From time to time someone gets cranky about an aspect of our insular little world and pops off a comment referencing the “in” group of sex-bloggers, whose members they invariably characterize as sycophantic, humorless and exclusive. Every time this happens I have to shake my head because in nearly five years of writing in this genre, I have not yet met such a creature.
Who are its members? Where are its members? What passwords or secret handshakes exist to grant one entrance? I don’t know! I’ve never heard of anyone who does know, nor even a breath of a whisper of a hint that would suggest the reality of this “in” group, and you know why? Because there is no “in” group. There are, however, many of us who feel passionately about certain topics, including two or three which have caused quite a kerfuffle lately — and rightly so.
The glorious interconnectedness of the ‘net means that if you post a blog about a topic abhorrent to me and I’m hosting your ad, your assholery rubs off on me. I look like a jerk by proxy, and trust me when I say that I do a fine enough job of looking like a jerk without anyone else’s help.
This phenomena seems to be getting more pronounced as Twitter, Facebook and other social media draw us into an ever more tightly woven network. The growing pains are sharp but they’re not nearly over. Companies have to be more cognizant than ever about how they look to their customers:
So what is the point of all this? The point is, FORGET YOUR BRAND. You don’t own it because it is literally nothing. You can spend all sorts of time and money trying to manufacture public opinion, but ultimately, that’s up to the public, now isn’t it?
You know the best way to get the public to respect your brand? Have a respectable brand. Offer a great, innovative product and make responsible, ethical business decisions.
I’ll add this: When you fuck up — and we all fuck up — have the ovaries to admit it. Face your failure, apologize for the misstep and promise to make things right. Look, it’s dead simple:
- “Our current linking strategy really isn’t building the kind of collaboration we want to encourage. Give us a week to reevaluate, during which we’d love to have your constructive feedback in our forums; at the end of this time we’ll roll out a new policy that will be fair to everyone.”
- “Our company makes products specifically designed to help people explore and enjoy their sexuality no matter what their body type. We’re saddened and embarrassed to have posted an article that suggests otherwise. We have removed the piece in question and in the future we’ll hire more qualified writers and better vet their work before allowing it on our site.”
- “After receiving an enormous amount of feedback on this topic we’ve come to the conclusion that linking to someone who put a bounty on sex workers was ill-advised at best. We’re proud to fight for sex-workers’ safety and human rights, and in the future we’ll do better to respond to their concerns promptly.”
Kindergartners know to do this when they’re wrong. CEOs should follow their example.
Should companies about-face with every complaint? Not hardly. But when dozens or hundreds start flowing in, it’s time to realize that those messages come not from anonymous nobodies but actual human beings who may in fact work in the very fields they’re critiquing and who quite literally put food on your table and a roof over your head. Consumers have more ability than ever to know you and contact you. Expect to be held accountable. Expect it if you are a blogger writing to an audience of dozens or if you are the President of a Fortune 500 company.
Do your opinions on these topics differ from mine? That’s ok. Economics being what they are right now, I cannot condemn anyone who keeps their ties to a company I’ve criticized. It’s hard to turn down affiliate checks no matter how small; it’s even harder to contemplate giving up full-time employment based on the experiences others have had. Affiliate away. Work away. But for the love of God have an exit strategy because my gut and overwhelmingly ample evidence tells me that sooner or later you will need it.
You don’t need an “in” crowd to tell you that.
My immediate response upon seeing the title of your post was this: ‘There’s an In Crowd for the sex bloggers? How did I miss that? I guess I’m not in it then! Ah well, not like I care anyhow …’
It’s entirely possible that my reaction is quite similar to most other sex bloggers’ reactions. Hence no In Crowd, and no need for one!
That said, there are a number of sex bloggers who have been around for ages – you’re definitely one of them, AAG – whose opinions and attitudes are formative, and welcome. You speak for a lot of us. Which is not to say that I won’t disagree from time to time! But you’re open and honest and I’m open and honest, and that communication and transparency works well for everyone :)
*hugs* and thanks for this post!
xx Dee
No “in” crowd, no need for one! You got it.
*smooches*
A-MOTHERFUCKING-MEN. I wish I could contribute something more productive, but for now, that’s about it.
I don’t know what this “in” crowd looks like, but it does seem that sex bloggers have an affinity for feeding on self-generated controversy. I’ve blogged about sex for about six years, mostly to write for whatever readership I find. I skip the day-to-day tedium of tweeted outrages and rants, enjoy sex and write what I care to write. To me, writing, sex and writing about sex remain welcome pleasures.
*Self*-generated? Not sure that applies to the situations I’ve linked to.
I really love this entry. I have nothing else of value to add except thank you.
i give & raise an “A-fucking-MEN” only because…I have yet to sign up to be a reviewer..even though I’ve wanted to for more than a year. Life took hold of me & I succumbed…I will be researching & trying to find companies who have some good background & “morals” hahaha. yep, sometimes ‘sluts’ have morals…but dammitall, if we don’t get the most action!!
Check out Babeland and Fascinations. :)
Dammit. Now I’m not sure which table to aspire to sit at during lunch, but this was very well put. There’s nothing “drama llama”-esque about wanting to work with companies that have integrity. At the same time, though, it’s unfair to expect everyone who blogs to fall in line and form a united front, especially when there’s money and other factors in play.
Sex bloggers, like human beings (which it seems that a large proportion of us coincidentally are), are a varied and diverse and far from monolithic group. Even, I suspect, the really popular ones.
A large proportion — but not ALL — of us. :)
I think you’re smack-dab on when you talk about the social networking tools making it harder for people like Fred — who clearly has a 20th-century big-corporate approach to brand management — to ignore and marginalize the ugly facts that undermine his brand management approach. People like him — or the PR team at British Petroleum who thinks that having thugs patrol the beaches of the Gulf waving off people with cameras will make the oiled seabirds never have happened — don’t understand the ways in which the game has changed and is still rapidly changing.
