Some of you may know that I run an online magazine about the video game industry. It’s more business to business than way cool consumer oriented so the focus is different from similar publications. We’ve never published an article on ‘tips and tricks’ or cheats or that sort of crap.
So I went to E3, the biggest trade show of the year, last week. My editor asked me to do a piece on the models that firms use to attract attention. “OK,” says I.
Well the more I thought about it, the more pissed off I got.
I can see how a few radical feminists might get up in arms over the “exploitation” thing (on both the “you didn’t cover that angle enough” and the “it’s patronizing to say they’re being exploited because these women make their own empowered decisions” sides – you can’t win sometimes).
More importantly, you may have got a few people upset because they misread the article. Honestly, I thought the piece wandered a bit and kind of skipped back and forth awkwardly between your opinions and the evidence to demonstrate them. I’ve seen you produce much better writing here at SD.
Oh, and it took about three tries to get the page to load. First it didn’t load at all, then it gave me a “page not found, please be patient while we restructure” message. Finally, I went to the main site and clicked in from there.
And finally, your point might have been better made if you didn’t include seven booth-babe photos in your photo-coverage of the event.
Actually, the flack I’ve been getting is of the ‘KILLJOY!’ variety. Guys arguing strongly for the innocence of the entire thing. I have a great post that I tried to put up earlier but I guess it’s still sitting on my desktop at work with a ‘server timed out’ message.
Meanwhile, here’s one I got within an hour of posting that last night:
Just to demonstrate the level of feedback I’ve been getting.
The piece IS a little awkward, I admit. The assignment I was given was a light-hearted 300 word sidebar about the concept and I just got more pissed off as I wrote each version. Nonetheless, I would have liked a few more hours to re-write.
I read the article, and I’m not sure quite where to start, so I’ll just dive in randomly. Fair warning, you’re probably not going to like what I have to say.
You assert that companies that use booth models do so because the companies have no content to show. This is an interesting idea. Unfortunately, you give absolutely no evidence to back it up. Her Interactive had a good product and no models, but nowhere do you write about the model-filled booths and their lack of content. the closest you come is saying “Shall I infer that there’s absolutely NOTHING that GoD is going to publish this year that will have an impact on the marketplace based upon its own merits?” Apparently you have inferred this. Instead of inferring a conclusion based on your own theory, why not go look at the booth for content? Tell the readers what content you did find there, and how trivial it was or was not. Then do it with three or four other model-filled booths. That would go a long way towards supporting your assertions.
You have a valid point when you say that using scantily clad women at E3 may drive females away from gaming. It didn’t seem like the main thrust of your article, though. In fact, I was hard pressed to figure out the main thrust of your article, other than “I’m offended.” Here’s a quote from your article:
“It’s only a small amount who ever get up the nerve to approach these women. Female sexuality is an intimidating thing to young men, unknown and unknowable. It’s far safer for them to stand back and let others take the chances than risk being put down themselves. They protect their egos by standing off and claiming they would NEVER go out with a slut like that.”
I heartily commend anyone who gives you flak for this. Mainly I have to commend them for knowing where to begin. You say the young men stand back and say they wouldn’t date sluts like that…Is that a quote from an E3 participant? If so, you should say so, because in my experience most young men would love to date scantily clad and sexually aware women. And you seem to criticize the young men for standing back, but a paragraph later you condemn the men who do ask, saying they should know that they have no chance. So what are they supposed to do, pretend these women don’t exist? And where did you get this idea about female sexuality being intimidating to young men? It’s used to draw them into the booths, so it’s apparently intimidating the way honey is intimidating to bears. But I suppose women who observably desirable to the hundreds of men walking by might seem unattainable and intimidating to young men…but what does your armchair psychoanalysis have to do with gaming??
