[HashHishBang]

> I consider it rude in the sense that women are not even considered in the consumer spectrum of these products

Fair point and one I hadn't considered. I had assumed that my income level meant I wasn't considered on the consumer spectrum. I can see where the inclusion of a booth babe could tip the scales from something I couldn't afford if I tried to something that doesn't want me to buy it even if I could. Thanks.

>I'm not picking up a fight about this, but it's now the time for these companies to notice that women are also in the market and we like to be included and more importantly, respected.

I have to keep stressing that my inquiries are genuine simply because it's very easy to read these kinds of things as disingenuous. What if there were men up there as well? Assuming that the marketing trend of "sex sells" doesn't stop any time soon is that an improvement? A lateral change towards inclusivity while still remaining classless?

[tinha]

> Fair point and one I hadn't considered.

That's the good thing when discussing different points of view.

> Assuming that the marketing trend of "sex sells" doesn't stop any time soon is that an improvement?

I agree that no one should be a booth babe, whether men or women, that's why I focus on the respect aspect. If it's a sex conference, it fits in the enviroment of "sex sells", if it's not, as you said, it remains classless.