Smart Bitches, Trashy Books

Wow, I’m actually shocked by this - the CNET video, I mean.  That is one of the most blatant displays of sexism I’ve ever seen - and from a woman!  The upsetting thing is, it is quite a handy tip to have, but why did she have to make the point that Kindle users “many of them women” like the fact they can hide embarrassing books on them?  Are women more likely to read embarrassing books?  Why are romance books embarrassing?  Many of my favourite romance authors like Elizabeth Rolls, Margaret Moore and others, write some of the most beautifully written stories I’ve ever read.

You know, sometimes insultingness can be quite subtle, but that was really blatant, as I said.  I just find it so sad.  And what’s wrong with reading Twilight?  It may be generally considered YA, but Stephenie Meyer has said she wrote it for herself, her own enjoyment and for other 30 year old women as well.  Hmm.

Molly Wood quite clearly said “romance novels, or Twilight, or worse” so evidently there are books even more embarrassing than “romance novels.”  And she’s “not going to judge” us either. How can you be so ungrateful given her overwhelming endorsement of the romance genre, her lack of prejudice, and the helpful tip she’s shared with us?

Stay classy, smart bitches. Someone has to!

I put a romance novel on my dad’s Sony505 for the times I borrow it.  Shortly after he finished the book he was reading and started reading mine.  He totally enjoyed it! The great thing about the digital e-readers is that judging a book by its cover happens less if the cover isn’t there, but aparently we’re still subject to title scrutiny or something.  Whatever CNET, if I really cared about what people might assume my taste level is, I’d have done a better job hiding the Phil Collins songs in my itunes.

Twilight is a romance in my mind, and it’s not being a romance that makes it embarrassing, its the screaming horde of teens that drove the Edward boy into traffic.

That said, reading Twilight would not lower my opinion of a person (though driving actors into traffic sure does).

THIS is freaking wonderful.  Am off to tweet it everywhere.

LOVE IT!  I’m going to re-tweet it everywhere!  Thanks for the link, Alyssa!

Dude. You rock.

Psh, CNET is only embarrassed because they are a bunch of unsophisticated dweebs. Way to make ignorant statements, CNET!

will tweet.

<3Nisha

Oh, I’m so glad the lady from CNET isn’t going to judge me by what I read!!  I was so worried that I stayed up all night thinking about what she might be thinking if she saw all those “romance novels or worse” on my Sony!  Thank God she’s got a way to protect my reputation if someone grabs my device!  (Oh, wait, that was for the Kindle…oops.  Guess my poor little Sony better not see the light of day, or someone might find out that I like reading about…*small voice* romance.)

*eye roll*  Puh-lease.  Spare me, CNET.  I don’t go to your website and I have one more reason not to now.

Loved your response to it!  I couldn’t have put it better myself.

Spam filter: plans84.  Hmm.  I have plans to read 84 romance novels on my Sony.  And if someone looks at it and wants to know what I’m reading, I’ll be more than happy to show them, regardless of what it is.

What’s bad is she probably spent a good amount of time working up that little speech of hers. And could she have said some of those words anymore snidely than she did? I’m a horribly shy person, but I have nothing against telling people what I read or write. They can like it or not. It’s their problem, not mine.

And though it was an interesting “tip” she was sharing, it could have been presented in a much less insulting manner.

My ex owns a Kindle, and he’ll read just about anything you put in front of him. When we split, he ran off with my Secrets volumes! At least now that he has a Kindle, I get to play with some new tech, provided he remembers to bring it next time he comes over. I’ll stick to my Sony, though.

Spam word: Police18 - it’s just too easy, I ain’t even gonna go there.

BTW, Great video comeback. It was a well needed chuckle this morning. Yes, I’m slow this morning. I blame the already loud 7y/o. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it. Now back to my Sony and non-embarrassing reading.

Bumper sticker idea-  Hide Cnet.  Flaunt your romance.

loved the video response.

Reading romance novels are embarrassing?  Now that the Kindle is out I can retire my trench coat and sunglasses as I read.
CNET fail!
And yes, I love Twilight! So take that.

