Being Amber Rhea

As you’ve seen if you read my Twitter tweets, a few days ago BlogHer Atlanta, along with the three other Southern locations of the BlogHer Reach Out tour (Greensboro, Nashville, New Orleans) has been canceled.

:( :( :(

(I guess this means I don’t have to worry about writing that other post where I talk about how I found people’s reactions to my panel announcement to be weird and hurtful!)

I’m going to try to cover as much as possible in this post - and there’s a lot to cover. Admittedly it might not be the best time for me to be writing it, as I’ve just taken a Klonopin and drank some sort of espresso/mint concocation, discovered a mysterious crack in my car windshield, fought for 15 minutes to unstick my parking break, and am generally freaking out about staying in Augusta for another two days while Rusty is in Knoxville. I really really don’t want to, but I know I’ll end up staying - at least til Saturday evening. You would think my dad died yesterday with the way my moods are all over the place. So, yeah, maybe not the best time. BUT, I don’t want to keep putting it off, and I’m in this Metro Coffeehouse and it seems (for the time being, anyway; that may change when these fratty-looking fools who just walked in start shooting pool) like a conducive place for blogging - moreso than my mom’s living room, for some reason.

ANYWAY. Onward to BlogHer stuff. If I leave something out, it’s just an oversight, as there’s a lot of related stuff swimming around in my head, and I’ll probably do a follow-up post in that case.

Also none of this is a personal dig at Elisa Camahort, who I think is great. BUT I do think BlogHer as an organization handled this situation poorly, and I feel I have the right to share that criticism, and hopefully they will be receptive.

The official explanation was inadequate “sponsor and community support” in these cities. I think this is an unfair and dishonest way of rhetorically shifting the blame to the communities. We have LOTS of community support for social media here in Atlanta. If the problem is lack of sponsor dollars, that’s not the same thing as lack of community support. Yes, I know it says “sponsor AND community support,” but the way that’s worded, the conflation is bound to happen whether it’s intentional or not.

Also you simply cannot have the same expectations for Atlanta that you have for LA, San Francisco, or New York. We have a thriving social media community here, BUT it does not (nor should it) look like the scenes in those cities. That doesn’t mean we don’t deserve a chance. And it feels pretty shitty to constantly get passed by. I remember when I was in the early planning stages of Sex 2.0, somebody (Melissa, maybe? I can’t remember) suggested I move it to San Francisco to coincide w/ Arse Elektronika or the Folsom Street Fair or something. My answer was an emphatic NO! I live in Atlanta, so why would I hold a conference that’s my brainchild in another city? Also, I am sick and tired of EVERYTHING being in California and New York. There are other places out there, believe it or not, and a lot of ‘em are pretty darn cool. As Jen said on Twitter: “Assuming that said community support doesn’t exist, how it (sic) one supposed to build it up without conferences?”

Basically I think BlogHer was aiming to do too much too soon w/ these Reach Out tours. Yes, it is definitely awesome that they provide breakfast and lunch at their conferences; but that’s not necessary. Cocktail parties are also nice, but again, not necessary. Sex 2.0 didn’t have any of those frills and it was a blast - because of the people and energy in attendance. That’s what will truly make or break any event.

Another issue may have been purely logistical; Darcey pointed out on Twitter, “Maybe has to do with the conference being held for one day during middle of the weel (sic)? Maybe if it were a Friday, would be diff.” I think there’s definitely some truth to that - it can be hard for people to get time off work.

I don’t know if I can convey how much I was looking forward to this panel. And we had some really awesome panelists lined up: yours truly (duh), Tiffany Brown, Amy Davis, and Callie Simms, with Elisa moderating. An excellent diversity of opinions and experiences, and only one panelist was not from Atlanta. To recap, this was the panel description:

The “Naked” Blogging Double Standard
At just about every BlogHer event we end up discussing the ramifications of “naked” blogging; that is, blogging your true self. Blogging’s low barrier to entry has provided a platform for everyone, and particularly women, to tell our own stories, to create a more diverse cultural record than has been historically typical, and to own our experiences and how transparently we choose to share those experiences. Every blogger draws their boundaries differently. In a survey BlogHer conducted a couple of years ago bloggers indicated that it was more taboo to discuss finances on their blog than sex! But, let’s get real: Really? We’re not sure we’re buying it. Is anyone else out there blown away by how much conflict the issues of gender, sex and sexuality (and society’s expectations of how women “should” behave) still stir up… and by how much judgment is still thrown at women who ignore the admonishment that “nice girls don’t?”

Every year at BlogHer the debate rages: Can we talk about shoes and still be taken seriously? Well, let’s take it a step further: Can women talk openly about sex and still be taken seriously? And is it different for men? Women certainly don’t agree on the answer, so you can be sure the answer is even more unclear in segments of society, industry and the blogosphere that are more male-dominated. How do we challenge that status quo - and support women in their choices, even when they might not be our choices? Join Amber Rhea, one of the women leading the charge for change, in a frank discussion designed to expose the naked blogging double standard and challenge our preconceived notions of what it means to be taken seriously.

I feel VERY passionately about this topic, and I don’t see it being discussed very many places. (And by “very many places” I mean “at all.”) I was SO looking forward to having a somewhat formal panel of questions, also with time for plenty of audience input and sharing of experiences, on this very important and under-explored topic, in a space with primarily women who blog or use social media in other ways.

I’ll be leading a session next weekend at BlogOrlando on a somewhat-related topic; hence:

Professionalism 2.0
What does “professionalism” mean in the context of blogging? Is it a matter of the topics you write about, the language you use, the amount of research you put into a typical post - or all or none of the above? Social media tools offer us the opportunity to express our full humanity instead of compartmentalizing aspects of who we are. To what degree do we need to adjust our pre-conceived notions about what’s professional and what isn’t?

And don’t get me wrong, it’s not that I’m not excited about this, because I definitely am. But it won’t be a mostly-women space, and thus the conversation won’t center on how these deeply entrenched and unexamined biases affect us as women online, and how we (consciously or unconsciously) replicate existing arbitrary standards among ourselves. It will also be an unconference format (which, duh, I love) so there won’t be a formal panel with a moderator, and I think this particular topic is one that is well-served by having a bit of structure.

Elisa mentioned in an email to me that she really likes the topic and hopes I will consider bringing it to BlogHer ‘09. At this point, I don’t know. It kind of feels like, “Sorry you couldn’t present this in your own community and engage the opinions of local social media participants; but hey, fly your ass all the way to California and do it here, because this is the place that really matters.”

Not a good feeling. Once again the South is passed over, deemed “not good enough.”

And it’s not just me who’s sad - a lot of people on Twitter and in email were conveying their disappointment.

