How does when the domain was registered affect whether it was a joke? The hackathon took place last night through today. I think it is supposed to be a mobile app (if any code actually exists) anyway, so having a domain isn't super important.

As opposed to being done accidentally?

These presentations were, of course, intended to be jokes. In fact, I'm sure they were designed to be harmless, unoffensive jokes.

Who cares?

Children and adults who were rightfully offended were all in the audience. TechCrunch showcasing an app designed to turn objectifying women into a social network is absolutely absurd.

I'm not a woman, but I also don't think that these types of "jokes" are acceptable at any sort of conference. If you want to joke around with your friends, fine. Hell, if you want to make an app called TitStare on your own time and publish it, great--but for an all-ages industry conference to publicize it? That's wrong.

I believe that the tech industry as a whole is doing great work towards being less misogynistic and being more diverse. Stunts like this at well-known events are huge road blocks towards that goal.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't make joke apps, but TechCrunch should not have let them take the stage.

Well, there's your problem.

(of _course_ they were done intentionally.)

I don't see the problem. Pornography is perfectly legal and big business.

Should we exclude all content with a sexual nature, even if there is good technology behind it?

If someone were presenting a true technical innovation that happened to be inspired by the needs of that industry, that would not be objectionable as long as the 'product' itself weren't displayed in the presentation. (e.g. this innovation in streaming video software enables 10,000 concurrent streams etc etc)

Though if it were the AVN conference rather than TechCrunch, showing the product would be practically required. You, know, for demonstration purposes ...

Judging by TechCrunch's reaction, they wholeheartedly agree.

I watched the videos and, while the Circle Shake presentation was cringeworthy, it was very mildly sexual at a conference that's aimed at adults, not children. There will have been people in the audience swearing in casual conversation too, possibly within earshot of the kid. I don't think anybody's equally upset about that though.

Regarding TitStare, I feel as though tackiness has been conflated with sexism. I just cannot see how such an app is sexist, especially given the fact there are plenty of bisexual and lesbian women. Conversely, if there were an app called ManButtStare, I'm really just not sure there would be the same response.

The reason I'm not offended by either of these apps is not because I'm a man (I'm not in the demographic for TitStare anyway given the fact I'm gay), but because the developers' intent didn't appear to be malicious or bad. It just seemed to be a joke that some people got offended over, but then again, I'm not sure why people think the world has to be so sterile so as to prevent people from getting offended.

I'm open to being wrong.

It also objectifies women. They're propagating the belief that women are only interesting as objects of men's sexual desires.

They don't have to explicitly do something sexist or racist to have a negative effect. Sometimes negative effect can simply be achieved by inaction or mis-action (action that isn't explicitly wrong, but has overarching negative effects).

The reason why you probably won't be offended by "ManButtStare" is because such a thing rarely if ever happens. You are in a male-dominated tech industry already so you don't feel alienation from that trivial instance of female-centric thinking. The problem with Titstare is it adds (in the wrong direction) to compounding attitudes of male-centric thinking and a male-centric industry, with negative consequences of alienation of straight female participants. This is a negative because there will be suboptimal appropriation of female talent into this sector due to alienation. More and more females will just end up going into fashion or art or English literature so they can join their gay, metrosexual, and non-sexist bffs.

See how I stereotyped fashion as dominated by gay men? Perhaps it is, but by promoting that attitude, I probably just added a little bit there to discourage a straight guy from going into fashion even though he may be good at it. That is bad.

Nope. That's just your interpretation of it and says more about you and your biases than it does about the makers of that app.

>The reason why you probably won't be offended by "ManButtStare" is because such a thing rarely if ever happens.

Yep, because women definitely never stare at men's butts. Basically, women lusting after men is okay because... women just don't lust after men? Men, on the other hand, are to be shamed for expressing their sexual preferences. This is sexism at work.

For example, I always drop the n-word when I'm walking around. People should be more like me, I don't get offended by that kind of language, why should anyone else? Sometimes people do, and I'm like, "What? Why're you getting so offended? I'm not offended, why are you?"