I also found your “looking like a jerk by proxy” explanation to be spot on. I can’t tell whether the people who compare this to pointless high-school status games genuinely don’t understand what’s going on here — protection of one’s own personal brand by prudent avoidance of virtual endorsement of toxic brands — or whether they do understand and are trying to confuse the issues for folks who aren’t quite up to speed on the nuances of 21st century online marketing.
I think it’s human nature to feel excluded from a group, especially when you’re feeling shitty about your own work — and who doesn’t, from time to time?
As far as looking like a jerk by proxy, I think it’s hard for people to realize that there are some of us whose income RELIES on our personal brands. We *don’t* have “real” jobs — this is our real job! And anything we do directly affects whether or not we can pay our property taxes or next month’s rent. :)
AAG, I suspect you’ve seen my 2006 post on personal branding, but some of these young pups haven’t been around that long. ;-) So I’m going to link it again, hope you don’t mind:
http://www.erosblog.com/2006/02/23/blogging-for-a-living-and-the-global-microbrand/
Not at all, darlin’. Let’s hope the young pups read it. :)
You don’t see the in-crowd/clique phenomenon because you are pretty much a member of it. Trust me when I say it is very easy to see from the outside. There is a set cast of characters who predictably never disagree with anything any of the others have to say, always assume that anything any of the other characters have to say is the absolute truth and anything anybody says in disagreement is an evil, bald-faced lie or *gasp* not sex-positive.
It’s not just about the latest campaigns against evil companies doing evil things. It shows up regularly on blogs, on forums and in reviewer chat rooms.
On the whole, this group comes off as intimidating, negative and hyper-critical. How ironic, since this same group spouts off about being sex-positive and ethical at every opportunity. You don’t see it because all you EVER get from this little crowd is unequivocal support whenever you share your opinion with the world.
You speak about how we all fuck up, but when was the last time any of this group called each other out on their own mistakes?
As someone who has had the nerve to hold an opinion contrary to the group’s, I can tell you that it’s a pretty miserable experience to be attacked en masse for doing so and once you’ve experienced it or witnessed it, you tend to think twice about going public with your opinion from then on.
You can deny this phenomenon all you want, but honey, the rest of us are laughing our asses off because it couldn’t be more obvious that it exists.
Hm. Perhaps.
And yet look: A dissenting opinion, published here for all to see (with a slight delay; apparently listing your email address as “anon@gmail.com” sends you automatically to spam).
I personally have been called out numerous times about my opinions on reproductive rights, health care reform, EF, Liberator, excessive sex toy reviews — publicly and privately I’ve dealt with opposing comments. I’ve not been toadied to. Maybe the full scope isn’t evident to someone who’s not reading all my comments, emails and instant messages but believe me, it’s there.
I think it’s kind of sad that whoever wrote this felt they had to remain anonymous, but I can’t really blame them for doing so.
AAG girl – I think you’re awesome and you’re certainly not an instigator of negativity, but you are ‘accepted’ by the clique that is and that’s perhaps why you can’t see its existence as clearly as the rest of us can – ‘us’ being those who dared to have an opinion that differed from what this malleable group deigned to be ‘acceptable.’
I certainly am not blameless for contributing to the drama – but even I’ve tried to remove myself from it recently. I can barely even stand to log onto Twitter these days for all the negativity, snark, insults and general high-school style behavior going on. Right at this exact second, I really don’t feel there’s much ‘sexy’ about the sex blogging community.
Certain individuals – you probably know who I’m talking about – have trivialized the sex blogging community before. The ongoing behavior and attitude of certain members of the community might be a reason why.
I’m an atheist, but I think Matthew 7:3-5 is something all of us should consider at this point in time (I know I did, and am ashamed for the way I’ve behaved recently.)
Oh they’re really not anonymous (to me anyway) but I completely understand why they chose to use that handle.
I’ve been accused of being a part of said “in” crowd, and people have called me out all the time. There are almost always dissenting opinions on my blog. People have trashed me in comments sections of other blogs that had nothing to do with me. People have harassed me via formspring to the point that I had to disable it for a while. So to say that those of us that share opinions on things are above reproach by the rest of the blogging community is bullshit. In fact, at this point, I think it’s invited more personal attacks and backlash.
You are not above reproach from the entirety of the blogging community, you’re above reproach from the rest of the “in” crowd, which is what makes them the “in” crowd. If any of the crowd WERE to start calling you out, they would immediately be shunned and out of the “in” crowd.
This “in” crowd is starting to sound pretty bleedin’ lonely.
Huh. Maybe that’s why I’m lonely most of the time.
And maybe that’s why the “in” crowd has become so incredibly snarky lately: they’re miserable and lonely.
Wow.
NICE TO MEET YOU, Ms. Dementia. So pleased to make your acquaintance!
Yes, because people that aren’t in the “in” crowd are NEVER snarky. In fact, all the people bitching about not being “in” the crowd seem to be a lot more negative than anyone else. So… who are the bitchy, snarky, miserable ones?
I never said that those in the “in” crowd are the ONLY ones who are snarky. That certainly wouldn’t be true.
Also, I don’t believe that anyone is bitching about not being IN the “in” crowd, because I don’t believe any of us have any desire to be associated with the negativity that the “in” crowd projects.
As far as those not in the “in” crowd being MORE negative and snarky? Well, as far as I can tell, the majority of us aren’t the ones who are picking on people who still choose to associate with EF, nor are we the ones who perpetuate constant drama when there is none to be found. There are certainly exceptions to the rule, just as not everyone who considers themselves in the “in” group (such as AAG) fit the pretentious, snarky mold that the rest do.
