Filed under: Internet, Blogging, Social Software, web 2.0
Compartmentalize, or you'll get 20 lashes! (unless you're into that sort of thing)
Recently I was interviewed by a graduate student who was working on a thesis about representations of female sexual empowerment in popular culture. Much of our conversation centered on women's usage of the internet. One of the first questions she asked me was whether I thought there was still a stigma against women being openly sexual online. After stumbling over my words because I couldn't get the "yes" out fast enough, I gave her an example that shows just how much of a problem this is. I go to a lot of conferences, unconferences, and all variety of social media-oriented events. Frankly, I'm feeling a little conferenced out at this point. Anyway, at each of these events I go to, there's almost always a panel or session or discussion group focused on the question of how to "present yourself" online – usually framed in a business context. And even if there isn't a session nominally devoted to this topic, it ends up coming up sooner or later. It's obligatory, just like the incessant "bloggers vs. journalists" debate.
These discussions can get quite heated, with people becoming very earnest about not wanting to look "unprofessional" online. Women in particular tend to get very worked up about it (which isn't surprising; there are expectations placed on us that men won't ever experience). Without fail, the ultimate example of "unprofessional" is always something sexual. Someone will be ranting about the presentation of their professional demeanor online and attracting new clients and blah blah blah, and it's only a matter of time before they make an offhand remark like, "So, I'm not going to go around posting naked pictures or anything!" Such comments are usually received with much laughter and nodding in agreement.
So, YES, if one's sexuality is the ultimate representation of what it means to be unprofessional, then absolutely we have a problem here.
Don't think the situation is quite as dire as I'm making it out to be? I'll give you just a few more things to chew on.
A few weeks ago we completed a new, thoroughly awesome press release for Sex 2.0, and I circulated it to several local news outlets. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, which is the major newspaper in town, bounced my email; as it turns out, newstips@ajc.com's spam filter automatically rejects any message with the word "sex" in it. Anything vaguely sexual isn't newsworthy, I guess.
I emailed a potential wifi sponsor for Sex 2.0 and didn't hear back for several days; when I did hear back, the person explained that my email had gotten caught in a "wildly undersexed spam filter" (complete with winky-smiley emoticon). Also, they turned down the sponsorship because the company was "probably too prudish."
Comments from Figleaf and Kochanie of the thought-provoking blog Real Adult Sex always get marked as spam by Akismet. Before I upgraded to the latest version of WordPress, I had the Akismet With Local Whitelist plug-in, and it was a lifesaver in this regard. Unfortunately it's not compatible with the new version.
Viviane, proprietress of the popular sex blog Viviane's Sex Carnival, had her MySpace profile unceremoniously deleted simply for having a text link to her blog.
While we're pointing fingers at MySpace, how about this weird message, which comes up when you click the link to The Sensual Vegan's web site from their MySpace profile (click to enlarge):
Here is the "very naughty" page in question (shockingly offensive, I know):
Meanwhile, MySpace's own homepage is just fine and dandy:
The Sensual Vegan situation is a perfect example of what Lux Alptraum was talking about in her recent Boinkology post, The Pink Ghetto: The Mainstream Media, the Madonna, and the Whore:
The media is all too happy to cover sex when it's sensationalistic, when there's a scandal, when they can cluck their tongues about what this world is coming to while simultaneously showing us Paris Hilton's goodies for our masturbatory pleasure.
Bring on your sex toy busts, your celebrity sex tapes, your teen sex scandals: the media will eat it up and serve it back to us on a platter.
But try discussing sex in a healthy, rational way: try talking about sexuality in a rational, intelligent matter, giving the topic the sensitivity and insight it deserves. Suddenly you're perverted, you're sick, you're unmarketable. (emphasis mine)
It's exactly this frustration that led me to organize Sex 2.0 in the first place. After a particularly maddening incarnation of this debate at SoCon07 (in a session entitled "Women and Blogging"), I resolved that I would not keep having this 101-level conversation over and over again.
We have to keep chipping away at these arbitrary walls that define what constitutes "professional" and what doesn't. Being an eternal optimist (sometimes to a fault), I can't not believe that social media will help us transcend the bullshit stereotypes we've been dealing with all our lives. But it's not going to do it on its own; that's where the "social" part comes in, after all.
Oh, and one last thing. For those of you headed to SXSW this week, be sure to check out these panels:
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Mysterius said 9:22PM on 3-02-2008
Interesting article.
