> I can understand "booth babes" etc. - but I saw none of those kind of
> images in the talk, and some of them (f.ex.McD clown stuffing a burger in
> a kids mouth) was outright funny, and clearly showed what many seem to
> forget about companies, like McDonalds.
Yeah, I know what you mean - I have no idea how anyone could be offended by a swarm of bees, either!
(I assume that you accidentally skipped slides 36, 38, 39, 42 and 63, which were all sexual in nature (although I'm sure that if 38, 39 and 42 were the only ones in there, there would not have been anything said).
And for the record, without having seen the presentation yet, they didn't bother me (but then I'm not everyone, and they are clearly sexualised images).
Posted Feb 3, 2011 17:11 UTC (Thu) by Seegras (subscriber, #20463)
[Link]
I read the presentation, and took a look at the slides.
First off, there is NOTHING in the talk that could be construed as "harassment". There's some use of the word "fuck" in there, but being european where the use of it is quite normal, I consider this a US-problem. It might be "offensive" to them, but it's certainly not harassement.
The pictures: Yes, there is clearly some sexual content there, but that does not imply harassement per se. Most of these clearly are not harassment (except maybe for pigs, who might object that they're depicted as goose-fuckers).
I don't know about BDSM-people, but they could actually feel harassed and ridiculed by Image Number 36, and certainly, homosexual people could feel offended by picture 39.
So it might have been right to trigger anti-harassment policies, but certainly not on the grounds mentioned thus far.