There have been a couple of comments about having a content disclaimer and a NSFW (not safe for work) tag on the top of my column, Ask Professor Foxy. The folks at Feministing and I have been discussing this and have thought up a couple of ways to handle the fact that the column is always going to be sexually explicit and almost always deal with NSFW topics.
We wanted to throw our ideas out at you so you can let us know your thoughts. First, my blog title will always give a general idea of the topic, i.e. last week's was on porn and the title said so. Second, we will run some kind of disclaimer along the top to the effect of:
Feministing's weekly Saturday column "Ask Professor Foxy" will regularly contain sexually explicit material. This material is likely not safe for work viewing. The title of the column will include the major topic of the post, so please read the topic when deciding whether or not to read the entire column.
We also discussed not having the full column appear on the front page, which we thought was not a great idea. Feministing often deals with sex and sexuality, and burying the content behind the jump feels like a way of hiding actual sex and making it shameful. If there was one thing I want to avoid is connecting shame and sex.
If you have any strong opinions, let us know in comments!
Thanks to everyone who has been contributing to the dialogue on the new series.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: About Ask Professor Foxy.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12839
lol! Who is sitting at work reading blogs? Can I have your job?! No, seriously... where do you work, and can you quit, and can I get hired? :o)
Yeah, seriously--if it's that much of a problem, just don't read blogs at work.
Personally, I don't mind what the topic of the post is, but if you are going to post explicit *pictures* I would like them to be behind a jump. Pictures can be seen by someone far away from the computer and can cause a lot more trouble than any text. Other than that, I think that sex comes up on this site often enough that it shouldn't be a big surprise when there is a post about sex. If someone will get in trouble for reading text about sex or rape or porn they shouldn't be reading Feministing at all at work. But most people will probably be fine as long as there are no photos or giant bold explicit text.
I agree with MissKitty--I know what I'm getting when I log on here, but that doesn't mean I necessarily need to broadcast it to the entire office. So, a warning about photos would be appreciated, but as far as text goes, anything is fare game.
And speaking of shaming and sex: The cow is not for sale
Uh, was it ever unclear that Ask Professor Foxy is a SEX COLUMN? Also, if you're going to be squeamish about clicking on a blog about sex, are you also uncomfortable opening a website with a naked lady holding up a middle finger? Have some common sense folks...
Some people use RSS readers... although there's no RSS feed for the comments so I still have to follow through to the main site for anything I'm really interested in.
This is somewhat off-topic, but ProfessorFoxy, can I ask you some historic questions about women's sexualities? Like, there's sooo much stuff I am curious about how women dealt with periods, pregnancies and STDS in the past, but I don't know anybody to ask on the Internet.
Try looking up the Museum of Menstruation. That is a good starting place. There are also historical books in Google Books you can look at for free.
I wrote a paper over the same topic last semester, dealing with 19th century women. Good luck!
thanks. I never heard of Musuem of Menstruation.
Ask away! Just send her emails, and she's open to answering all sorts of questions.
Thanks for everyone's thoughts. We know not everyone has an issue with this, but since we got a few emails and comments we thought it'd be better to address it openly.
I see the logic behind using a jump honestly.
I read this at work and I know I wouldn't get in trouble for an article about date rape or something of the sort, but if something says "so there I was, with his X in my Y..."*, I highly doubt that would fly. I don't see it as making sex shameful. To me its about it being in the abstract vs. reality.
*I'm at work as I type this.
(not that I'm trying to imply that the two subjects deal with the same kind of info. For a better example, I wouldn't get in trouble for reading about something concerning sexuality in the abstract)
I used to read feministing at work! Last time I was scrolling through and the title for the sex column was "Ask Professor Foxy: How much porn is too much porn?"
Which is the exact moment I decided to stop reading feministing at work. I would be embarassed if my boss/coworker happened to walk by while I'm on that article. So those are my two cents.
Have you been reading the Feministing Community? Because there have been several posts on that exact same subject in the past few weeks before Professor Foxy's last column.
Maybe the owners of the blog want to have a different policy for the main site and for the community site, and that's certainly up to them. But I tend to read them both at once and so I know there has been tons of explicit stuff on the community pages, and I wouldn't click to them if I was worried about being seen reading about those issues.
I like that Professor Foxy's column is up front and before the jump. If it were hidden, I'd assume that less people would read it, and sometimes these columns are important to read. For example, the column about feminists having submissive sexual fantasies was very interesting for me and was a question I hadn't thought to ask but had wondered about for a long time. If the column wasn't on the front page, I may not have seen it.
And by the way, I read Feministing regularly in class, and everyone in class around me can see it and read it if they so choose. I figure if we shouldn't be ashamed about sex and sexual topics, why hide it? Of course, I don't have a boss to get angry about it, and my professors aren't aware I'm reading Feministing instead of taking notes.
