Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
The letters thread is now closed.
"B: But why did Gore and Pelosi show up for Netroots and not BlogHer when BlogHer was a gathering of women with the power to communicate to millions?"
Good question.
Good piece, Rebecca, but the last paragraph doesn't do it justice, imho...the many good details get lost in generalities that don't reflect the BlogHer - or blogging - community that I know and participate in.
I've gone to BlogHer and written for the site for three years. Stephanie and Heather are extreme examples who define success for some but definitely not for all. I read Heather, not Stephanie, just because I didn't know about her before this summer.
The point of the conference and the site in the first place is that it is NOT (or should not be) a boys' world. It is a world, where women want to write and connect with others who do the same, who want to share ideas and influences. Politics was PLENTY present at BlogHer. Anyone who'd like to know just how much should check the agenda, which is still available online.
I would hardly classify the many and varied brilliant women writing as spinning their wheels and losing traction here. And packing it in and heading to any corner? Absolutely not. Drop into the next event (men, and clearly even reporters, can come) and let me know if you can find an empty space.
Oh, and I'll be at the DNC on assignment with my journalism program. BlogHer will be there too. I'm there because I'm a writer engaged in covering the political process of my country, and I'm at BlogHer for the same reasons...just add because I love it, it makes me a better writer and a more informed and engaged human being.
I'm wherever I want to be, and that's the point. It's pretty simple, and pretty great, no?
or something called BlogHim, for that matter
although the word "Broadsheet" seems to have lured me in
We are changing the whole world.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
breathe
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Jesus god, you're precious. Blogging is you and your 12 friends chatting up each other about how great you are. Even St. Glenn Mao von Greenwald and his minions of weed addled antisemites are really just the same 5 dozen people who go to his book signings.
I spoke to a real live Obama campaign volunteer today, a young man, not entirely attractive but very polite and earnest who was going door to door asking for donations. I'd take one of him vs 10000 blaawgurrs any day.
Her racist slur against "Obama boys" discredits her, and she has never apologized for it:
http://www.salon.com/mwt/feature/2008/04/14/obama_supporters/
Salon should fire her or have her issue an apology.
This issue isn't going away.
You know, Heather Armstrong does write about being a mother sometimes, but really, for me, her most important posts are about dealing with depression. Depression is not a gendered issue.
She doesn't really write a 'mommy' blog. It's pretty much just a blog about life. Of course, maybe she identifies with that title of 'mommy' blog. I honestly don't know if she does or not. Nothing wrong with it. It's just she writes about a lot of other things, too.
I actually really don't know very many bloggers who write a 'mommy' blog, meaning they exclusively write about raising children. I think that phrase "mommy blog" was just a good sound bite created by television networks and the tv news, who are justly worried about how blogs and the Internet are affecting their revenue. It is sort of a way to relegate that type of writing to this 'feminine' world and thus, tried to make it an unimportant issue.
Sadly, using the words "mommy" (a diminutive of mother) and blog together actually take away from the importance of what's happening there.
Which is pretty depressing on its own. After all, if you're a parent, mom or dad, nothing is more important. Why would it be relegated to mean nothing? And yet, here we are. Patriarchy. Let's all say it together now!
It should be that a blog about motherhood or fatherhood is the most important thing out there. Maybe we should embrace these names and make them the strong, important ideas that they are. Maybe everyone who is a parent and even mentions his or her child in passing should say they write a 'mommy or daddy blog.'
but what about starting from a place of self-regard and personal authority
The irony of that phrase published on a blog called Broadsheet is stupefying.
is not the the name of blogs. That's a stupid idea. The real problem is that we still have sexism in the world. It pretty much doesn't matter what something is named. Even "Pink Fluffy Bunnies" if run by a man (and it is KNOWN to be run by a man) would be treated with more respect than if run by a woman.
Then, we have this idea of 'women's issues' which is ridiculous because the issues of home and family and balancing that with work and life in general should be important to everyone, not just women.
Next, we have those who believe if a woman is blogging it must be about family and home and balancing work and other things and yet, many blogs written by women aren't really about those things at all. AND some men blog about child rearing and home life!! No!!!! It can't be!!!
The outrage over the coverage of BlogHer was justified. And I think it's telling that Ms. Traister thought someone outraged over the issue was a woman when it was a man. Men did go to this conference, I'm pretty sure.
Women aren't taken as seriously as men anywhere, never mind the web. It's a patriarchy. That's what happens in those.
Or, should women get together and name their blogs things like "Enormous Throbbing Member?" Would that help? Would we move out of a patriarchy then?
Obviously, no.
On the positive side, if what I read earlier in these letters is true, the other conference moved its time to compete with BlogHer. Which means they feel threatened and competitive. I find that a much more interesting point to consider. It means the conference has a lot of power, even if it was ostentatiously ignored by those prominent, (and mostly sexist) set of politicians.
And you know, yuck, who wants that "compromiser" Pelosi anywhere near their conference?