While those spam filters do sound a little over-sensitive, I don't think it's fair to blame the newspaper for that; blame mass spam mailers, instead.
I haven't thought much about your topic this way before, but I'll try to keep it in mind, now.
Reply
Jack Kerouac said 9:33PM on 3-02-2008
Sorry, but posting naked pictures of yourself is NOT professional, male or female. You wouldn't keep naked pictures of yourself on your desk (male or female), so you don't post them online if you want people to treat you as a professional.
Reply
Amber Rhea said 9:34PM on 3-02-2008
Wow, only two comments in and already a "totally proving my point" commenter has shown up? Even *I* was betting it would take at *least* 4 comments. Well, kudos to you, Jack... you keep your head in the sand, and I'll keep on being, like, totally unprofessional.
Reply
Grant Robertson said 10:07PM on 3-02-2008
Wow. How can you invoke the name of Kerouac _and_ lay a heavy trip of judgment like that? I'd have thought you'd be ripped apart from the sheer force of the irony involved.
Reply
Fred Thompson said 11:20PM on 3-02-2008
So...this post was an Ambertrap to attack somebody who makes the perfectly obvious comment that putting naked pictures of yourself online is unprofessional? Ooookay...
Methinks there's a huge difference between the cheesecake image for yet another stupid bombing dud movie and putting your own body on full public display.
It's really simple, if you cover yourself with tattoos, piercings, etc. and/or let it all hang out, you're not professional unless you're in a very small minority of "performing artists" who actually manage to have commercial success. This things fall in the realm of personal grooming. Outward appearance indicates the mental state of the individual.
It's simple, commercial success in the vast majority of occupations and business ventures involve interactions in which another person places their future on your performance. If you seem irresponsible, they don't invest in you. Period. Dot. Inability to confine sexual behavior to private life is considered low class and untrustworthy.
Reply
Grant Robertson said 12:18AM on 3-03-2008
Fred Thompson: Seriously, what planet do you live on? If tattoos and piercings make you "unprofessional", then Gen X is a seriously unprofessional lot. I'll bet to someone of your discerning eye, my box frame glasses make me one of those wacky free-thinkers who must be kept down. Performing artists? Hardly. Are you living in some time-challenged section of the upper mid-west? In any metropolitan area it's common for adult, professional people to have a tattoo or a piercing. Amber's point is totally valid, and you're only serving to prove it correct. Antiquated, backward, puritanical views of female sexuality and sex in general are pervasive, common and ready for the scrap heap.
Oh my god, the "girl" had an independent thought! Congrats for coining a new term, "Ambertrap". I'm totally using that one in our next editorial meeting.
Reply
Dave Forster said 3:47AM on 3-03-2008
Ok... there's only one way to settle this... why don't you go ahead and post some naked pictures of yourself and perhaps some voting buttons... "Pro" / "Unpro".
See what the stats say after say... 24 hrs ;-)
Reply
Fred Thompson said 4:41AM on 3-03-2008
Bingo, Grant. Gen X Americans most certainly ARE highly unprofessional. This really isn't that difficult to verify, ask any headhunter.
The rest of your post fits the psychological term, "projection." In that regard, it's similar to Amber's complaining at the other guy. You're also fabricating personal attacks instead of debating the issue, a sure sign of someone who isn't confident in the validity of their position.
Western society does not put people with extensive body modification in positions of responsibility. It doesn't matter if you agree or not.
You can see a face shot of Amber on her posts and profile. Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder, no doubt, but there's a lot of truth to the observation that women who complain about the attention attractive women get feel overshadowed. It's no different than the guy with the better car or fatter wallet. Women buy fake boobs, guys lease cars. Both are fakers.
Reply
Amber Rhea said 7:09AM on 3-03-2008
I'm not going to devote a lot of time or energy to responding to ridiculous comments that prove my point. But I mean, what I would really love is for somebody to just tell me, *without* reinforcing any of the shit I called out, WHY posting naked photos online is unprofessional. And stuff like this: "Inability to confine sexual behavior to private life is considered low class and untrustworthy" does NOT count, because it doesn't answer the 'why.' I see that ignorant statement and I think, "Yep, it sure is! And that's a problem!" The whole point of what I'm getting at is trying to address the ROOT of those perceptions. Okay, you have that perception. But why? Where does it come from? Have you challenged yourself about why you believe that, or have you just regurgitated what the dominant culture has fed you?