Now, I also want to be kind of devil’s advocate here - or not really devil’s advocate, but just address some things that would be valid criticisms if I left it just at this. First of all, it annoyed the shit out of me when I saw people whining and complaining on Twitter about BlogHer ATL being “too expensive.” Well, what do you expect? Do you really expect to be handed an awesome event on a platter for free? If it pisses you off that much, try organizing your own event and then maybe you’ll see how it’s not exactly a walk in the park. The two conferences I’ve organized, which are much smaller in scale than BlogHer ATL would have been (although, tangent: there’s no reason it couldn’t have been on that smaller scale, and in fact originally I thought that was the whole point of the Reach Out tour) drained me completely, so that I will never do anything like that again. And guess what, that shit COSTS MONEY. Even Sex 2.0, where we had no frills whatsoever, cost just over $4,000 - and there were STILL people bitching about paying the $40 admission!! (And you know how much I hate the word “bitching,” so I must be pretty worked up to use it here.) I just get so damn irritated with people who just expect that everything should be handed to them and wah wah wah if it costs “too much.” Fuck that. You want community events, let’s sack up and make ‘em happen - and quit whining!

But all that being said, I do think BlogHer could have (and should have) scaled back the event and then the admission would’ve been able to be lower and then more people might have signed up. Of course, you can’t make people go to anything - and lord knows I’ve dealt with more than my share of lazy asses who say they’ll do something or come to something and then they JUST DON’T - but that might have helped a bit. And then next year people might be willing to pay more for an event with more frills. (Keep in mind, too, that salaries and such in Atlanta aren’t what they are in LA!)

And now I have totally lost my train of thought. There was more I wanted to say, and certainly some of the above that I didn’t say nearly as eloquently as I should. I’ll go ahead and stop for now, though, and put this up in its imperfect state, and let the flamage commence, I guess. I better go get a chicken salad sandwich at New Moon… all I’ve had to eat all day is a banana and a plum, and that can’t be helping my frazzled state.

Overall I am just really, really sad about BlogHer Atlanta being canceled. I’m not sure many people truly understood how important this was to me. Now I don’t know if I’ll ever get a chance to hold a forum on this topic that I’m so passionate about.

Hey, guess what? I’m hosting a panel at BlogHer Atlanta! Here’s the description:

The “Naked” Blogging Double Standard
At just about every BlogHer event we end up discussing the ramifications of “naked” blogging; that is, blogging your true self. Blogging’s low barrier to entry has provided a platform for everyone, and particularly women, to tell our own stories, to create a more diverse cultural record than has been historically typical, and to own our experiences and how transparently we choose to share those experiences. Every blogger draws their boundaries differently. In a survey BlogHer conducted a couple of years ago bloggers indicated that it was more taboo to discuss finances on their blog than sex! But, let’s get real: Really? We’re not sure we’re buying it. Is anyone else out there blown away by how much conflict the issues of gender, sex and sexuality (and society’s expectations of how women “should” behave) still stir up… and by how much judgment is still thrown at women who ignore the admonishment that “nice girls don’t?”

Every year at BlogHer the debate rages: Can we talk about shoes and still be taken seriously? Well, let’s take it a step further: Can women talk openly about sex and still be taken seriously? And is it different for men? Women certainly don’t agree on the answer, so you can be sure the answer is even more unclear in segments of society, industry and the blogosphere that are more male-dominated. How do we challenge that status quo - and support women in their choices, even when they might not be our choices? Join Amber Rhea, one of the women leading the charge for change, in a frank discussion designed to expose the naked blogging double standard and challenge our preconceived notions of what it means to be taken seriously.

Many thanks to super-cool Elisa for giving me this opportunity. (Gee, do I sound like I’m accepting any Emmy or something?) I hope you folks reading this will come and help make it an interesting panel. (I resisted the urge to say, sarcastically, “join the conversation.”) You can register for BlogHer Atlanta here. And here’s the run-down of what the BlogHer Reach Out Tour is all about, if you’re too lazy to click through:

BlogHer’s Reach Out Tour:
Register now for BlogHer ATLANTA ‘08!

When?
Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Where?
Georgia Tech Hotel & Conference Center
800 Spring St NW
Atlanta, Georgia 30308
404.347.9440

What is BlogHer ATLANTA ‘08 About?
For the first time ever, BlogHer is launching a two-week tour, bringing highlights from the annual event to six different cities. Each of these one-day conferences will feature a broad range of topics and speakers, a cocktail reception for networking and socializing, and a little bit of local flavor. We’ll be focusing on topics that seem to resonate strongest in each city, and looking for your local bloggers to lead the discussions.

BlogHer ATLANTA is the fifth stop on the six-city Reach Out Tour, and we’re looking forward to spending time with the many and varied “Hotlanta” bloggers. Details about the agenda, speakers, and sponsors coming soon. In the meantime, please sign up to receive the BlogHer Conference Newsletter and get announcements as they happen. Or sign up to receive our Conference RSS feed.

Who Should Attend?
BlogHer is open to anyone and everyone who considers themselves part of the blogosphere, and is particularly focused on highlighting the skills and talents of women who blog. All ages, ethnicities, genders, and levels of blogging experience are encouraged to attend.

Additional Info:

• Every stop on the tour will feature a track specifically designed for new and beginning bloggers.
• The cocktail reception will take place on-site at the hotel.
• If you’re thinking about bringing your partner, spouse, or kids — great! If your partner is not interested in attending the programming with you but would like to join us for the cocktail parties, that ticketing option is available.

Fees:
BlogHer ATLANTA ‘08 costs $100 for the full day, and this includes admission to the cocktail reception.

BlogHer will be staying on-site at the Georgia Tech Hotel and Conference center. If you’re interested in staying there as well, please call (800) 838-2060. Please note: We do not have a BlogHer group rate available at this venue.

Note: You will not be required to enter any billing information before you’ve had an opportunity to review and select from the various registration options; however, BlogHer cannot issue refunds.

About BlogHer:
BlogHer has developed one of the most influential communities by, for, about and of women who blog. BlogHer’s mission is to create opportunities for women bloggers to pursue education, exposure, community and economic empowerment through our online platforms and conferences.

More to come… must get back to work now.

ETA: Now the title doesn’t make sense, because I changed my mind and got rid of the bullets.

Part of why I’m on the fence about BlogHer Atlanta? Well, aside from the $100 entry fee (which is totally fine of them to charge; I am NOT being one of those people who complains about anything that’s not totally free at the expense of someone else’s hard work), there’s also the fact that I’m just over a lot of these conferences.

Rusty and I talked about why on a podcast a while ago. They’ve become commercialized, but that’s not even the word. Cartoonized, maybe? Firefox spellcheck doesn’t know that word (but then it doesn’t know “spellcheck” either) but I think it’s the most apt. If I hear the word “conversation” again I may puke.

