in Search
Welcome to Neopoleon - Sign in | Join | Help
Navigation: Home | Forums | Galleries

Female bloggers and bananas

[Note: Still sick, but couldn’t keep quiet about this one.]

Imagine Caligula without Peter O’Toole and with about a tenth as many women. That is the software development world.

I just read a post [via Dare] in which a “Bloghercon” is proposed. The idea being all the usual late-90s platitudes: Empowerment, equality, blah blah blah.

I guess some people are concerned that there aren’t enough women blogging, and that there aren’t enough women who are “A-List” bloggers.

First of all, screw the A-List! Who cares! Seriously. Did you know that A-List bloggers are just regular losers like everybody else as soon as they step out from behind their keyboards? Try going to a coffee shop with one. Do they get recognized like the rock stars they think they are? Does anybody care? Maybe in certain exceptionally tech-dense parts of the world, but for the most part, no. They’re recognized by those who link to them, and by those who read them, but that’s still a very small crowd.

So forget this A-List stuff. The A-List doesn’t really matter. I’m not even entirely sure it exists, but that’s another argument for another post.

Let’s move on, then, to what appears to be the real problem: Not enough women blogging.

And allow me to say that I don’t really think this is a problem.

To start, I agree with Dare when he says, “I am constantly surprised by the people who read the closed circle of white-male dominated blogs commonly called the A-list who think that this somehow constitutes the entire blogosphere…”

It isn’t so much that there aren’t a lot of women blogging (there are), but that there aren’t many female tech bloggers.

Go out to Blogger sometime and check out random sites (try starting with this post and follow the directions (posted by a woman, no less!)). I used to do this for kicks until I learned that every other site was just another place where some teenage vaginally-endowed person was writing all of her “black rose” poetry about how she was going to hang herself in front of the entire student body if Donny didn’t take her to the homecoming dance [yawn].

One of the best writers I know out there in bloggyland is Monica (although she quit in February, but she was damn good). And she is totally a woman. Boobs, ‘gina, the whole shebang.

But, she wasn’t a tech blogger.

If anybody somehow expected the demographic of the tech blogging world to not mirror the physical side, then he was in a for a big surprise. There just doesn’t seem to be that many women in tech. Why shouldn’t we see that reflected in tech blogger demographics?

Then, there are other things that people don’t seem to be considering.

For example, and this might come as a shock to some of you, but men and women are, like, different.

Look at the animal kingdom – who is often doing the attracting? Who has the brightly colored coat of plumage? The female peacock? The female duck? No! It’s often the banananimal who’s strutting his wares and trying to attract the attention of the other gender.

When certain male primates want to attract a mate, what do they do? They bang on trees - they try to draw attention to themselves.

Isn’t that a little bit like blogging?

Our behavior is a little different in some areas.

And, men and women actually have slightly different brains.

Male brains tend to be a little larger and heavier than female brains.

Females tend to have a larger corpus s(this is a bit of think-meat that binds the two hemispheres of the brain).

Men tend to have about 50% gray matter think-meat, while women tend to have about 55% gray matter think-meat. In case you’re curious, by the way, the gray stuff is what you want, and it’s thought that the larger percentage in women makes up for the slightly smaller brain.

Men tend to be good at spatial problems, and women tend to be good at verbal ones (in other words, men like chess, and women like Scrabble).

The differences go on and on. It has nothing to do with which one is better or worse - they’re just different. And, this stuff isn’t up for debate – we’re dealing with facts. There’s no sexism here.

Frankly, I’d rather have a female brain. While the male brain tends to show a steep decline in verbal abilities past about age thirty, women tend to maintain their abilities throughout their lives. For someone who loves writing, I sure could use those extra few decades.

Anyway, I could go on all bloody day about this, but here’s what I want to leave you with:

Before anybody goes and tries to come up with a solution to the “problem” of too few female tech bloggers, determine first if it is a problem. I’m not saying that it isn’t, but it’s foolish to assume without weighing differences between the sexes that it is.

