15 Responses for "Gender and blogging"

1. D M March 14th, 2006 at 1:04 pm 1

   I’m just curious how a woman’s voice could be missing from the blogosphere, since at this point they have as easy access to blogging tools as men.

   Certainly 5 years ago, I might’ve thought that women were missing, since the tools were much trickier to use, and blogging as a concept wasn’t even out there much. Now, though, all that I think is really required to start some kind of blog is basic computer skills, which most people have, or are aquiring.

   I think it’s a bit more human, though. When people talk, a great deal of communicating is done non-verbally. Women especially excell at communicating verbally, and taking that away via blogging means one is communicating and missing something like 80% of the process. Maybe for some people, whose primary method of communication is speech (this could be anyone), blogging just lacks something necessary to them.

   I’ve even lamented this myself; my friends and I don’t meet up and drink beer, or have dinner, we often keep track of each other’s lives via a blog. I sometimes keep stories to myself so that I have something to say to friends when we meet up.

2. bckhough March 14th, 2006 at 1:20 pm 2

   But isn’t access to the tools is just one piece of it? There are lots of other factors like motivation, confidence, etc….. I have had several people say to me that they think it takes a lot of confidence to blog, which is not something I would have thought about. Confidence that you have something worth saying? Confidence that other people will value it (or at least not laugh at or attack you for it?)?

   I think that’s a good point about women communicating verbally. I have noticed that my male friends will comment directly on my blog, while female friends often either email me or call me if there’s something interesting to them. And I think you’re right about blogging lacking something for people – I’ve had many people tell me they are just plain bored by them.

   For me the best thing about the blogs has been staying in touch with friends. I visited Seattle after being gone for two-years, but still pretty much knew what was going on with a lot of people (many from the blogs). In my Bloglines account, I ALWAYS read my “friend” blogs — the technology and the library categories are often filled with posts I have not yet taken the time to read.

   B

3. Toftie March 14th, 2006 at 6:23 pm 3

   I agree with a lot of what you have to say Brenda. I find that I always wrote about stuff that was more self-deprecating (which is very like me in person as well) but never anything that might have to do with political knowledge or some realm where I could get attacked for being wrong. Total lack of confidence that what I have to say about the state of affairs today would be good enough to post. So yes, there is some confidence it takes to have a certain type of blog. Topic oriented ones: sports, politics, literature, or academic in general.

   So it’s much easier to blog about my underwear being on inside out because noone can say, “that’s just not true” or “you’re way off on that.” I hate that I am not up to date on politics or well versed enough any one topic to maintain any kind of topic-centered blog, but then again I jumped topics in real life as well.

   Women are circular communicators. I recommend everyone reading “The Sex Which is not One” by Luce Irigaray. It talks about some differences in how men and women communicate. Simply put men tend to be linear and women tend to touch upon a lot of points and come back around to those points while exploring other ideas. She compares this to how we are sexually as well and it’s fascinating. I only bring up this generalization because I think a lot of the political/sports/academic tend to be men because of this while women are touching on a variety of topics and coming back around again. Dooce is a great example of where continued reading of her blog becomes even more satisfying because of how it ties in with posts from two years ago.

   I’m writing too much. Sorry.

4. Kables March 14th, 2006 at 7:17 pm 4

   Blogher.

5. Brenda March 15th, 2006 at 5:59 am 5

   I am going to order a copy of “The Sex Which is not One” by Luce Irigaray right now. I’ve seen the name a lot but have never read anything. Thanks for the recommendation, KT.

6. Melissa March 15th, 2006 at 8:47 am 6

   This is an interesting post and I’m gonna think about it for awhile before I respond in depth.

   Personally, I find most topic-oriented blogs to be tired. I mean, yes, I dig music. Mostly, I find politics and politicians and the parodies they make of themselves to be incredibly dull. Sports – yawn, I appeal to the authorities.

   I think blogging about life (which is to say, putting your underwear on backwards, etc.) is more…real (ugh, kill me now if you like me.) I mean to say that I believe writing about what is actually happening to you every day is a better representation of…well, you. And what is a blog but an extension of our attempts to be known; to be historically significant? Well, “historically significant” sounds a lot more delusions of grandeur than I meant it to but I guess I mean…an attempt to be immortalized in the ether? Even just a little.

   I’ve never been “cause” people. My life is enough of a cause for me. Zealotry of any kind makes me nervous.

   Now I’ve written too much, and it’s recursive. I gotta think about this more because I’ve never really considered the fact that the differences in blog content to be gender-predicated.

   At any rate, good questions raised.

7. D M March 15th, 2006 at 9:07 am 7

   I had never thought of confidence as being a requirement for blogging. It should be noted, however, that I’ve been writing since I was 15, and writing online for probably close to 6 years. It was just something that I did, and while I knew I had an audience of sorts (a very, very tiny one), I quit caring about who read what I wrote.