Maybe we can start a series of Kindle covers “I read romance, get over it,” kind of thing.

Wow. I can’t believe CNET even called out one of Gena’s books specifically. Now *that* is rude, not the people checking out your Kindle bookshelf.

Well played ladies, well played.
~Amy

security word is justice97—how appropriate!

OMG, that’s priceless!

My jaw dropped. Thanks, Sarah, for setting it all to rights.

Going off now to hide my husband’s copy of BIMBOS OF THE DEATH SUN.

Hey, Bimbos of the Death Sun is a great book!  (And it has one of the most hilarious descriptions of a Star Trek-themed wedding ever.)  The sequel, Zombies of the Gene Pool, was even better, IIRC.

you rock, Sarah!

tweeting it.

Gotta say, I’m a big fan of Molly Wood and never miss her appearances on BOL or Gadgettes, and as a romance-reading Kindle owner, I wasn’t offended by her video.  She’s smart and funny, and there are people who are ashamed of their reading matter whther it’s romance or other genre.  Should they be?  Well, that’s for them to decide, but Molly presented the info in an entertaining way.

Loved the SB response, though!

Jane

CNET may have had some good tips to share, but the reporter truly should have kept her opinions about what people may read on it to herself.

Personally I don’t care who sees what I read. I read on the bus, at home and my office. I’ve never hidden a book cover (even the ones I don’t like). I’ll flash the cover to anyone who looks my way. I’m proud to say I read romance and many other genres as well.

Good response Sarah!

Of course, this advice only is useful if you think to hide any “embarrassing” books in advance. It doesn’t seem all that useful for anything you might be about to read.

Great response Sarah! I guess the CNET lady never needs to look at my Sony. I’m pretty sure about the only books on it are romances. Of course, I don’t care who knows what books I read, but I guess the “non-judging” CNET lady doesn’t realize that romance readers are proud of what we read.

When I saw that Cnet video, I decided that the cover for my Cybook really needed a cover - or a big sticker or something. For me, I think a babe in a brass bra, swinging a huge sword would be just dandy. (I like Fantasy)
Or perhaps battling starships in outer space, shooting colorful (and scientifically inaccurate) lasers at each others. (I like SF, too.)
Or perhaps a well-built couple in a clinch in unlikely tropical vegetation (or another suitably romancey environment) - clothing optional.  ;-)
show53 - I am sure I have more than 53 covers on deeply loved books that the Cnet person would be deeply embarrassed to show off. Though I wouldn’t. Hah! If anybody comments negatively on the covers of whatever-it-is I am reading - screw them!!

Awesome! So glad you responded like this! I love it!

Forgetting the supposed embarrassment factor for a moment, this is such a bad idea technologically. It reminds me of the story of the computer user who ‘hid’ all of his important files in the trash can on his computer, and then was shocked to find them gone when tech support cleaned up his machine. And while I don’t own a kindle and don’t know how fast downloads are, it strikes me as very wasteful of bandwidth to have to re-download your books every time you want to read them. And with Amazon’s track record of deleting books already on your device, who knows what they would do if they thought you wanted the book archived. Lastly, one of the advantages of having a kindle is the ability to schlep tons of books in a small space to a remote location. Would downloads reach the depths of the Amazon or a secluded beach on the other side of the world? I guess then you wouldn’t be worried about someone seeing your secret, shameful, reading list.

Well, two good things came from that CNet thingy.  One, the lovely response video (truly, a classic).  And two, I googled and immediately downloaded Bimbos of the Death Sun.  Whee!

Now, I use the Kindle App, so this may be different on an actual honest-to-goodness Kindle, but I sort of have to be connected to retrieve archived books.  So what is this twit going to do when she wants to retrieve her romance novel, Twilight or worse?  She might be stuck reading (gasp) boring stuff!

(hours45:  45 hours without reading romance - Inconceivable!)

My shock is the assumption that anyone would let a piece of tech they paid that much for be “grabbed” from them and then pawed through. Really!?!? I’m thinking that it would be snatched back and the grabbie would be beaten into the ground.