Published Friday, March 11, 2005 9:42 PM by Rory

Filed Under:

Comments

 

Avonelle Lovhaug said:

This chick blogger completely agrees. It is not a problem, and people should get over it.

But...

Are you trying to get yourself fired??? Suggesting that there are differences between women and men is what got Harvard President Larry Summers in trouble. (Apparently science isn't that big of deal at Harvard...better to be politically correct.)

Viva le difference!
March 11, 2005 10:11 PM
 

cubiclegrrl said:

Are we entirely sure that all of the male bloggers actually have Y-chromosomes? It wouldn't be the first time that the double-Xs have published under a psuedonym just to dodge the hassles of being a chick... ;-)
March 11, 2005 11:01 PM
 

Michael Giagnocavo said:

Avonelle: And Amazon just got a patent on gender stereotyping :).

Rory: Nice to see someone not bowing down to another misapplication of "equality".
March 11, 2005 11:20 PM
 

Elisa Camahort said:

Boy, all the people who find out about Bloghercon from a man come away with the same mistaken impression: that it is we women who are saying there aren't enough women bloggers. Quite the contrary. WE know there are tons of women blogging. It's completely frustrating to have some white, male blogger thinking he's being a stand-up guy by lamenting the lack of women bloggers...because he hasn't looked past the Technorati Top 100 to find them!

The point is that some women bloggers want to leverage their blogging in the way many male bloggers have...to get business, jobs, money etc...and are hitting roadblocks. I wouldn't say this is necessarily the conference for someone who purely blogs for their own enjoyment/edification.

Nope, it's not going to be a conference to sit around and talk about being women and being bloggers and being women bloggers...blah, blah, blah, I agree with you.

Just wanted to clarify: I and my Bloghercon never lamented that there weren't enough women bloggers...in fact the contrary.
March 12, 2005 2:49 AM
 

bliz said:

Great video with Scott! :)
March 12, 2005 2:50 AM
 

Rory said:

Elisa -

"The point is that some women bloggers want to leverage their blogging in the way many male bloggers have...to get business, jobs, money etc... and are hitting roadblocks."

I don't know what those roadblocks might be, but let's pretend for a minute that male bloggers outnumber female bloggers by, oh, I don't know... 3 to 1 (just for kicks).

Wouldn't that mean that there aren't just *as many*, but actually many, many more males who aren't leveraging their blogs the way you'd like women to? And that these males might like this as well?

Where does gender come into this?

If you want to leverage your blog, then *write well*. That's the only advice I ever give anybody, male *or* female.

"I wouldn't say this is necessarily the conference for someone who purely blogs for their own enjoyment/edification."

I would say that people who blog for any other reason are phonies, and, again, you're not going to find a gender problem here.

When people ask me if they should start blogs or not, I ask, "Do you like to write?"

If the answer is even a *hesitant* "yes," then I tell them that they might do better to spend their energy elsewhere.

If you aren't doing it to write, and if you aren't doing it for yourself, then you *should* get into journalism. Otherwise, you're just not going to fit in. Poeple can smell phonies from a long way off, and they're not especially interested in reading what shills have to say about themselves.

In my opinion, anyway.
March 12, 2005 4:12 AM
 

Elisa Camahort said:

Your opinion, or rather, definition of blogs is fine...for you. But it hardly reflects the reality anymore. Blogging is a tool or technology, and the content in that blog can vary widely. Just because you don't want to expand the use of this medium doesn't mean you can dictate to others that they can't. If you don't find the blog content interesting or useful or authentic, than it is part of the beauty of the medium that you can boot it from your aggregator and never see it again.

And it's all very well for people to say "write well", as other have too, but again, it's ignoring reality. We all know it is not always the most talented at *anything* that moves ahead. Talent is accompanied by luck, timing, connections, hell...good marketing, in almost every field out there...even creative fields.

(And I agree that all of this is a gender-neutral truth, BTW.)