Wait wait now!
I *don’t* consider myself to be in the “in” crowd!
After writing that, I realized I had misspoke. What I meant was people who are considered in the “in” crowd (which apparently some people think you are, though I’ve never thought of you that way, mainly because I just recently introduced to you & your blog).
Sorry, I have to agree that there most certainly are cliques, if not an “in-crowd”. And the level of bloggers that are more recognized do tend to stick together. The level of popularity is stemming from not just the blogs and their popularity, but the Twitter networking. And I do agree with a good bit of what Anon has said.
Last night I saw a tweet ridiculing a reviewer who posted her review to EF. A public ridicule. A big ole “open up the bathroom stall door and crowd around and laugh”. Yes, the writing was bad (what actually seemed to me like a bad copy/paste job, bc it was shortly fixed and she showed she was not an idiot) but it seemed like merely an attempt to point a finger at EF and lowly newbies trying to join the circle. Then to my dismay I saw other “popular” bloggers, you included, RTing it.
I am no angel, but I draw the line at public humiliation like that.
And it shocked and saddened me that no one else does.
What does that sort of behavior say to newcomers? Do you think they’re going to keep trying? If they have the cohones, maybe. Most won’t. It took me personally nearly a year to stop feeling like the outsider-newbie being giggled at or eye-rolled by the “popular bloggers”.
Snark can be humourous when done right. There’s a fine line though between funny, and ugly.
You’re probably right about the RT. I shouldn’t have passed that on.
I like you, Lilly. (That’s my way of saying, I’m not attacking even if I sound like I am) but I gotta say, there are lots of people who intimidate others and often times it’s not those who are all that popular or in a certain clique at all. I get the feeling people are grouping me in with this latest drama and it’s as good a group as any but I think it sucks that just because I am “intimidating” that no one ever cared when I said “Hey, don’t think you your company/this person might be treating people like crap?”
It’s funny how the people speaking out have become the bad guys for picking on EF when no one ever came to our defense before this. Maybe we’ve resulted to being harsh because nobody ever fucking listens if we don’t?!
You know, I think what Lilly is saying is that it may be “okay” to pick on a company and be firm about it when you feel you’re being treated like crap but it’s not okay to carry that into treating newcomers like crap just cuz they review for that company.
And what does “no one ever fucking listens” have to do with how a new reviewer is treated anyhow? Why in the sam hell would feeling like you haven’t been listened to make it “okay” to ridicule and publicly humiliate someone who has NOTHING to do with any of it?
Completely outside of my role at EF, outside of toy reviewing and this and that company in general, the sexblogging community has gotten butt fucking ugly in many ways. If my job didn’t include being social in this community, I’d be gone.
I’m with Lilly. That tweet the other day — and the retweets of it — was nasty, ugly and crossed a line.
And it’s been happening since WAY before this most recent rash of drama.
So what you’re saying is that you don’t really like the sexblogging community and you only participate because you’re paid to?
Then let me very cordially invite you to stop wasting your time in “participating” here.
My comments had nothing to do with the Tweets as I have no idea what anyone is even talking about and apparently, I missed them.. Maybe I assumed Lilly was discussing some things in general and I was wrong. My bad. In no way was I advocating the event that, as I said, I was not party to. My terminology about being “harsh” was only in reference to behavior regarding EF as a company (ie blog posts, general bitching on twitter, etc).
My comment was primarily about how a PERSON who’s pretty much not done anything to offend anyone was publicly picked out and ridiculed by and in part because the review is on EF which the people tweeting about it are also against.
I’m saying, say what you want against a company as a company entity but when you start making it personal, then you’ve crossed a line called decency.
In other words, i think you mis-read my comment and your comment is going another direction from mine.
I think I did, too. I was looking at things in a broader sense and, as I replied to Carrie Ann, had no idea about this RT stuff.
I think that the recent outrages are entirely valid. So there’s a network of people who picked up on that? Is it the network’s fault for being linked somehow or is it the company’s/blog’s fault for making such a huge gaffe that it made them look like jerks and prompted a response? I think the latter. There is no sex blog mafia, only smart people who use their voices to promote sex positivity and denounce those who seek to harm it.
I beg to differ. There is an in crowd and there has always been an in crowd, as there are in and out groups beyond the net. It’s basic social psychology and to deny that there is an in crowd is to not tell the entire truth, and I don’t care if some people are angered by that. I’ve experienced it and I know others who have experienced it and life is too short to butt heads over adult blogs or adult products. The in group and out group will always be in a state of flux. One year or two, a particular group will be dominant and then this will shift. In regard to sex, sex has become more and more commercial and money, unfortunately, speaks.
People or should I say bloggers, who purportedly say they represent sex positive views are known to deny links or remove links if they are told to do so by other blogger friends/associates or they are annoyed with particular bloggers or feel threatened by the popularity of other bloggers, and it goes on. I can name blogs that have done that and I can name bloggers, or should I say former bloggers, who have closed their blogs because they didn’t want to be associated with the politics of sex blogging.
Let’s be real here. Sex blogging has ceased to be a warm sharing environment. Much is commercialized. Practically all blogs are motivated by advertising and other endorsements, which raises the question about the authenticity of some blogs (in terns of whether they’re non fictional or not: their ‘niche’) and some sex educators have vague qualifications yet sell themselves as experts and at the end of the day it’s all about affiliate dollars or ad dollars.
If I had a sex blog, I’d be disillusioned, but I don’t and haven’t had one for a couple of years now, and I’m so much happier for it.
Who are the members of the current “in” crowd? Srsly, I’d like to know so that I can go make friends with them.