If she was trying to be funny/snarky, she missed. Definitely like the rebuttal! FYI, MS. Wood? I READ ROMANCE AND I’M DAMN PROUD OF IT! I also write it, so there! PHBBTH!

Spam word: some17 Yeah, I like me some 17 romance novels! (X100)

Sarah,
Your response to CNET is made of awesome.  :)

Brava!! Sara your response was spot on. I’ve never hidden a book cover when I read and proudly display my own.

The weird thing to me about the Cnet video was how a lot of the books apparently “embarrassing” to the reporter were the In Death titles, which I think of as far more mystery/police procedurals than straight romance. Not that crime dramas are in any way better than romance or any other genre, but they don’t have the stigma that romance does, so…what is she ashamed of, exactly? Just seems an odd choice to use for an example.

Loved the SBTB video response! Very clever and an excellent rebuttal.

So awesome Sarah!

I’m waiting for the Kindle Brown Paperbag Edition before I buy—that way all those folks in the doctor’s waiting room won’t have to speculate whether or not I’m hiding some shameful reading. Instead, they can drive themselves crazy wondering if I’m reading romance, Twilight, or Rush Limbaugh.

When I was a teenager some people nicknamed me Jellyfish because I rarely ever took a side in arguments. It’s very rare for me not to be able to understand both sides of an issue and sometimes agree with both. I agree with a lot of the responses here, including Jael’s.

People should not feel embarrassed about reading romance, but it doesn’t change the fact that many are. I also think that if they want to hide their reading materials on their own reader, it’s their right and they should be able to do so. I read some erotica and erotic romance and keep the device lock on my eReader in case I leave it lying around and my kids get in to it. Sure, it might open up on one of my sci-fi books, or classics, but do I want to chance it with my 10 yr old son? Not really. Especially since he’s autistic, remembers the oddest things and often walks around repeating stuff.

I think they could have easily given their tech tip without singling romance books out. They could have said that sometimes we read books that we don’t necessarily want everyone knowing we read instead of mentioning a genre in specific or they could have listed multiple genres. Some people are just as embarrassed for people to know they read sci-fi, mystery, true crime, etc. I certainly think they could have done it without using a current author as an example. CNET bungled it and they deserve to take some flak over it.

I think michy’ analogy about the files in the trash can was spot on. As soon as I saw that their tip was to toss the books into the “Recycle Bin” I thought to myself that it just could not be the best idea. Also fully agree that it’s a waste of bandwidth an that you could be sol if you’re in an area where the wireless to Amazon won’t work where you are. You know there are going to be some people tossing stuff in the archive before every time they turn their reader off and re-downloading it every time they want to keep reading it.

Personally I think it would be awesome if e-readers had the option to code-lock specific bookshelves. That way I could put all of my non-kid-safe books in one bookshelf and not have to keep the device lock on, which I have to turn off to plug my eReader into my pc, otherwise it won’t connect.

If I understand this “tip” correctly, you are being advised to delete the books off your Kindle and then re-download them. Sounds pretty kludge to me. Big FAIL.

On the other hand, one of the minor reasons I haven’t bought an e-reader is because they don’t have a password function. Not that I’m going to carry around sooper-sekrit documents or something, but I do think e-readers should have much better GUIs, including a password function like most laptops. And a security function to set permissions on certain documents would be ideal.

Ha! Go Smart Bitches! I actually scoffed when she said “The Darkest Pleasure” with her eyebrow raised- that book f-in’ rocks- so when I actually saw Gena Showalter (!) in the video I kind of squealed. Then my BF asked what was going on, and I yelled at him “I’M READING SMART BITCHES AND THERE’S NO REASON TO BE ASHAMED!” and thew a paperweight at this head.

I think I need happy medium.

That’s an issue that’s been addressed here before.  Cnet’s a tool for specifically calling romances out but it IS an issue for people in certain circumstances.  Still, ROCKIN response! LOL Kudos to Jane and Gena for participating and to dh for holding camera.

http://www.smartbitchestrashybooks.com/index.php/weblog/comments/trading-embarrassments/

But let’s be honest: privacy while reading is a total benefit to eBooks. Being seen with some erotica covers is embarrassing in the context I defined above: disconcerting, difficult, potentially hampering my financial status. Cover art decisions are often so salacious that while they work as a point-of-sale attractant to potential readers, they do NOT work as something I can read at work on my lunch break without having a call from Human Resources within 5 minutes.

