November 9, 2007. Welcome to folks finding their way here from Make Them Accountable. Please note that this post is over two years old now. A lot has changed since I wrote it. I have a post up today that's sort of an update.
By way of Amanda at Pandagon, who learned of it from Echidne, comes the news that Atrios was on C-SPAN the other night and he got asked the question.
You know THE Question.
"Where are all the women bloggers?"
Sigh.
As I wrote in Amanda's comments, "That question, 'Where are all the women bloggers?' a babelfish would translate as 'I only know the names of four or five bloggers. You, the guy I'm interviewing right now, and I just learned your name from my producer. Matt Drudge, Glenn Reynolds, and Mickey Kaus. Frankly, that's more names than my head can hold and I'm really not interested in reading any blogs. Can you please say something that will stir up a little controversary on the subject and help keep me awake through the rest of this interview?'"
But I think another way to translate it is, "Hey, fella, how come I have to sit here with you, a boring, pasty-faced white guy, instead of some hot chick in a mini-skirt, and, by the way, do you have Wonkette's phone number?"
There are plenty of women blogging, of course. What there are not are any who are regularly linked to by the top five or six male bloggers (Wonkette is a special case), who are the only ones the producers who book slots for talk shows care about.
I don't think the reason for this is sexism, although sexism always seems to come into play when those top male bloggers try to explain why they don't link to more female bloggers.
I think the reason is an extreme narrow-mindedness---or, to put it more flatteringly, a laser-like focus on a single aspect of human behavior. The top dog bloggers are almost autistically obsessed with politics as it's practiced in Washington D.C.
Or to put it another way: As far as I'm concerned, the most influential and popular female blogger, who also happens to be a hot young chick who looks good in a mini skirt, is not Wonkette. It's Maud Newton, whose name never comes up in these debates, for the simple reason that her focus is the contemporary literary scene and the top dog bloggers don't read books that aren't written by anyone whose byline hasn't appeared on the New York Times op-ed page so they never link to her.
The trouble is that the top dog male bloggers are just not as interested in the wider world as most women bloggers are.
Name your favorite female bloggers and then go over their last twenty or so posts. Odds are very good that at least half those posts, or more, have nothing to do with what is going on inside the Beltway. But look at Kevin Drum's last 20, or Josh Marshall's, or Atrios'.
Then look at the types of posts on other bloggers' sites that they link to. The top dog male bloggers almost always link to purely political posts.
Meanwhile, Avedon Carol, although most of her posts and links are political, regularly links to bloggers posting on a wide-range of subjects
When male bloggers talk about this, they don't discuss it as if there's a difference of focus. They see it simply as proof of the essential soft-heartedness---by which some of them mean soft-headedness---of women. Women aren't up to the hurly burly of political debate, is the implicit and sometimes explicit message.
(By the way, if you happen to think this way, then you haven't read Shakespeare's Sister.)
But the actual weakness is that of the top dog male bloggers and their most fiercely loyal readers.
They have all been consumed by the debate.
They don't have any space in their heads anymore for anything other than politics.
Now, I admire them all and I'm glad they've chosen to fight the good fight. And obviously they are all intelligent guys who know what they're talking about.
But, frankly, they are kind of dumb.
And dull.
Dumb in the way anyone who becomes too specialized is dumb. Dull in the way anyone who can't talk about anything but his or her own obsessions is dull.
When there is a big issue on the table---the election, the fillibuster, Social Security, I can't get enough of them. But when things in DC are relatively quiet, I can go days and days without visiting their pages and not miss them...and not miss anything.
Often, when I do return to their pages after skipping a few days, it seems as though I never left. The same subjects are being worried and I think, "Hey, this is where I came in."
I can't do that with Roxanne, or Amanda, or Nance, Trish, Susie, Lindsay, or just about any of the women on my blog roll.
But here's the thing. I can't do that with many of the men over there either.
Neddie, Tom, Matt (Welch not Yglesias), Roy, Jaquandor, Ratty, Denis, Link, Bora, the Heretik, and lots of the others can be counted on to surprise me with the subjects they've chosen to write about that day.
The divide isn't between male and female bloggers. It's between wonks and writers.
Between editorialists/analysts/reporters and journalists, in the older, broader sense of the word.
