"Now imagine that some of these females might have the opinion that males inherently are inferior intellectually than females."
With what justification do you add that to the story? And if that would have been the case, wouldn't that be the problem, rather than the pictures?
I can imagine a minority situation feeling strange and uncomfortable, but it seems a bit unfair to blame the men for that - as a man, the only way to tilt the gender balance would be to not attend the conference.
I don't think the controversy is about the gender balance. From my understanding it seems to be about antagonising these females.
I added the inferiority thing to show that these females might feel they are undermined and might perhaps feel some sense of discrimination. From my understanding basically it is a power possession issue. They might feel that they are not on equal standing with their male counterparts and that such presentation only serve to legitimise and create a culture of harnessing such perceived or real inequality by further creating a sense that this presentation is only aimed at guys as most of the pictures were of females.
I mean how would you feel if all those pictures were of men rather than women, it would just be weird.
But it happens every day, I remember advertisements going both ways. I don't watch much TV, but already a couple of years ago there was the Coke advert with the well trained building worker.
With what justification do you add that to the story? And if that would have been the case, wouldn't that be the problem, rather than the pictures?
I can imagine a minority situation feeling strange and uncomfortable, but it seems a bit unfair to blame the men for that - as a man, the only way to tilt the gender balance would be to not attend the conference.