Oh, and female and male bloggers are nearly equal in number. Not that any of these stupid research reports are entirely reliable, especially considering that these two were released within a month of one another: the first said that 57% of bloggers were women, the second (Pew) said the exact opposite. Whatever...I think it's about equal.

March 12, 2005 4:02 PM
 

Rory said:

Elisa -

"Your opinion, or rather, definition of blogs is fine...for you. But it hardly reflects the reality anymore. Blogging is a tool or technology, and the content in that blog can vary widely."

I don't recall having said anything to the contrary.

I understand that content can vary widely.

"Just because you don't want to expand the use of this medium doesn't mean you can dictate to others that they can't."

Was I dictating? I don't believe that I was.

Did I say I didn't want to "expand the use of this medium?" I don't believe that I did.

My point is that people can smell bullshit, and they don't like it. You were talking about "leveraging" your blog for money, business, and whatever. As long as that's your *goal* (rather than writing), your blog is going to suck.

Keep in mind that *you're* the one who's having a tough time figuring out how to make use of a blog for those reasons.

You might wonder *why*.

"And it's all very well for people to say 'write well', as other have too, but again, it's ignoring reality."

I disagree. Entirely.

While writing well on its own won't ensure a successful blog, it's going to be much more difficult to claw your way to the top when you're making mistakes left and right.

There are exceptions, but that's *exactly* what they are.

Would you watch a television program in which the actors constantly screwed up their lines? Where edits were sloppy and made it difficult to follow the point? You *might* if the content were good enough, but how often is that?
March 12, 2005 6:42 PM
 

Mark Miller said:

The issue of "women in tech" has long been an issue of interest for me. I think there are too few, but then, that's not an unusual opinion among those who contemplate the issue. I've read many articles over the years trying to explain it. I can remember about 8 years ago reading Laura Didio's regular articles about this in Computerworld. Some of them were interesting, but others I objected to, much as you did on this blogging issue, because she was just making weak arguments (IMO, anyway). The common theme I remember her talking about was that female tech's who had made it into the work world were being driven out because of lack of advancement (being passed by male peers), and hazing by peers. I forget how the hazing incidents were described. They did sound humiliating. I couldn't believe they were that common though. I certainly never saw it. I don't doubt her sincerity in describing these incidents. Probably the weakest argument I saw her make was when she said that computer science programs were deliberately making entrance into the programs harder by changing the "freshman-level learning language" from Pascal to C++. She said some women complained that C++ was too much of a "hacker's language". For one thing, C++ emphasized OOP, which requires some contemplation and planning before proceeding down a path. Hardly a hacker quality. I could understand this criticism if they were talking about C. Secondly, in the same article, she practically argued for the idea that male students should be discouraged from proceeding so quickly in the technological knowledge to allow their female peers to catch up. At least that's the way I read it. Personally I like the "encouragement" approach, rather than discouraging people from obtaining knowledge...but that's just me.

The most common argument I used to hear repeatedly was that sociologically, women were discouraged from entering math, science, and engineering disciplines, either by their parents, their teachers, or both. Often the discouragement described was explicit, like: "Women shouldn't be engineers" and that sort of crap. Again, I don't remember seeing it in school.

Some of the articles that have been printed recently sound more plausible, but who knows. One said that women don't go into math and technology fields because they want to go into fields they feel are socially relevant, that make a social contribution, like psychology, biology, medicine, journalism, etc.

I read an article about the "women in tech" issue just recently in my local paper. It went a little deeper, and for once it sounded plausible. It cited a recent study which showed some striking statistics. It said that women who tended to go into and stay in math, science, or engineering, had parents who had that background themselves, and so tended to encourage their daughters to stick with it. This was in contrast to females who didn't have parents of that background. Most of the time, it showed, females in this situation dropped out of the programs.