Well, not only did MADD say it much better, but apparently there is some kind of “device lock” I wasn’t aware of. That is a feature they ought to advertise more, IMO. Unless it’s some kind of hardware feature, which would be useless for me.

Wow.  Great video, Sarah!  Not so great, CNET.  Though I have a Kindle, it has nothing to do with wanting to hide my embarrassing content and everything to do with the fact my house is being taken over by books.  And no, you may not paw my Kindle, dude.  I’ll be happy to show you how it works, but if the words sex, hard manhood, or shattering climax appear on screen, don’t be shocked.

apparently there is some kind of “device lock” I wasn’t aware of. That is a feature they ought to advertise more, IMO. Unless it’s some kind of hardware feature, which would be useless for me.

I have a Sony PRS-700, the one with the touch screen. The device lock is sort of like a 4-digit log on password. You turn it on in the settings. Then every time you turn it on, you have to tap in the code to access anything. The pain in the butt part comes when you have to go in to the setting and turn it off every time you want to plug it in to your computer and then turn it back on afterward. If you don’t, then it automatically activates when you plug it in and makes it so that you can’t connect.

Love, love, love the video response!  I saw the cnet video yesterday when Gena linked to it on her blog.  I agree, it’s very embarassing - but then again, all publicity is essentially ‘good’ publicity. 

I’m not sure the reporter meant to make it sound like we should be ashamed of what we read, but it sure came off that way.  I was certainly offended.  I do agree, however, that there are times that certain reading should probably be kept hidden.  For instance, I have many nieces and nephews that love to come and stay over with my husband and me (apparently, we’re the fun ones).  Said children love to get into gadgets and I have many erotic novels on my ereader and computer.  To protect their virgin eyes (and to keep their mothers from hating me) I keep all devices locked.

I agree that there should be a way to lock certain documents away from prying eyes - but for now, I just lock my stuff and keep it out of reach from the kids. 

Mos Stef, you made me laugh!  My husband is so lucky he’s not here right now because I probably would have done the same thing - minus throwing the paper weight.  We don’t have those. ;)

“I read romance, get over it”

—- I’d buy that on a bumper sticker!

Hi, Sarah, et al—

I’m sorry you didn’t receive this video in the spirit it was intended. I hope you’ll observe upon watching the video again (if you’re not too embarrassed) that the Kindle in use is my *personal* device, meaning that I *personally* have purchased “Darkest Pleasure” and, in fact, that entire Showalter series, plus many more similar books that I proudly display on my Goodreads profile (including, yes, the Twilight series):  http://www.goodreads.com/review/list/278795-molly?shelf=read 

I also read “even worse” content like the New Yorker—we were trying to make a little joke there. Ha ha.

Look, I was trying to find a humorous avenue into introducing this tip. And yes, I have personally discovered that I’d rather not explain all my guilty-pleasure reading to every person who wants to peruse my Kindle collection. Even the most unapologetic readers of “trashy” (your word!) books, like Felicia Day, have extolled the virtue of reading whatever you want on your Kindle without prying eyes:

http://feliciaday.com/blog/kindle-oh-kindle

And why did I single out women reading “trashy” fiction on their Kindles? Actual evidence, in addition to personal experience. Women are the primary buyers and likely future buyers of the Kindle and devices like it:

http://www.newsfactor.com/news/E-Book-Market-Shifting-From-Amazon/story.xhtml?story_id=0120013WJ37C

The market for romance and paranormal erotica is red-hot right now (so to speak):

http://www.examiner.com/x-17277-SF-Womens-Issues-Examiner~y2009m8d4-Selling-sex-in-a-recession

And people are starting to speculate that romance fiction and erotica are driving a lot of the Kindle’s success.