And I’m really not trying to be one of those too-cool-for-school assholes who blogs about why blogging sucks, or that kind of thing. I HATE that!

But look, here’s the truth. In addition to the cartoony, sales-pitchy bullshit, I don’t feel welcome at these conferences. With rare exception, I never really have - it just took me a while to admit it to myself, I guess. The BlogSavannah experience was a breakthrough, of course, but there have been so many other instances that I’ve lost count.

When you talk about sex, and you’re a woman, and you’re a tech geek, and you (gasp!) also talk about things other than sex (because OMG, people who aren’t ashamed about sex do other things in their lives, too)… well, let’s just say it doesn’t add up to a good combination, with a lot of people. There are some awesome people, sure. But they don’t tend to be the majority at these conferences. Which is one reason I created Sex 2.0 - to bring all those people together and none (or, well, very few) of the sucky ones!

Sometimes I wonder how much of me not feeling welcome is an accurate perception of reality, and how much is self-induced. Then I remember how good I am at reading people and situations, and that my intuition is almost always spot on, and that I always doubt it anyway, because somehow that seems like the proper thing to do (surely we must consider all angles, surely!) and heaven forfend, I would appear “selfish” if I didn’t.

I remember the guy guffawing at BarCamp Atlanta about Sex 2.0. I remember the stupid, predictable, un-funny, adolescent-level jokes. BarCamp Atlanta pretty much sucked all around, but that’s the stuff that stands out the most in my memory. Oh, and the hooker jokes. Those fucking guys joking about going down to 11th street and finding the hookers.

Here’s a secret. When you make a hooker joke - whoever you are - I hate you, right then and there. Even if generally, rationally, I know that most of the time you’re a “good person” - whatever that even means. When you do that, I hate you, and my eyes want to seer through you.

Oh and back to being a woman who talks about sex (bullet point above). Sometimes people seem incredulous that it’s still such a “big deal.” I want to ask where the fuck they’ve been, anyway. Last week, at Manuel’s, I overheard that conversation at the table behind us, carried on by supposed friends-of-friends. I didn’t know these people, but it didn’t matter. I’ve heard a million conversations like it before. Quote: “She was really weird, she talked about sex all the time.” Quote: “Yeah, I mean she was a total weirdo… she said if we went to this party, we’d be expected to have sex in front of people!” Just shove a dagger through my chest already. We’re back to square one.

Well, I should probably wrap it up and try to get some sleep. I feel very restless, but we’re going to Radial for breakfast, so I need to get my butt to bed.

One last thing - I feel the need to say here, too, that Elisa Camahort is awesome and I’m not trying to trash BlogHer or anything like that. I had so much fun hanging out with her at ConvergeSouth - she is just a nice, cool, down-to-earth person. And look at the super cool slide she made!

Still not feeling up to writing a post of my own, and things are basically shit; but, here’s a repost from BlogHer:

If you can’t make it to BlogHer ‘08 in San Francisco this year, maybe you can join us in one of our SIX “Reach Out Tour” cities this fall? We’ll be condensing our annual event into one-day extravaganzas in Boston, DC, Nashville, Greensboro, Atlanta and New Orleans. And you can register now for any or all of them!

We’re still finalizing the various agendas, but you can expect each city’s sessions to feature fantastic speakers, relevant sessions, and a lot of local flair. Plus, we’ll have a track just for beginners (so if you know someone — your friend, sister, mother, grandmother, neighbor — who should be blogging if she just had the right tools and motivation, send her over!).

Read more about the Reach Out Tour on our official Conference Blog, or simply click on the city below to learn more about where, when, how much and how to register:

October 11 - BlogHer BOSTON

October 13 - BlogHer DC

October 16 - BlogHer NASHVILLE

October 18 - BlogHer GREENSBORO

October 21 - BlogHer ATLANTA

October 25 - BlogHer NEW ORLEANS

As of now, I’m on the fence about whether I’ll go. BlogHer ‘07 was a lot of fun, but I just haven’t decided about this Atlanta version. Not sure if I want to pay $100 to hang out with a lot of the same people I hang out with anyway. Fortunately, there’s plenty of time to decide.

Lately, Melissa keeps writing stuff that feels like something piercing my gut and brings a tear to my eye, and then I struggle to put into words what is resonating so deeply and why. Here’s the latest installment. And my rambling commences after the cut.
Read the full post »

In an email thread with potential organizers of next year’s Sex 2.0, I said something that I felt was worth reposting here, as it kind of gives a basic idea of what my “vision” was with Sex 2.0. It can also be extrapolated to other causes/events/etc.

In response to Match’s question:

3. Did the conf pay for travel/boarding for any speakers?

I answered:

You’re funny! Unless you count Dacia staying at my place, nope.

On the one hand I wish we could’ve, but that would’ve taken a shit-ton more money than I even dreamed of being able to raise. I do feel very strongly that people deserve to be paid for their hard work, including speaking, presentations, etc. - and I resent the fact that oftentimes in “progressive” circles, it’s taken as a given that people will do things “pro bono,” or they’re seen as greedy or somehow bad if they expect compensation for their efforts.

On the other hand, since fundamentally this was an unconference, setting up a hierarchy of “speaker” vs. “not-speaker” defeats the purpose. There was no call for papers. Sessions did not have to be pre-approved. Basically if somebody wanted to lead a session, they said so, and sent me a description and I posted it on the web site. It was first come, first served.

So I would caveat my first statement (”on the one hand”) by pointing out that those expectations are reasonable in some circumstances and not in others. I feel like w/ Sex 2.0, there’s a real spirit of community and all of us working for a greater good - and recognizing that we DON’T get a lot of funding, bc we have to fight tooth and nail for what little we get bc of the stigma. I feel like there was passion behind Sex 2.0 that I’ve rarely seen elsewhere.

Y’all certainly don’t have to structure it as an unconference next year if you don’t want to. Seriously, you can and should do whatever you want! Personally I think the unconference model works for Sex 2.0 in maintaining and fostering the sex commons that Elizabeth Wood spoke about. To me it makes sense for Sex 2.0 to be a space for non-hierarchical, collaborative learning. We all have things to teach and things to learn.

Finally, I will caveat THAT by saying that while I really enjoy the unconference model, I think if taken too far it descends into unmanageable chaos. I’ve had a few people lecture me on why I shouldn’t call Sex 2.0 an unconference, since it doesn’t use the “open space” model. I think these people are, quite simply, assholes - and I welcome them to run their own sex conference if they’re so full of bright ideas. I just think asking people to travel across the country without SOME idea of what to expect in terms of sessions, participants, etc. is unrealistic. I think it works best to strike a balance between the two extremes - build a general framework of expectations, and let the content grow organically.

