As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Jessica Nigri asked to leave? Why?
CARTER-A259
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
http://kotaku.com/5900134/skimpy-outfit-gets-lollipop-chainsaw-cosplayer-asked-to-leave-pax
For those who were attending and stopped by the Lollipop Chainsaw booth, Jessica Nigri was the cosplayer who was promoting the game.
Now on friday, she wore a more or less typical cheerleading uniform with a bare midriff (skimpy, yes, but there are REAL uniforms that are skimpier than what she was wearing). Saturday, she wore a much more revealing costume and was asked to change. Ok. She changed back to the original costume, and then was told that was also "too revealing"? That's, if anything, hypocritical PAX. Stick to your guns.
Considering what she was wearing (which is actually a pretty common cut of High School Cheerleading uniform), I really think the "no booth girls" thing is being taken too far here. We can have disembodied heads and mutilated corpses in games like House of the Dead 4 for all to see, games such as Far Cry and other shooters broadcasting on large monitors, but apparently something I can see if I go to a high school football game is over the line?
Seriously, I think she deserves an apology.
For those who were attending and stopped by the Lollipop Chainsaw booth, Jessica Nigri was the cosplayer who was promoting the game.
Now on friday, she wore a more or less typical cheerleading uniform with a bare midriff (skimpy, yes, but there are REAL uniforms that are skimpier than what she was wearing). Saturday, she wore a much more revealing costume and was asked to change. Ok. She changed back to the original costume, and then was told that was also "too revealing"? That's, if anything, hypocritical PAX. Stick to your guns.
Considering what she was wearing (which is actually a pretty common cut of High School Cheerleading uniform), I really think the "no booth girls" thing is being taken too far here. We can have disembodied heads and mutilated corpses in games like House of the Dead 4 for all to see, games such as Far Cry and other shooters broadcasting on large monitors, but apparently something I can see if I go to a high school football game is over the line?
Seriously, I think she deserves an apology.
CARTER-A259 on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
There were complaints about the girls last year, specifically I think the Duke Nukem girls so they did another survey and the community pretty much affirmed that they're not okay with the skimpy outfits. People were complaining and PA responded to those complaints by asking her to change or leave.
I don't really see the controversy. If parents are required to agree to allow their children to view/demo mature rated games then the same should apply to booth cosplay. If the outfit is obviously skimpy, like the two in that article it should be locked behind the same restrictions as the mature rated games or not there at all.
The issue here, is that the first costume is not what I'd consider "skimpy", and was apparently well and good for the entirety of friday at the convention. It was also fine for PAX Prime I believe. The second (pink) costume, could be considered too skimpy, so she returned in the original costume (which was OK friday, and at previous cons) and was told it wasn't now. This is the hypocritical nature.
Its not about me or you individually though.
The community as a whole voted on the issue and decided against skimpy.
Your definition of skimpy may be different then for others, but the point remains, they acted on complaints they received about something what was bordering on going against something that was decided on by the community.
Its not hypocritical, people saw it Friday, complained, and on Saturday it was acted on.
I saw quite a few skimpy cosplays here and there on Saturday...
The issue is the definition of "skimpy" is just flat out incorrect. Fullstop. Let us vote exactly on what constitutes the rules, instead of having someone make decisions that really don't mesh with the integrity of the con.
I can go to a high school football game, and see uniforms skimpier than that. Why don't we ask the "Steel Batalion" girls to cover up? Actually why don't we just have a rule that no skin can be shown below the neck if we're so worried about a family friendly image.
The rule, as I recall, was not "no skimpy" anyway, it was "no boothbabes" meaning models hired expressively to promote material at booths, which is quite different from having an official spokesperson from the game "who actually was pretty knowledgeable about the game"
I'd certainly like to meet the people who did complain about this. They really must not get out of the house much.
I'm assuming the issue stemmed from her being seen by different people on the different days, combined with a varying number of complaints of other attendees (which drove the issue from the issue from the very beginning).
All in all, my opinion is that her being asked to leave was justified.
My understanding is if she wore it as an attendee she'd be fine but as a paid member of a booth you can't use skin to draw folks in...
What I was more offended by was that I waited an hour in line to play Chainsaw Lollipop, it sucked.
