Reader “Jim” doesn’t like that I have password-protected posts. Heavens!
What intrigues me is that after you’ve openly discussed having sex at a swinger’s club, what aspects of one’s life might warrant a password protected post. After some thought, I’ve concluded the two go hand in hand. If I wanted to share a private thought with friends, I’d send an email. Heck, I might even pick up a phone. But if I were an exhibitionist, I’d do the blog-equivalent of “I’ve got a secret.”
You got a sweet theory, boy!
I emailed him:
I was going to respond to your rather nebulous post about me on your blog, but since you don’t have comments, I can’t. There’s a lesson in there about glass houses and stones, I think. If I cared enough to bother playing such a game, that is.
Sorry if you don’t like the password protected thing, but oh well, it’s my blog. It’s amusing to me that you think going to a sex club is OMG TEH MOST PRIVATE PERSONAL THING EVAR!!!!1!1! - as if real people’s real lives aren’t actually much more complicated than that. Perhaps for your next trick, you could post your full medical records?
Anyway, kisses, and thanks for being a fan. In the interest of transparency, I’ll be sure to blog this email, as well.
This is now completely recursive.
READ ME: Disclaimer
8 Responses to "All for the nookie"
The irony of this is that you had to email him, because Reader “Jim” doesn’t accept comments on his own blog.*
* - Which is the blog equivalent of “I’m an insecure asshat with no time for opinions other than my own.”
Well.
In fairness… sometimes that is true. Not always.
There have been posts where I’ve turned off comments. It’s not because I’m insecure. It’s because I didn’t have the time or patience to deal with a whole lotta bullshit re: whatever it was I posted about. My blog is, first and foremost, for ME. I decide when comments are acceptable and when they are not. Anyone who disagrees with the calls I make in that regard can kindly fuck right off. No, sometimes, I do not want to hear other people’s opinions, because sometimes, other people’s opinions are completely irrelevant.
So, while I think having no comments at all on one’s blog is a bit odd, and I acknowledge that closing comments certainly can point to insecurity on the blog owner’s part, I also will defend anyone’s right to do whatever they want on their own blog, and I acknowledge that’s it not always that simple and clean-cut. Using that kind of generalization is an easy way of not acknowledging nuance. And it gets waaaaaay too close to the “FREE SPEECH!!11!1″ (translation: I should be free to come over and shit in the middle of your living room and you can’t kick me out) blather for my comfort.
Not that you were doing any of that, Thomas; just notin’, is all.
pst..jim…it ain’t none o yo bidness.
I’m trying to give Jim the benefit of the doubt. He’s not being particularly rude, he just doesn’t get it. Right? I’m trying not to just roll my eyes and flip up the hypocrisy mirror. Dialogue, right? (Again, resisting the hypocrisy mirror…) We enjoy dialogue.
Okay…
If you start with typical social constructions, I can see how one might think there is nothing more personal than going to a sex club. However, if you take the thought process one step further, perhaps it should also be clear that the very act of going to a sex club is indicative that that isn’t the most private aspect of your life.
Right?
Going to a public place means you’re…out in public. By its very definition, it’s not so private.
Additionally, and I think much more importantly, it should be noted that Amber has made deliberate efforts to be as forthcoming and honest as possible on her blog. This is a medium that she loves, is comfortable in and has consciously tried to push herself to be open. What I think these semi-public posts should really throw into light is how bold and open her blog really is. The fact that it is so rare for her to not put herself out there for anyone and everyone needs to be considered.
Concerning the “I have a secret” question / “exhibitionism,” I admit that it’s easier for me to shrug that off because, yeah, I know the password and I know what was in the post. I know it was a situation that would have just spiraled into needless drama, had it been out for public consumption. The argument of “so just send an email then,” is fair, but it’s just as fair to do what Amber did and blog it for a limited audience. I would wager that those of us who know Amber well and would have been on the receiving end of that mythical email are all here and reading anyway. It’s just as easy to say, “Here’s the password, read if you will, on your own time.”
Frankly, at this point, it seems truer to me for Amber to blog things, even if she’s oh-so-rarely doing so in a less public way. (Not that I don’t love talking, chatting, emailing and good lord, seeing you, should we ever be in the same state again, my dear!) Amber’s blog and the way she chooses to blog is, I believe, a much more significant aspect of her life and is approached much more deliberately than the vast majority of blogs are for their authors. What is strange for me is when I know there are things in her life that aren’t being blogged - for very good and incontrovertible reasons. It’s still odd to know they aren’t being addressed here.
So, Jim…what appears to you to be incongruous, appears to me to be the more honest route - the more authentic route. Just as it’s your right, Jim, to not have comments open on your blog, it’s Amber’s choice to, very rarely, limit her readers. One would hope that both of those things could be done without eliciting snark and criticism.
Amusing irony, perhaps, but not criticism.
Apologies that this is so long and rambling. It’s been a long day…
((((((((())))))))
I love you.
To reiterate:
((((((((())))))))
See, Jim? This is why Jenny gets the password, and you don’t. This is why there was a password to begin with. Because people who don’t have a fucking clue about who I am simply would not “get it.” And I don’t have the time, energy, and *certainly* not the obligation to try to placate such people.
As for the stuff I’m not blogging… well. “Good and incontrovertible” - yeah, those are two apt words.
And as I said in my interview for Naked on the Internet, there’s also the whole overlap between *my* life and experiences and *other people’s* lives and experiences. Hence, not blogging about my ex’s transition when all that shit was in the early stages and sie wasn’t out to hir family and friends.
:-D I love you too.
And I’m really fucking proud of you and your blog. There will be NO implications of you not being open and forthcoming in this space. :-) None.
I respect a person’s decision to reveal exactly as much of their personal lives as is their inclination. I in no way fault Amber for the decision to exclude any aspect of her life from the blog for any reason, good, incontrovertible or otherwise. My criticism and/or snark is with the method that Amber chose to protect her privacy. To that point, I’ll let my post speak for itself.
OK… So now that you’ve clarified, I still don’t understand your point, Jim. Yes, the protection offered by a simple, shared password is only as good as the least trustworthy person with whom it is shared. What the hell does that have to do with a post about a sex club? Your insinuation is thus:
A. She’s posted about visiting a sex club before
B. Amber therefore doesn’t actually have anything she wishes to keep private
C. The password protection must therefore be intended not to keep her post private, but to serve an exhibitionist need to pretend to have a secret
Assertion B is still at the heart of your snark, and it’s a downright flimsy assertion.
While I’m sure Amber understands that a single, shared password isn’t exactly 128-bit encryption, I don’t think your assumption is warranted.
Leave a comment