   I guess you could say I had the “I am not a unique snowflake” moment.

   I will say that over the past few years, working in an office where I was the only male, I’ve learned some of the benefits of the circular communication trend exhibited by most women. But circular communication really works best, I think, when you’re having a discussion, not when you’re blogging, which I think we can all agree is several steps down on the interaction scale.

   Not that linear communication is better, merely advantagous when you’re trying to get a point across quickly. Circular works better when you’re telling a story, something most blogs don’t do. Even this blog, if you look at it, has a limited interaction between members. Wasn’t the post about vomiting the one that got the most feedback?

   But we all interact with the tools we choose. Maybe women, as a trend, don’t find blogging to be as satisfying as phone calls, for example. (I’m trying to speak in general terms because I don’t think that we can be so easily pigeonholed via gender. There are trends, yes, but to say that women don’t blog, or men always speak directly, is a disservice to the discussion, I think.)

8. Melissa March 15th, 2006 at 9:55 am 8

   Brenda,

   This post has inspired me to write an indictment against civilization.

   I mean, I’m expounding on my personal blog.

   Will link.

   Very good topic.

9. Kerry G. March 15th, 2006 at 10:40 am 9

   Blogging definitely isn’t as good as a phone call. I like details. I like to ask questions. You can get exactly what you want to know from a conversation and also hear tone and inflection in people’s voices, which defintely is lacking on a blog.

10. Amber March 15th, 2006 at 2:07 pm 10

    Came here from Melissa’s awesome post on her own blog. Just gotta say, about this:

    Certainly 5 years ago, I might’ve thought that women were missing, since the tools were much trickier to use, and blogging as a concept wasn’t even out there much.

    Dude, what the fuck? “Since the tools were much trickier to use”? Women can’t handle “tricky tools”? You want some implicit sexism, it’s RIGHT THERE, bub.

11. Melissa March 15th, 2006 at 6:33 pm 11

    When Dan said this:

    Certainly 5 years ago, I might’ve thought that women were missing, since the tools were much trickier to use, and blogging as a concept wasn’t even out there much.

    I think he meant that the tools were more technical and less push button publishing (or rather, they weren’t WYSIWYG at all) and that it is a fact that there are more men out there with that kind of technical knowledge than there are women, even five years ago – maybe even especially five years ago. It’s a male dominated industry, although I think that gap is closing.

    I don’t think he meant that women aren’t capable of learning and implementing the technical knowledge to blog w/o the use of a blogging application like Blogger/Wordpress/Whathaveyou. Dan is not sexist peoples, implied or otherwise.

    Just saying.

12. D M March 16th, 2006 at 8:28 am 12

    Hm. Well, I suppose one could read it the way you did. Of course, you’re the only one so far, and I will not live my life going around pardoning myself to every creature that cannot read properly.

    Since I never said “Women can’t handle tricky tools”-those were your words-nor did I ever imply any sexism in blogging as an act (I’m not exactly sure how I could since writing is just writing, and the tools are the tools; nobody every said a hammer was racist), nor that women couldn’t learn, I have no qualms telling someone who decides to not read my writings with care, misses the second post entirely, and swears at me to either apologize to me or kindly go away.

    The fact of the matter is: until recently, the tools for blogging were unwieldly, and a specialized group of people, mostly men, were the only ones interested in learning it. As the online culture progressed, the tools became easier to use, and the necessity of learning how to use those specialized tools decreased, opening up blogging to a greater number of people-people without an implicit interest in learning code.

    You can call that sexist if you wish, but it won’t change the facts, nor will it make you right and me bad.

13. Amber March 16th, 2006 at 1:56 pm 13

    Alright, Dan, now don’t be a dick. Melissa explained everything clearly and non-bitchily, and if her description fits your intent, then I get it. I bet you could do the same kind of explaining without getting all up in my grill if you wanted to. And yes, I’m going to be like that now, because you played it that way.

    Apparently most of the people here know each other, but I don’t, so just chill the fuck out.

    I could also play the “I wrote my own blogging software 4 years ago and I’m a girl” card, but I won’t. Oh wait, I just did.

14. D M March 16th, 2006 at 5:46 pm 14

    Excuse me? You’re the one who decided to come in here and swear and call me sexist. You didn’t ask me questions, you didn’t do anything but presume.

    Melissa may have explained, but as I was the one being attacked, I feel it I was well within my rights to respond as well, and I did so with great restraint.

    You’re right, you don’t know anyone here, but guess what? I don’t know many people here. I do, however, know how to talk to strangers.

    So kindly behave. Or if you can’t behave, leave.

15. Being Amber Rhea » Blog Archive » Spring cleaning Gmail May 12th, 2008 at 7:08 am 15

    [...] Gender and blogging – also the implicitly sexist remark on the referring blog about blogging tools being “tricky” – http://a.bunchof.us/2006/03/14/gender-and-blogging/ [...]