Most of the women whose blogs I frequent are writers and journalists in that sense. Their interests are broader, the subjects they tackle are more varied, and their posts are, usually, more discursive. These are not traits that are going to get them lots of links from the top male bloggers who are looking for specifically political and quickly digested posts to link to and quote from.
The top dog bloggers are obsessed with politics, but their readers are addicted to politics. Their readers need frequent fixes of anger to keep their adrenal glands pumping and new fully loaded clips of damning facts to arm them in arguments either on their own blogs or around the water cooler or dorms.
Someone looking for another dumb thing Bush said today isn't going to take kindly to being directed to Neddie Jingo's Grand Unified Theory of Lost in which your Neddie connects the TV series to the political theories of John Locke and the rise of Unitarian-Universalim (and Ned thinks those of us who write too much about Star Wars are nuts) or to Nance's light-hearted recounting of the lack of treasures to be found at her new neighbors' garage sales.
They don't care what the Heretik thinks of Edward Hopper's paintings or how since she was mugged Blue Girl has had to struggle with an anguishing clash between her traumatized feelings and her Liberal ideals.
They don't want to read about the trouble Juno is having with a shawl she is knitting or wade through George's review of Austin Pendleton's new play. (They probably would like to know why Juno has declared a sweater moratorium though.)
I've been lucky recently, having been linked to by the Daou Report, Somerby, and Atrios, among others, and I've been grateful for the increased traffic and happy to have a whole bunch of new readers. But the posts those guys chose to link to are not among what I consider my best stuff.
They linked to posts that were more focused on politics than most of my posts (although politics has a way of creeping in everywhere and shame on me for that) and, grateful as I was, a part of me actually resented the links. C'mon, guys, I was thinking, I've written much better posts, why don't you link to any of them? Take a look at all I've got archived under Sketchpad and Now Playing at Cine 1-1000, why don't you?
But they're not going to. Movies, home improvement, and my old girlfriends aren't their thing. Nor should they be. They've got their interests and their jobs to do. They've got their readers to serve.
I can't helping thinking it's their loss. Avedon Carol has linked to several of my political posts, but she's also thought her readers would be interested in what I think of Orlando Bloom. Roxanne has linked to posts of mine on Count Dooku and moving diners and Seinfeld trivia. Neither of them could send anywheres near the traffic my way as Atrios did. But I was just as grateful for their links, if not more so.
But it's not just that the top dogs and their readers are obsessed with politics.
The regular media types are too, only more so.
This being the way the world is then I don't think we can rely on the top dogs for increases in readership and attention from the regular media.
We have to find other paths to fame and fortune.
Amanda thinks the problem can be solved through more sophisticated self-promotion on the part of women bloggers.
Luckily, an idea happened upon me while reading Rebecca Traister's latest article in Salon criticizing the media's love of the catfight. It was obvious all along what female bloggers need to do to garner some attention--an all-out Jello wrestling competition. There's thousands of worthy female bloggers who need the attention, which means that a Jello wrestling contest would drag on for a long time as the various elimination rounds were played out. I have a feeling this is the sort of political writing event that would get massive amounts of coverage on CSPAN and various other news outlets. If we drag it out long enough, before you know it, people will be saying "Atrios who?" and "Matt who?"
I think this is a good idea, especially if it's done in conjunction with an idea I've been pushing for a while.
More cheesecake!
I think women bloggers should post lots of pictures of themselves in lingerie or swimsuits.
I think male bloggers should post lots of pictures of their wives and girlfriends in lingerie or swimsuits.
That's sexist, you say? Why shouldn't we male bloggers also pose in our boxers and swim trunks?
Think about it. Do you really want us to? Seriously, if we looked good stripped down do you think we'd be spending all our time online blogging? No way. We'd be out there flaunting the goods and hitting on hot chicks in miniskirts, even hot chicks in miniskirts who don't have their own blogs.
Nope. The world will be a happier, more beautiful place if we remain invisible. But we all have attractive wives and girlfriends and we should make the most of our great and totally inexplicable good fortune.
Those of us male bloggers who have husbands or boyfriends should also exploit their partners because even though gay men on the whole keep themselves up better than straight guys, gay male bloggers are still bloggers and like their hetero counterparts are probably not the pretty ones in the relationship.
Anyway, I've got some nice shots of the blonde taken on Cape Cod. I promise signed 8 x 10 glossies to my 500,000th and 750,000th visitors.