Badges [ ] Hotel [ ] Complete Pixelist.net [x] Excitement [x]
Well, there's a disparity between "M rated game" and "showing your bellybutton". Games like House of the Dead 4 were not enclosed. Borderlands 2 was not enclosed either, with LCD screen showing lots of carnage. Another large FPS game had rather risque live-action video featured as part of its "draw". Even Lollipop Chainsaw had video footage playing at the same booth that this cosplayer was at, in plain sight. Diablo 3 was being played in the open at one of booths. "The Secret World" an mmo involving zombies, gunplay, and other horrors (such a drowned and disfigured bodies) was featured prominently via several large LCD screens above the play kiosks.
After time adrift among open stars
Among tides of light and to shoals of dust
I will return to where I began
Oh yeah, I definitely agree. The pink skintight getup is a bit too revealing. The crux for me, is that PAX should decide on its own what is and is not considered "appropriate", and rule accordingly. The first costume was not considered inappropriate until after the second one was. Why? Because people entered the con on saturday who don't like seeing a bellybutton? There's a point when PAX needs to say "look, I'm sorry you're offended that this girl is wearing a cheerleading uniform, but sorry, its not really that bad."
Basically, she wore the first costume Friday. Then she wore the second costume saturday. She was asked to change, and went back to the costume she wore friday. Then she was asked to change or leave again, even though she had worn that costume the entirety of friday. That's the issue. Its like a moving line of "this is acceptable, haha nope, just kidding".
From what I understand, it was actually confusion. WB was told that people were complaining about Nigri but, not what outfit they were complaining about. So, that resulted in the poor girl being tossed even when she was in her Juliet outfit.
I saw the chainsaw girl on Friday, but I figured since it was technically accurate to the game that it was fine. I didn't see the costume on Saturday, but again, she's the character in the game. The argument is more about people wanting to be in place where they feel comfortable. While it would be nice to see studly bronzed men shirtless with bow ties and tight man briefs sometimes, I would rather it be at a night club with dollar bills and not at my gaming conventions.
Except that, according to Robert Khoo, everything was within the rules, they just made a "judgement call". Hopefully the rules are amended for next year.
From my understanding, she wasn't asked to change again by the WB people, but by the PAX staff. She actually left for an extended period to grab a sweater and some other items to 'cover up" and appease PAX.
In reality, this has nothing to do with the "booth babe" rule, by Robert Khoo's own admission. It had more to do with complaints, most likely by a select few attendees, about what constitutes skimpy attire, especially for a game featuring a character wearing the exact same skimpy attire in plain view.
I feel like if PAX truly were interested in its "family friendly" image as Mr Khoo says, then we wouldn't have M or even T-rated games in plain view in the expo hall.
To put it simply, just as people are expected to deal with a bit of blood and gore wandering the show floor, they should also probably be prepared to deal with seeing a few bare midriffs.
But where do you draw the line? What is the difference between a "professional cosplayer" and a model paid to wear a costume and hand out flyers and walk around the show floor? If you're being paid to be at the show and wear a sexy costume, then you're a model, plain and simple, I don't really see any distinction between the two.
The fact of the matter is she is widely known for being a cosplayer, it just so happened that WB picked her up because of her costume. BTW she wasn't handing out flyers and she was constantly on her own doing her thing with out a bodyguard like all the professional models for the booths had. I think that is the distinction between the two you speak of.
Maybe I'm too cynical, maybe I don't know enough about Ms. Nigri and am ignorant, but you call it well known for being a cosplayer, I call it professional model with a gimmick.
It's not because Khoo and the rest of the crew don't want to see it, but because I and most of the community don't want to. I'm a male gamer and I'm pretty tired of the way women are treated at conventions (not to mention in game). PAX is fucking great because my wife and I can go together and not deal with models wearing next to nothing trying to hawk their shit. Instead we get people who are at least somewhat knowledgeable, and no one is uncomfortable or, you know.. objectified.
People decided her clothes were too much (or little) for their tastes, and the group decided to ask her to change or leave based on those complaints. Totally reasonable. Should other reps have received the same complaints? Maybe, but they didn't, so that's that.
If you watch that video, you can see she clearly wasn't just some bimbo payed to stand around and look pretty. She was very excited to attend PAX in the outfit that she worked hard to make.
It's understandable to not let people walk around in certain costumes, but I don't see the need to label them "booth babes" as if they have no thoughts on the matter themselves, and are instead just representing some parent company (which Jessica Nigri clearly wasn't doing)
(Notice the part where she says "Hopefully... hopefully I'll be able to wear my gimp suit that I'm making here" and then holds up the pink costume)
the first thing I see on her website is an upskirt picture
I am not agreeing or disagreeing with the decision or request, I am just noting that her second outfit WAS also a Lollipop Chainsaw outfit- one that I saw a few other con goers wearing, actually.
