A negative comment about a party at Arisia

[xiphias]

Far as I'm concerned, you can EITHER have an invite-only party OR you can advertise your party.

But it's FUCKING RUDE to advertise your invite-only party.

Don't mind invite-only parties. Don't even mind invite-only parties who, apparently, were going around handing out invites only to women who were dressed slutty. Heck, if someone took that to the extreme, and walked around the con handing out slips of paper which said, "You're sexy. Come to my room at 11 pm," that wouldn't bother me. And if he or she got people to show up, more power to him or her.

DO mind people who do that and also put posters up in the stairwells advertising their party. It's fucking RUDE to do that, then set up a velvet rope outside, and do the "club" thing. Dunno about you, but I go to cons to get away from that kind of dynamic.

Yes, I'm pissed off at not being pretty enough to get into that party.

Comments

[cheshyre]

But honestly, I feel like sometimes that goes too far, and the 11th Commandment is not necessarily "Thou Shalt Invite Everybody".
Let's not create a strawman here. I haven't seen anybody arguing against the existence of closed parties at cons. The problem is that this one was advertising itself as if it were an open party, with the restricted nature of admissions only mentioned in fine print or at the door.

If I could make a suggestion for the concom, Arisia rules already state that parties must be registered. If a party is closed, then it should not be allowed to advertise its presence with posters and should not be listed on the party board or in Clear Ether.
At the very least, any such advertising must make clear the party's closed status and/or the requirements for admission in large print so everybody is clear on the matter.

One of the Party Hosts

[(Anonymous)]

Hmm, after reading all your posts, I'd like to apologize to the folks that were disappointed or upset. This is the third year we've had a Skank party, but only the first we had a volunteer willing to make posters. We were excited by how cool the posters looked, and didn't think about the conflict of advertising a private party. However, invites were *not* required at the door, only meeting the dress code.

While we do encourage the skanky attire, an effort is all that is required - some sort of costume that is not jeans and a T-shirt. We had a luke skywalker and lots of (full coverage) trek uniforms and aliens (seeing as we'd built the bridge of the enterprise) - it wasn't just about dressing slutty. We enforce the dress code to keep the spirit of the party theme so that everyone inside is fun to look at, and the leashes were intended as a way to let in a limited number of folks who had not taken the time to get costumed, so they could be "accompanied" by someone who was dressed appropriately. I am honestly sorry if anyone was made to feel that *they* were not welcome, as opposed to what they were wearing.

But you're all right about the private party / poster conflict. I didn't think of it that way. I just want to mention that it was a private party only because of the hotel beverage policy. In the Park Plaza private parties were in a separate wing, and you needed an invite to get past the actual hotel security people that guarded the end of the hall, but anyone who managed to make it without an invite and with a costume was welcome. (Speaking of the Park Plaza the 'club cordons' were a precaution because last year the hotel gave us a ton of grief about 'crowds in the hall being a fire code problem' so we used tape on the floor to keep half the hall clear & thought stanchions would work better this time.) This year while we did use our invites to troll for invitees, they were handed out to anyone we ran across dressed up in awesome costumes, not just the skanked out ladies, and folks were definitely let in without an invite if they had taken the time to dress up. Or yes, if there were inches of cleavage. :)

Anyway, if we shouldn't have put up posters I'm sorry & we won't do it again, but I just wanted to mention that we meant it in a spirit of fun, its only 'private' in the arisia definition of what is being served, we spent about 150 hours collectively on the decorations and our costumes, and we feel that entitles us to require folks to dress up to get in. I will make sure the language at the door is more clear in the future, and we will rethink/ doublecheck the whole poster thing.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[chanaleh.livejournal.com]

I just wanted to add a PS that I am genuinely impressed by your (the host's) taking the time to respond -- respectfully instead of defensively -- to the complaints in this forum. I think that's wonderful. And it does sound like the party was great and (mostly) well thought out -- I hope it was everything you envisioned! and that the feedback helps to get even more people enjoy your efforts next year.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you chanelah, I appreciate your comments. It's hard to see every angle of an idea ahead of time and in retrospect with all the fetish at Arisia (I heard there was an entire fetish floor at the spillover hotel) perhaps the leashes gave the wrong idea for our party theme. My husband just suggested maybe we should have some stupid hats for muggles. :)

It did turn out as well as we hoped (except for seeing how we upset folks with the posters), but we're all exhausted. :) We've gotten requests that we disseminate the theme ahead of time so maybe folks can come up with costumes specifically for our party, and that is really a wonderful compliment and we will seriously consider doing so.

I really do appreciate the feedback and will do my best to make sure that everyone who wants to come can in the future (barring space limitations of course.) This new hotel despite all the problems with its miniature size was *much* better for us - no hotel security, no family with a baby booked below us, no repeated orders to turn down the music, and we got the suite we needed this year. Once we're rested up, we'll see about planning for next year. :)

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Yeah. . . stupid hats would go over better than leashes.

Leashes are already a touchy subject for some of us. . . because we take them seriously. You'll find a number of people at Arisia who are really offended by using leashes as fashion statements.

