Salon has invested a lot in Broadsheet and I suspect its unlikely they'll ever change for something else.

So Option 4 - keep Broadsheet and add "Gendersheet" (Le Castor - love it)as a separate section.

It would need equal space on the Front page (Blogbox etc) to get a fair shake. Salon can blog away in it and solict submisisons from readers.

The biggest problem would be decding which articles go in BS and which is GS, which kinda of illustrates the problems with BS.

Its got style and cheek :)

think it's less of an ideological choice and more of a marketing choice. Salon probably realized that many of its readers are feminists and care about feminist stuff.

True - I guess they forgot that feminist doesn't mean "Women only"

1) women are the biggest non-white-male minority who read salon

Also true.

Side note: When I first read that I wondered "Only non-white women read salon ?" :)

When you say "minority" do you mean "group" ? Because there are more women than men in the world.

a "women's" blog is the only allowed form of minority blogging. Can you imagine how outraged people would be if salon had a "asian blog" or "black blog"? No, it would have to be a "race blog" to be palatable.

exactly - illustrates how offensive some people find Broadsheet and why a gender blog is a lot more palatable.

The problem, though, if you want balanced viewpoints is then would salon have to hire a Cailtin Flanagan to balance out Joan Walsh? Or some crazy chauvinist pig to balance out the feminists?

The mind boggles - I think we'd run the risk of a implosion in SF ...

I don't think the issue is "balance" so much - being feminist doesn't mean one-sided, rather a broader range of viewpoints. I'd like to see more input from men and conservative feminists (they do exist) would be interesting. Everyone really.

To often people see "balance" as its implemented on Fox news - two extreme viewpoints brought together for a mud wrestling match.

So suppose we retitled it Gendersheet and instructed the current staff to post things about gender, not just women. Would that be okay

Yup, though I suspect they would need to bring more people into the tent purely because the Salon staff is somewhat limited in that area, but its a start. Perhaps salon could establish a area for people to post suggestions for them to follow up on.

or would their still be a bias because they're mostly feminists?

As above - I don't think being a feminist implies a bias, I am a feminist myself - was brought up one. Of course there are people such as Brightstar666 who are convinced of the feminazi conspiracy - we're all out to castrate poor Brightstar ...

Anything upto 5% of the general population is not statistically insignificant. Plus we're not talking the general population, we're talking salon, which as a liberal sympathetic publication tends to attract more out there people than other mags.

Also the whole issue is fascinating to a number of "straight" people as well.

Nor is anyone saying special issues should take over a whole section - unless you mean broadsheet itsel of course.

And your last paragraph is just plain hateful.

NOT: Besides, if you're not a subscriber then WTF? Who cares if you don't like it, freeloader?

Muffy: because you don't like the title of a subsection of a website that most of you get for free

See the little gold star over my handle ? that means I'm a "S U B S C R I B E R" - yes I pay for this site, unlike your goodselves.

I should know better than to feed the trolls ...

The biggest slanders of a womens chances for president will be other womens. Hands down when it comes to backstabbing and pulling each other apart women can't beat their "sisters".

And thos infamous soccer mums - they certainly won't vote for a female president, no'll they vote for that sexy man in the flight suit - "I feel so much safer with him charge"

who's the elected leader of the free world in the first place

Last time I checked I have lived in several free countries (NZ, Australia & England) and the US president was not the elected leader of any of them. This constant US parochalism gets really irritating, when its not hysterically funny.

Actually you could hardly call the current US president elected anyway.

Let's engage in a farce. Suppose we were to elect a woman President, (that would just be way too awesome).

You might want to reconsider that - remember Maggie Thatcher ? just suppose you got Condi Rice as president - still awesome ?

I mean, really? "all women are catty bitches"? "all men are violent assholes"? You know?

Fair enough. Though I didn't mean "catty bitches", anecdotal evidence indicates strongly that there is a subsection of women who feel resentful of successful women - but that could be another myth.

I think the biggest obstacle for a woman president is just in the numbers. In polls, between 75 and 92 % of people say they would vote for a woman president.

(Presume you mean *wouldn't* vote for). It would be interesting to see a gender breakdown of numbers - will women vote for a female president ?

Maybe because I've only worked in computer sciency environments I feel that women being catty isn't the biggest problem

Interesting - I work in a small computer firm, one of the three directors/owners is female. The majority of the staff are female, though in the Sales, Marketing, Admin and Support roles. IT (All 4 of us) are male.

By far the biggest turnover is with the women, particularly the support manager role - 5 in the past two years :) none of them can get on with the female marketing/sales director. Oddly I get on with her just fine, but she's not my direct boss either.

We have our first male Support manager now, should be intersting to see how that pans out.