Misbehaving pointed to a new Geek Calendar featuring 12 young, attractive female tech workers in typical calendar poses.
According to the “About the Producer” page (the producer being one of the models):
Lilac Mohr, who herself is a Senior Java Developer, is the producer of the Geek Gorgeous Calendar. Sick of hearing complaints from male co-workers about the lack of attractive women in the computer industry, Lilac set out to show the world that there are plenty of beautiful, intelligent, and interesting women in the fields of computers and engineering.
Gina at Misbehaving writes:
This seems like a good idea, but it’s too bad the photos are so cheesy and tasteless (in my opinion). I don’t know about you, but I don’t use pink ethernet cable as a bikini top. In addition to the photo, each month includes a summary of each model’s technical skills and quotes on working in the male-dominated tech industry.
I would have much rather seen classy, artsy photos of people looking both beautiful and geeky.
Personally, I would rather have seen a small, stylish photo of each woman, and then fill the page with code or other results of their work. To me that would be both geeky and beautiful. But then, according to the creative tech writer, I’m not the target audience:
My version would probably be a study of “What Not to Wear” befores and afters — in my experience, it’s a rare geek who can pull off the prOn pout with studied disheveledness with any style. Give me the slightly overweight and overworked senior network engineer who wears too-tight yoga pants, oversized sweaters, and ponytails. Or the newly-back-from-maternity-leave security manager who’s gotten no sleep in 12 weeks and still has to manage the outcomes of 3 crises her first week back. Talk about people in need of some cheesecake overhauling. And after they’ve been pampered and styled for the camera, what do you think their eyes would say as you stared at their calendar pic? I don’t think it would be anything like what the GeekGorgeous.com girls are saying. Sure, they’d look as good, but they’d be telling a whole other story.
I’m sure that were I to interview at any number of companies, and I walked in looking like who I am — an almost 51 year old woman who would really prefer not to pose in Victoria Secret underwear in public, thank you–there would be no disappointment among the young males who I’m most likely to be interviewing with. I believe in challenging stereotypes, but I agree with I Speak of Dreams: There are better approaches.
Maybe my reluctance about the calendar is that I don’t know any of the women. I wonder how Joi Ito would look as a Victoria Secret Angel?
Your approach – a smaller, tasteful photo next to a page of code or other results of their work – would be much better and more attractive in my book.
A calendar like this does have a target audience, one that for the most part couldnt care less about their acconplishments or code.
Beauty to my eye is the result of an appealing mix of intelligence, wisdom, humor, courage, and spirit. I have experienced each of these qualities in reading your thoughts and ideas and seeing your photography on this blog. I dont need Victoria Secret to know and feel your beauty.
This calendar will probably be a big seller. For all the wrong reasons. Because its target audience has its focus elsewhere, and not on the traits that add up to gorgeous.
I wonder how Joi Ito would look as a Victoria Secret Angel?
You just killed me. Who can I sue now?
Hmm. I looked at the calendar and found myself wondering why I’d want to buy it.
The woman are okay-looking, but they’re doing the faux-pr0n poses and I see nothing of their personalities. That makes them a lot less attractive out of the gate.
The photography itself is nothing like as flattering as it should be for a “glamour” calendar. Maybe I’m too much of perfectionist, but I wouldn’t be happy with most of the pictures if I’d taken them as portraits.
For $24? Meh. I expect better.
John-
your comment made me smile. Good to know someone out there is still looking beyond skin deep.
I agree-this calendar probably will sell for all the wrong reasons.
John – you’re challenging Frank Paynter for the World of Blog’s Most Understanding Male Shoulder Award here. That was a beautiful comment.
Shelley – oye. Wouldn’t be wanted for posing, wouldn’t want to own one, so I guess it’s all internet noise to me. ;-)
Lilac does have a blurb about what each woman does and likes, but the focus is in the wrong place. Maybe she is confused about who she wants to sell this product to. There’s a market for this calendar and this market is not about encouraging young women to get into technical fields.
Maybe pin-up?
As others have already pointed out, we all know that geeky women are as beautiful as any other women. We don’t need them to strike a pose. Intelligence is sexy too.
Then again, some people might disagree. The whole “smart women” thing reminds me of Maureen Dowd’s latest piece.
didier, not sure I can handle Dowd tonight, will read tomorrow.
Jeneane, I do agree, John’s comment was lovely. Thanks, John.
Arthur, well I hope it gave you a chuckle before it killed you. I hope it gave Joi a chuckle, too.
Personally, perhaps we should put together a geek male calendar. Who should we get?
Lilac:
When women choose by their own accord to show off their bodies not to attract men and not to advance their careers, but simply to show they are proud of who they are both inside and outside, they are taking the power away from men to view women as one-dimensional sex objects.
[Frasier]Oh, dear God…[/Frasier]
I was eleven years old when I first found that certain, er, images were having certain, um, effects on me, to put it no more bluntly than that. The images most likely to have those effects were established quite early on and haven’t really changed. But I was rather younger than eleven when I first decided somebody was beautiful, or attractive, or admirable, or interesting, or just plain nice-looking – and I’ve made that call, with different combinations of criteria, different overtones and different implications, just about every day of my life. (I’ve known people I’d call beautiful but not attractive; people I’d call attractive, who I wasn’t personally attracted to; people I was attracted to for no reason even I could identify; people I liked and admired but didn’t care for; people I cared for deeply but didn’t really like or admire…)
Pr0n (and its sniggering cousin ‘glamour’) is all about button-pushing, and all about fantasy – solitary fantasy, primarily. It’s not about attractiveness or beauty or pride in who you are – because it’s not about anything that happens between real people.
(No, not even that.)
Personally, perhaps we should put together a geek male calendar. Who should we get?
Dave Winer?
Why not just use the interview list at nerdtv – it’s almost all men.
I’ve been out of pocket in DC for a few days and am way behind on reading. I took a quick look and found it distasteful and sexist. I think this calendar does far more harm than good. It’s only a half step from tech company booth babes at a trade show at best.