It’s 2013. Let’s end ‘booth babes’ for good

Woman of the future, when perhaps one can present technology and also simultaneously not be objectified.

Scene: It’s the year 2137. The world is doing pretty well. Hoverboards have gone out of style almost as quickly as they came in, surprising a lot of people. UGGs inexplicably live on in popular conceptions of fashion, as do ‘boots with the fur’. The President of what’s left of the United States (the previously large U.S. was reduced to a small island off the coast of Mexico after its population became predominantly, then overwhelmingly brown and insisted the mainland be renamed to “Brownlandia”) is a multi-racial pansexual queer-identifying trans womyn who was elected on campaign promises to bring traditional family values back into politics. It is against this backdrop that our protagonist, Beth, a 15-year old girl who has dreams of one day  becoming an engineer (a very blase dream in 2137, when the field of engineering has been flooded with brilliant ladyminds, but whatever, fuck the haters, Beth thinks) is writing a report on the history of the tech industry. In her research, she comes upon information on a quaint practice that used to be associated with the Consumer Electronics Association, an annual conference highlighting new and upcoming products, open to those affiliated with the technology industry, among many other conferences and expos.

Beth: Mommmmmmmmm

Beth’s mom: (Segways in from the greenhouse, where she was robo gardening) What is it honey?

B: Well I hate interrupting you from your eternal lady bliss sessions since they discovered the pill for having it all. But I need help with my report and my Google Glasses aren’t working right.

BM: Oh, dear, I knew we were overdue for a visit to Dr. Spaceman. Oh well, what is it? Maybe I can help the old-fashioned way and Bing it.

B: Great thanks. The thing is, I found out about this weird barbaric practice they were using up until the turn of the millennium and even a little bit after! It seems so unbelievable and I need to know more.

BM: Go on.

B: It’s a phenomenon called “booth babes”. A puzzling and archaic traditional practice from the pre-Smashed Binary era, it appears to involve objectifying entire swaths of the population for the great and noble purpose of…selling tech related products.

BM: (Gasps and begins to mutter angrily under her breath)

B: What is it Mom?

BM: (Sighs wearily) It’s just…it’s just that I’d hoped you wouldn’t uncover these horrid historical details. At least, not until you were more grown up.

B: It’s hard for me to miss. There’s so much detail in these old online archives I found. Like this piece from a now defunct pseudo journalistic outlet known as “Business Insider”. Apparently they endorsed and even celebrated the phenomenon as late as January 2013. In this post “Meet the Booth Babes of CES” they were actually brazen enough to document their adventures in sexism by describing the experience of ogling the so-called “booth babes” table by table. They also operated under this bizarre and thankfully dated assumption that “technology reporters” and “attractive ladies” are two mutually exclusive groups, and never the twain shall meet.

BM: I’m sorry honey. You must understand it was another world.

B: That hardly seems an excuse. I mean look at this. There are literally photos here of women being paid to stand naked and speechless “like sculptures” and imitate “fembots”. And even when the popular tech blog Mashable published a piece ostensibly “showing everything wrong with ‘booth babes’ at CES” they still managed to miss the point, using the very same image of the naked women in their post for pageviews, and posing the inane question “is this an appropriate way to sell a tech product, or anything for that matter?” rather than strongly denouncing the obvious sexism and double standards.

BM: I’m sorry you had to find out this way, but this was the reality not so long ago. Maybe you can do some more research and include information in your report on the social movements that brought about change.

B: You mean like feminism? I don’t know Mom. I mean, I like my peter pan collars like the next 22nd century gal, but the f-word? I’m not sure it’s my thing.

BM: (Smiles) I guess some things never change.

*End Scene*

Brooklyn, NY

Lori Adelman is Executive Director of Partnerships at Feministing, where she enjoys creating and curating content on gender, race, class, technology, and the media. Lori is also an advocacy and communications professional specializing in sexual and reproductive rights and health, and currently works in the Global Division of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. A graduate of Harvard University, she lives in Brooklyn.

Lori Adelman is an Executive Director of Feministing in charge of Partnerships.

Read more about Lori

Join the Conversation

  • honeybee

    I find the constant outrage over “objectification” to be saddening becauase I know in my heart it will never go away. In fact I suspect it will get worse not better over time. In 2137 I definitely expect things like booth babes to still exist. Only difference is I expect Both Studs to exist as well.

  • http://feministing.com/members/samll/ Sam L-L

    This post was worth it just for the stage direction “Segways in from the greenhouse, where she was robo gardening”.

  • http://feministing.com/members/femmepower/ Anjana

    I hate to put it crudely, but as long as there is demand, there will be supply. Objectified women (models, prostitutes, booth babes, etc.) attract the “male gaze,” and so will probably still be there in 2137. The only thing I can hope for is that women can objectify men as well. If they can do it, why not us? I don’t know if that’s a logical response, but it seems like it could be legitimate.

  • http://feministing.com/members/christines/ Christine

    BBC news has an article about this, too: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20957848

    Speaking as a woman engineer, this just drives me crazy. How are we going to encourage women to study engineering when our culture keeps telling them that their only place is as a ‘booth babe’? And how are we going to keep women who are in engineering from leaving if they feel unwanted and unappreciated?

    And frankly, I don’t understand the appeal for men either. Do they really want to work in a field where women have to be paid to show up and pretend they care?

    To say that booth babes are harmless marketing ploys (see the BBC video) is say that men don’t mind being pandered to and women don’t mind being excluded. These companies should be named and shamed.

    • http://feministing.com/members/knatx/ Steve

      And frankly, I don’t understand the appeal for men either. Do they really want to work in a field where women have to be paid to show up and pretend they care?>

      Do you realize where the booth babes show up at? If you did then you would realize they are at places where MALE consumers are going to be at, NOT men in some industry. If you went to an actual trade show for an industry, one would see zero booth babes, let alone women being “objectified” (no I don’t think women are being objectified here)

      To say that booth babes are harmless marketing ploys (see the BBC video) is say that men don’t mind being pandered to and women don’t mind being excluded. These companies should be named and shamed.

      Guess what most men don’t mind it, and how are women being excluded? There are male booth “babes” as well.

  • http://feministing.com/members/leanora/ Leanora

    “The President of what’s left of the United States [...] is a multi-racial pansexual queer-identifying trans womyn who was elected on campaign promises to bring traditional family values back into politics.”

    This. This is art.