You also make the point that there hardly any female E3 attendees. Doesn’t that sort of support the idea that marketing efforts there should target males? I agree that GoD’s exhibition was tasteless, but something as innocent as a sexily dressed model is hardly scandalous. Look at Tomb Raider, which features the ridiculously proportioned Lara Croft. It was a huge success. If it works in the game, why not have a model dressed as Ms. Croft at the booth? That seems entirely appropriate. And what bait and switch is occurring? People are lured into the booth by cute women, and when they get to the booth…well, there are cute women. There’s bait, but there’s no switch. Unless you mean that people are going to feel conned when they realize that the E3 booth they’ve wandered into is actually selling Computer Games. “What? I thought this hot babe was their product! I’ll sue!” Riiiiight.
Okay, I’m starting to get sarcastic, so I’d better stop. I haven’t hit all the problems I saw with your article, but ere’s the main problem I had: There are valid complaints and serious issues that you raise, but they are obscured by a poorly focused essay and a lot of off-topic and pointless frothing.
I do not cosider models, etc. to be exploitation exactly.
It does make me wonder what the mind set of of game companies is, however. Here is one industry that would rather have me as window dressing than a customer, investor or employee. It saddens me because I love games, but I think the industry is stuck in a bit of a rut. If cheesecake is the best attraction they have to offer, it is going to be a long time before gaming breaks out of it’s adolescent-boy mold and acheives the standards of “art” that they so desperately seek.
Let me start off by saying that I second Manhatten. This was not a good piece of writing. Where does all this hate come from? Why would you get angry at all?
The whole gist of the article is that you hate the stereotyping of the booth babes. But I guess that stereotyping of the hardcore game fan is okay, right? Why are you so caustic with the guys who attend these conventions? Why are you so offended that a guys would actually hit on a pretty woman? Let me tell you something, beautiful women get hit on all the time by guys who are out of their league. I wonder what you would of said if there were guys in loincloths. Would you have been as brutal if women who had no chance were to hit on the guy.
Who is being harmed here? I don’t know of any game with crappy graphics that gets a good write up just because they had knock-out booth babes. I didn’t have the privilege to attend this year, but I don’t suppose it was any worse than the year before. At the end of the day, you got to see a bunch of great games and get to take pictures with a bunch of pretty women. The booth babes didn’t distract from seeing that Daikatana was going to blow. The demo damsels didn’t need to convince me that the Sims was going to be awesome.
We can also get into an argument on what is exploitation. If a lonely guy goes into a strip club, and turns over most of his paycheck to a dancer he has a crush on, do you really think the dancer is being exploited.
I do believe Lowenstein when he says that 39 percent of game players are women. You cover the industry, you should know the dynamics that are taking place. More people are getting into computer games. More women are playing games such as “The Sims”, but the hardcore players are still men. Hardcore gamers who are looking for the next iteration of Quake are exactly the type that would pay hundreds of dollars to attend E3. The convention producers cater to this. When the young housewife who plays Sim Theme Park starts going to these conventions, it will change.
Lastly the cynical in me thinks that if I ran an online game magazine, the booth babe article always generates a lot of hits. But what if I still posted the booth babe pictures, and said that this is evil. That would generate even more traffic. Brilliant.
Several other websites I go to have commented fairly extensively on E3, and not one mentioned anything at all about the booth babes. Of course, that’s probably because they’re video game websites, hence they’re reporting on the GAMES, not some meaningless window dressing.
Anyway, to me the antics at E3 are no different from the antics during a Gay Pride march, Spring Break, or for that matter nearly any football game. Pointing to the scantily-clad women at a once-a-year event as indicative of what videogamers “really believe” (or whatever) is silly.
If anyone still has any concerns, here’s a real easy way to alleviate them…go to an arcade. Go see the actual games and gamers. Trust me, sexism is never, ever an issue. Come to think of it, I’ve rarely ever seen violence mentioned as a problem, gaudy square stickers notwithstanding, but never mind.
I’m an older (43) housewife and a hardcore gamer…and I’m completely turned off by this sort of thing. I know it goes on, I know that the conventions are targeting males, so I don’t bother going. It’s one of the VERY few things that I’d consider travelling to see, but since I know that the producers are not targetting me, and in fact will do their best to ignore me, I’m not going to go. So it’s a vicious circle. I will go to SF cons, they are FAR more female-friendly, though males still outnumber females.
