feelings is done online. Others do not necessarily discover these actions, and it is, therefore, the self-consciousness and self-value connected to the emotion of shame that prevents Mimi and Pemala to feel like they want to use this function. It is shameful for them, as well as the viewer if they know who has viewed their profile. Looking back to the status updates I presented earlier; they are quite personal. They were meant to be seen, as things posted in a newsfeed often are. There is then a distinction between what you choose to let people see, and the wish to know who saw it and how many times. When asking Dedan how he knew if the girls had seen his post, he would smile, roll his shoulders, and say: “Nah, they have seen it, I just know.” I will once more bring Goffman´s role-playing into my discussion. As mentioned earlier, Facebook somewhat functions as a backstage, within dating, arguing, and personal and private life. On Facebook, you choose your friends, whom that can see what kind of things, and what you share with these people. You somewhat construct the context of which you post and what you post there. Facebook is, as argued, looked upon as a safe space, a free-space where you can perform whatever feelings or thoughts you might have. However, this is, as expected, not unproblematic and without nuances. Shame is an important aspect when discussing intimacy and sharing. In addition to what I already discussed, it also came up when I had my focus group interview. The students introduced me to the concept of poppers. A popper is a person who only shares positive aspects of their life and never any negative ones. This makes you an untrustworthy person, it is not realistic to only have a good thing happen to you, and you are therefore considered to be “fake,” untrustworthy. It is shameful to be a popper, and it is only when you share several sides of reality that you can be trusted. “Bad stuff happens to everyone!” the students told me. There is an interesting balance in this concept, between being discreetly positive online and becoming a popper. Miller´s work in Trinidad showed him that, in their view, the truth of a person is not who they think they are, but rather who others deems them to be on the basis of their appearance, online and offline. This then means that the picture and status updates that is posted online and what one shows on social media is the curated truth of a person. (Daniel Miller, 2016) Miller describes Facebook in Trinidad as “the book of truth”, since social media makes what’s already visible in a person hyper-visible “…[and therefore] further re-enforcing their constructed identity” (Daniel Miller, 2016, pp. 111-112). It is therefore essential to have the right balance, a balance which is connected to shame viewed as discussed above. Is it 71