And, like Erica said, I really do appriciate you dropping by to explain what was going on. I hope it is clear that my problem is the disconnect between a closed party and an advertised party -- and the lack of understanding what the party IS.

Had the people at the door turned us away by saying, "We're asking people to come to the party in costume," we would not have been offended. Having the woman at the door turn to my wife, gesture at herself, and say, "If you want to come back dressed more like this, that would be okay" -- that sent an unintended message.

NOW I understand that "more like this" meant, "in costume." What we heard was "like a slut," and that offended us.

We like dressing sexy. Sometimes. Had we known about that ahead of time, we could have chosen to do so -- thinking about what we had with us, we could probably have put something together. But being hit by it the way it was expressed hit my "I'm not your fucking trained monkey" reaction.

"Dress like this" sounds like "dance, monkey dance". "Dress in costume" is cool.

And, again -- I don't have a problem with closed parties. I've been a door guard for closed invitation-only parties at Arisia at previous years.

I've been a door guard for parties at Arisia that were invitation-only because we didn't want the police to find out. We weren't breaking any of the drug laws, but . . . um, I'm not going to go into detail about what laws we WERE breaking because rebmommy is my mother and reads my LJ.

Mom, Lis and I haven't been to any of THOSE parties since we've been married.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[(Anonymous)]

OK now I'm starting to get defensive. :)

I'm sorry it came off like that and will see that door speak is more clear in the future. While I understand some folks would take offense at a leash as a fashion statement, I also hate the boundaries of political correctness and would have to say that last years Church of Skank was surely offensive to persons of each religion of the types of clergies we dressed up as, but we still did that. We like to be equal opportunity offensive.

I might curb the leash use so as not to send the wrong message at the door, but I would not want to take it off the list of possibilities just to avoid offending alternative lifestyle folk (whom I nevertheless support fully). Can I also not wear collars or leather, or rubber, or latex, unless I am heading to a play party? What if I belong to a certain group, but am just going out dancing? Is it offensive to wear a ring on your left hand if you are not married?

We understand special relationships and we actually let either party hold the leash if it was requested, not a problem. But everything is a symbol to someone and in our walk-on-eggshell society, sometimes I just get tired of the overthink. I can't promise we won't offend someone next year too, but only some of it will be on purpose, and none of it will be meant to hurt anyone's feelings, or to exclude a single person who has met our single criteria of spending time and effort on making a cool costume and not creeping us out.

Thanks.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

or to exclude a single person who has met our single criteria of spending time and effort on making a cool costume and not creeping us out.

I think those are good and admirable criteria for a party.

I just wish I'd known about the first half of it.

(I did kind of assume the second half.)

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[voltbang.livejournal.com]

Yeah, my time at the door talking to the guardian was spent finding out what the dress code was, and then we slipped down the hall and complied with it. And yes, it would have been easy to get a bad feel from that discussion, but I routinely get told no in much less agreeable ways, by people who are professionally mean, so I just talked through it. It really depended on how you heard what was being said, and the presentation was borderline. On the other hand, this discussion started from the lack of major incident, and the people who were cruising for booze, with the intent of getting polluted and falling down the stairs didn't seem to be able to comprehend and comply with the dress code. So, in a way, it worked.

And for the poster down the thread who complained about how the party seemed organized to draw conventionally attractrive women, there was at least one fantasticly attractive man there. I had to stand between my wife and him at one point to get her attention to ask a question :)

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

Leashes are already a touchy subject for some of us. . . because we take them seriously. You'll find a number of people at Arisia who are really offended by using leashes as fashion statements.

-In my opinion, such offense is equivalent to certain types of Christians objecting to other people using the name of God in vain.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[dda.livejournal.com]

NOW I understand that "more like this" meant, "in costume." What we heard was "like a slut," and that offended us.

So you got offended by what you heard rather than by what was said; that explains a lot.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

And is pretty typical in human communication, yes.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[tamidon.livejournal.com]

I thought the party was wonderful, and having folks put effort into a real party, not just putting out chips and m-n-m's and expect people to show up and hang out.Party throwing is an art, and you did great.
Also, I agree with gilana, a dress code does not make it a closed party.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[(Anonymous)]

*Thank* you. :)

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[undauntra.livejournal.com]

Would it still be a concern if the dress code were clearly stated on the posters?

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

The more I think about it, I think, yeah, that would have helped.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[(Anonymous)]

But we can't do that because a) it's technically a closed party and b) then if someone meets the dress code we have to tell them explicitly that they creep us out/smell/were stalking the DJ and she asked us not to let you in (actually we told that guy :) ). Leaving it a little nebulous gives us that wiggle room of saying it's because you don't have an invitation.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

. . . which means that my wife and I were either turned away because we weren't in costume, or because we're skeevy.

. . . and there's no way to tell. Hmm. Oh, well, there goes MY self-esteem. . .

Yes, I'm being humorous.