The other thing for companies to remember, is one written complaint represents the one individual who felt it worth the time to write, compared to the others who took issue, blocked that website and moved on with their lives.
I can’t tell you how many times I’ve found issues (even less subjective ones, such as technical issues) that others surely had run across, but I’m the first to flag. Heck, on a friend’s website recently, I discovered the link to her new book excerpt wouldn’t come up, and the web-mistress feedback email address bounced!
Anyways remember the 90-9-1 rule (look it up on Wikipedia), for each who write there are probably 10 more with the same issues.
I think one problem with some companies, especially those involved in the relatively niche sex blogging/adult products market, is separating their business from the individuals that it employs. It’s an unfortunate symptom of being closer to the community/customers through utilising social networking sites or forums. You really can’t go ‘off clock’ when you’re a figurehead/employee for any of these businesses, even when it’s your own personal blog or twitter that you’re posting on. This is not to say you’re not entitled to your opinion, but whatever your opinion is, you must know that when you come out with it in a public place, it ends up linking back to the company you’re a part of. When these individuals post snarky comments or have a go at people/groups even without directly naming them (often still making it clear who it’s directed at) in a personal capacity, it has far more serious and nasty repercussions than if they were a ‘normal’ blogger. It’s hard to rise above and beyond whatever is going on, especially on sites like Twitter, but when it comes to carefully managing PR when situations get grim, in the end it’s better to say ‘I can’t comment’ and just sit it out, or direct people to a response by the company in question. Any issues with people should be discussed in private, so as to at least give the image of dealings with the company in question being unbiased or fair. I mean clearly everyone is human and has feelings/thoughts/opinions, but more often than not I think it’s inappropriate for employees to be making these personal comments or attacks in public, no matter how frustrating the situation is.
For the most part, I’ve been entirely silent on this subject, for many of the reasons you mention, Sundae. I do feel it’s ridiculously unfair that people are free to personally attack me and the people I work with, relentlessly and at the same time expect me to keep my mouth shut because I work for a company they have issues with.
You say that companies have problems separating their business from the people it employs, but the reverse is true. People outside the company seem to forget that a “company” is entirely made up of human beings, who have feelings, take things personally and feel attacked. When you feel attacked, do you not have the instinct to stand up for and defend yourself? Why is it that everybody who doesn’t work for the company in question gets to make personal comments and attacks in public, but are not subject to the same judgment of being unprofessional?
I’ve been called unethical, untrustworthy, stupid, bad at my job and told that I deserve to be out of a job (and therefore homeless) – both in public and in private.
How long to people get to trash me and abuse me verbally before I get to stand up for and defend myself?
I feel for you, Laurel. You’re in an exceptionally awkward position and one that I don’t envy a bit.
I can’t address what others have said to you but this is my message: I have no doubt but that EF employs some wonderful people. I know many of them. I was one of them. But this does not negate the fact that the *company* has made some breathtakingly bad decisions.
I would trust you as a person but not as a representative of the company because in my experience, EF does not always follow through on the promises it makes. This has nothing to do with *you as a person* and everything to do with *the policies of the company who employs you*.
I hope that others in our community can see a difference between criticizing *you as a person* and criticizing *the company who employs you*, and I hope *you* can hear the differences in criticizing you as a person and criticizing the company who employs you.
I’m really sorry you’ve been called all those things Laurel and yes, it is very hard for you to be stuck between wanting to defend yourself and having to stay neutral on a subject for the good of EF. So, I’d agree with what aag said and hope that perhaps in future the line can be drawn more clearly.
So, please don’t think that was intended to be an attack, you’re right and it does work back the opposite way re: the community separating individuals from the company because the more intertwined we get in social networking, the harder it is criticise a business not its employees or vice versa.
I believe that I have also been accused of being a part of this so-caled “in” crowd of sex blogging. This despite the fact that I’m not a sex blogger… or all that much of a *blogger*, really (I hardly update the thing). But I occasionally comment on sex blogs, agree with some of their opinions and identify as “kinky” on my profile so I’m totes one of the Mean Girls.
Gah. That should be “so-called”. >_<
There certainly is are “in” crowds in the blogosphere. I’ve been privately contacted by readers who have expressed a reluctance to comment on blog posts because they felt like they were outsiders, due to an apparent camaraderie between myself and other bloggers (some of whom I’ve met in real life or otherwise have developed good friendships with, so there is an element of truth to what they’re saying).
I was like this when I first started reading sex blogs. I was afraid to comment, but I don’t think it was because of any intimidation by the “in” crowd.
I noticed that on Twitter, you started inquiring about the “in” crowd soon after I had tweeted something using those words. I’m not positive if it was my tweet that inspired this, but if so, let me tell you that my using that phrase had NOTHING to do with the goings-on with EF. The person I was tweeting was someone who had a beef with the sex blogging community, saying that there is “that group of bloggers and most of them are all pretentious snarky and … always think they’re right” (her lack of a comma, not mine). So though I had never used he phrase “the ‘in’ crowd” when it came to the sex blogging community before, it seemed appropriate at the time because when she mentioned the “pretentious and snarky” group, I immediately knew who she was talking about.
Like I said, being in the “in” crowd has nothing to do with EF. It has to do with how people have handled what happened at EF, the constant drama that is perpetuated within the group and the fact that those who are IN the “in” crowd NEVER disagree with others in the “in” crowd. You may get disagreements and people who “call you out” but those people are not others in the “in” crowd. No one said the “in” crowd is above reproach from the rest of the community, you’re just above reproach from the rest of the “in” crowd because IF someone from the “in” crowd suddenly started to speak out against others in the “in” crowd, they would be shunned.