My one-millioneth visitor wins a nude. Very tasteful, of course.
There, that should drum up some traffic.
Love it! Except, c'mon. We know at least of few of you male bloggers have to be hot--it's the law of averages. I had a troll saying that if female bloggers were hot, we wouldn't be blogging, since hotness somehow precludes the desire to pontificate at length online about bullshit. If it's not true for women, I imagine it's not true for men, either.
Posted by: Amanda | Saturday, June 04, 2005 at 01:46 PM
That may be the first time I've ever been called a generalist without a sneer in the tone. Thanks, Lance!
Posted by: Linkmeister | Saturday, June 04, 2005 at 02:17 PM
Heretik who? When he wanders, he is truly lost. Perhaps in a world of wonder. We do have so much to wonder about. And enjoy. Your check will be arriving shortly. Thanks.
Posted by: The Heretik | Saturday, June 04, 2005 at 03:08 PM
great post, lance. it had the right amount of common sense mixed with sprinkles of humor.
btw, i find bloggers like you, who write of varied things, and alicublog, with his interests in arts, and steve gilliard, who posts a lot on cooking and soccer, to be a lot more interesting that the straight ahead political bloggers.
Posted by: harry near indy | Saturday, June 04, 2005 at 06:58 PM
Great topic, Lance. I smell ya about the occasional ennui of trolling political blogs... Some small, still voice waaay at the back of the head wants to plead, "C'mon, kids -- is there really nothing else going on in your lives?"
I've been scribbling away on the Internets in some way or another since I discovered USENET back in about '92, and I've always tried to live by the rule, Point A to Point B. If you start at Point A, goddamned well be at Point B by the time you put up your .sig or what you've written will be BORING. And "Blogger X has some interesting points about Scandal Y, click here to read" is NOT getting to Point B.
Oh, and one other thing. I am un-fuckin'-believably hot. I make Clooney look like Skippy the Bush Kangaroo. And I'm not talking about Jon Stewart's favorite blogger. Huge cock, too. Huge.
Posted by: Neddie Jingo | Saturday, June 04, 2005 at 09:38 PM
Hmmmm...perhaps I should put up some pictures of myself in Speedos!
Posted by: coturnix | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 10:15 AM
Great post, Lance. I expect to see some naked pictures of you up on this site by monday morning.
As re: women bloggers, I think the fact that this "issue" comes up every time there's a "blogger panel" is partly a function of sexism and partly a function of the extreme pinheadedness of our journalists, who can really only hold one topic in their mind at once. For them, "blogging" is one topic; "women's issues" is a second topic. If they have to think about both, their heads will explode. In the meantime, it's sort of a non-issue. I mean...women bloggers....we have 'em....we love 'em. Amanda, Roxanne, and Echidne, in particular, are requisite for my daily survival.
You make an excellent point about the dull over-specialization of many of the "big name" bloggers and their groupies. However, as a former resident of Diaryland, I will point out that there are many, many, many blogs out there (and plenty of them belong to women) that are so unfocused and narcissistic that they devolve into a sort of "guess what my cat did today" pointlessness. It's sort of the flip side of the overspecialization problem.
You are thoughtful and judicious as ever; basically the total opposite of me!
Oh PS, the line "gay male bloggers are still bloggers and like their hetero counterparts are probably not the pretty ones in the relationship" made me laugh so hard I shot orange juice through my nose! Which is amazingly painful! You don't have to say things just because they're "true". I'm probably the worst-groomed gay man ever, a sort of Anti-Queer-Eye. My boyfriend is pretty hot, though, so I'm going to redesign my site featuring lots of beefcake pictures of him and his giant package. Or maybe a new regular feature...."Friday Cock Blogging!"
Posted by: will | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 01:22 PM
Lance, the "C" word keeps appearing over and over (well, ok just twice) -- in response to your post.
And at first I thought I would reply to Neddie Jingo -- "Oh yeah?!! Prove it!!"
But, I'm afraid he might!!
Posted by: blue girl | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 02:29 PM
Umm...yeah....it was Neddie. I learned it from watching him, okay!!?!?! *runs away sobbing*
Posted by: will | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 03:31 PM
Wait...no...It was Harry from Indy. I learned it from watching Harry from Indy, okay!!?!?! *runs away sobbing again*
Posted by: will | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 03:37 PM
I'm sorry Will. I didn't mean to make you cry! Come back! Come back!