My jobs aren't desk-type jobs, so I don't read much of anything during them, but I do have one more point about reading Feministing at work: I get that your boss may not want to pay you for your time while you read a blog, but why should a blog that tackles sexual topics be treated differently than a game site or a random entertainment site?
Basically, yeah, maybe we shouldn't read Feministing or Ask Professor Foxy at work, but technically we also shouldn't be playing Text Twist or checking out fmylife.com on the clock. I'm probably being naive, but I don't see the difference between reading one material over another during work time. I mean, it's a sex column, not explicit porn.
Some workplaces have really draconian rules in an attempt to avoid lawsuits for sexual harassment for a hostile work environment. But I think if you work at one of those places a lot of things on this blog would probably be an issue.
Just a head's up that the link to ask professor foxy is broken. Missing the 'h' in 'http'
Thanks! It should be fixed now.
Don't change a thing!
It's awesome if you can read blogs at work (seriously, who wouldn't if they could?), but I don't think that's the goal of Feministing, right? I mean, you want the site to be accessible and all, but I just don't think this is necessary. With other sites that are inappropriate for work, wouldn't you just check it later in the day?
There's a difference between making sex seem shameful and putting possibly triggering discussions behind a cut. Posts about the experiences of rape survivors/victims are put behind cuts and its not because it wants to make rape something that is hidden.
I totally support not modifying the main page.
For me, a lot of the reason feministing is good is because it's subversive. Part of the art of subversivity is toeing the line without going over it.
Perhaps a "www.feministing.org/sfw/" with a filter for NSFW content would be a good solution. Allows people who work in fascist environments to be subversive without getting fired.
As it stands now, it seems bizarre to me that trigger warnings are offered. And also that trigger warnings are offered but not NSFW warnings.
I like this idea. I definitely don't work in a fascist environment, but I am still uncomfortable with the idea of my boss or co-workers stumbling upon me while I'm reading something sexually explicit.
I generally don't read Feministing at work because I'm busy doing my job, but I do have downtime and break-time (database work for the last two hours = 5-10 minutes of me looking at something unrelated so as to clear my head!).
I agree that making sex and sexuality seem shameful would be against the nature of this site. But, even there are lots of things that aren't shameful that I'd still not discuss at work - my own sex life, medical conditions, family problems, and so on. Nothing to be ashamed of, but for me personally it just doesn't seem like the right environment to talk about it. (And I wouldn't describe my workplace as a "fascist" environment; this is just my own preference.)
I think the Dr. Foxy column differs fundamentally from the rest of the content on the main site in that it answers personal questions rather than addressing cultural and political issues. So, I don't think it would be strange to treat it a bit differently than other posts on the main site.
I agree that making sex and sexuality seem shameful would be against the nature of this site. But, even there are lots of things that aren't shameful that I'd still not discuss at work - my own sex life, medical conditions, family problems, and so on. Nothing to be ashamed of, but for me personally it just doesn't seem like the right environment to talk about it. (And I wouldn't describe my workplace as a "fascist" environment; this is just my own preference.)
I think the Dr. Foxy column differs fundamentally from the rest of the content on the main site in that it answers personal questions rather than addressing cultural and political issues. So, I don't think it would be strange to treat it a bit differently than other posts on the main site.
I agree that making sex and sexuality seem shameful would be against the nature of this site. But, even there are lots of things that aren't shameful that I'd still not discuss at work - my own sex life, medical conditions, family problems, and so on. Nothing to be ashamed of, but for me personally it just doesn't seem like the right environment to talk about it. (And I wouldn't describe my workplace as a "fascist" environment; this is just my own preference.)
I think the Professor Foxy column differs fundamentally from the rest of the content on the main site in that it answers personal questions rather than addressing cultural and political issues. So, I don't think it would be strange to treat it a bit differently than other posts on the main site.
I'm a fan of Feministing and I think the"Ask Professor Foxy" column is a positive contribution to the dialogue. One question that comes to mind is whether the "sex and sexuality shouldn't be shameful" message is diminished by the pseudonymity of the advice-giver. In other words, would the pro-sex, pro-sexuality message be enhanced if the columnist were willing/able/free (enough) from constraints to use her own name?
I myself do not have an answer to the question. There is no doubt that female bloggers are subject to a particularly nasty vitriol and harassment. But do women collectively "lose" when some of our clearest voices aren't associated with a real-life person? Conversely do women "gain" (freedom? empowerment?) when some of our clearest voices aren't associated with a real-life person?
I should add that I'm aware that via click-throughs, readers can learn that there is a person (who uses her own name) "behind" the pseudonym. My question goes to whether the effectiveness would be enhanced/decreased by the association of a "real name" with the column/screen post itself.