That being said, I don’t have anything against most of the “in” crowd personally, it’s just that as a group, they seem to spread more negativity and drama than they do sex-positivity.
Talk of an “in” crowd has been circulating for years.
I have been called out publicly or privately by almost every other sex-blogger I know over the years, and I in turn have disagreed publicly or privately with every other sex-blogger close to me. Individuals may not SEE every one of those disagreements…but they are there.
To my knowledge there iis no unilateral consensus among any group of sex-bloggers.
Well, it may be the public perception that’s the problem, but when people get called out for “ass-kissing” one blogger that’s not in the “in” crowd, and yet the “in” crowd bow down to each other constantly in reverence, the glaring hypocrisy starts to blur what may be reality. If all of those in the “in” crowd truly have the exact same thoughts and opinions on the vast majority of things, more power to them, I’m glad they have each other. But to cast stones at the non-”in” crowd for agreeing with each other’s points of view is just another example of the hypocritical snark that the “in” crowd spouts on a fairly regular basis.
I think there both is, and is not an in crowd. Part of blogging is finding your niche, and finding a community. All niches and communities have people who are more or less popular, more or less well known, etc.
Someone who may be active in, say,review blogs, a member of the review blog in-crowd may be completely unknown to me, because my niche, and my interest, are in sex blogs that are more narrative/personal experience oriented, where there are well known bloggers and perhaps an in crowd that is known to me.
Yet, I tend to not read many blogs written by sex workers and sex worker activists, or feminists, or female submissives, so they each may have their own in crowd, and sub-incrowds, depending on their niches. Hell, within the general NYC sex blogging community, there are several groups who consider themselves the ‘in’ crowd, and others not. Does it even matter? Should it matter? Small groups of people may all decided they agree on the same thing, but who gives a shit? All my friends and I agree that Eddie Izzard is the best thing since sliced bread. That’s wonderful for us, and for him. Do I care if other people agree? Nope. Should other people care that I care? Nope. But if we all blog about Izzard, we all look like a little Eddie Izzard cabal, and thus appear to be a clique of like minded Izzard fans. But maybe we all disagree about what the best flavour of Sweethearts is (red).
Its human nature to form communities within communities, even on the internet. And there are always going to be issues – the ones you mention, IMO are the sort of issues that matter, because they affect the community as a whole, and deal with ethics and safety and other such things. However, there will often be petty bits of drama and issues as well, because we’re people, and as such, we’re simply a cross section of the larger population, albeit with the semi-anonymity of the internet around us, so sometimes people behave more badly than they would in person (or not).
There will also always be people who WANT to be part of the in crowd, and thus, create one where there is none in order to be part of it, or do what they can to join what appears to them to be ‘the’ in crowd, because of our human need to feel as if we belong to some sort of supersekretspecialawesometotallycool group.
Alright, Wendy, I’m now considering you & your friends THE “in” crowd because, yes, Eddie Izzard IS the best thing since sliced bread! :)
YES! Go me! I finally made it in to the in-crowd! I will celebrate be being COVERED IN BEES!
Can I get covered with bees too?
No? I can’t be a part of the bee-covered club?
Eh, that’s ok. I’ll form a different club. Maybe a fantasizing-about-Christoper-Meloni-in-lingerie club.
:P
Ha! I’m in that club too. We’re getting matching jackets made.
I did send you those screen caps of him in a bra and panties from OZ, right?
Yes. Weak in the knees my friend. :)
Hold up a minute; Meloni in bra and panties from Oz? I think we need to start a sharing photos of Christopher Meloni in lingerie club.
SOMEONE START A TUMBLR!
Must scout for photos!
Maybe if we ask him very nicely, Mr. Meloni will send us some new ones?
I’m not sure if there is one “in” crowd as much as there are circles of friends. That happens in every part of life. In the sex blogging world, people who are vocal about a specific subject leave comments on related posts by other bloggers and friendships just naturally form. The most prolific bloggers often are the ones running and going to sex-related events too, so they get to know one another in real life, creating an even tighter circle. It’s isn’t a malicious thing like “we’re cooler than everyone else.” It just happens.
The problem in any kind of circle of friends is that it is super intimidating for a new person to try to get to know everyone, especially if some members of the group aren’t especially welcoming. I’ve read recently that a huge percentage of bloggers, regardless of how often they write or what they write about, are extremely introverted and shy in real life. So meeting new people is hard!
That’s part of the reason I started doing a sex bloggers list every year – to try to give people a way to meet new bloggers and a starting point for conversation when emailing someone new. Regardless of our opinions on different issues in the blogging world, there’s no reason why we can’t all extend a hand of friendship to someone we haven’t met yet.
I agree – and sometimes you fall in to the habit of reading what your friends read and post, and often friends agree on the same things. One is more likely to read a new blog started, or recommended by a friend than to go out and find one on their own. And friendships in real life bleed over into blogging. Its just the nature of the beast. Its scary to start commenting on other, popular blogs for a newbie. Hell, it took me forever to start commenting on BoingBoing, because even they have an ‘in’ crowd – or at least regular group of people who always comment all the time. Its intimidating for a new comer to a community to try and jump into things!
It’s not just about “being friends,” though. It’s about the negativity projected by this circle to a large portion of those who they don’t agree with or who don’t agree with them. I certainly agree that there shouldn’t be any reason not to extend a hand of friendship, but it’s also about disagreeing respectfully instead of resorting to name-calling and snark. That happens WAY too often in the blogging community.
It does, but it also happens all over the internet. As a species, we’re a bunch of tool using tools. It takes a thick skin to be a blogger, because so many people are douches to so many other people, for a variety of reason, and a variety of cliques, for a variety of reasons.