What is Sex 2.0?

Sex 2.0 will focus on the intersection of social media, feminism, and sexuality. How is social media enabling people to learn, grow, and connect sexually? How is sexual expression tied to social activism? Does the concept of transparency online offer new opportunities or present new roadblocks — or both? These questions, and many more, will be addressed within a safe, welcoming, sex-positive space.

Respecting the confidentiality and protecting the identities of participants who wish to maintain a degree of anonymity will be a top priority at Sex 2.0.

When? April 12, 2008
Where? 1763~A Deviant Place of Decadence, 1763 Montreal Circle, Tucker, Ga., 30084
How much? $50.

REGISTRATION IS MANDATORY. We will not be taking any walk-up registrations at the door.

At Sex 2.0, everyone is a participant rather than a passive attendee. This is YOUR event!

Ahem. I had every intention of writing a WAM wrap-up post while it was still fresh in my mind, but then I had a little, er, fender-bender, and subsequently freaked out.

But as you’ve probably gathered by now, WAM was awesome. I had a blast, and it was energizing, inspiring, and fun (except for the Saturday night party, which brought back lots of bad middle school memories; but, I also met the super-cool Lisa Jervis and Debbie Rasmussen that night, so there was some good to the night).

I’ve been to a lot of conferences, but I can say with confidence that this was the best conference I’ve been to yet. Helen Thomas was introduced (appropriately) as “the patron saint of not shutting up,” and her keynote was wonderful. The sessions I went to were great. They were chock full of good, thoughtful discussion and useful, practical information. (True, I didn’t find the talking to editors session particularly useful, but hopefully there are people who did.)

Dacia’s session in particular was amazing. An entire hour and a half of conversation about sex work and the media, without devolving into the same old pro/anti bullshit. It was a smart move on Dacia’s part to lay out some ground rules at the beginning of the session; I think that’s a big part of what made the session actually productive. And, a cool new project that’s already got a lot of interest came out of it: Sex Work 101 (as mentioned here).

I am in awe of Jaclyn Friedman for making such an awesome event happen (and I told her so, in very effusive terms). I’m looking forward to next year!

All my live-blogging can be found here. Did I mention that Cover It Live rocks?

People I met:

• Joanne McNeil
• Sarah Jenny Bleviss
• Axon Damien Luxe
• Octogalore
• Apostate
• Hugo Schwyzer
• Debbie Rasmussen from Bitch Magazine
• Lisa Jervis from Bitch Magazine
• Jill from Feministe - I got the impression that Jill didn’t want to talk to me… we met at the Sunday brunch buffet and it seemed like she was faking a smile… but I could be wrong (stranger things have happened). Anyway, I was happy to meet her, and hopefully the feeling was mutual!
• Roy MacKenzie
• Tough Like a Creampuff
• Jaclyn Friedman

And, of course, a few photos:

More here.

See ya next year, WAM!

If you want to come to Sex 2.0, register by tomorrow in order to take advantage of the $10 early bird rate. On Monday, registration goes up to $40.

For those who were wondering, there will be a few volunteer opportunities. If you’re interested in one of them and have already registered, I’ll refund your money when you commit to the spots. I just need to wait a couple weeks until some of the money situation (as in, do we have any) gets sorted out before I’ll know how many and what type of spots there are.

I’m presenting at ConvergeSouth, a little less than one month from now. My session is called “Podcasting and Beyond.” I think the ConvergeSouth people gave it that name; or else I did and just don’t remember. Anyway, I want to focus on the “beyond” aspect, rather than getting tied up in boring technical details and talking about the pros and cons of various audio editors (I hate talking about that kind of shit) and explaining what an RSS feed is, and such. But “beyond” is pretty broad, so if you’re going to be there and have an opinion about what the general theme of the session should be, let me know.

ConvergeSouth is an unconference, so it’s not like I’ll be yakking the whole time. I plan to talk for like 5-10 minutes at the beginning, and then just do the open-ended discussion thing; but even with an open-ended discussion, you need some kind of unifying theme.

Share your thoughts!

Friday evening, I talked with a guy (not using his name at the moment in case he doesn’t want me to) who has coordinated lots of events and is very well-connected in terms of knowing people who would be interested in Sex 2.0. I told him some of the stuff I was stressing out about: how to get sponsors, how to make it look like an attractive venture without compromising what we want to do, what to do if we can’t get enough sponsors to cover the overhead costs, my worries that other people involved weren’t doing their fair share, and so on and so forth.

His advice?

Charge $10 admission rather than relying on sponsors to cover costs. That way, we’re not beholden to sponsors’ wants or squicks, and we can do it our way. As for the $10 admission, he said, if people say they’re not going to come because we’re charging $10, then they weren’t going to come in the first place, because that’s not a valid excuse. And if they really are pissed about such a paltry price, then we don’t want them there anyway. Also, people tend to be more invested in something if they have to pay, even if the price is low. For one thing that’ll make our headcount much more accurate.

Additionally, we can have vendor tables at a low cost. I think this is great, because one of the things I’ve wanted to do with this ever since I came up w/ the Sex 2.0 idea is showcase local sex-positive businesses and organizations. This way, that goal will be accomplished, and I won’t have to beg them for money. I know many of the places I have in mind don’t have the kind of money that we would need from sponsors, but I don’t want them to be excluded from the event, which is what would’ve happened with the old model.

All in all, I feel about 100 times better about Sex 2.0 after that conversation, and I have a renewed feeling of inspiration and vigor! I also decided to ditch the wiki and make a WordPress-based web site instead. There will be a blog component, of course. It’s pretty much complete: http://sex20con.com. The registration page works and everything. Did I mention, Eventbrite rocks my socks?

So, once again, mark your calendars for April 12, 2008. Sex 2.0 is going to be an amazing event!!

[Cross-posted on the Sex 2.0 blog]

This October will mark the third ConvergeSouth unconference, which I believe (and don’t quote me on this, ’cause I might be wrong) was the first new media unconference in the South. Rusty and I were there last year and it proved to be the gateway drug for what’s developed into an unconference addiction on our part; we’ll be back for another fix this year, and this time, I’m a presenter.

I’ll be leading a session titled “Podcasting and Beyond,” scheduled for 1:00-2:00 (I think; the schedule is a little hard to read) on Saturday, October 20. It’s listed as a how-to session, but I don’t plan to get too deep into the nuts-and-bolts of the technical side of podcasting. If people want an Audacity demo, we can do that before or after; but in unconference fashion, I would like this to be more of a discussion about what the “beyond” is. If you’ll be at ConvergeSouth, let me know if you have any ideas of what you’d like to see in this session!

