POLL: Would you mind your girlfriend/fiancee/wife being a scantily clad booth babe?

Remove all ads!

I don't want to have to take a heavy hand in telling my significant other how to dress. There's more to promoting a product than sex. I'm not looking for a bimbo. If she dresses sexy (but not slutty) on the floor, but talks intelligently about the product, then that's fine.

 

Yessir, that's exactly what I thought.

Honestly, those pictures that Chev singled out... they're not even, "not that bad," they're completely unremarkable.

 

Wow. You're right. Those photos are not very "risque" at all. I agree - you do see MUCH worse at the beach or at a night club or just walking down the street. And I would have absolutely no problem with my girlfriend, wife, and/or mother of my children doing that job and dressing like that. That is a whole universe away from being a stripper, pornstar, or prostitute.

 

To me it's not so much the fact that men adore her or what she wears that is the issue. It's more the profession. I'm not sure I would want a very serious relationship with a model or a boothbabe. A casual relationship sure but I'd not be too enthusiastic about the idea of someday marrying her.

 

1. Velcro would LOVE it if I were a booth babe. He trusts me.

2. There wouldn't be an issue about women "exposing" them selves to hawk a product if some men weren't gullible enough to fall for it, and other men weren't greedy/clever enough to make use of this gullibility. STOP BLAMING THE WOMEN.

3. Chev, you have simply GOT to find a wife soon so you can lighten up and stop judging everyone else's morals.

 

Well from what I've heard from Chev he would have to date a woman for ten years at least before he could be sure enough about her morals to marry her.

Seriously though, blaming the women is obviously wrong but so is blaming the men. We could start bashing the western sex oriented society about this but that would do little good either. These booth babes exist because men enjoy watching them and they choose their profession because they enjoy being watched. Perfectly normal and acceptable in my opinion. As Harbourboy said they are not prostitutes, porn stars or strippers. Quite far from it actually.

 

Oh, for sure! In our capitalistic world, it takes both supply and demand to make something continue. Any such situation has to be addressed from both sides to make a problem go away.

That said, I don't see a problem with booth babes.

 

dmc, I agree on the female body being a work of art. But there's a difference between a painter Rembrandt and an always drunk stinking excuse of a photographer, right?

This said, I still wouldn't enjoy my wife or even girlfriend posing for even artistic nude pictures. I would dump a girlfriend for a single such picture and would examine the validity of my marriage with a woman having such inclinations. By Canon 1095, there is some chance.

Naah. Just enough to prove her credibility, so that I could trust her assertions in the moral area. I believe that any kind of romantic feelings or romantic gesture is strictly exclusive and shouldn't be performed otherwise (for example, I believe first aid training doesn't justify mouth contact with a real person of the opposite gender instead of a plastic doll). I believe that whatever is sexual is to be saved for after marriage. I also believe that any sort of causing arousal for monetary gain carries the additional stigma of prostitution (includes "magnetic" cleavages of certain businesswomen). So long as I'm not asked for sex, I could probably get along with a woman not necessarily believing it's wrong, but any sort of non-exclusivity or monetary gain for arousing I am not going to put up with. I'll sooner die single.

Let me show you E3 2005 pictures I have a problem with. Here's the first one:

http://www.fragland.net/gallery/e3babes2005/IMG_0012

While I don't have any immediate strong feelings about this lady's clothes, I wouldn't like my woman to pose to photos in such clothes with a guy's arm around her. I wouldn't take such a photo if I weren't single -- if at all.

Such stuff wouldn't be all right even on a beach:

http://www.fragland.net/gallery/e3babes2005/5_19_2005_11_08_33_PM_0011

It's slutty. I've seen swimsuits covering less and being much more decent than this crap.

As for this one, I'm offended by profanation of the crucifix:

http://www.fragland.net/gallery/e3babes2005/IMG_0023

No problem on a beach, but if my wife wore such things publicly, she would feel quite cold in bed:

http://www.fragland.net/gallery/e3babes2005/IMG_0025

If my wife posed to SUCH photos, especially with men, I would really read Canon 1095 closely:

http://www.futurelooks.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/3060/cat/557/page/2

Same for SUCH close-ups of the cleavage:

http://www.futurelooks.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/3058/cat/557/page/2

THIS would get a girlfriend dumped, wife separated and the nearest diocesan tribunal filed for marriage nullity trial:

http://www.lanmaniac.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=55&pos=1

Not much better for the one on the right:

http://www.lanmaniac.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=55&pos=8

Posing to SUCH photos with other guys than I would be BAD:

http://www.lanmaniac.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=55&pos=15

THIS even worse:

http://www.lanmaniac.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=55&pos=34

As for this one:

http://www.lanmaniac.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=55&pos=53

Canon 1095...

This would make me mad:

http://www.lanmaniac.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=55&pos=99

Improper breast display... huge argument and likely dumping/separation:

http://www.lanmaniac.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=55&pos=120

http://www.lanmaniac.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=55&pos=122

The one on the right would get dumped if I were her boyfriend or fiance:

http://www.lanmaniac.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=55&pos=142

Another one I would dump for:

http://tth.tentonhammer.com/modules.php?set_albumName=album02&id=IMG_0819&op=modload&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_photo.php

So, which of the pictures do you NOT have a problem with?

 

Chev: For someone who is against such things, you spent a lot of energy searching and posting such pictures. Most of the strongly religious men and women I've known do not spend any energy on such pursuits -- even to prove a point.

I actually agree with you on many points. I believe there is a time and place for such outfits -- a gaming convention is not one of those (although given the makeup of audience -- sex sells very well in that environment). I certainly do not fault the models -- they are trying to make a living (and really don't get paid enough for the garbage they have to put up with at those conventions).

