You know, one of the things that I was thinking of this morning while my brain was cranking away.... was posing for Playboy. Not as in "I, Meagan, plan to or want to pose for Playboy."
Let me expand.
I recently (okay a while ago) saw or read something about parents "these days" being especially concerned that their kids who blog or use MySpace will be googled by future employers and then will not be hired based on their internet or personal life activities.
Okay. That made me giggle. It's like "Whoa, we saw some sideboob on the internet and therefore we know that girl isn't (insert employer name here) material!" Um. Okay. Things amaze me.
Actors can be nude in movies. Nude Art is a widely recognized art form. Playboy is a nationally read and recognized magazine. People. Are. Naked. Everyday. Everyone gets undressed at night. Everyone is naked when they shower. People have sex. But if you even talk candidly about sex or nudity or show a little skin, you jeopardize your chance at getting a job? that bugs me.
That's like saying "You have kids. We know you had sex once. That means we can't hire you!" EVERYONE (except the pope) has Sex! Who CARES! People masturbate. People get naked. People wear bikinis. People have a drink or a smoke now and then. Unless you are interviewing for a job at the Vatican**, is there any reason for am employer to google you and look into your personal life to determine if they want to hire you? Isn't THAT Discrimination? You can't refuse to hire me because of my race or sex or marital status but you CAN refuse to hire me based on my personal views or sexual orientation? Hmmm. That bugs me.
What also bugs me is the hypocrisy that is involved. "Mr. Bossman" has sex. with his wife. MAYBE even with a mistress. Maybe he has illegitimate children. Maybe he watches porn. MAYBE He has a subscription to playboy. It's okay for him to do all these things because they are parts of his private life. So one day Mr. Bossman has an interview for a secretary. One candidate is beautiful. She is qualified. Problem is, Mr. Bossman saw her in the January 1999 issue of Playboy. Well. She can't be trusted. She's damn hot but she's not "insert employer name here" material. Hypocrite. He can look at her naked in a magazine but he can't hire her because "being naked in a magazine is wrong."
Same concept.... It's okay for "Ms. Boss" to have sex with younger men and frequent internet chat rooms- but she saw a potential employee's personal website and "we just can't hire someone like that here."
I hate how hypocritical it all is. And then you have the people who aren't internet savvy. "I can't believe you would have a blog, or write anything on the internet." Hmm. Well, "internet hating guy" I can't believe that you cheated on your wife, are raising a son who you THINK is yours, and got a DUI and lost your license in the 80's. Hypocrite. It's like you did your stupid things right out there in the public. And if you think this small town doesn't know 90% of your dirty little secrets, have another drink.
So it really pisses me off that if I have a photo on Flickr of me, 26 years old, On my honeymoon with a drink in my hand.... that might mean that in the future, an employer will google me, find that, and assume that I have a drinking problem. It pisses me off that I might choose to write a post in my blog about having a sex toy party, and that years later an employer might google me, find that on my blog, and decide that I am not worthy of a job with their company.
But, When I think about it, that's the kind of company I would NOT want to work for.
** I am not implying by any means that the Vatican has this strict of employment qualifications. Ahem.