The “in crowd” thing is tricky – often people who are in the “in crowd” have no idea they are – or only the slightest idea. I think in some circles I may be “in” but the sex blog world is so large that there’s more than one circle to move around in. I constantly find blogs I’ve never read before that other people I interact with know about and interact with the blogger – in those cases I’m not trying to leave anyone out I’m just not aware of them. And hell, there’s plenty of people who have no fucking clue who I am. When people contact me on twitter and are nice, funny or interesting, I tend to give them a second look and often end up following them. I don’t follow everyone, but this doesn’t mean your views aren’t worth hearing – it just means we didn’t click in my mind. Or I’m too overloaded with blogs to read. (Here’s a secret, I don’t read all my friends’ blogs. I’m sure they don’t all read mine (they don’t link to me). But they’re still my friends. Taking it personally wouldn’t do me a bit of good.)
I’ve found that the very people I think of so highly of and think of as the “in crowd” often don’t feel like they’re “in.” The intimidating and unapproachable thing some people experience is partly down to that person giving the other blogger that designation as “in”. We’re all human beings – flawed. I’ve found that if I’m friendly to someone most of the time they will be friendly back – and if they don’t it’s not necessarily that they’re snubbing me.
I know I have moments when I feel like the “in” crowd is ignoring me – but I’ve discovered that mostly it’s that they’re busy interacting with their friends – not that they hate me or deliberately exclude me. Just because a certain blogger doesn’t become your new best friend doesn’t mean they are excluding you. (And this is a lesson I have had to learn myself, believe me. I used to have a lot of angst.) And definitely I’ve enlarged my circle by people taking a moment to reply on my blog or tweet to me – I don’t run in a circle that’s impenetrable. I think most of us on here were outcasts in school and deplore the idea of a clique. It’s human nature to have circles of friends, but we all need to make sure we don’t become too insular OR assume that a group is insular.
I do find it rich that a blogger who writes extensively long, defamatory blog posts about other bloggers would comment on this thread acting like their shit don’t stink. I’m not naming names. No point. I opt not to read their blog unless directed to by a friend (usually because said friend is being torn to pieces on there) and I do my best to ignore their existence. People are more than welcome to do that with me if they like. We have to remember that we can ignore people who we don’t like or don’t think highly of.
Not everyone in the blogosphere will like everyone else. Sometimes we will say things that are unpopular – and sometimes people will agree with us even if you don’t. Sometimes they won’t. I do agree that Lilly was right to point out the meanness of the recent retweeting incident for the poorly written review – I was starting to slide into the mob mentality and her speaking up was a great wake up call. I think every blogger will at some point feel like part of the “in” and “out” crowds. We do need to make a point of not being mean and petty, but the fact is we also need to be able to express opinions. I’ve disagreed publicly with some of my favorite people (Champers and Benz, we don’t always agree but I adore you!)
Sorry this is rambling. I hope I made clear points despite the rambling!
I think the clearest point you made would be “We have to remember that we can ignore people who we don’t like or don’t think highly of.” which is something so few people remember. No one is forced to read the blog of anyone else. Its the same with changing the channel, not reading a book you don’t agree with, or anything. We don’t live in world where we don’t have the right to be shocked, and we don’t live in a world where we cannot respond to it – but we do have the choice to ignore it and let it be, to go somewhere else, to spend our energies on something more important to us.
And really, if the most important thing to someone is drama llama bs on the intertubes, well, leave it to ‘em.
“I’ve found that the very people I think of so highly of and think of as the “in crowd” often don’t feel like they’re “in.” ”
So true and more applicable in this case than many people even realize!
Yes. Very much yes.
it’s not so much an “in” crowd so much as it is a couple of groups of loosely affiliated bloggers that share some common characteristics. This “cabal” as I like to refer to them as, morphs and changes but there are a few bloggers that are at it’s core.
This group isn’t interested in discussion or debate to forward their thinking, but rather they use the tactic of bullying and intimidation to get their point across.
Pity the unsuspecting blogger that happens use a poor choice of words, or who has then audacity to put forth an opinion that happens to be at odds with their way of thinking. Instead of engaging the blogger in discussion privately or in a polite way in an attempt to help the blogger understand their position, and perhaps sway their opinion, they attack their target in public, with the sole intention of harassing, humiliating, and bullying the target in to submission.
Core members of the cabal are above reproach and and the wagons are circled when they commit a transgression that would be a hanging offence if a mere mortal had done the same. Bloggers that are new to the community take note and either jump on the bandwagon in an attempt to impress the cool kids or they blog in fear that they might become the next target.
Some of of these bloggers have an air of arrogance about them that is hysterical in it’s abundance. they are rude, curt, condescending and bitter. They seem to not be happy unless they are unhappy. They are in a perpetual state of outrage and are offended constantly.
In my work, I am involved in a number of online communities across several niches and have to say that the sex blogging community is by far the most close minded, viscous group I have ever been involved in. All online communities have cliques and leaders but they don’t have the gang fuck mentality that this group has. If someones fly is down, shouldn’t tell the poor guy discreetly instead of pointing and laughing as a group in order to humiliate him?
The sex blogging community is rudderless and is in desperate need of leaders and mentors that can drag it out of the shit that it is mired in, but the unfortunate fact is that negativity is so deeply ingrained in this community that that task might be impossible.
An amazing thing happens when you actually take the time and effort to engage with people that you disagree with. If you take it out of the public timeline and really listen to what people have to say, you can actually make great things happen. You can change minds, you can find common ground, and you can gain respect for people that might not share your world view. Some of you might want to try that approach instead of of your current strategy. You never know, you might even meet new allies instead of making fresh enemies.
Every single time there’s been a dust-up in the sex-blogging world — and I’ve been watching dust-ups since September of 2005 — I have come out with new allies.