Reply
Amber Rhea said 7:12AM on 3-03-2008
Furthermore, comment #7 wouldn't have been left on an identical blog post written by a guy. Which also basically proves my entire point. And.... SCENE!
Reply
Rocketboy said 9:57AM on 3-03-2008
Yes, you should all be ashamed of yourselves for not thinking just like Amber.
Amber.. Show me a man trying to make the same argument as you, and then you'll find a comment just like in number 7. Apples meet oranges. Do you see a difference? Good.
Reply
Amber Rhea said 10:51AM on 3-03-2008
"But it does mean that most people (*raising hand*) still feel varying degrees of discomfort about sex(ual discussions) in public."
Right! And see, the key here? Is *own your shit.* Yeah, lots of people feel uncomfortable with sexuality, discussions of sexuality, people who are *not* uncomfortable with sexuality, etc. But, the first step is, you (generic "you") gotta own that that's *your* issue. And then you address it -- examine where it came from, why you feel the way you do, and what you might want to do to make changes. What you *don't* do is project your insecurities onto others and avoid dealing w/ your own issues.
Reply
tiffany said 11:27AM on 3-03-2008
Eh, I agree that naked pictures aren't "professional." But then my definition of professional means 'a straight-laced, line toe-er, who stifles emotions, and wears uncomfortable clothes for 8 hours a day.'
So maybe this isn't about 'professionalism' per se, but more about this crazy notion that 'sex(y)' and 'smart' or 'capable' can't exist in the same person.
It doesn't mean that sex is an unworthy topic that can't and shouldn't be discussed intelligently. But it does mean that most people (*raising hand*) still feel varying degrees of discomfort about sex(ual discussions) in public.
Reply
Grant Robertson said 11:33AM on 3-03-2008
Maybe a more cogent argument here is, why "professionalism" is some sort of holy grail?
-Are "professionals" more reliable?
-Are they better at problem solving? Community building? Managing customer expectations?
Or is that just your perception?
I'm fully behind meritocracy. I've hired, I've fired, I've managed both creative types and engineers and I can say from my own experience, I don't much care what you look like or what you do in your spare time as much as I care that you get the job done, done well, and are able to make the right decisions without a ton of my time.
I can't find a salient argument to connect any of those qualities with naked pictures, tattoos, piercings, or "professionalism" as it's being defined here. Take all the naked shots you want, post them wherever. As long as you hit the dates on my editorial calendar, or ship code when you say you will, I couldn't personally care less.
Reply
Amber Rhea said 11:43AM on 3-03-2008
Okay, don't know why Tiffany's comment is showing up *after* mine... obviously she posted hers first bc I quoted and replied to part of it! The timestamp must be going funky.
Reply
Rocketboy said 12:06PM on 3-03-2008
Ok, how's this for why.
If I show up somewhere on a loud harley with a do-rag, full leathers and a scruffy beard, people are going to think that I'm a biker, and associate me with bikers.
If I show up somewhere in a nice car, well groomed, and well dressed, people are going to think that i'm a 'professional', and associate me with 'professional' people.
If I show up with my boxers showing because my pants are so low, wearing two baseball caps with the brims going in different directions, an oversized basketball jersey, and blasting gangster rap, people are going to think that I'm a thug, and associate me with thugs.
Do I need to go on?
Reply
farmok said 12:48PM on 3-03-2008
Here is my take on this topic. I agree with what you say Amber. Discussing sex should never be considered a negative thing, and does not reflect your level of professionalism. Unfortunately, sex is having a bad rap. Like you said, the media loves to show all the negatives that involve sex and sexuality, but the minute someone tries to bring it up in a positive and constructive manner, they are shut out. Why this has happened requires more than one post to delve into, but it would make for a great discussion. Short answer based on my observation would be man and religion, but like I said, its more complicated than that.
The way I see it, we need more panels and conferences like yours, to educate people, and open their eyes. Sex does not have to be evil.
Reply
Anonman said 12:50PM on 3-03-2008
Pornstars are all about sexuality,and they are professionals.
So sex does not ncessarilly relate to unprofessionalism.
So for sake of argument, sex and professionalism can go hand in hand (no pun intended).
Reply
Jake said 12:50PM on 3-03-2008
Wait, is this still Download Squad? For the life of me, I can't reconcile the content of this post with the overall theme of this blog. Am I missing something?
Reply
Amber Rhea said 12:51PM on 3-03-2008
Also, what Regina Lynn said, far more eloquently than I: http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/commentary/sexdrive/2007/04/sexdrive_0413
Reply