Same thing with the games themselves. I don’t LIKE excessively violent, gory, sexual games. I was about to buy [paradise eve II], for instance, until I read that it was gorier than the first. Since PE was too gory for my taste (I particularly disliked the dog’s transformation, and the park audience) I decided then and there that I was NOT gonna get the game, or even rent it to see if I liked it.
Oh, and if ANY game show producers are reading this, no, I don’t want guys in loincloths as Demo Dudes. I want to know about the GAME. I’m far more interested in playing videogames than sex. Just ask my husband.
OK, so as predicted earlier, my original reply was sitting on my desktop with a ‘server time out’ message.
Here’s another email I received. Make of it what you will.
Argh.
I know it’s not my best piece of writing. I save that for here (and here I’m not under a tight deadline). And, to be frank, some of the article was inserted by my editor.
And the weasel took out my, “Blow jobs and on the road don’t count” line, too. (I was told that by an 60-year old ad rep while on my first road trip, no kidding.)
And to address some specific comments…
Well, we’re actually positioned as a business-to-business site covering the industry rather than the games. Take a look at the rest of our coverage and I think you’ll agree to that. We clearly don’t wish to be about the games themselves, too many other sites and magazines do that. I wanted our niche to be a little different. Because of that I believe the tactics used to market the games to the press are fair game.
I disagree with part of the first paragraph. God knows I’ve caused comment about Gay Pride marches in the recent past but in such marches the participants are extolling something they believe in. I don’t think I found one model who could give a rats ass about video games. They’re there to be eye candy and know it. Those I talked to found it demeaning and so did I. Make of that what you will.
On the subject of football games (I’m assuming you mean cheerleaders) and Spring Break (if we’re talking about MTV’s Spring Break or any of that ilk)(if we’re just talking about the behavior at Spring Break sites I’d have to say that’s a symptom, not a disease) I agree. They’re just as bad. And so are music videos, beer commercials, the Miss America pageant and all the other means by which we decide that women’s role in our society is defined by their sexual attractiveness and not by their other characteristics and abilities.
And you can find sexual objectification in almost any arcade. Look at the hooters on Lara Croft (who HAS been portrayed by a model at E3 in the past). Or any of the women in the Mortal Kombat series. I saw a demo video for the new Baldur’s Gate game at E3 and one of the things I noted is that EVERY SINGLE woman portrayed in the game had ENORMOUS breasts AND had protruding nipples. It gave me the creeps.
And the last sentence is my point. Any reasonable person can tell if a game is good or bad, innovative or derivative. Women dressed as barbarian princesses aren’t necesary except as a shout for attention.
As to who is being harmed I’m trying to address a larger, societal problem: that of the pigeon-holing of women into very specific roles. I could have easily (upon further thought) written about the majority of PR people who are women (at least at E3) and the fact that they have to constantly refer up the food chain to male (almost exclusively) executives for policy-level decisions. Hell, that’s one of the reasons we devoted a whole weeks coverage to woman-run companies.
In short, I believe that the objectification of women is a bad thing. I think it’s a sign of something wrong in our culture that, in general, women are perceived as being worth less than men and are subsequently paid less for the same work. I think it’s wrong that women are used for their sexual attractiveness. I also think it’s wrong that using women for their sexual attractiveness works. I don’t know who here is old enough to remember that Diet Pepsi commercial some Godawful number of years ago that featured several women in an office environment ogling a male construction worker as he stopped to drink a soda but I seem to recall that it generated a HUGE amount of press (I remember a page and a half in Newsweek and coverage on ABCNews and the Washington Post). But what about the amazing number of other ads that feature women in the ogled role? That’s not worth commenting on because it’s common.
Women are people, not solely objects for sexual gratification. I admit, sexual gratification is a good thing. No arguments there. Especially when it’s a two way street, if you get what I’m saying. But the simple fact is that women are treated in the industry not as people but as objects to be used and exploited for their appearance.
