Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Because thats all Boeing and NASA can show off.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

You, FIRST or anyone is not defined by any one sponsor. I've seen efforts to boycott virtually every single founding sponsor of FIRST because each company violated someone's moral framework. If for instance, you go to Bing (because after all, Google is evil) and search "why should I boycott <sponsor>" I'm sure you'll get plenty of reasons why FIRST shouldn't have that company as a sponsor.

The perception that someone who wants to use cosmetics shouldn't be on a robotics team is as silly as saying someone who's on the volley ball team or hockey team or dances ballet cannot be on the robotics team because they couldn't be "geeky" enough.

Our love of science and technology is what brings us together. Let's just leave it at that an not start carving out exclusions.

Personally, I'm for more inclusion, let's ask the sugar beet farmers, the Emu ranchers, the P90X guys and the International Association of Hermits to sponsor FIRST as well.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I agree. I previously stated that our worth as members of a team can not be determined how we look. That goes both ways. It is ludicrous to assume that because someone wears make up that they are any less valuable as a member of FIRST and I am genuinely sorry if it came across that way.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

When I was visiting with an FTC team that I previously mentored, they were telling me all about going to the Jane Cosmetics booth and getting their makeup done. What I saw was young girls who were excited that they could have fun competing with their robot and get some free makeup at the same time. They didn't go get makeovers to make themselves feel better, or because they felt inadequate without it; they were simply happy about the fact that there were two things they enjoyed at the same place.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I didn't hear or see Ms. Tilton at any point in time, so I can only talk about their exhibit in the pits and the way it presented the company.

I generally don't wear makeup, and I'm having some issues with my eyes right now that mean I couldn't have gotten my makeup done. (Which I probably would have, assuming there was time, even with the teasing I would expect from my team for acting so out of character. I like being able to dress like a slightly different version of myself.)
But I was still curious, so I stopped by their booth on Thursday or Friday. I talked with one of the exhibitors, and basically said, "This is the last thing I would have expected to see here. Why are you here (what do you hope to achieve)?"
The answer I got was something to the effect of "We are trying to empower young women by showing them that they can be both beautiful and smart/involved in STEM." Which is a good sentiment, that you don't have to give up part of your identity to be a part of this community. But it rubbed me the wrong way by implying that we aren't already pretty, that it matters, or that there is only one standard of beauty (that, of course, just happens to be helped by their products).
I also didn't get a very good vibe from their exhibit, because it was set up too much like a makeup store (as opposed to a demonstration of their technology, though I'm not sure what that would have looked like) for comfort, so that probably didn't help. Any time it feels like someone is saying "Buy this!" it puts me a little bit on edge.

That being said, because it's the last thing I (and, I assume, others) expected to see associated with FIRST, I agree it would be a good outlet for recruiting from a slightly different segment of the population. They just need to tweak the subtext and premises of their message.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

As a guy who at least tries to be receptive to gender issues, this is where I have to sit on the topic.

Garnet Squadron was 50% girls this year, and was actually 100% so starting out (by coincidence, not by design). I didn't see or hear any big fuss from our girls one way or the other. When I walked by their booth, I didn't see any carnival-barker-esque tactics going on. It could be enjoyed or ignored* at will, and that felt fine to me (all I'm-not-a-girl biases known).

*Okay, so you couldn't ignore their sponsorship on Einstein--but that's no different from UTC or Qualcomm or any other sponsor there. Doesn't count.

To stir the pot among those with objections to Jane's presence as it was: Is there a scenario where a makeup brand could have a presence at Championship that wouldn't draw your ire?

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Just remember, as Jeremy Bem states in an interview with his mother, "...it’s okay to have conventional desires as well as unconventional ones."

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Let me start off by saying that as a girl in FTC and FRC robotics I am really excited that FIRST is trying to get more girls involved! Additionally, as an FLL mentor for a few years now (some of the teams I work with are all-girl teams), I think the sentiment that "girls can be beautiful and smart/involved in STEM" is a valid one to communicate. However, I think that there are more effective ways to go about getting more girls into FIRST.

From what I've read and seen from personal experience, the most effective time to get girls involved in STEM activities (and keep them involved) is around 4th-6th grade, or elementary and middle school. Perhaps I got into the makeup world a little late, but it is my thinking that by the time girls are old enough to be interested in/wearing makeup, it is already too late to be effectively targeting them for FIRST. I think you need to catch them before they've even begun to deal with the pressures and weird dynamics of societal ideas of beauty or insecurities about appearance. I hope that in the future FIRST can work with organizations like GoldieBlox, a company aiming to inspire more girls to become engineers by developing toys, to get more girls involved at younger ages.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Don't offer makeovers and have representatives on hand to discuss your research, development and manufacturing roles. Pretty straightforward stuff.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I have to say that I was a bit taken aback when I saw the display that Jane had set up in the pit area. I also had the reaction at first that this could be sending the wrong message, depending on the way the information was communicated to the students. Here is what I would have liked to have seen from Jane:

We employ chemical, manufacturing, programmers, packaging, etc. engineers and graphic design, marketing, project management, etc personnel.
Here is our workshop showing students how to make homemade lipgloss, chocolate asphalt, etc. that they can take with them.
The message is that females can design and configure the electrical, mechanical, software, and be on the drive team and not just perform the Team fund raising, chairman's award presentation, finances, etc. tasks.