You go ahead and set up any kind of regular feature you want on your site. "C" word or no "C" word -- I'll come by and check it out.
Posted by: blue girl | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 04:05 PM
Just what the FUCK are you trying to imply about me, Lance?!
;-)
(Just kidding, of course.)
Great post. I think you're right that the assumptions about women not being able to hack the "food fight" are well past their bedtime.
"They don't have any space in their heads anymore for anything other than politics." - I would add to this thought that it's not just that they can't think about anything other than politics; it that they also can't think about politics in any other way than their existing frame. Which is a shame, because the greatest thing about the blogosphere is its diversity, not only in terms of who's blogging, but in terms of how they're blogging, even on the same topic.
Posted by: Shakespeare's Sister | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 06:29 PM
Eh don't sweat it, blue girl...it was one of those dramatic, Mary Catherine Gallagher style cry-and-runs. To really cry, I'd have to have like *feelings* and stuff. :)
Posted by: will | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 08:05 PM
Lance, you're brilliant. And right. Writers vs. wonks, it's that simple.
Posted by: Susie from Philly | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 09:52 PM
Hang on, when you say "drum up some traffic" shouldn't you be spelling that with a capital D?
In all seriousness, very good point about "wonks versus writers."
Posted by: Elayne Riggs | Sunday, June 05, 2005 at 11:24 PM
Very good post. Can I point out that there are some of us that are trying to help draw attention to the growing list of women bloggers out there. And if you dont' mind a bit of shameless advertising, you can see the growing list here --- http://www.blogsbywomen.blogspot.com ... please do check it out. I have just recently joined the crew in finding women that blog and advertising them. And not just the political or left-leaning as well (tho that is hard for me to do).
Posted by: Angie | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 01:11 AM
Great post. I said in another blog's comments that I'd jello wrestle only if it was strawberry jello. I look good in red. ;)
Someone pointed out ages ago that some of the top conservative female bloggers rank high because they post cheesecake-styled photos of themselves. If I posted a picture of myself it would put to rest the rumor mill that says I probably wear studded leather, thigh-high-boots, and crack a cat-o-nine-tails. Can't have that now, can I?
Posted by: Trish Wilson | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 07:42 AM
Huh?
(kinda the remark you expected from a blonde female blogger, no?)
Posted by: pissed off patricia | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 08:08 AM
Excellent post, Lance, but don't forget about us gay bloggers...where are we? :)
There are one or two male bloggers I wouldn't mind seeing in a Speedo... but that would be shallow, wouldn't it?
Posted by: Mustang Bobby | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 09:26 AM
First, thanks for writing about this again. Perhaps, blogging is like most other aspects of our socitety, women have so many more additional duties in life that we may not have time to be as self-promoting as male bloggers?
Or is that we are more naive to think that if we have quality posts, people will find us and help give us the credit that we deserve?
I am not sure. Thanks, Lance.
Posted by: Catherine | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 11:03 AM
Very similar experiences on this end with the stuff of mine Roxanne (and some others - not all of them with fallopian tubes) link to as opposed to the straight political stuff I write. I know which bloggers read my stuff carefully and which ones just find the posts that accidentally tap into the Pipeline O' Blogosphere Zeitgeist.
Not that I mind any of the links, mind you. I just get more of a warm feeling from certain traffic.
Posted by: Chris Clarke | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 02:03 PM
Atrios? Who's that? Never heard of the guy.
Posted by: Pepper | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 03:43 PM
Swimsuits? Do you realize I live on the 51st parallel? The best I can do is a light jacket and gloves. As for jello, only if it's the kind without gelatin for this vegan.
Otherwise, fantastic post. You're one of those guys who's been on the periphery of my particular blog world for a while, and now I see why I should be reading you every day. I actually thought you mostly posted political stuff, and I get that from Jeanne and Kathy and Shakes' Sis. Go figure!
Posted by: KathyF | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 03:48 PM
Oh, OK. Here you go. Me. That's about as stripped down as anyone is going to get me.
Posted by: PZ Myers | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 04:23 PM
PZ, that's hot! LOL.