Hey, here’s an encouraging email I just got. I thought it worthwhile to throw into the ring:
I don’t want to get into his opinions about the writing of the article, that’s a side issue. The author is a journalist for a B2B magazine covering a non-game industry and is male.
Boy are you naive. E3 is a B2B conference, it is not targeted at game buyers, it is targeted at game SELLERS and they just happen to be mostly male. And nobody under 18 is allowed to attend E3, so I don’t see your problem with the more extreme costumes.
Did you honestly go up to each booth babe and the first thing out of your mouth was “Look, I’m not hitting on you”…? They must have thought you were a major dweeb.
I think it was hypocritical to put in 3 photos of booth babes in your article. You’re using sex to attract people to reading your article. You can pander and complain about panderers at the same time and still keep a straight face?
Overall, a very poorly done article. The Salon article was much better, and actually addressed real social issues rather than just blathering on about how offended you were.
umm… you have a few misconceptions about E3. Young housewives will never attend E3. It is targeted at game sellers and developers, not consumers. It is a vacation junket to LA for middle-management executives, not gamers. When I attended, I spent about 30 minutes on the show floor and all the rest of my time in free seminars for developers. A friend of mine worked the Sony booth, he spent all his time handling buyers from around the world in back-room meetings. All of the show-floor gimmickry is a false front for what is really going on at E3. The real action is all happening in the back rooms.
Well, anyone who thinks end consumers don’t get into E3 is wimply not paying attention. While the ISDA won’t release any figures I’d estimate (unscientifically, I admit) that at least 25% of the people there over the weekend were the game players. Heck, the line for those $200 ‘exhibit only’ badges must have been 500 people strong just before the show opened.
I realize that the IDSA publicly proclaims that E3 is a trade show and no one under 18 will be permitted inside (and they even state, “including infants”) it’s an open secret in the industry that it’s not really enforced. If you can pony up the dough you can get in. During day three I saw countless children on the show floors.
To address the point from Chas. E, however, I don’t see how saying that it’s aimed at buyers makes the issue any better. It’s still an example of the game companies using the perceived objectification of women to promote their products rather than the strength of the products merits. Is that somehow more justified because they’re competing for shelf-space rather than end-user dollars?
Chas.E, now who’s being naive. I have to second Jonathan. Yes it is a B2B event. Yes it is a trade show. Yes a lot of business is done behind closed doors. But let’s not kid each other. A lot of hardcore fans attend these shows. They make up a lot of the people standing in line. I don’t have a problem stereotyping the fan boys, and that is exactly what they are. You can tell just by looking at them.
Jonathan, if your whole issue is that you want to stop the utilization of women’s sexuality, I feel more sympathetic but what can be done. It reminds me of that line from “Slaughterhouse Five”. Why don’t you write an anti-glacier book? There is always going to be ‘exploitation’ and it is as easy to stop as glaciers. Does it bug me a little? Yes, it does. Do I think it can be changed? Not a chance. My wife and I, are thinking about having children real soon. I think it is very unfair that she is going to have to carry a baby around inside her for nine months. I think it is unfair that she is going to have to deal with morning sickness. But I can’t do anything about the biology. What I am trying to say is that there are inequities in the world, and not all of them can be solved.
I think you have a bigger problem with people getting by on just their looks. I get the sense that if men were used in the same manner, you would be offended as well. But once again what can be done. The Halo Effect will always be there. Juries will always be less likely to believe that a good looking defendant is less likely to have committed a crime. If two applicant with the same credentials apply for a job, most likely the better looking applicant will get the job.
Well I’ll just stop there before they move this thread to the BBQ Pit.
Well of course endusers sneak into the show. But that’s not why the vendors are there, they’re not interested in hyping their products to end users, only to the press and wholesalers.
I don’t recall any minors getting into E3 when I attended. In fact, I recall a flap over an 17yr old programmer who was denied admission. He even offered to bring his father along as a chaperone, but they would not budge, he didn’t get in.
(I was told that by an 60-year old ad rep while on my first road trip, no kidding.)