Also, for any of y’all who are handy with a digicam, ConvergeSouth will have a film festival component this year. In particular, several local folks come to mind for the Citizen Journalism category:

We are looking for self-produced videos that are newsworthy stories. Can be but not limited to stories about historic events, local politics, corporate accountability, personal documentary, current events and similar. No more than 15 minutes in length.

Submit your videos by September 25!

Susie Bright and Amber Rhea

Originally uploaded by viviane212

I haven’t been doing any liveblogging today. I’ve been doing a fair amount of Twittering but just haven’t felt like liveblogging.

We got to BlogHer a little late today because we needed to shake off some cobwebs (am I using that phrase correctly?) this morning, but it has been a great day so far. Actually, at the moment I’m sitting in the closing keynote with Elizabeth Edwards, and it’s going great. Anyway, just wanted to share this photo Viviane took yesterday of Susie Bright and me. :)

More blogging to come later! Tonight we’ll probably be chilling at the cocktail reception, and then collapsing into bed. (Major thanks to Cunning Minx for giving us a ride back to our hotel last night, btw! That was huge.)

2:45 p.m. - Does the Blogosphere Need an Intolerance Intervention?

Not sure how much liveblogging I’ll be doing in this session. I sort of want to take a break. But on the other hand this session sounds like it’ll be really interesting and I’d like to document it. Laina Dawes is talking about ten common things people do to stifle discussion of racism online. “You’re too sensitive” gets used and abused in so many conversations.

Anyway, my battery might die soon, and I might not bother to charge it.

They’re still having sound system problems. This seems to happen at a lot of conferences that are big and not free, so it makes me feel even better about how things went at PodCamp Atlanta (and also reminds me not to worry about that stuff too much).

Tish Grier says the local newspaper would not list her blog in their blogroll. They said she had to do something different to get listed. Okay, I missed what just happened there, I was talking to Rusty so I don’t know what happened with the newspaper. Also she says she goes to blogs of A-list male bloggers and disagrees with them vehemently, and sometimes it upsets them, but “they need to be.” ;)

The A-list blogs talk about how blogs are an echo chamber. But when you look at their comments sections, it’s all men talking about how blogs are echo chambers. There are no women’s voices. She says her purpose in life is challenging things and changing things.

Question to the panel (Liz Henry moderating): how do you know if an argument has been constructive? And for whom has it been constructive?

What Laina Dawes was saying just now makes it sound like she thinks “just stating your opinion” isn’t worthwhile. I think it’s very worthwhile. Maybe that’s not what she meant but that’s how it sounded.

There’s a Mormon girl on the panel (Kathryn Thompson) and she’s talking about writing about why she’s pro-life during Blog for Choice week. Hmmmmm. I don’t know. Maybe there are limits to civil discourse.

Tish asks rhetorically, “Are the A-listers gate-keepers?”

WTF is all this noise outside the door?? A guy went outside to tell them to STFU.

Question: What is the responsibility of the blog owner to corral the discussion? And how does it get more complicated when it’s a group blog?

Comment policy is needed when comments are deleted, says Kathryn. I think it’s a good idea to have a comment policy posted; but still, it is the blog owner’s discretion. Her blog, her rules. My comment policy is basically, “Don’t be an asshole.”

They’re bringing up Kathy Sierra again. This is the eternal debate about the fine line. It’s really hard and I don’t think there’s a good answer. I just wish people wouldn’t be assholes.

I want a snack.

Difference between writing a personal blog and writing on an institutional blog e.g. parenting.com - people feel like they can say much more horrible things on the institutional blogs because they don’t think of you like a person, they think of you as an institution or a company.

Tish says, “There is no credibility behind anonymous comments.” Totally agree. Fuck that noise.

Battery is dying. Snack break at 4:00. Then I need to schmooze w/ sponsors for Sex 2.0, but I don’t feel like. I’ll do it, though, and get it out of the way. That’s all for liveblogging this session.

Fri. 1:30 p.m. - Privacy, Exposure, and Risk: Can you maintain safer spaces online?

Lunch was great, and now we are back up on the 2nd floor, getting ready for the session with Susie Bright, Ann Crady, and Tara Hunt. Speaking of which, Susie Bright came up to our table at lunch to get Rachel because they were doing a book signing together. Viviane got up and hugged her. Then she turned to me and asked my name, and I stuck out my hand and said, “I’m Amber,” and she was all, “Oh! Amber!” Seriously, y’all. She recognized me from my blog, and when I kind of breathlessly asked, “You read my blog?” she acted like it was obvious and I should stop being so modest. (!!!!) Total fan-girl moment. I felt flustered after that, but not in a bad way. So anyway, that was awesome. And Susie seems like a total sweetheart. She’s up there now wearing a tiara.

Session is starting now. Lynne D. Johnson is the moderator.

My camera battery is almost dead, but it’s just as well, because from my vantage point, all my photos are going to have a bright-red-haired woman’s head smack in the middle.

Each panelist now is going to say how much they are “exposed” online.

Tara says pretty much her whole life is online and she’s not very worried about potential risks. She says she’s had benefits from putting herself out there, including career benefits because people feel that they know her better or trust her more. She says she trusts human nature and believes people are mostly good and that might be part of why she doesn’t obsess about all the bad things that could happen.

Ann says for her the benefits far outweigh the potential risks and she thinks the dangers are far over-blown.

Susie Bright hates the mics and doesn’t want to use one. But she has to because they’re streaming live in Second Life.

Someone said the feedback was “unbearable.” I just Twittered that it’s not unbearable. Ha.

Anyway, moving on, Susie Bright is talking now about some of her history in political activism. She says being out there is one of the best protections, because as a general rule, people will protect you if they know who you are. Being “out there” is a good defense; it makes it much harder for people to twist your words or blackmail you.

What does “safe” mean, Susie asks. She’s questioning the terminology and trying to define “safe.”

She says if you are a journalist and say something controversial, you will get flak. She said she kind of wants to shake people’s hands when they say they’ve been threatened on their blog, because it means they are making a difference.

She says sometimes saying someone is making you unsafe is just a way of trying to shut them up. And it’s difficult to speak out about without sounding cruel or callous.

Question from the moderator: are women more likely to get threatened online? Tara is talking about a Pew study that shows girls and women are more likely to experience bullying or threats.

Audience member asks how each of the panelists define cyber-bullying. Susie Bright says, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me - or will they?” This is what women experience online that men do not or do only rarely. But she also says women are being encouraged to stay offline because of this fear, and it’s like saying you shouldn’t go out at night. It’s the problem of the bullies, not the women. She says, “Most of these bullies are full of it.”