I want to see the 30% female involvement increase to 50% and I want to see that 50% be hands on the robot vs. 90% of the 30% performing all the other skills required for a successful team.

With that being said, if you are a girly-girl who loves tech and gaming, please do not give up your femininity either. A pink phone case is your individual taste and you have every right to have it as well as wear make-up, a skirt, or heels. We only request you to be classy and not trashy in your choices because trashy is still sending the wrong message in today's still male-dominated engineering workplace.

If you want to talk to a female engineer who has served on a design team for various space missions, please come find me at an event or send me a PM.

BTW, NASA had hardware in Atlanta one year. I believe it was the Robonaut vehicle.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I ignored the makeup booth. It wasn't targeted at me and I don't feel qualified to assess it, beyond a general feeling of unease at the existence of the idea that makeup is for girls.

I could not ignore Ms. Tilton. Her speech didn't seem particularly focused to me, but I might have been distracted by the cognitive dissonance her high heels evoked in me. I am not accustomed to seeing someone with such good business success make a conscious decision to walk that way.



(Full disclosure of my personal opinions: I think high heels make people look silly, and I generally do not appreciate makeup.)

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I'm not sure if any scenario should be upsetting. Companies like Rolex sponsor a ton of motorsport events, even though watchmaking has nothing whatsoever to do with racing cars. If the company is willing to help FIRST reach it's goals in return for a little product exposure, why should anyone object?

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Is timing still captured during lapped races?
I'm thinking Rolex 24, 24 of Sebring, Daytona 500, Pepsi 400, Grand Prix, Le Mans, etc. Omega/Swatch for the Olympics.

Non-government, non-direct tax-payer-funding via government, government contractors, or government suppliers is what they are going for with non-traditional funding sources. Congress does funny things sometimes and FIRST needs to be sustained without Congress providing the funding for FIRST indirectly through a funnel from NASA etc. and the KoP suppliers who's primary customer is the Fed.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

As an observer who was actually at the FIRST Championship, heard Dean introduce Ms. Tilton at least twice (therefore hearing his take on her inclusion), and hearing Ms. Tilton speak on her own behalf, I'd like to offer a perspective:
The theme throughout the event was let's stop preaching to the choir. Over the past quarter century, FIRST has become pretty good at infiltrating STEM-centric industries. Now their focus is on expanding beyond that. They've created partnerships with celebrities, television networks, athletes - and Jane offers an example of industry beyond the traditional tech firms with which we're normally associated.
Ms. Tilton explained that she could have brought in one of her mills, automotive manufacturers, etc. - but those are already captured audiences. Cosmetics is largely untapped with regards to FIRST, and could have the largest effect.
Since she, and her corporate interests, are new to FIRST, I'm not at all surprised that a new sponsor set up a booth (which was given its prominent position, I assume, in proportion to the monetary donation given) that displays its products, and allows interested parties to test them out. Of the 'makeovers' I witnessed, I didn't see anything garish. I didn't see any implied message other than "hey, we support FIRST, and here's our company and what we do" - just like any other corporate sponsor does.
In her remarks, like Chris said, Ms. Tilton expressed support for confidence, not conformity. And rather than espouse the societal idea of beauty, she chose to focus on the philanthropic nature of the product line.
As with many things, if one enters this partnership with preconceived notions and makes value judgments based on those biases, then one is mostly missing the point.
The hope is Jane will help #MakeItLoud
And I don't see this partnership as any more outlandish than McDonald's sponsoring the Olympics. It's all about Top Of Mind Awareness, for all parties involved.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Madison, I understand your point and I think it's something to keep in mind. However, if we are going to dissect corporate sponsorship's ethics or social impact I believe it would be equally valuable to ask why we don't take a look at the defense suppliers, bio-engineering firms (Monsanto), and the company voted 'worst in America in 2014' (Comcast/NBC). They are all major FIRST sponsors.

This is the situation we are in. FIRST needs money to become all it can be. As long as we can control that impact inside FIRST and turn it into a net positive, I'm for taking money where we can get it. There is a line to be drawn in accepting sponsorship dollars, but I don't believe Jane is where that line belongs.

In the scheme of things I believe that a loving family and a cast of FIRST mentors will structure females self-worth more than a cosmetics company and their advertisements. I expect the additional exposure that FIRST will receive will help far more people that it will hurt.