“The success of the ebook is being fueled by the romance and erotic romance market,” Peter Smith, of ITworld, reports.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/08/03/090803fa_fact_baker?currentPage=all

So, yeah. A lot women are finding that the Kindle is a great way to read all the erotic fiction you didn’t want to cart around on the bus. And yeah. A fair number of those people would prefer to present themselves as “Infinite Jest” types. That’s not snide stereotyping. It’s a fact of human nature. You guys don’t have to find me funny, but please understand that was my intent.

@Elizabeth W, I was being sorta snarky/tongue in cheek. I Lurrve BIMBOS OF THE DEATH SUN. Gotta love it. What else does a romance/reader writer do in a domicile with 4,000+ science fiction titles, but love it?

Laura Vivanco - were you joking or being sarcastic?  I can’t actually tell.  :S

Laura Vivanco - were you joking or being sarcastic?  I can’t actually tell.  :S

I was being sarcastic. I don’t think anyone could seriously describe Molly’s piece as an “overwhelming endorsement of the romance genre.”

I was trying to find a humorous avenue into introducing this tip. And yes, I have personally discovered that I’d rather not explain all my guilty-pleasure reading to every person who wants to peruse my Kindle collection. Even the most unapologetic readers of “trashy” (your word!) books

The Smart Bitches do call romance “trashy books” but they do so in the context of a website which reveals that they actually believe that many romances are well-written, thought-provoking works of fiction. There are also visual clues, such as the retro pictures at the top and the bright pink colour, which might suggest to even the most casual reader that the tone of the website is humorous/ironic.

Admittedly my own piece of sarcasm may not have been very clear, so I’m perhaps not best placed to comment on other people’s failed attempts at humour, but it seems to me that the CNET piece did not make it at all clear that there was no good reason to be ashamed of reading romance. In addition, the use of the phrase “my guilty-pleasure reading” in the explanation again suggests that there’s something guilt-inducing/embarrassing about the genre.

I was showing off my Sony 505 to all and sundry last week.  The doctor visting from England immediately paged over to the erotica I’m in the middle of (with the type on large, because my eyes get weaker as the day goes on).

I wasn’t embarrassed at all, and she’s going to buy a reader for her husband, because he reads a lot of fiction.  She only reads medical journals and stuff.  You know, because she’s a doctor and all.  Uh-huh.

Showing the thing off to the nieces and nephews, however, I did feel the need to warn them to be careful what they opened, on account of I have some naughty books on there.  Which didn’t interest them at all, oddly.  Strange kids.

And the golfer, who said something like “you’d have to really read a lot to want to buy one of those.”  Duh.

You guys don’t have to find me funny, but please understand that was my intent.

I can see where you’re coming from, but romance is too easy a target.  So easy that everyone takes shots at it.  It’s lazy.

You could have made the same joke using a title like “Controlling Chronic Flatulence” or “Adult Bed-Wetters: Avoiding the Shame”.  It would have been funny, and got your point across, without insulting people who get sneered at daily for our reading choices.  In spite of keeping the publishing industry afloat.

one69?  Only one?

Great video, Sarah!  It’s hilarious that CNET is teaching people the hardest way possible to archive a book.  All you need to do is press left on the control button from the home page, instead of multi-step process she showed from the home page.  Well, at least the quality of the technical how-to is equal to the commentaries :-)

Oooh, poor misunderstood baby. imagine meeting up with the Bitchery, who actually kick back when the entire Romance GENRE is dissed. We may slice-and-dice authors and books, when they deserve it, but if you lay a disrespectful hand on our favorite books, you are likely to pull back a bloody stump.

gave59: ... And for those who seriously piss us off - we can give them at least 59 worse-than-death fates

SB- Awesome.

CNET- Ricockulous.

Hit27- that hit 27 of my piss-me-right-the-hell-off buttons.

Sarah, you are a goddess. Excellent comeback.

And who in the hell would let someone grab their Kindle and paw through it without filing charges? That really made the CNET thing really stupid.