Again, I'm not getting into the right or wrong, I'm just noting the detail for those debating it.
Relevant info: #PAX East: 3 Coin Lunch organizer. 2012 Trading card available. Pokecrawl Assistant 2012. Pokecrawl attendee 2011. Cult of the Leaf attendee 2012.
The way I see it is Khoo is acting in a way to save face for the business side of PA, of course doing this makes him come off as a hypocritical tool. However seeing the prevalent view in the U.S is that viewing violence is okay while viewing sexuality is not this is to be expected. Seeing as part of his job is protect the way people see PA you can also forgive him for acting the tool. This is not the first time and it wont be the last.
You're crusading for sexually exploitative marketing? Really guys? Devote your effort to something more worthy.
I agree the no booth babe rule is what should be enforced, and was clearly not as evident at several booths. This is getting a lot more attnetion than it should but I think, as someone has said, it's because of the hypocrisy that was displayed in the 'judgement' call.
So mostly this is because you guys know her name, and think her specific history of pandering to the gaming community means she should be an exception to the rules?
After all this, I'm left wondering - why did she have to leave, but the huge banner of Juliet was still up? Would a full size cardboard cutout or figure (like Borderlands had) been acceptable? Why is it different if it's an actual person wearing the costume in real life? A full size figure could have been created to be more risque, and with a very unrealistic body type. She made the costume, she entered the contest to become the official LC girl, so it's not like they hired her and dressed up in the costume - it's what she wanted to do. If PAX wants to regulate what can be worn for cosplay at a booth, then they should do some kind of pre-approval beforehand.
Also the family friendly argument doesn't make sense here because then you would have to ask other cosplayers to cover up (which is not a new problem for conventions, given some anime and sci-fi costume designs), and censor more of the violent footage that is shown in plain view.
It's not necessarily about a "family friendly" atmosphere. The booth babe policy is what it is because of community survey. The community at large decided that they did not want to be pandered to via booth babes, and now things are what they are. Also, this specific issue is due to the fact that she was being paid to pimp a game, which makes her subject to the policy. Cosplayers are not under the same policy since the community did not vote to ban skimpy unpaid cosplay. It's not hypocritical because it's not about being "family friendly" or "politically correct"; it's about saying that attendees do not want to be sold things on the show floor using sexual exploitation.
Or, if you think this is an important issue, start planning a Models Who Sexually Pander to Gamers Expo, because that isn't PAX, and never will be.
Exploiting women to sell a product is degrading and creates an uncomfortable environment for a group that is in most need of a safe place to enjoy their hobby. I don't think a developer should get around this rule because their game has misogynistic elements designed to help it sell. "Oh but my game features a scantily clad high school student!" does not magically absolve you of this rule. There will be gray areas, but I feel this is pretty cut-and-dry.
It's a shame that the person in question was eager and willing to create/wear such a costume, but it's still exploitation. If you want to do some racier cosplay as a regular PAX participant, cool, but you have to follow certain rules once you decide to don your cosplay as the representative of a company.
No, I totally get why this is being looked down upon. I don't understand why it stops at the cosplay and doesn't go to the game itself. If bringing the character into the real world is not okay, then how is showing the game okay? Personally I think the whole concept of Lollipop Chainsaw is just to have a scantily clad girl running around killing zombies, and that is misogynistic. If people want this safe environment, then maybe games like this shouldn't be allowed in the first place.
I personally have nothing against Jessica or her outfits or the game (I'm planning on buying the game and yes, this is on the understanding that all it is is having a scantily clad cheerleader running around cutting up zombies - looks like fun) but if there were complaints and PAX is supposed to be a more or less family friendly event, I don't see what the big deal is.
Penny Arcade are only appearing hypocritical because of the Dickwolves thing a couple of of years back. Have people considered it's not hypocrisy but a little thing called "learning from your mistakes"? I don't necessarily like that Jessica was sent away, but I think PAX did the right thing here.
You can argue "oh, well she just dressed like the character from the game", but games aren't real life. This isn't about misogyny or objectification or whether or not Jessica was comfortable dressing in those outfits (having seen some of her previous work I don't even think the pink outfit was her most scandalous costume to date), it's just a judgement call that was made because enough complaints were generated that not taking action may have become an issue.
We all know Jessica wasn't just some hired booth bimbo, but not everyone appreciates that.