I'm kidding. I don't ask "why are you?" -- that doesn't matter LOL 8-)

For some reason, black people get especially offended at this kind of stuff. No clue why. I mean, I don't get offended and that's literally the only thing that matters when considering whether something should or shouldn't be said. Not the audience, the venue or the event.

Literally, only my own sensibilities matter. Everyone else should loosen up. Like me.

I can't say I agree with the GP post, since I didn't see the presentations being discussed, but I know your comment is off base.

The point is that, you, the reader, obviously understand that a word, concept or type of behavior can offend others and would therefore abstain from employing it. Or at least exercise judgment in doing so, because you understand that you have a measure of responsibility when speaking publicly.

The inanity of GP's comments is staggering. He is literally saying that because he, himself, is not offended by such humor that everyone else should similarly relax their sensibilities.

If you understand that some language and behavior can offend others, even if you personally are not offended by it, then you already get the point of my argument. If you fixate on disproving the (not-claimed) equivalency between racial slurs and an app about breast obsession -- then you have missed the point.

What this really means is that it's not you who should take responsibility for your emotions, it's everyone else that should watch out for you.

What exactly did you get offended by? If you claim that prank was sexist in any way, you clearly lack the ability to judge a situation and its context.

It's not my job to know which words are going to upset another person's emotional state! I'm not a mind reader! My responsibility is only to say what I want.

Seriously though -- it's absolutely-fucking-hilarious that you think I'm the one lacking situational awareness. The guys who got up and made boob jokes? Total awareness, perhaps even masters of humor.

People who are offended, or can see why it would be particularly offensive to some women -- no awareness. Amazing.

You appear to be saying that simply because you are not offended, nobody else should be -- which is an incredibly stupid position to hold. I don't care to explain to you why breast obsession apps and mock-stroking in front of and all over an audience are offensive to others. I doubt you would get it anyway.

Evidently your reaction if someone got up to present the latter would not be "LOL guys loosen up!" -- even though you are not someone at whom the humor/offense is targeted. Why the difference in attitude?

But I guess the larger lesson here is: do not try these things unless you're The Onion, SNL, or Key and Peele.

You're not stupid, you get the point no matter how obtuse you're pretending to be. You know that I'm not saying that "tits == N-word" and you know that such an equivalency is not central to or required for my example.

You simply don't want to admit that the only explanation of your position is to say "well black people have a right to get offended by the N-word, but women aren't allowed to object to breasts being objectified."

If you fail to see it as such, that's your problem.

The good thing about this position is that you lack such self-awareness that you would never know the extent to which your limited perceptual abilities cripple you. The bad thing is that you likely do understand the objections here, and are therefore a keyboard jockey. Accordingly, you would never have the courage to make such a ludicrous stand in a public, mixed audience, thereby giving others a fair, advance bozo alert.

If you see it is as even a semi professional event, then I do know how you could justify it.

The fact 'it was a joke' really isn't an excuse...I'd argue it actually makes it worse.

I also don't understand why they were only a problem because they were "sexist". The apps were parodying behavior that well... many men engage in -- which is something you can acknowledge regardless of your gender. The immaturity alone should have been grounds for exclusion. Calling them out specifically for sexism seems to be a little heavy handed.

Whoever doxed them was heavy-handed, but since I haven't seen any threat worse than "I will never work with them" apparently not that heavy-handed. There are consequences for performing your sexism for all the world to see.

Oh right, I forgot that we all have a one, shared judgement and that material that is offensive to one person is equally offensive to everyone else.

>> any given conference has its own rules regarding inclusivity and anti-discrimination

It appears that in this case they did not have these rules, the article says that they failed to "establish clear guidelines for these submissions".

P.S. I find your comment extremely offensive, could you please remove it? Thanks.

> This is a great example of what I call "petty injustice". The sheer volume of petty injustice causes far more net harm than "great injustice" but because it happens incrementally it is incredibly hard to combat for precisely the reasons you anecdotally state.

> When someone tells you to lighten up, have a script ready. Something like, "What you just said was one small example in a long-standing pattern of subtle discrimination that I've had to endure for years. In that context, it is not okay for you to tell me to lighten up."