I must agree with Suze…There are plenty of helpful books out there with titles that would give WAY TMI about one’s personal life that would have been funnier choices. Oh, but then the support groups for those folks would be up in arms about trivializing their pain…

I guess I’m in the “yes, it’s a Kindle. Now fuck off.” camp of ‘how to respond to people with an overwhelming interest in my personal stuff’. Besides, aren’t you going to arouse MORE suspicion if you spend 5 minutes clicking and scrolling before you hand over your Kindle? Just so you can leave the Tolstoy and Steinbeck titles visible so those nosy people are impressed by your reading selections? MYOB, and get your own damn Kindle.

If you follow this hint multiple times, will you reach the limit of the number of times that Amazon lets you download?

Is this a secret plot to make you buy more books?

I was talking about ebooks to my Dad yesterday, and he said “you would have to reread” like it was a disease. He particularly did not see why a limit on the number of times I download a book would annoy me. He buys secondhand paperbacks and gives them away when he is finished. When I did that, I had to keep buying the same damn paperbacks over and over.

Yah, I DLed a book called Copy Room, er, See-You-Next-Tuesday. It was really, as you might expect, bad. Color me curious. THAT I hid. Nothing else, ever.

The only other time this would ever come in handy is if I were to go temporarily insane and purchase something by Malkin, Coulter, or Beck—and then I’d probably opt to burn my Kindle and salt the last surface the device touched.

To get to my archive folder takes flipping through 38 pages.

Most people don’t try to handle the Kindle, but when they ask about it, I turn it toward them and give a min-tutorial/testimonial.

Types85: What, per minute? Not even on my most caffeinated day.

Next time, Molly, I suggest you cite titles such as the following deathless tomes:
BONSAI YOUR HUSBAND
YOU AND YOUR SPLEEN
WHY KAMIKAZE PILOTS WEAR CRASH HELMETS
THE 8-TRACK TAPE FAN’S GUIDE

and the like. If you need more guilt-ridden e-titles for a future piece, please get in touch. You needn’t even mention us hiding our romance titles…

If I ever buy myself an e-reader and someone asks to see it, I think I’ll just say, “Sure! Hold on a minute while I hide the porn.” If that won’t give ‘em pause…?

Sarah, you are MADE OF WIN! Until recently, I wasn’t a big romance fan. In fact, I was one of those sneering naysayers, without ever having read one. *hangs head in shame* But then you Smart Bitches, God bless you, showed me the awesomeness of Romance. I’ve been devouring Nora Roberts, Kathleen Woodiwiss, Julie Garwood, Sharon Sala, and Amanda Quick (just to name my most favorites) ever since. And I’ll be damned if I’ll let anyone tell me I should be ashamed of reading beautifully crafted, well-written books. If someone doesn’t like the buxom girl and Fabio-esque guy on the cover, that’s their own problem. So thanks for a great laugh, Smart Bitches; you guys rock.

This is great. Thank you, Sarah (and Gena and Jane)!

I understand that CNET was trying to capture the fact that women buy Kindles, they read hot stuff, and some may not want to display it.

On vacation in March I was approached by a male octogenarian who peered over my shoulder at my Kindle when it was displaying a particularly erotic scene and yes, I was uncomfortable with that. But the problem was with his rudeness, not my reading material.

CNET could easily have just added a phrase or two to change the feel of the piece. Something like, “A few readers might want more privacy than nosy strangers give them”, or “I love these romances, but I’m not sure I want to share some of the steamier bits with prying eyes.”

And as someone who lives in an area with spotty Whispernet, that “solution”,  is a recipe for losing access to your books.  If a Kindle owner is really determined to create a false persona on the device, a much better idea is to download loads of free classics with titles beginning with “A”.

(ps. Laura—I totally got it. Funny.)

moral94—uncanny sometimes.

Brilliant response, Sarah! (And Gena and Jane, too!)

Molly, I doubt we’d be pissed off if the video had just used books with bad titles, instead of focusing on romances. Yes, there are all sorts of novels with horribly embarrassing titles, but they’re not restricted to one genre. By calling out romance in the way you did, you made it seem like romance novels are inherently embarrassing. And yes, this site does use the word “trashy” to describe them, but everyone here realizes that it’s all in good fun. The general perception of romance novels, however, is that they truly are trashy, and when you call them that in a public venue, you’re setting yourself up for insults from those who love them. Reinforcing the negative stereotypes against the genre is the last thing any fan should want to do. While I get that you were trying to be funny, you should’ve made sure you were being tactful, too.