It also cited that technology education programs in universities were unique in that they had an almost "boot camp" quality to them. I think "boot camp" is kind of a strong term for it, but what they were talking about were the "weeder" courses, intended to "weed out" those students early who wouldn't be able to "tough out" the program. The study said female students tended to not understand this process, and so would get easily discouraged from pursuing the program further. Their parents would acquiesce as well, not understanding it either, thinking "Well, it must be too hard for her. Try a different major, honey. It's alright with us." The exceptions were the female students who had parents with a background in math, science, or engineering. They tended to stay, because their parents gave them constant encouragement. I don't know if this is psychobabble, but it went on to say that male students, being more socialized to "tough out" situations, understood the "boot camp" environment, and did not get discouraged by it.

I know that weeder courses exist in computer science programs at universities. They had them where I went to school. The thing was they weren't that hard for me. So it's difficult for me to see where the problem may have been. And no I don't recall running 10 miles every morning, doing 200 sit-ups, 200 push-ups, drill officers yelling in my face, doing target practice, running the gauntlet of barbed wire...
March 13, 2005 12:38 AM
 

Ralph Loizzo said:

So like uh...

how old does me haf ta be 'fore
I

uh


cannt talk no more?

ud tell me rite man?
March 13, 2005 7:44 AM
 

Ralph Loizzo said:

Okay...

seriously...

in my limited experience ( cmon... I don't know EVERYthing - just seems like it :) )

the college classmates I had who repeatedly had the best grades (and I mean computers and engineering too) were women.

Fine women at that!

Maybe it's better multi-tasking. Or Time management. Or better organizational skills.

Or maybe it's because they had to work 3 times as hard to be taken at least half as seriously as their male counterparts.
March 13, 2005 7:49 AM
 

Avonelle Lovhaug said:

A related post about concerns about "diversity" in the blogosphere...
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/004064.php
March 14, 2005 5:16 AM
 

Michelle said:

Hmm.. Was wondering why I got so many hits from your site - and here I thought it might be because I'd written something worth reading! Silly me... :)
March 14, 2005 2:59 PM
 

Scott Mitchell said:

Word. My wife works as an ASP.NET developer, but has absolutely no interest in blogging or writing articles. None whatsoever. It's not that she doesn't enjoy the technology, she just doesn't need to shout out loud that she likes it. She's happy to just sit in her cubicle and do her thing all day long in a semi-vacuum. I wonder how much of this can be explained to gender differences vs. her own unique personality.

Personally I greatly enjoy writing technical articles and whatnot. Part of it is that writing about something helps me understand it at a deeper level. Another part is I like helping folks out. And, I'll be honest, part of it is that I like hearing the sound of my own typing. Again, I wonder how much of this is gender related vs. my own unique personality. The world may never know!
March 16, 2005 2:17 AM
 

lysrian said:

I think I have to agree with Scott Mitchell’s wife, I think some women just don’t have an interest in blogging. I know that I don’t.

There was a comment earlier about the lack of women in the tech world and the various reasons for it, not to sure I agree with all of the reasons cited. I know in my own little world it’s a life style choice. If you are a consultant for a large company like MS (and yes I was), you live breathe and die for the job. I was traveling quite a bit and it came to a point in my life that I wanted to stay in the same city and see my son. Now I have a great job at a small company and for once the ratio of women to men in the tech is not out of hand. So…for whatever its worth, I think that one of the major reasons is the lifestyle.

I really disagree with the reason of education programs, how many of the people that you work with (women and men) have an actual degree in CS? I know I don’t. I have met coders that have degrees in biology, religion, business, fine art, theatre, and social science. In fact, most of the people that I have worked with don’t have an advanced degree in CS. If they did writing code is not that person’s primary function.

Anyway, that is my opinion.
March 16, 2005 1:54 PM
 

TrackBack said:

Women Bloggers Needed- Kind-Of
March 12, 2005 1:48 AM
 

TrackBack said:

Why do some blogs succeed? Why do some suck?
March 12, 2005 6:00 AM
 

TrackBack said:

Not enough women blogging?
March 13, 2005 12:08 AM
New Comments to this post are disabled

About Rory

I *own* this site, you loser.