One is a psychologically manipulative way to get attention (like most advertising) in public that is also offensive to some and one is for use by consenting individuals in private. I don't see the issue explaining those moral values.

I bet all the people presenting products are still attractive models and salesmen though, so to an extent they're still using sex to sell things just in a less titillating manner.

Hasn't the consenting adult also been manipulated by a CES advertising booth into buying the sex item..?

And why is it bad to use sex to manipulate a customer into buying an item, but it is good to use free samples or pretty pictures to manipulate a customer into buying the same item?

Deriving cultural moral values from first principles is hairy :/

Are there ever been male babes in undergarments at CES ?

Or was it just a way to appeal to straight males in the attendance while reminding everybody else that they are not supposed to exist ?

Not to mention that in an industry that is already pretty sexist, re-enforcing the idea that women are just a pair a tits is just what is needed.

> So simultaneously it is both more for and more against sex.

It's for selling sex tech, and against using appeal to sex to sell not-sex tech. So, it'd both more for sex and more for honesty.