Posted by: Catherine | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 06:14 PM
PZ, you look like an ad for the movie "Fargo". YOU put Steve Buscemi into the wood chipper, didn't you? ;)
Posted by: Trish Wilson | Monday, June 06, 2005 at 07:11 PM
I have a pic of me oyster wrestling, because you know, oysters enhance virility. If I look a bit chafed, it's from all the damn shells.
Posted by: Kevin Hayden | Tuesday, June 07, 2005 at 03:34 AM
Well, I know what my best features are and that's what y'all are only getting the mugshot on my blog.
Some random thoughts follow.
You are completely wrong about politics only weblogs you know: in your dichotomy between wonks and writers you put the case much, much too strong. And I don't like the undertone that focusing solely on politics is dumb. The same with your depiction of politics blog readers as angry AND dumb.
Furthermore, we are no longer living at a point in time where you could ignore
politics with no real consequences, if there ever was such a time. It is precisely because of that characterisation of politics as dumb, boring and weird that so much evil could and can go on unnoticed, because intelligent, goodwilled people did not think it's worth bothering about.
This is a bit of a sore point with me as you may have noticed, living in a city with a smug cultural elite who could not care two cents for politics as long as they have their own cozy little lives...
Think also of what you hope to accomplish by blogging: nice hobby of no real consequence or tool to achieve real world goals?
Also, people read more than one blog, read many different blogs for the main part, going to Atrios for politics, to others for other things.
Overtly generalised blogs, unless the writer is really good or some sort of "celebrity", will always have less traffic/dedicated readers than more focussed
blogs, as people who like subject [foo] don't necessarily want to wade through posts on subjects [bar] and [baz]
There are women who focus soley or almost soley on politics; Bionic Octopus, World of Crap, even Avedon focuses much more on politics than on any other subject.
Posted by: Martin Wisse | Tuesday, June 07, 2005 at 10:41 AM
Martin, I took a gander at Atrios today. The fucker is still talking about the Swift Boat veterans. Get some fucking perspective, you know? It's not a dichotomy between being a hyper-focused activist needing his daily outrage at the latest bit of Bushian hypocrisay and a wine-sipping cultural elite ignoring the gas chamber down the block. There's a whole world of in between for people to talk about politics, and still you know, have a fucking life.
Posted by: jedmunds | Tuesday, June 07, 2005 at 12:24 PM
What, you think you shouldn't follow a story? You think it's fine and dandy to have been outraged at the lies of these people six months ago, but now it's passe, it doesn't matter anymore?
Who's lacking a perspective here?
You seem to think politics is a hobby, a game, that people like atrios are in it for the fun and it doesn't really matter who wins or not.
Well, it does.
And hey, having posts on your blog about the latest fashion tips for teenage girls or lists of your favourite music in between the politics posts does not a life make.
Posted by: Martin Wisse | Tuesday, June 07, 2005 at 02:47 PM
You draw some weird little dichotomies friend. But as far as this goes:
And hey, having posts on your blog about the latest fashion tips for teenage girls or lists of your favourite music in between the politics posts does not a life make.
You've got it backwards. I post on politics between posts on teenage girls and my favorite music.
Posted by: jedmunds | Tuesday, June 07, 2005 at 03:50 PM
The entirety of my life is not on my blog. It isn't a diary.
Posted by: Atrios | Wednesday, June 08, 2005 at 09:23 AM
Atrios, Of course it's not! I was being too cute. I was referring only to how bloggers present themselves on their pages. The whole of some people's lives are their blogs, and some of them are among the writers, while the wonks are by the very nature of their work presenting only the smallest sliver of themselves to the world so that very complex and fascinating biographies are totally excluded from their pages, necessarily. As far as that goes, I would be very interested in reading a lot more about your trip to Spain, but you don't write that kind of page, and so a big and interesting part of your life and who you are is invisible to your readers.
But I'm not advocating more personal revelation, I just favor a wider brand of journalism that includes wonkery and travel writing.
And I also failed to make clear that by the writers I don't mean the diarists.
Posted by: Lance | Wednesday, June 08, 2005 at 09:38 AM
I'm always fascinated by the deep stratification between the political blogs and others.
