Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 234 posts

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#211

Post by twobyfour »

jasode wrote: post #209
twobyfour wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not suggesting that it's a quasi strip club environment or nearly as egregious a violation as taking employees to a strip club. Just that it's along the same spectrum of making beautiful women available for men's enjoyment and that that's what causes it to be a source of discomfort. And if my company hired a bunch of gorgeous models - most female but a few male - for our holiday party, I would be outraged. The ma…

These 2 comments looked like they contradict each other: 1) ">It's one step short of holding your holiday party at a strip club." 2) ">I'm not suggesting it's [...] nearly as egregious a violation as taking employees to a strip club." The "one step" looks like "nearly" to me which is why I tried to clarify the nature of the interactions. If any _hint_ of "strip club" is even mentioned in the replies to my anecdote ab…

I'm not responding just to your comment. I'm also responding to the concept in general of hiring models for a party.

If the intent were solely to entertain rather than to titillate, they would be hiring comedians rather than models.

Is it explicitly sexualized and objectifying like a strip club? No. Is it implicitly sexualized and objectifying? Hell yes.

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#212

Post by jerf »

ImSkeptical wrote: post #147
jerf wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the problem anyone is having with this.

It seems like you're suggesting women should be free to do this, but men should be shamed for asking women to do it - which seems like a weird position to hold. I can imagine some harm comes from this - e.g. an employee is mistaken for a model, or perhaps an employee is never mistaken for a model, but the magnitude of the harm doesn't seem so severe, and seems comparable to the benefit - the party is more fun. I know…

I am suggesting that that is not the problem anyone is having with this. Nothing more, nothing less. The rest of your inferences are entirely wrong, if indeed you even replied to the correct comment. Nobody is complaining about the fact that if the job is offered, there are women who will take it, or implying that those women (or men) are in the wrong. That is simply not the problem people have with this.

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#213

Post by jasode »

twobyfour wrote: post #211
jasode wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These 2 comments looked like they contradict each other: 1) ">It's one step short of holding your holiday party at a strip club." 2) ">I'm not suggesting it's [...] nearly as egregious a violation as taking employees to a strip club." The "one step" looks like "nearly" to me which is why I tried to clarify the nature of the interactions. If any _hint_ of "strip club" is even mentioned in the replies to my anecdote ab…

I'm not responding just to your comment. I'm also responding to the concept in general of hiring models for a party. If the intent were solely to entertain rather than to titillate, they would be hiring comedians rather than models. Is it explicitly sexualized and objectifying like a strip club? No. Is it implicitly sexualized and objectifying? Hell yes.

>If the intent were solely to entertain rather than to titillate, they would be hiring comedians rather than models.

I don't think it clarifies the discussion by labeling them "comedians" XOR "models". It's impossible to disentangle the gender/beauty or its effects from the role being played. It's an unavoidable blend of multiple roles.

In other words, it would be naive to think there is zero sexual objectification of Disney Gaston models at the park. Disney is not hiring androgynous robots so we have to be realistic here. The men have to be "eye candy" to some degree to get the job.

Likewise, even if a company tried to hire "entertainers" for a work party and those entertainers happened to also look beautiful, you will still have objectification. Is the model hired for a corporaty party to hang coats a "coat valet" or a "model"? It's not what you label them; it's the effects.

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#214

Post by nsgi »

zeveb wrote: post #152
thorell wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their job isn't just to be attractive. Their job is to help schmooze people who don't seem to be having fun. There are social skills involved, whether or not you value or believe in them.

This is honestly the most valuable comment on this page, and ironically it's the very last one that I see. The models in this case really are performing a valuable job.

Perhaps that's worth doing, no one wants to feel left out at a party. But then why do they need to be models, or focus on talking to the opposite gender?

