greenpass: Femmeblog

The Green Pass Sampler

About

Morning Rounds

« Georgia on my mind | Main | I want it to be my birthday too »

August 06, 2004

Femmeblog

One of the most persistent questions I was asked at the convention was "What's it like to be a female blogger?" I never really thought about it, but it's true that out of the 15 or so blogs I read every morning, and the 30 or so that get read every few days, I can count the women on one hand with room to spare. When Matt Singer at Not Geniuses linked to my site with some flattering words, I did some more navel-gazing about the plight of women in the blogosphere.

At first glance, there should be nothing stopping women from sweeping onto the Internet Boadicea-style and taking over the place. Women are no less likely to own computers than men, and women are often more comfortable with the written word than face to face discussion, especially about something contentious like politics. Many women also purposely seek out communities and networks rather than one-to-many communication channels, making me think that the blog format and inter-blog conversation is perfect for us members of the fairer sex. Finally, the Internet has the advantage of giving every voice a fair shot at being heard, meaning that even people that are shy or dislike cross-talk can speak up and make a point as a comment on a post.

The answer that I came up with after the question was asked a couple of times was a little complicated, and has a few assumptions built into it that I'm not quite so confident in as I tried to sound to the reporters.

Political and media-critical blogs of the type that were at the convention require a certain type of mind to write - one has to be comfortable with the technical underpinnings of the blog format, to start with, which automatically excludes more men than women for societal reasons that you'd think would have been eradicated by now. But also one has to be attuned to politics, media matters and current affairs, an area where I have found many women don't like to speak up too much. To have a good blog you need to be at a high-ish level with all these things. Since there are fewer than average women in all of these groups, the intersection (potential political blog writers) contains so few women as to make Jeralyn and Natasha rarities, and myself an oddity without even the expertise of a fabulous legal career under my belt to justify myself and my commentary.

But more generally, I fear that the dearth of women in the blogosphere is a worrying sign of women excluding themselves from the political process. I know many women my own age who are turned off by the perceived bitterness, negativity and partisan tribalism inherent in the present-day political discourse. And of course when the niche of female "political blogger" is occupied, very wrongly in my opinion, by Wonkette, it's no wonder that women seem not to have wanted to join in the conversation that was started on the Internet 2 or so years ago.

Women are far more attracted to things that are written by women (although not necessarily exclusively written for women). The success of "women's portals" like iVillage, with a lack of anything comparable for our Y chromosome carrying counterparts, should confirm that there are women out there some of whom must not realize that they would really love the format found here and at other blogs. Hopefully this site will tempt some of them to stay a while and become part of a conversation that desperately needs more female voices. As I wrote when I was at the convention, women must join the national debate or risk having issues that impact them the most, such as reproductive policy, be decided by those who have no personal stake in the matter.

Posted at 03:44 PM in Weblogs | Permalink

Comments

Zoe: I think there are plenty of women bloggers. I read many on a daily basis. And while some of us, myself included, talk about politics fairly often, it isn't the sole purpose of the blog. You could say that there is a lacking of specific female-run political blogs, but there are a lot of other topics out there to be blogging on as well. And that's where the women come in - chefs, musicians, psychologists ... I read all their blogs. Politics just isn't the center.
It's all in the perspective I guess.

Posted by: Shel | August 06, 2004 at 06:27 PM

I guess what I tried to imply when I said "Political and media-critical blogs of the type that were at the convention require a certain type of mind to write" was that my focus is mainly on that type of blog. I don't have much crossover with other more profession-specific blogs, but I am sure that there are lots of women bloggers in those fields. The questions the mainstream media were asking were directly related to political blogs though - I guess it was the convention, after all.

Posted by: Zoe | August 06, 2004 at 06:42 PM

The comments about the nastiness and bitterness of politics are interesting. Most of the men I know in politics are much more into the go-for-the-throat methods. Many of the women are inclined to say they're sick of the divisiveness of politics. The women who feel otherwise and do play in the mud are often nastier and more Machivallian than the men (evidenced, I believe, by Ann Coulter and a number of people on the right and even by Hillary Clinton who is as shrewd of a power broker as any man in the Senate).

Next debate: nurture or nature?

