Tweet 

Dopey dogooders target EA over booth babe promotion (#EAFail)

Wow, look who's the one ignoring the overall picture. The entire point of the grievances with this situation has to do with the culture of objectification and misogyny that runs rampant in the games industry. This silly contest is but one manifestation of that rampant misogyny and sexism.

It's possible you may get a clue if you read iola's comments here: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/07/ea-p…

But I seriously doubt it, because you seem part and parcel of the sexism and ass-backwards cultural mindset that dreamt up this contest.

The issue isn't that there's booth babes, or that they represent the objectification of women. It's a job, these women knew exactly what they were signing up for, and it is what it is. Booth babes have always been a staple at cons and, for better or worse, there always will be.

The actual problem, and one you've ignored, is what this says about gamer culture. There's been a lot of progress made over the past few years in legitimizing the hobby and broadening the appeal of gaming across all demographics. A contest like this just reinforces the false stereotype of gamers being a bunch of sex-starved losers, living in their mom's basement, whose only opportunity to meet a woman is when she's being paid to be there.

The entire concept of booth babes *has* been criticized extensively. Many conventions have started banning the use of them entirely (PAX has done this very successfully). The problem is that this contest goes beyond the objectification of just having booth babes. If you really want to understand the criticisms and not just make the situation worse, check out the great summary of what's going on at While !Finished: http://whilenotfinished.theirisnetwork.org/2009…

I realized that maybe we should explain why the “acts of lust” phrase and the contest requirements are such a problem, more so than just having booth babes.

So first the phrase itself. To enter the contest you are supposed to “Commit acts of lust: take photos with us or any booth babe”. To commit an act is to do something, it's more than just standing there. This is reinforced by the fact that the winner of the contest will be chosen based on creativity (the rules have been taken down, or I'd link them for you, but trust me, the winner was chosen on creativity and the runners up were randomly drawn). So you probably weren't going to win if you just stood there, you needed to create a creative image. “Lust” is defined as “an overwhelming desire or craving, usually associated with sex or power” (according to the Merriam Webster's Dictionary on my desk). So you're supposed to create an image showing you actively craving sex or power over a scantily dressed woman who is paid to submit to this. And this is not misogynistic sexual harassment… how?

See, booth babes expect to be subject to oppressive male gazes pretty much the whole time they are at a convention, but many companies have no touching policies for their models or keep the models at arms length to help protect them from the really gross kind of harassment. This is a contest saying “go for it guys, do whatever you want to these women because they are there to be sexual objects under your power”. Putting out eye candy is one thing, actually encouraging harassment is another.

Can you see the difference now and maybe understand a little bit why this is so upsetting? Particularly when so many women (booth babes and attendees) suffer from scary harassment at conventions like this all the time?

I'd like to point out that the comments above are universally better thought out, better researched and more insightful then the actual article. Well done posters.

Mr Riley seems to think that twitterers disapproval of ea is stupid, presumably because he's so outraged at the general misogyny in the games industry that our failure to rise up in arms against it fills him with impotent rage. “Look at the big picture,” he squawks. Don't just twitter for that is useless and pointless! We must rise up and free our booth dwelling sisters from the chains of sexism. Well I will be there at your side, Duncan Riley, styrofoam broadsword in hand.

My point is that he complains of twitterers not looking at the “big picture”, but doesn't levy any criticism at that big, disgusting picture. Probably because he's fine with it, probably because he's just another jock douchebag who thinks spending his years at college playing video games qualifies him to be a games journalist.

The overall picture dopey is that the mere presence of the women is sexist…

I've read and re-read the rules…which you don't seem to have done. They clearly state take a picture with a booth babe. The objectification here ISN”T NEW. If you want to target anything, target their presence.

I have read and re-read the rules. I read the long-winded legal version as well, which appears to have been taken offline now. I never disputed that it said to take a picture, but it says you need to do more than that to win – it says you need to take a creative picture.

No, the objectification isn't new. Is that really an excuse to let it go? As I said, booth babes have and do get protested against regularly. Some conventions have banned them altogether. But the problem here goes beyond booth babes themselves and that's what we're objecting to. This creates more of a hostile environment and it affects more than just the booth babes hired by EA and likely more than just the booth babes period.

Harassment at conventions is a regular problem for women, even those who don't work in booths (dressed up or not). SDCC doesn't have a harassment policy, which is awful, and this drew attention to that as well. Sexual harassment is illegal. For a company to be encouraging it is not only irresponsible, it's dangerous.

And please don't be rude to commenters. It's rude and unprofessional, especially when the conversation has largely been kept pretty respectful.

Whats wrong with booth babes?

Arguing that, because the practice of 'booth babes' is objectifying, it's unreasonable to criticise EA's stupidly misogynistic competition for worsening the situation, makes no sense. It's like claiming that, because stealing is bad, we shouldn't criticise someone who runs a competition rewarding people for taking a picture of themselves stealing stuff.

No-one angered by this incredibly offensive competition has said that the 'booth babe' culture only became objectifying with the advent of the competition. I think just about everyone would agree with you that it's an objectifying practice already – and it has come under fire. This competition just made the situation even worse, which is what's made people justifiably angry.

Yes, I agree with you that it's a crappy practice having 'booth babes'. But that only makes it all the worse that EA exploited the practice.

Trying to make money off the shameless objectification of women is pathetic, stupid and offensive. Of course it should be criticised – in general, and in this specific case.

(Oh, and I should add that the fact that there are women who willing participate in this doesn't make it okay. I mean, you could find black people willing to say, for money, that whites are intellectually superior, but that doesn't make it okay to pay people to say stuff like that.)