Kinda.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[redbird]

On a practical level, there's no way to have what's for most purposes an open party (made known to all attendees at a convention, with entrance requirements that anyone who makes a bit of effort can fit), turn people away at the door if you don't like them, and not offend or upset anyone who is turned away. The reason doesn't matter, and the person is likely to guess, whether it's "because you haven't showered recently" or "because you had a messy breakup with one of the hosts recently."

Another aspect of that problem is that the invites you handed out are essentially bearer instruments, and there are a lot of them. zarhooie got three invitations to the 2006 party. Someone else might get two or three, and give one to their friend, after some such conversation as "I'm going to the Skank party, how about you?" "It sounds interesting, but I wasn't invited." "Here, I've got an extra." At that point, your invited group includes "friends of people who were wearing cool costumes."

You might as well do what Alexis and Doll Gilliland did, many Disclaves ago: they announced a party for "BNFs". They ordered many hundred little white-on-green buttons reading "BNF" and made sure that everyone at the con got one (I think that included handing them out at the door of the party).

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[surrealestate.livejournal.com]

As a long-time party host (of non-Arisia parties) and attendee of the Skank events, I just wanted to give you guys a big thanks for throwing such a great party. I also put hundreds of hours and dollars into my (also themed) parties, and I also get flak from people who are unhappy about the dress code, so I feel your pain. (And that's with many weeks' notice for them to figure something out, or just make other plans.)

I had a great time at your party and look forward to next year's. I know y'all aren't entirely local, but I'd love to be in touch by email. If you're amenable, you can contact me via pheromone at livejournal dot com.

And I don't know if we actually met, but I was Batgirl on Saturday night.

Re: One of the Party Hosts

[tehuti.livejournal.com]

If you know how to contact the organizers of this party, I would appreciate some contact info. This was a great party, and I'd like a little more notice for next year.

[dda.livejournal.com]

Let's not create a strawman here.

Let's not. The problem is clearly that the OP didn't get in and feels pissy about it. Whether or not it was advertised is also a strawman; it's the fact they had a dress code that the OP didn't happen to meet and how they reacted to it that is the basis for all of this.

I'm guessing that if they had gotten in, this whole thread wouldn't exist. Or if the criteria wasn't based on "conventional sexyness" it would also not be an issue.

[voltbang.livejournal.com]

Percieved to be conventional sexyness. I don't think that actualy was the criteria, as I was in the party, and observed some guests who were conventionally sexy, some who were unconventionally sexy, and some whose sexyness totally escaped me, but they did all more or less fit the dress code as described at the door.

[dda.livejournal.com]

...they did all more or less fit the dress code as described at the door.

I'll buy that; I think the dress code was described on the poster and I know it was described on the invite. I'm just saying that I if the dress code were more related to, say, a period of dress (Victorian or Edwardian or 80s), the reactions wouldn't be so outraged.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

You're making a number assumptions about me, here.

Some of them are probably accurate. But let's look at them.

Is the problem that I didn't get in and feel pissy about it? Somewhat, yes. But that's not the WHOLE story.

Because, when I get upset and pissy, I try to figure out why. I try to figure out whether it's something internal to me, or if there is something external which is actually wrong, which needs to be fixed.

And it was clear to me that, in this case, there was a little from column A, and a little from column B.

Yes, this hit a number of internal buttons of mine -- I'd just come down from working a bunch of hours, and had seen a fair percentage of the people I came to the con to see walk into the party, and was turned away. Yes, that hit a whole lot of internal stuff that is not the responsibility of the party organizers, and that's what started to get me thinking.

So I had to ask myself -- are my reactions entirely because of my own shit, or is there a portion of this which is external?

Now, triggers about exclusion are a significant thing -- and I realized that the part of the situation which WAS external was precisely what I posted here: that a private party is okay, and an advertised party is okay -- but a private party which is advertised attempts to be in two categories at once, which is inappropriate, and that the fact that this event DID push my buttons was, obviously, because of my buttons, but ALSO because that "category error" was a Wrong Thing.

So -- your assumption that the "advertisement" thing is a strawman -- that's wrong. Because that genuinely is the thing about which I am upset that I think is external to me.

Had I gotten in, would this exist? Probably not, that's true -- but it nonetheless SHOULD. However, as I would personally not have felt like there was something wrong, I wouldn't have sat down and tried to figure out what it was. So, you are probably correct factually -- but that doesn't change the ethical situation. It merely means that I wouldn't have been aware of the problem since it wouldn't have affected me.

[dda.livejournal.com]

So -- your assumption that the "advertisement" thing is a strawman -- that's wrong. Because that genuinely is the thing about which I am upset that I think is external to me.

I'm sorry but I'm not buying that in the slightest; from reading the rest of this thread, it was the fact that they didn't let you (and others) in that bugs you. The fact it was advertised was what drew you to the party but at least on the poster I saw, it never said, "Come find this party so we can turn you away, xiphias!"

It didn't give a room number and did heavily imply (if it didn't say outright) that skanky clothing was the way in. You had to go do something to find it and then to be upset when you did find it seems a tad, well, petty.