Audience member brought up Kathy Sierra and couldn’t remember her name. Everyone in the room said, “Kathy Sierra.” If this woman tries to minimalize what happened to Kathy Sierra I’m going to feel like punching her (the audience member, not Kathy Sierra). And yes I am fully aware of the irony there!

People are fucking assholes and it can be a tough spot. I totally agree with Susie that this stuff should not silence women’s voices or prevent us from going online, because it is not OUR problem. Just like rape is not our problem, it’s the rapists’ problem. But on the other hand this stuff REALLY HURTS and more than hurts, it can be downright terrifying, and I really don’t think men understand the way women experience this stuff, as part of the larger culture. Which is why I turn off my ears when men start yapping about “growing a spine” or some shit. Just shut the fuck up, asshole. But anyway, how do we deal with this? I can’t blame Kathy Sierra for what she did. I might have done the same. That shit can be overwhelming. And yet… I feel it is vitally important for women NOT to shut up. ESPECIALLY if it’s controversial and makes people uncomfortable and shakes things up.

Audience member asks where is the line between developing a thicker skin and dealing with active threats that could be damaging to you physically, financially, etc.?
The eternal question.

Ann says, “the line is the law.” Not sure if I agree or not. Will need to think on that some more.

Audience members should use the mic because it’s in Second Life. Oh, who am I kidding, I don’t know a thing about Second Life and I don’t care.

Susie Bright says, when you get a whiff of a troll, block them immediately so you’re not inundated with their bullshit. They thrive on attention.

Susie says a woman was waiting for her in the bathroom with a knife when she spoke at the University of Minnesota one time (not sure when this was). She mentions how absurd it was. (She went with another person to the bathroom, too, btw.) She says she does not regret her activism and she will not stop. Hell yeah!

Good damn question that I wonder about a lot: what are the kids of the “mommy bloggers” going to think when they get old enough to read the blogs? I wonder about that. At a certain point (certain age?) it seems kind of like… exploitation? That’s a loaded word but I can’t think of another one. It’s a tough call. Maybe it’s just the same question as blogging about other people in your life in general.

Statistically your child has a much greater chance of being molested in the grocery store or in church than on MySpace. The media blows it out of proportion.

“Everyone in Second Life… fuck, fuck fuck!!”

Tara is talking about Molly Holszchlag (can never spell it). I love what she does on her blog because she talks about her depression and other stuff right there on the same blog as web standards and Microsoft and stuff. Molly rocks.

“It’s a sign of strength to say, ‘I’m going to say what I want, fuck you.’” - Tara

Susie is talking about the inherent sexism in the fear we feel as women about speaking up. Men are not critiqued for who they go to bed with… this is Women’s Studies 101, she says.

Audience member says handling professional criticism is a walk in the park after dealing with so many trolls. Silver lining!

Here comes the appeal to “what about the children.” I don’t buy it anymore, hardly at all.

Dude is talking about making sure you are comfortable with anyone seeing what you put online. For some reason he is really putting me off because I feel like everyone here knows that already. Thanks for words of wisdom.

Now Susie Bright is saying she believes a lot of the malicious behavior online is motivated by jealousy, and she doesn’t know how to handle that. Ann disagrees and thinks it’s mostly boredom. I think there’s probably some of both, but I can’t really attribute a whole lot of it to just boredom.

Okay this audience member has been talking too long. There’s a line of people behind her waiting to talk. I think the lilt of her voice makes me not absorb anything she’s saying. I have no idea what she’s talking about.

Audience member is breastfeeding and unlike at most conferences, no one is going to give her shit about it.

Analee Newitz is speaking up from the audience now. Personal blogging “can bite people in the ass.” She’s talking about how some of us are lucky in that we have lots of options for employment and such, but a lot of people don’t have those options and can’t say, “fuck you, I’ll work somewhere else.” I’m glad someone pointed that out. Because yes, even though this is a problem with the company, the effect is on the particular woman’s life. Ideology is nice and all, but being able to feed your family is nicer.

Now an audience member says she never intended to be a public figure, but after starting her blog, a few months later she was on the front page of the New York Times business section. She said we need to realize that it’s a risk and an opportunity that any one of us could become a public figure overnight. I definitely agree that we have to be aware of that, but I don’t think that should make people stifle or self-censor. Real people have real lives and do real things. Imagine that!

Now a woman who runs a blog called I, Asshole is talking. She is awesome. She talks about how she edits her trollish comments and adds to the end, “Now I must go home and fuck some puppies.”

Susie Bright adds some levity. Yes, we’re all talking about how important it is to stand up and have a thick skin, but it really does hurt when you feel like you’ve been passed over because of something you wrote, or because people might be laughing at you, or whatever. Pink Ghetto, anyone?

Tara says, “We all have inner Gollums.” Let’s stop putting up these facades that say we’re perfect. The world says we’re not allowed to talk about these things, but we all feel this way at some point.

Session is almost over. I’m going to try to get my picture taken with Susie Bright.

Fri. 10:45 a.m. - Digital Exhibitionists or Chroniclers of their Time: Will Naked Bloggers Make History?

“There are a lot of things happening in our lives that we feel like we have to hide.” - Stacy Campbell

“I do all the stupid stuff everybody else did, but I write about it.” - Heather Barmore

First question for the panel: How honest can and should you be? What will be missing 100 years from now?

Kris was angry with herself for holding back and not being honest at the time in blogging about a relationship that later ended

“Keeping it honest has become more difficult as the readership grows.” - Stacy
This is the classic blogger conundrum. We all struggle with this. And yet it is never less of a struggle. And there isn’t one right answer.

So far everyone on the panel has been self-deprecating and saying no one will be reading their blog in 100 years. But the whole point is, people will! This stuff that might seem mundane or even whiny now is important. Chronicling real life (everyone’s unique experience) is hugely important. I’m reminded of what Josh was saying at BlogSavannah about finding letters written to family members during the Civil War, and how in many ways that offers us the most insight. (Still, though, a blog is different in some ways… but that’s another tangent. Knowing that there’s an audience - even a tiny one, or a potential one - does change things.)

AAG says she went online to be more private… LOL. She says she is still at times afraid of being judged. I can relate.

Somebody in the audience just said she threw away all her old diaries! Aaaaaagggghhh!!! Nooo!! Sacrilege! I cannot imagine throwing away something that personal and unique… even if you do regret things you wrote, or not want certain people to see it.

Audience member makes a good point about the power of women writing blogs is that we are in control of representing our own lives, rather than leaving it up to someone else to reconstruct the story of your life and maybe get things wrong or add their own judgment.

Next question for the panel: What makes you most uncomfortable? Family and friends reading it? Co-workers? Something else?

Heather almost got kicked out of her apartment because of something she wrote. (!!!)