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#215

Post by twobyfour »

jasode wrote: post #213
twobyfour wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not responding just to your comment. I'm also responding to the concept in general of hiring models for a party. If the intent were solely to entertain rather than to titillate, they would be hiring comedians rather than models. Is it explicitly sexualized and objectifying like a strip club? No. Is it implicitly sexualized and objectifying? Hell yes.

>If the intent were solely to entertain rather than to titillate, they would be hiring comedians rather than models. I don't think it clarifies the discussion by labeling them "comedians" XOR "models". It's impossible to disentangle the gender/beauty or its effects from the role being played. It's an unavoidable blend of multiple roles. In other words, it would be naive to think there is zero sexual objectification o…

If attraction weren't part of what's trying to be accomplished, attractiveness wouldn't be a qualification. The whole point of hiring a model is that they're attractive.

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#216

Post by stillsut »

Isn't the whole point of paying $5000/month to live in SF the access to cultural benefits? If you want a strict monastic environment for your company, rural Idaho would probably get the job done at 1/10 the price.

I'm reminded of a story a couple years ago when all incoming Duke freshman had to read Alison Bechdel's Fun House, a graphic novel with slightly gay themes. Yes, a few were offended by this, and one person made the news for publicly refusing to read it. But I don't think it ended up as a PR loss for Duke. They said if you are coming into an elite liberal arts college, these are the type of things that are consumed and debated.

Everything makes someone uncomfortable, mine's Karaoke - if they have a machine there people will be like, "stillsut come up and sing Tom Petty with me". But we need to be firm about our desires and not let the heckler's veto erode the culture.

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#217

Post by ImSkeptical »

heartbreak wrote: post #210
ImSkeptical wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's only fine if a private individual hires models for their party?

That’s not what I said.

You wrote that women should be free to work as models at a party, but that companies shouldn't employ them - what else does that mean if not that women should be models at private parties only?

Instead of requiring me to guess what you mean, why not state it plainly?

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#218

Post by ImSkeptical »

jerf wrote: post #212
ImSkeptical wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you're suggesting women should be free to do this, but men should be shamed for asking women to do it - which seems like a weird position to hold. I can imagine some harm comes from this - e.g. an employee is mistaken for a model, or perhaps an employee is never mistaken for a model, but the magnitude of the harm doesn't seem so severe, and seems comparable to the benefit - the party is more fun. I know…

I am suggesting that that is not the problem anyone is having with this. Nothing more, nothing less. The rest of your inferences are entirely wrong, if indeed you even replied to the correct comment. Nobody is complaining about the fact that if the job is offered, there are women who will take it, or implying that those women (or men) are in the wrong. That is simply not the problem people have with this.

Instead of speaking vaguely, and pretending you speak on behalf of everyone, why don't you clearly state what problem you are having with this?

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#219

Post by heartbreak »

ImSkeptical wrote: post #217
heartbreak wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not what I said.

You wrote that women should be free to work as models at a party, but that companies shouldn't employ them - what else does that mean if not that women should be models at private parties only? Instead of requiring me to guess what you mean, why not state it plainly?

The set of all party throwers is not composed of private individuals plus employers. But now you’ve changed it to private parties, which would seem to include parties thrown by privately held companies. Maybe you should start by getting your terminology straight.

My point is that employees should not be subjected to employers hiring models to attend company events.

Re: Silicon Valley Is Sneaking Models into This Year’s Holiday Parties

#220

Post by danjoc »

heartbreak wrote: post #199
danjoc wrote: post #177

Why would you be upset if the models are not? The models might be really upset if they don't get that job where they make $200 an hour. That might be the difference between presents under a tree and no Christmas for their kids.

I, too, frequently forget that there are people in this world besides me and “the models.”

Well, yeah, that's my not so subtle point here. The only people who seem to be upset are the people who have to have paid actors pretend to be their friends for a few hours.

From the outside, it looks silly. I think it would be a shame to see their personal embarrassment and bruised egos ruin an easy job opportunity for a few people who would like to make $200/hr attending a party. That sounds like a pie job. Professional party attender.

Post reply on HN