Despite the wide-ranging content on my site, I'm generally classified as a "book blogger." I started the site on a lark three years ago to talk about books, but also to rant about politics and culture (I use that word loosely) and my crazy parents. To my amazement, the blog has since been mentioned in The New York Times, The Washington Post, USA Today, and a bunch of other newspapers in the U.S., Canada, and Britain. I guess the book blog world, like the political blog world, is fairly insular. But I'm always fascinated when the "where are the women bloggers?" meme surfaces in the political blog sphere, because the book blogs traditionally were dominated by -- or at least equally manned (for lack of a better word) by -- women. So these questions never arise in that context.
I read many of the lefty political blogs: Kos, for links and occasionally insightful commentary, Digby, for well-reasoned, well-articulated political arguments, Walcott, for smart, scathing attacks on everything dumb (although I was saddened by his enthusiastic mention of networking with Caitlin "eradicate the marital rape laws"* Flanagan a few months ago), and DC Media Girl, to name a few.
I read Atrios less often than I have in the past. I haven't given much thought to the reasons, but I think I'm simply drawn to sites that, at least occasionally, provide more thoroughgoing analysis. His links are good, but the commentary is a bit thin. (Too bad because, as a former tax attorney, I'd like to see him do more economist kung-fu on the Bush administration.)
Also, the unintelligent, vituperative comments left on many of the political sites drive me nuts, although I'm about as left-wing as you can get short of becoming a full-on Marxist or advocating that women bear children only in test tubes.
Anyhow, thanks for pointing out that there are female bloggers who write about things other than rainbows and unicorns.
* Okay, that's a slight distortion of her position, but not really.
Posted by: Maud | Wednesday, June 08, 2005 at 11:59 AM
I take back what I said about Kos. I've just familiarized myself with his outright dismissal of women's concerns. I will not be reading his site anymore.
Posted by: Maud | Wednesday, June 08, 2005 at 01:25 PM
Now that Atrios has dropped by, I don't want to sound unappreciative of what he does either. Eschaton is a pretty invaluable resource. Light on the analysis sometimes yes, but I don't really go there for that, but the man links to all sorts of important stuff daily. Some days I'm less in the mood for it than others, but whatever. HE's got his schtick and he's been successful with it. I wouldn't ask him to post about his personal life, and I'm not really interested in it for that matter. But there are limits he's imposed on himself, and that's not necesarrily the most interesting thing in the world all the time either. No more no less.
Posted by: Jedmunds | Wednesday, June 08, 2005 at 03:59 PM
A necessary condition for having a high traffic blog is to Post A Lot, though it isn't a sufficient one.
Posted by: Atrios | Wednesday, June 08, 2005 at 06:11 PM
Yeah I know about the hard work that you surely put into your blog. Despite my limited traffic, I still now and then have to put up with people who think they own the blog. so sorry if I took that tone. and I really do appreciate everything you do.
Posted by: jedmunds | Wednesday, June 08, 2005 at 09:37 PM
I can't quite figure out the "mystery of the women bloggers" crap. I'm a woman. I write about politics and things political almost exclusively. I've a list on my blog of other women who write almost exclusively about politics.
Most of these women are writing hard charging, well thought out, good stuff.
Maybe Amanda's right...maybe it's a promotion thing. But sweet jeezus can we move on from this already?
Posted by: carla | Thursday, June 09, 2005 at 01:14 AM
I think will has a excellent point -- in my personal experience, for a lot of guys, and especially for a lot of POLITICAL guys, there's a "politics" box and a "women stuff" box, and they don't even consider the possiblity that using those boxes is interfering with the way they think. Try using the phrase "the personal is political" around a policy wonk & watch him turn puce. For a lot of policy wonks, Politics seems to be a way to NOT talk about personal stuff... personal stuff not being something that policy wonks have gotten much enjoyment from... thus the considerable intersection between neocons & rotisserie baseball & Star Wars (the Lucas, not the Teller mythology, err, *also* the Lucas version). Telling a policy wonk of this stripe that he should talk more about his "real life" just irks him with the fear that he should actually HAVE one. Telling him that women should get credit for talking about THEIR real lives only reminds him that women all seem to get "real lives" automatically, which irks him & also reminds him that one of the things he hates about women is this "real life" issue (probably invented by women because they couldn't memorize baseball statistics with their smaller brains!)...
