Re: [93attendees] IETF dress code policy

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Sat, 25 July 2015 10:54 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
X-Original-To: 93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E59C71A044F for <93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 03:54:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8fUesdNZ0JiS for <93attendees@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 03:54:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A585F1A036C for <93attendees@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 03:54:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3mdkmp4hr3zD7M; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 12:54:34 +0200 (CEST)
Authentication-Results: mx.nohats.ca; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nohats.ca header.i=@nohats.ca header.b=p6OKwCJH
X-OPENPGPKEY: Message passed unmodified
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JFx5V5FtWBbF; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 12:54:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (206-248-139-105.dsl.teksavvy.com [206.248.139.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 12:54:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (bofh.nohats.ca [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5A0D800B3; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 06:54:32 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nohats.ca; s=default; t=1437821672; bh=Q01Z/3gFwY8h41XE61FF5SF0Rzt+4cziiPY8ntg0e4U=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=p6OKwCJHJV1HsoiMbM1ECR79V+PnYvA6bDU/QE4V/IjTEWrPbXN60bjJCFiSe13He amcYF7toxG6WoxxdrmvPM7swgG/85thVycpEEBGJGP6eih05D5DPp4MJp9dos61Xfu SiWLGfpScOuH42evtGXzd6r4q/3nM7c1Ysg9tJwQ=
Received: from localhost (paul@localhost) by bofh.nohats.ca (8.15.1/8.15.1/Submit) with ESMTP id t6PAsWm1005798; Sat, 25 Jul 2015 06:54:32 -0400
X-Authentication-Warning: bofh.nohats.ca: paul owned process doing -bs
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 06:54:32 -0400
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1507251218170.11810@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.11.1507250637550.854@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <28B1F49A-AAE4-429F-B70E-6783040FE829@spirent.com> <BN1PR06MB4371C7F6FE511FAD63C2FE8A8810@BN1PR06MB437.namprd06.prod.outlook.com> <79BC3C72-BE65-40D6-86F4-16E3FF59FBED@cisco.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1507251218170.11810@uplift.swm.pp.se>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LFD 23 2013-08-11)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/93attendees/cx7w98oNZf3C02ONIi_F46926Oc>
Cc: "93attendees@ietf.org" <93attendees@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [93attendees] IETF dress code policy
X-BeenThere: 93attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list of IETF 93 attendees that have opted in on this list. " <93attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/93attendees>, <mailto:93attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/93attendees/>
List-Post: <mailto:93attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:93attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/93attendees>, <mailto:93attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2015 10:54:38 -0000

On Sat, 25 Jul 2015, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:

> I would not have had a problem with the entire team (men and women) wearing 
> the same type of outfit, so they all had matching tight "sexy" clothing, my 
> problem was that only the women did. I don't really care if the women were 
> engineers or not, it's ok to have mascots, but then you need to have mascots 
> of (in this case) both genitesders to avoid the "booth babe" problem.

That only addresses the problem of misogyny, not the problem of using
non-technical (sexy) arguments for advertising products or services
that are of interest to the IETF community. The bits & bites is not the
CeBIT, there is no need to result to trickery to get the attention of
attendees. (apart from the bites which targets everyone equally)

Adding booth boys is not the solution :P

Paul