On the New York Times Magazine's Blog Article

A few days ago when the pictures of this week's New York Times magazine cover appeared online, a friend of mine suggested I write a blog post in responose, assuming I'd be bothered by it.

I clicked over to the cover photo (article wasn't posted yet): former Gawker editor Emily Gould lying in a come-hither way on rumpled bedsheets over the title, "Blog-post Confidential: What I Gained -- and Lost -- By Revealing My Intimate Life on the Web."

I sort of rolled by eyes at the photo because it seemed like an obvious way to illustrate that story. By that I mean, I probably would have thought up with the "intimate = have her lie on her back on a bed" idea myself and I'm no NYT-caliber photographer. Composition-wise, I prefer the photograph illustrating the story inside the mag, which I read yesterday: the author lying curled up next to her Mac like the computer is her boyfriend. Or like she was so busy blogging that she conked out.

But I wasn't offended by the photo, and I say that as a female blogger who writes about her personal life to a certain degree on (a much more private) personal blog (with much smaller readership). It seems like a good, albeit unoriginal, way to illustrate that piece. I find it curious that my friend thought I'd think the image was offensive.

Compared to a lot of feminists, I am pretty liberal about use of sexualized imagery of women on shows and advertising, even though I understand how that piece fits into the puzzle of objectification of women. Generally I try to resist the Puritanism in American cultural, which I've grown uncomfortably comfortable with from my WASP upbringing in Connecticut. When I have a knee-jerk eye-rolling reaction towards a sexualized depiction of a woman, I force myself to consider why and how its damaging.

And I don't love the cover photo, but not sure it's because of anything having to do with feminism.