As for posting cheesecake pics, I will grant that some men seem to find Coulter attractive, or at least seem to think that OTHER men would find her attractive. (Incidentally, a very wise gay male friend once said you could always spot a MTF transsexual by asking a straight guy if he found the suspected MTF attractive. If Straight Guy said, well, she's not exactly my type, but ya gotta admit she's hot... bingo, that's a tranny, because MTF transsexuals are acting out a straight guy's impression of what a Hot Babe "ought" to be, which is not actually what straight guys find hot, although they're certain that all the OTHER straight guys would totally Do Her.) But does ANYBODY really want to see Katherine Lopez of the National Review in a bikini?
Posted by: Anne Laurie | Saturday, June 11, 2005 at 11:01 PM
Im hot and Im a woman and i blog, you wanna see some jello wrestling check out my blog ....www.mitrochondria.blogspot.com....bitches
Posted by: Laura Yager | Wednesday, December 07, 2005 at 08:42 PM
Jello wrestling and mixed wrestling in various substances is great fun!
Posted by: Jello Wrestling Fan | Friday, January 13, 2006 at 11:47 AM
Re: women's jello wrestling:
http://flickr.com/photos/anp/320733216/
Posted by: ANP | Tuesday, December 12, 2006 at 04:52 PM
Atrios and Kos link to Firedoglake all the time. And FDL is not only owned by a woman (Jane Hamsher), but its most prolific posters are women: Jane, Christy Hardin Smith, looseheadprop, and myself, to name four.
Oh, and if anyone think that Atrios rarely links to female bloggers, then they must have missed all the posts of his that are titled "What Digby Said". (Not to mention his having Avedon Carol and Watertiger pinch-blog for him an average of once a week, if not oftener.)
Meanwhile, the biggest blog out there in terms of readership is -- ta-dah! -- the Huffington Post, which last I looked was run by a woman.
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | Friday, November 09, 2007 at 10:55 AM
-- I can't quite figure out the "mystery of the women bloggers" crap. I'm a woman. I write about politics and things political almost exclusively. I've a list on my blog of other women who write almost exclusively about politics. --
It's because according to the media, women bloggers don't exist unless they fit the media's stereotypes about women bloggers. (The biggest one: That women bloggers only count as such if they write almost exclusively about the media considers to be strictly "women's issues".)
That's why people like Jane Hamsher and Arianna Huffington (whose Huffington Post blows away Daily Kos in terms of readership, largely because Huffington has got a large number of people who'd never before read blogs to visit her in the blogosphere) are either ignored or not counted as women bloggers, unless it's to diss them as "foul-mouthed fembloggers".
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | Friday, November 09, 2007 at 11:02 AM
PW.
I don't know why Carolyn linked to this post. It's over two years old now. Huffington and FDL didn't exist yet, or at least I didn't know about them, and people thought digby was a man. And it was about that time that Avedon began to shame Atrios into linking to more women. Anyway things have changed somewhat for the better and I put up a post today sort of apologizing for this one.
Posted by: Lance | Friday, November 09, 2007 at 11:52 AM
lance, i beg to differ with your basic premise...
firstly, i would consider firedoglake, blogged primarily by women, as one of the top 5 or 6 liberal blogs.
but secondly, the problem isn't that the top guys only link to guys talking politics...the problem is non-sexist but very classist (a la peter principle) in nature...the top 5 or 6 guys link to the top 5 or 6 guys over and over and over again.
there is very little traffic exchanged between the various tiers of blog levels. i believe this to be a conscious choice on the part of the top level bloggers.
there are tons of mid- and lower- level bloggers who write great, have pithy analysis, and actually break stories (eplurbus media and the jeff guckert/gannon story, for example, and there were women involved in that investigation).
and there are tons of great women writers in those lower-tiered blogs.
unless and until there is a more concerted effort to create an informal cohesive infrastructure a la the hardly-ever-right wing blogs (malkin and reynolds happily link to the smaller blogs at the drop of a pixel), not only will women be under-represented in blogtopia and yes i coined that phrase, but we will still have big troubles getting our message out.
Posted by: skippy | Friday, November 09, 2007 at 01:33 PM
http://politicsanew.com/ Political Voices of Women
http://www.catherineblogs.com/
List of 200+ Women Bloggers, Lance !
Posted by: opit | Sunday, November 11, 2007 at 12:31 AM
Mixed martial arts has gained so much popularity in the past few years. It's really becoming a widely recognised sport. It's good to see those guys who go out and battle like they do, get some well deserved attention.
Posted by: Layla | Thursday, September 25, 2008 at 11:07 AM