I realize I am very, very lucky in the approach I take to blogging nowadays. I didn’t always take this approach - because I couldn’t (e.g. when I was looking for a job when I lived in Texas; a bunch of stuff w/ my marriage; etc). And to some people who don’t know me very well, they might think it looks very cavalier… but it’s not. It’s very much intentional and I am determined to be as open and honest as possible. Of course, “as possible” is the caveat there, and the definition is always changing.

Sarcastic Journalist is talking about how she got fired for her blog. She was a reporter and she was anonymous and she still got fired - just like Dooce. A few of her family members disowned her too. Anonymity is NOT the protection you might think it is. Don’t be naive. You’re never really anonymous.

I think that’s the biggest - HUGEST - difference between blogs and personal diaries. Even though, yes, people can and do find and read other people’s personal diaries, the whole world can’t find your personal diary on Google. It’s less of a risk. Certainly can be more of a liability if people find it bc you’re being more personal and not holding back, but that is valuable; but I don’t think blogs will ever be exactly the same.

Someone in the audience is talking about how she went to a conference and found herself apologetically telling people she “writes JUST a personal blog.” Right on!! I HATE that shit! I hate that perception of personal blogs (whatever that even means; I have a beef with that term, too, but I can write about that later) as somehow “less than” other types of blogs such as political blogs.

I think we should have a session at Sex 2.0 that’s like this except focused on writing about sexuality and your personal sex life and all that good stuff. (Btw I am having some… I don’t know… burned-out? feelings about Sex 2.0. But I’ll get to that another time.) I kind of hoped this would be more sexuality-focused, but then, the general personal stuff topic is fascinating and important, and sexuality is a part of that.

Audience member says, “Our personal honesty on our blogs is politically important.” I agree. The personal is political, indeed.

Someone else is speaking now who developed a plug-in for WordPress called Post Levels, which lets you control who sees certain posts. I may have to look into this.

Culture Kitchen woman is talking now. I don’t know her name but I know her blog! (I’m surrounded by the bloggerati, hell yeah.) She says, “As my blog kept rising and getting more and more readers, it started having less and less personal stuff. The blog started to have a life of its own.”

Now the conversation is turning to talking about how personal blogs are breaking stereotypes in very powerful ways. Someone asked Culture Kitchen woman “how dare you be one of the top Latina bloggers in the country and say you’re an atheist.” Heather talks about how people assumed she was white, and when they found out she was black they’d say, “You speak so eloquently” and shit. Stacy says not everyone who struggles with depression is completely batshit. AAG talks about how powerful it is that she can be not young and not thin and still be having great sex and letting everyone know about it.

ROCK ON!

Moderator says none of these personal records are complete (she’s a historian who deals w/ a lot of personal journals, letter, etc.). This self-censoring is not unique to blogging and we should not get too hung up on it, as in worrying about whether or not it’s “real.”

Another audience member is talking about how people say they didn’t realize she was a POC. She gets called “exotic.” She says, “Guess what, if you’re going to keep calling me ‘exotic,’ I’m going to keep talking about race!” Heather says she doesn’t talk about being black all the time because (gesturing toward Kris) “do you talk about being white all the time?”

AAG says it’s not courageous for her to write about sexual abuse. This is something someone did to her, it’s a reflection on the person who did it to her, not a reflection on what kind of person she is. She encourages everyone in the audience to write about it if it happened to you. Stacy says, “If it makes somebody uncomfortable, then maybe you need to write about it even more urgently.” I am mentally high-fiving her now.

Now a dude is talking about how he feels like people at some parenting blogs think he doesn’t have a right to talk about parenting. He says even though he gets a lot of crap, it’s worth it because he’s breaking the stereotype and showing that there are men who care actively about being parents.

Another audience member is now saying she feels like her blog has brought her closer to her family. This is interesting.

Another woman is talking about how her friends pressure her to write about certain things. Like, “Why didn’t you write about my engagement.” Heh. Start your own blog!

Session is almost over… I think there’s supposed to be some kind of prize drawing. AAG brought some amazing schwag, including dildos.

Well, we’re here - at the Navy Pier for the start of the BlogHer conference. Right now most people are doing this “speed dating” introduction thing, but Rusty and I opted out because it’s just way too damn social. I know I should probably be taking this opportunity to force Sex 2.0 MOO Cards on people, but I just can’t handle it. So, instead, I’m doing what my T-shirt says I’m doing: blogging this. The wifi here is great, the schwag bags are amazing… well, generally everything is amazing so far.

The best way to follow me today will probably be Twitter, but even with that i don’t know how many updates I’ll be posting, since my top priority will be having fun, participating, and all that good stuff.

We had breakfast with AAG, Viviane, RKB, Susan Mernit, and a few other people whose names I can’t remember. Last night we had dinner w/ Viviane, RKB, Susan, Cunning Minx (who called me “perky and adorable” - ha!), and Lisa Williams. I’ll post photos when I get a chance!

So far I think Chicago is a great city. One thing we learned: there is apparently a shuttle from the Orange Line train to Navy Pier. We did not know that, and instead spent $75 on a cab this morning. Oh well, live and learn. It was the cab driver who told us about the shuttle, actually; and he was a really nice guy, he and Rusty had a grand old time talking about sports. So it could have been much worse.

Okay, that’s all for now… off to enjoy! :)

I am so excited about our soon-to-commence trip to Chicago.

We’ll arrive tomorrow afternoon at (purportedly) 4:35 p.m., whereupon we will travel to our accomodations* at the luxurious Midway Airport Sleep Inn. We’re classy like that.

Later that night, we’ll be meeting some sexy bloggerati for dinner: namely, Viviane, Cunning Minx (whose podcast was nominated for a Podcast Award; congrats!), Rachel Kramer Bussel, and Susan Mernit.

Friday morning is the start of the BlogHer conference. We’ll be meeting Always Aroused Girl at breakfast. Even though I’m sure I’ll be doing a fair amount of wandering, these are the break-out sessions I’m interested in attending Friday:

• 10:45: Digital Exhibitionists or Chroniclers of their Time: Will Naked Bloggers Make History?
• 1:30: Privacy, Exposure, Risk: Can you maintain safer spaces online?
• 2:45: Still a toss-up between Media Training and Does the Blogosphere Need an Intolerance Intervention?
• 4:30: Don’t feel strongly about any of ‘em, so it might be a good time to wander from room to room or do some blogging.

Friday night, we’ll be having dinner with some of the same folks from Thursday’s dinner, plus a few more - possibly including (OMG FAN-GIRL) Susie Bright. (!!!)