It’s not like I can judge whether or not the advice was any good, though, since the Kindle still isn’t available in Canada.

Hurrah!  Your response was spot-on, Sarah.

guess I will now spend my weekend buying lots and lots of romance for my Sony. And reading them. And not caring when someone stops me to talk about my Sony and letting them see what I read.

Go pound salt Cnet.

I thought this was an overreaction.  I didn’t think the video was all that bad—though I agree that the actual tip may not be a great idea—and I did pick up on the fact that that was the reporter’s own book collection.

Honestly, I’m getting a little tired of the constant jumping on anyone who doesn’t speak of romance with the utmost reverence. This site does not hold the copyright on irreverent appreciation.

I thought this was an overreaction.  I didn’t think the video was all that bad—though I agree that the actual tip may not be a great idea—and I did pick up on the fact that that was the reporter’s own book collection.

I agree with you willaful.  I didn’t think it was that egregious a video.  And if you think about it, there’s no way for her to demo being embarrassed by some of the titles suggested here as replacements unless she bought the books in order to have them on the list.  She was using the titles already on her Kindle.

And truthfully I’ve had the exact experience of wanting a less obvious list of titles on the front page.  A library board member is thinking of getting a Kindle and asked to see mine.  I didn’t use the archiving tip (which is not putting things in the trash, btw) but I did go through my list of books and open up a bunch of the less splashy titles.  Everything you open and look at ends up at the top of the list on the front page and thus pushes other books off the page.  Worked like a charm.

Well played, Sarah!

In the deepest recesses of my memory, it seems that back in the day (mid-1980s) there were phony book covers that women were urged to buy so that they could read romance novels on the subways, etc., with a cover that made it appear they were reading, say, Middlemarch.  This makes just as much sense.

I’m with the gal who loaded up some less exciting titles before letting her colleague check out her Kindle. In the same way I don’t let just anyone browse through my Keeper Shelves, I don’t want Joe or Jane Schblognick cruising through my Kindle (or if I had one, I wouldn’t).

So I guess my preference/solution would be to tell people not to read over my shoulder.

What about Kindles/readers and kids? I seem to recall a convo about what age is a good one for introducing daughters/nieces et al to romancelandia. Do people with younger readers under the same roof keep their Kindles in a place where said media savvy kids can’t cruise through? My dd is over the age of consent LOL but I’m curious.

BREAK

Haha: eye43—do you want 43 eyes reading through your electronic reader? :)

Both Molly and Sarah attempted to be humorous.  Only Sarah succeeded.  Plus tips on how to mess up your Kindle might not make one popular with the technologically impaired.

Hah!
Smart Bitches - 1,000,000
CNet - Meh (not even worth the effort to come up with a score)

I actually loved this CNet piece because it’s a problem I run into constantly.

I’m past the point where I try to hide my reading tastes from coworkers, friends, relations, etc. but when I loan my Kindle to my boss so that she can show her husband how it works to see if he wants one for his birthday…. do I really want her opening up one of Lora Leigh’s Bound series to show him how E-Ink technology is just like a real book? Uh, no.

Truth: You should not be ashamed of who you are or what you like to read.
Truth: You cannot stop people from judging you on it. And when it comes to a work environment maintaining an image can mean a lot money and promotion-wise, even if our inner selves are yelling that it shouldn’t. (This is why I dress “business casual” and not in tie-dyes and cargo pants when I go to work.)
Truth: No matter how much pride you have in your romance novel reading, you should keep in mind other people’s comfort levels while showing off your cool tech.

For most of the above reasons I simply move a few non-graphic mystery and sci-fi novels to the top of the list to use as show and tell pieces. But the real reason I got a kindle was so that I could get rid of the majority of my printed graphic romance novels before my son hit reading age. A kindle is easier to hide than three groaning bookshelves of paperbacks after all. But since I know my curious and mischievouslittle guy, I think the CNET trick will work very well to keep him from an unintended early education when he does figure out where Mommy hides the kindle.