You might be surprised to know that those allies call me on my shit all the motherfucking time. They confront me via blog comments, IM, email, phone and in person. And I confront my allies all the time too, in the same public and private ways. We disagree in ways big and small but yet we still stay friends.
Everybody disagrees. Everybody has conflicts. Many if not most of those conflicts are hashed out privately. And yes, amazing things happen when we engage that way.
I find it interesting how you view the sexblogging world, Mr. Puck. It’s often said that the faults we see in others are the ones we’re most upset about in ourselves. I wonder if what you wrote applies also to you?
You have a blog, a public blog, on which you allow public comments. For someone, especially someone, who works with online communities, to expect all those comments to be glowing accolades is patently unrealistic. If you publish something controversial, or deemed to be so, in a public forum, expect to be called on it publicly. Why should someone who doesn’t know you personally address an issue you made public in the private sphere? Why would you even expect that?
I have had some really awful comments in my blogging years. Including someone telling me that because I have an open marriage my husband will surely commit suicide. You know what, it sucks, but in the end, I’m who I am and comments can’t hurt me. If I ever feel that they can or do, I am still in control and I can disable them.
If you want to have a blog, let alone a “popular” (however one defines popular) blog, you have to be prepared for dissent. If you can’t take some criticism, you’re in the wrong game.
You’re not making these statements as an observer, though. You’re making these accusations as a person who was the subject of said “attack”. When you came to me to ask to be removed from e[lust], I tried to discuss with you that half or even more than half of the reason for the group attack wasn’t the actual subject matter but YOUR volatile reaction to it. I don’t think that the people telling you that statement was wrong were mean until you got mean. You get what you put out there, and you continually put out there a negative, shit-stirring put-your-dukes-up attitude.
Yes, absolutely I am speaking as not only an observer but also as someone that watched my wife get the angry mob treatment. It left a lasting impression. Not sure why that should dismiss me from the debate though.
And YOU are not a negative, shit-stirring asshole that takes every low-blow possible and uses ad-hominem arguments to make his point all the time? You’re the meanest, most negative person I’ve ever encountered in this community, actually. So I actually find this comment to be horribly ironic, coming from you.
And yet you’re the first and only one to start name-calling here.
Just because no one has mentioned my name outright doesn’t mean that I don’t know that I’m one of the implied “negative, snarky” etc. ones. And that isn’t name calling?
I’ve been called out and attacked in comments sections of posts that have nothing to do with me and aren’t on my blog. I’ve been called more names than you can even imagine. How is me telling someone (to their face) that I think they’re mean, because they’ve been OUTRIGHT mean to me and questioned my ability as a mental health professional, my ability to watch children, my mental health, called me a drug addict, and countless other things “calling names?”
And why is it that you only seem to comment on my blog or reply to comments on many others (and, before I blocked you on Twitter and Facebook, there, too) when you have something critical to say about me? Find someone else to attack, please. I’ve heard your criticisms enough, and I get it.
You assume that you’re included as one of the “negative, snarky” ones because you’ve been called those things before by a great deal of others. That’s none of my doing.
You being attacked by others OUTSIDE of this blog post has NOTHING to do with what’s being said IN this blog post. We were all giving our input of AAG’s query objectively and without attacking individual people. Assuming that you are implied in the attack is not a just reason for calling people names, IMO, but then again, it’s AAG’s blog and if she wants to allow it, that’s up to her.
As far as me being ONLY critical of you, I believe that you focus on the criticisms because that’s where the drama lies. You conveniently forget the times that I’ve left supportive comments, that I’ve asked non-attacking questions on Formspring, that I’ve RT’d your tweets about blog posts, etc. Have those positive things come lately? No, not at all, because 1) since you’re only focused on the negative, I realize that it doesn’t matter what I do, you’re always going to treat me like the enemy and 2) I’ve become wholly exhausted of your hypocrisy & drama.
I have stayed away from your blog in the past couple of months because I am done feeling sad for you & the only times I’ve responded to your comments on other blogs were when you were attacking the people you were commenting about.
You continue doing that, and I’ll continue responding to it, but other than that, I will ignore you as you do me.
I didn’t know you were one of the ‘negative, snarky’ ones until this comment, for what its worth.
“And maybe that’s why the “in” crowd has become so incredibly snarky lately: they’re miserable and lonely.”
You may not have used profanity, but I certainly count this sweet little gem as name-calling.
Panda, I’m not sure what your major complaint is but I’ve got to tell you — you’re coming off as incredibly snarky and insecure in your posts on this thread. If you want to get along with people in the sex-blogging world or any other portion of the world, my advice would be to check yourself for the very things you’re criticizing in others.
You said the “in” crowd sounds lonely, I was simply posing a theory as to why that may be. If that came out as snarky, that wasn’t my intention.
I have no complaints, I was just responding to your query about the “in” crowd. It sounded like you were actually looking for an explanation from those who see it that way. If that wasn’t the case, then I apologize for making the wrong assumption.
Not at all sure where you get the “insecure” portion of your claim, but let me assure you that’s not the case. As far as being snarky, I’ve never claimed to be the paragon of innocence, but I always try to approach a subject with respectful deference before indulging in snark (which I hope you can agree is what I did with my first comment to the post). Something that I believe separates me from some others.
And thank you for your concern about my wellbeing, but I can also assure you that I have no problem making friends.
thanks for your input. Please subscribe me to your newsletter.
