a conflation, I would need to have said, "being an actor just is being a sex worker."

Words mean things.

What you are uncomfortable with is adjacency, and it points to internal work you need to do.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by Fjolsvith on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @01:42AM (#20456803)
The booth babes should set up a picket line outside to protest their plight.
Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by mcphage on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @01:54PM (#20462216)
> Remember, in 2019 you can be sex positive

Booth babes are not about sex positivity. Their presence does not correlate with sex positivity, and the people and industries that hire them are not sex positive industries.

Re:CES will allow sex tech on a one-year trial basis, and fi... by okcando on Wednesday July 17, 2019 @12:35AM (#20456490)
Don't be a spoil-sport. Sex positivity is all about everyone having fun---you, the babe, and everyone else in your sex-heap of consenting adults with varied preferences, fetishes, and body types.