As a young man I would have agreed with you 100%. I was offended by and yet strangely attracted to the behavior you obviously disagree with. I never would have dated such a woman, but certainly wanted to (which I acknowledged as a weakness of the flesh that I needed to overcome). I have since stopped judging these women -- I can accept their desire for attention or need to pay the bills. The old addage 'don't judge a book by its cover' seems appropriate.

Your post reminds of the Utah state legislature. A video was prepared for the state assembly depicting the most sexually explicit scenes from movies shown on cable. The Utah legislature banned R-rated movies on cable after watching the video (all four hours of it) THREE times. They sure put a lot of time and effort into something they disagreed with....

 

To me, they're just pictures. It's the behavior that counts the most. If all those women were doing at the convention was standing around in skimpy clothes to get libidinous pseudo-adolescents to come over and hear a sales pitch about some hot new memory card, I don't have a problem. However, if those women were actively making passes at the men, really teasing them with or using any sort of innuendo and double entendre, then that's going beyond what's reasonable.

Turn it around, Chev. Are the wives/girlfriends of the men that posed with (or drooled over) those women - heck, make it the ones who took the pictures - justified in dumping or seeking divorce? How about the wives and girlfriends of the men who HIRED the booth babes in the first place?

 

Are you making a distinction here based on the fact that they are earning money while they are so dressed and in a show like E3 2005? What about people working in shows like Baywatch. Or would any female dressed in similar manner (for example in a pub) attract the same views.

If its the former then there is not much reason to continue the discussion further. I wonder if any of us here belong to the demographic where the woman would need to work as a booth babe after marriage. If and when I married, there would be no need for my wife to work as one. I am in my early 20's and regularly save/invest for my future.

If you would be offended if your g/f or wife were in one of these pics and she was showing off and this were not her profession then thats your opinion but I would not be party to it. I wouldn't give a rats ass if I was confident that she was mine and mine alone.

As far as the pics go (and thanks for the entertainment Chev ) I would disagree with the fairy and the bikini girl. The others wouldn't get me to raise an eyebrow.
And would you please edit the last link. Its screwing up the page view.

 

@T2Bruno: I'm not judging the women individually. I'm #1 judging the outfit, #2 saying I wouldn't like my girlfriend to behave like that.

We aren't talking about extremes -- could we fault a regular prostitute if that were her only way of getting money for her sick mother's surgery? The excuse of trying to make a living falls off. The are other ways. Getting attention is all right by trying to be pretty -- but not by trying to arouse.

Ignorance, clouded judgement... many such excuses could work here. Still, even given those, I wouldn't date such a woman and if I were already dating her, I would most likely break up. I would 100% surely break up for consenting to a butt close-up, cleavage close-up etc or wearing just a thong around men and showing it off.

@Rallymama: I agree that it's behaviour that counts. Theoretically, one can be stark naked without immoral behaviour. However, posing to photos is already an act.

Posing to close-ups of cleavage and butt is beyond reasonable IMO and so is posing to photos with sex-hungry guys' arms around them.

Dumping yes. Of course. If I were female, I would dump the guy for embracing a booth babe for a souvenir photo (I wouldn't bitch about embracing a friend if he didn't touch too close to butt or breasts).

Edit: Forgot to add, "You know what I think about divorce."

I would slap the guy across the kisser for treating women like that if I were his woman... Not like I'm not dreaming about doing it anyway. Since I'm male, that would be a punch in the teeth instead of a slap across the kisser.

EDIT: @Shrikant: When she's doing anything to give other guys a "hard time", she isn't fully yours.

[ May 20, 2005, 22:30: Message edited by: chevalier ]

 

Warning --- Off Topic Alert -----


Hey I have been a booth-bunny and I am a guy. Ha!

But I was never scantily clad. Where I work, they put up a booth once in a while at conferences associated with our work. So, I take a demo of my project and sit in the stinkin' booth all day. Hoping that someone attending the conference will be interested enough to actually look at it. The bosses hope that someone will actually buy something. But everyone else at the conference is just there to sell their stuff also. So we just sit around bitching about being booth-bunnies all day. These are small conferences geared towards a specific kind of work. Nothing like an E3.

 

But the problem is that marriage isn't about ownership, but about partnership. That's why I haven't came out and said one way or another. If I find a woman willing to partner with me in bringing forth a family, then she would be considered as an individual.

 

All right, but in my book, marriage is total partnership, which means that giving oneself away in tiny pieces is incompatible with it. Doing such stuff would result in the wife having the whole bed for herself, in my case. I would never do anything even as a little as a tiny coy peck with a woman I didn't know to be 100% faithful. Bad conduct isn't faithful.

 

Posing with a guy's arm around you is hardly "giving yourself away in tiny pieces". By that token, most movie actresses have given themselves away many many times.

 

They have. And it's not about posing with someone's arm per se -- photos with friends are taken like that. Friends do hug and embrace. But the message of such an embrace is different when the hand goes close to the girl's breast and she's dressed in something provocative, while the guy is a nerdy loonie.

 

Oh well, we're probably going to have to agree to disagree on this one. If these girls' boyfriends and/or husbands had a problem with it, I guess they would have let them know.

The orginal question asked was whether "you" (I) would have a problem with it, to which my answer continues to be No.

 

Yeah, that's pretty much what I asked and the rest is our reasons for thinking as we do. My chief concern is intentionally dressing to arouse another while being committed to someone third. As brief as I can put it.

 

I don't get what's so attractive about them. They're (fake) blonde, and yeah they have huge (silicone) breasts, but for the rest.... Their outfits are often ridiculous (green spandex, oversized plastic breast plate and a fake sword they don't know how to hold properly).

No refinement, no character. Could hormones really cloud men's vision that much?