I find this all very interesting. “Clique”? Well maybe… I suppose people tend to gravitate towards those they feel most comfortable. The power that some seem to be attaching to said groupings, however, is purely arbitrary. Power is something that is GIVEN. You allow people to have power, it is a self-constructed notion. And I believe the question I’m interested in is, why does it matter? Why does people having a place higher in some social hierarchy matter? Why does it automatically make them exclusive? How does it affect your ability to get whatever message you are trying to convey through you blog? Granted, I can only go off the blogs that I do read on a regular basis, and as someone pointed out that is going to be based on my interests. While I’ve seen some opinions that I disagree with, that doesn’t really bother me to the point of anger. Rather, it’s interesting and what I think speaks volumes is WHY we have a difference of opinion. Figuring out that is what can help educate or simply better communicate with other like minds.
My personal experience is perhaps not as similar to most newbie bloggers in the community. I don’t presently review (although I wouldn’t be opposed to it) and I don’t really blog for others. My blogging began as my own self exploration. It simply happened that my secondary partner, Essin’em, found out about my writing and introduced me to parts of the sex blogging community. I became involved as a way of learning more from others about how to better tell the story I was attempting on my blog. I’ve never felt any animosity or criticism for reaching out and commenting on their blogs. Do they immediately respond or recognize me? No. But they initially didn’t know me, so why should I expect that? Eventually, I did have some people who regularly gave me feedback, and it has so far been much appreciated. I say my experience was dissimilar because I did have an “in”, despite my disinterest in using it for any sort of social or political gain. Anywho… just my 2cents.
-Evey
O HAI. Nice to meetcha, Evey. Adding to feed reader now…
>>>>I wonder if what you wrote applies also to you?
In some ways yes it could. Having said that, you won’t find me attacking anyone that hasn’t already thrown a grenade in my direction.
>>>>If you publish something controversial, or deemed to be so, in a public forum, expect to be called on it publicly.
There is a distinct difference between calling someone out and an angry mob using bullying and intimidation to get their way.
Lets take the whole Liberator situation as an example. As far as I know Liberator has gone about its business as a friend of the community for a long time and again, as far as I know doesn’t have a track record of stirring up controversy. Liberator’s “fly was down.” They might have used poor judgment in running a piece. An editorial mistake. Instead of engaging Liberator quietly behind the scenes, or politely in public The Cabal grabbed their pitchforks and crucified them via Twitter and their blogs.
What did it solve? Did Liberator come to respect the community for engaging it in discussion about some consider outrageous content? Did Liberator come out of this episode with a sense that the sex blogging community is a place that they can feel comfortable with in the future?
I would argue that the answer is no. What they came away with from this whole shit storm is that the sex blogging community is something to be feared. That if they dare put content out that a few members of the cabal don’t like, they will be attacked by a mob that want’s nothing more than to humiliate and intimidate them.
If you had instead engaged them politely with an email or even a polite comment explaining why you found the content so outrageous, perhaps you would have been able to bring about real noteworthy change. You might have found that they were willing to have a discussion with the community about the type of content they produce and used your input to make their blog a better place.
Highly unlikely that will ever happen now.
How do you know I didn’t email them politely?
I did. My concerned were ignored — in the exact same way that my concerns were ignored months ago over the affiliate situation.
Having said that, you won’t find me attacking anyone that hasn’t already thrown a grenade in my direction.
I’ve never said anything overtly rude to you, and you have said some absolutely terrible things about me. You decided that you didn’t like me because I took issue with something posted on your wife’s site. That is in no way “throwing a grenade in your direction,” nor is it a personal attack on you or anybody else. Your reaction and treatment of me since has been mean, inappropriate, and downright hurtful at times. So, sorry, but I have to disagree with that.
I think Mr. Puck has made it very clear in these comments, on comments on other sites, and on Twitter that he is the Kelly Bensimon of the sex-blogging world.
Pot, meet Kettle.
My shit stinks. I have no problem admitting to that.
When you lead an attack on my wife, you are also attacking me. I’m old school like that.
I didn’t attack your wife. I attacked the article that was written (not by your wife). That wasn’t a personal attack at anyone.
And what about Epiphora? She commented on a post I wrote about role play, had never spoken to you, and you repeatedly called her a pedophile on Twitter. What grenade did she throw at you?
The “attack” was never on your wife or the author of that post.
The CRITICISM was on the *idea* that gushing was disgusting. People were upset about the expressed *opinion* that there was something gross about that physiological response — which was not satire and was not, at least to me, even a little bit funny.
Sadly, I feel that trying to explain this to you any further is a waste of my time.
Tit for tat, dude.
Liberator’s article was entitled “Bad Pussy: Brutal Honesty from Guys”. Anyone who responded via a pissed-the-fuck-off e-mail, blog post or comment was just returning the favor. I’m sorry, but when a guy (who is also a doctor) writes publicly about how disgusted he is by having to see his patients vulva and ‘ass so monstrous you could park a truck in it’ or how grossed out he is by long labia, why is it then the readers responsibility to put a lid on their outrage and politely e-mail anyone?
You can’t write something intentionally offensive and expect people to not be offended by it.
“You can’t write something intentionally offensive and expect people to not be offended by it.”
THIS. Unless you expect people — women in particular — to be doormats.
People like the author of that offensive, unfunny, ignorant and poorly-written Liberator thing can dish it out but they can’t take it. I have zero respect for that.
Unfortunately, it seems as though they’re just ignoring it all. The piece was up last time I checked, and the author was still churning out words.
I seem to have missed more stuff while I was gone this week.
As for this “in crowd” stuff — all I know is that the people accused of being the “in crowd” have been nothing but welcoming, respectful, helpful, and awesome to me, and I’m nobody. Also, anyone who expects people to be constantly perfectly Polyanna polite about everything, all the time, even when we’re talking about something as important and emotional as sexuality, is dreaming. I’ve never gotten along with the Nice Police, partly because I don’t think demanding others express themselves in a certain way is very nice.
HAHA awesome… love the term “Nice Police”