Saturday morning, it’ll be back to the conference! I’m planning to attend these break-out sessions:

• 10:30: Women Across the World
• 1:30: Blogging: the Voice For Silenced Communities
• 2:45: Sex & Relationship Blogging Behind Closed Doors, an Off-the-Record session

Not sure what’s happening Saturday night, but I think there’s going to be some sort of sex bloggers’ happy hour.

Sunday I think we’ll probably spend a fair amount of time relaxing, and then go to the Museum of Surgical Sciences. I doubt we’ll try to pack a whole lot of activity into that day. (It’s the Sabbath, after all.)

Monday we’ll be going to the Museum of Science and Industry to see the baby chick hatchery (squee!!) and whatever else we might want to look at that’s not as cute as baby chicks. Monday night, we’re going to a Cubs game.

Then, Tuesday morning, it’s back to the ATL! There will be tons of photos, and a decent amount of blogging and podcasting, too.

Btw, the BlogHer web site just launched a redesign, and it looks great!

* Firefox spell-check does not know the word “accomodations.” Weird.

This weekend, Rusty and I will be heading to Chicago for the third annual BlogHer conference! I’m looking forward to attending lots of great sessions and meeting a bunch of people whose blogs I’ve been reading for months or years. We’ll also be hanging around Chicago for a few extra days after the conference for general vacationing goodness - a baseball game, a surgical museum, and a chick hatchery, among other things. Standard issue, really.

If you’ll be at BlogHer, say hi if you see us. And yes, we’ll be recording a podcast (maybe more than one). This will be the furthest OTP we’ve gone so far!

[Cross-posted on my Georgia Podcast Network blog]

Big thanks to Laura Ross, who has been coming up with some amazing potential logos for Sex 2.0. She has been posting them to the Google group and we’ve had some lively discussion about the merits of each design; but the conversation ebbs and flows and is currently in an “ebb” stage, and we need to decide on a logo soon, so that we can move forward with planning.

So! I’m posting the four logos that have gotten the most favorable responses here, for anyone and everyone to vote on.

Colors are changeable, so don’t worry about that stuff so much as the actual design itself. Share your opinions in the comments. Ideally I would like to have determined which one we’re going to use by the end of next week.

1) Lips:

2) Handprints:

3) Mask:

4) Pole:

If you’re at all interested in Sex 2.0, please join the Google group. Help make this unconference what you want it to be!

Update: As I mentioned here, and have mentioned previously on the Google group, anyone should feel free to come up with your own logo designs for consideration. It’s an unconference, after all!

Sex 2.0 is progressing nicely!

We have a good summary paragraph describing the overall goals of the conference. (We’ll need more detailed literature, such as a media kit, of course.) We have 320 MySpace friends as of this writing. We have a wiki (soon we’ll have a separate domain name pointing to the wiki); email me for the password.

We tentatively have a venue; I’m just waiting to hear back from the owners re: cost.

We have the dates narrowed down to two possibilities: April 5, 2008, or April 12, 2008. (We’ll be choosing one shortly.)

Laura Ross is working on logo designs.

Audacia Ray is lined up as the keynote speaker. Steve Eley has confirmed that he’ll lead a session titled “How not to be the creepy guy.” (Heh.) Several other people have expressed interest in speaking, presenting, or moderating panels, and we’ll be working out the details in the coming months.

Interested in helping plan and coordinate? Please join the Google group! Remember, this is a community-driven effort, following the unconference model as much as is possible due to the somewhat sensitive nature of some topics and participants. This is YOUR conference!

I am so excited about this! :D

More thoughts on the conference idea…

My working title: Sex 2.0. I realized a bunch of people have already been calling it that, so why not just use that as the name? It’s short, catchy, and plays off Web 2.0 in a way that’s slightly ironic. I like it.

Subtitle? It should be something more descriptive, but also catchy. I thought of, “Log on. Get off.” It’s cute, but I don’t know if it’s descriptive enough. I might be willing to make that sacrifice, though. After all, it’s damn near impossible to describe in one sentence a conference that covers so many intersecting topics.

If anyone has any other ideas, let me know. So far I haven’t gotten any! I’ll probably set up a wiki or something soon, to make this kind of thing easier.

Onto logistics…

Viviane brought up a good point:

One thing to consider. A bunch of us felt comfortable presenting at Dark Odyssey because there were no cameras or recording equipment.

Although I will be at Blogher, there will be no official events for the sex bloggers, because I personally am unwilling to out myself. I plan on organizing a private event for the sex bloggers.

Many sex bloggers have very valid reasons for not wanting to be outed - especially bloggers who work in the sex industry. I intend to respect these boundaries. Sex workers absolutely must be included in this conference. Sure, as a social media Kool-Aid drinker, I value transparency. But I also recognize that being able to take such a position is a privilege that many people do not have. I refuse to contribute, in the name of transparency, to the continued marginalization of sex workers. This will not be a conference where non-sex workers sit around talking for and about sex workers.

So how do we negotiate the balance between being transparent, and being respectful of the boundaries of people who wish to remain anonymous or pseudonymous? If it comes down to it, I will opt in favor of inclusion of sex workers and others who wish to protect their identities. Ideally, though, I would like it not to be a “one or the other” situation.

Rusty and I discussed a few possibilities last night. The first idea was, if this event is held in a venue similar to that of PodCamp Atlanta, where there’s a large discussion hall and several smaller break-out rooms, maybe we could make it clear ahead of time that the sessions in the main room will be recorded, and the others will be left up to the discretion of the session leader. However, I don’t think this is a realistic solution, because I want to follow the unconference model of discussion, and if the sessions in the main room are being recorded, some sex workers may not feel comfortable joining the conversation. I do not want their voices to be excluded, so that idea was scrapped.

The second idea was, instead of purely following the unconference model, maybe we could have some sessions which are discussion style, and some which are presentation style. The ones that are presentation style could be recorded. However, this is still not an ideal solution, because what if the presenter wants to leave time for questions and answers at the end? And what if the presenter is someone who does not want to be recorded?

Furthermore, neither of these ideas address issues of live-blogging and photos. To be honest, audio and video recording are not a ‘must,’ and we should probably address this more fundamental unconference behavior first. If people don’t feel free to live-blog, take photos, etc., then I really feel like, why have this conference at all? But again, I want to balance these things that I’ve come to value at unconferences with respect for people whose voices are typically not included at all.

I want to hear any input and suggestions y’all may have.

Also, the venue is still a major question. A big part of figuring that out will be determining how many people we think we’ll have. Maybe 200? I don’t want to over-estimate. I also don’t want to sacrifice intimacy for sheer numbers.

Many thanks to Viviane, Dacia, Sherry, Melissa Gira, Miss Beth, and everyone else who has expressed interest in this idea and is willing to help make it happen! I’ll probably set up a separate blog and/or a wiki soon. Stay tuned!