Posted by: Matt Singer | August 06, 2004 at 07:38 PM

Reminiscent of the famous question a sportswriter asked Doug Williams before Super Bowl XXII: "So, how long have you been a black quarterback?"

(I think there was actually a backstory there that made the question less stupid than it sounded, but I don't remember what it was at the moment.)

Posted by: JP | August 07, 2004 at 01:14 AM

I actively write 5 different blogs: one personal, one for my small business, two that I get paid to write for two local small businesses and one as official blogger for the Santa Clara County Democratic Party web site.

There are three things that are potential turn-offs to this level of blogging;

1. The pressure to always write. I mean, maybe I'm a little overboard with my five blogs, but I've gotta write every day and on a lot of different topics. Currently the political and the small business blogs get top priority (the former because I'm committed to doing everything I can to boot Bush, the latter because it's my business) so my personal blogs get short shrift. And, of course, i started out doing the personal blogging, because I enjoyed it.

2. The pressure to get connected. It's not enough to be a blogger. There's a part of me that really wants to get my blogs out there and well-known and well-read...especially, again, the political one. But the whole culture of not only spending hours writing the blogs, but hours reading the blogs and commenting on them and networking yourself onto other blogs...it's a little overwhelming.

3. The freedom people feel to be vicious and flame-y when it's online communications. I don't particularly enjoy getting nasty emails or comments because someone disagrees with me. It's one thing to disagree; it's another to cast aspersions on my patriotism and my character because of it. And the awareness of my gender means that I get the kind of comments no man would get. I've had these:

"Why don't you do what's good for the nation, instead of what your bridge club thinks!" (HUH?? Bridge club? Dude!)

"You've got quite a little temper, don't you?" (Yeah, and I'm a naughty little minx too!)

"You're over-reacting" or "Your reaction is over-the-top" or "You're getting so emotional about it." (This coming from the person whose literary red face and throbbing veins practically jump off the "page.")

I feel discouraged at the level of discourse that is deemed acceptable online. Who needs it?

BUT, it doesn't seem to really stop me. As long as you have a point of view, and think it's worth sharing, blogs are an incredible way to do so. And from a reader's perspective, an incredible way to find out about all sorts of things you never would have learned about otherwise.

Links:
Democratic Party blog: http://sccdp.org/blog.php
Personal blog: http://homepage.mac.com/elisa_camahort/iblog
Business blog: http://workerbeesblog.blogspot.com

Posted by: Elisa Camahort | August 07, 2004 at 11:13 AM

Interesting observations, Zoe.

In comparison, in the brick and mortar world, regional Democratic Committee meetings and progressive meetups are populated entirely by women. And, in my experience with political campaigns, paid campaign staff are predominantly men, and volunteers are mainly women.

Here's a wierd one for you: here in the Virginia state legislature, Democrats' legislative assistants are almost always women, and Republicans' are almost exclusively male, and very often ex-military.

Posted by: Shaula Evans | August 07, 2004 at 08:44 PM

excellent blog, Zoe

it must be added to this discussion that while we may also blog, we are still the envelope stuffers in our movements. it we weren't, just about no one would be, nothing would change. and no change happens without the grunt work.

to blog on top of that is wondrous, but it tends to be a sideline for the most dedicated of activist womyn.

keep on, Zoe and ALL!

Posted by: friend | August 08, 2004 at 02:41 AM

uh
sorry, Shaula Evans, for basically repeating what you'd written in the very prior post.
i had scrolled right past your post!

keep on!

Posted by: friend | August 08, 2004 at 02:48 AM

Elisa -- To be fair, I'm regularly called "hysterical", "excitable" and "over the top" on my blog -- all this despite having a penis. I will agree, however, that it is almost always my nuttiest, most vein-poppingly enraged commentors flinging the insult. Glass houses and stones, huh?

Posted by: Ezra | August 08, 2004 at 12:57 PM

To be fair, I'm regularly called "hysterical", "excitable" and "over the top" on my blog

And that's just John Cole!

Posted by: praktike | August 08, 2004 at 01:09 PM

Ezra: Good to know. Although I doubt you'll hear comments abut your bridge club any time soon, I am more than willing to concede that people can dismiss both men and women of conviction and passion as "hysterical" when they disagree with them.

Posted by: Elisa Camahort | August 09, 2004 at 06:39 PM