Finally, I found a site that I can depend on for good content. THanks!...

Porn makes more cash than blogs any day of the year--particularly porn involving dames. If you want to start raking in the cabbage, drop the blogging insanity and set up a web-cam site with paypal.

You can retire by the time you hit 30--believe me, I know.

I'll tell you who gets the truth about women blogging about even that oh-so-insignificant thing as RAISING THE NEXT GENERATION--companies that want us to buy stuff. There were more corporate sponsors tap dancing at BlogHer than I could have imagined. Of course, that doesn't mean they are willing to PAY us to blog about them.

Dollar for dollar, the money that is being paid to bloggers is going to men. And there is no way you can say that is fair.

BlogHer is a convention of all types of bloggers and while it did provide services geared towards women---such as childcare, nursing rooms, and more bathrooms---that was provided as a backdrop that enabled women to attend political panels, discussions on race and gender, building a writing career in order to make a living, and how to use Web 2.0 to do good.

Perhaps Jessella simply doesn't know how to write anything other than style and fashion, but in that case, she could have---and should have---made it clear that focusing on that was her own personal limitation, not that of the conference or its attendees. And it could easily have been delivered in a way that didn't mock or create a caricaturization of the attendees of BlogHer.

Perhaps you can't imagine that women prefer to not be mocked or depicted overly simplistically as squeeing fashionistas or money-greedy writers striving to be as successful as Dooce. But try to wrap your mind around it. Try hard. Or...better yet, open a discussion instead of ladling out judgment and shutting down conversation with written hand slaps.

Many of us contribute to more than one blog---I have three, personally: one for activism, one for politics, and one for personal---and I have a day job writing freelance. So my criticism is that I prefer to be viewed as a professional who enjoyed the opportunity to gather with other women writers and explore the many facets of a life of writing, regardless of topic or how much it earns.

Even though little of my writing is about motherhood, some of it is, so your comment that writing about motherhood isn't a topic people care about and isn't going to get respect? Gets no props from this quarter.

Neither does this article, especially because you conclude by telling me I shouldn't open my mouth or worry my pretty little head about how women are depicted, and I ought to simply be grateful we get any attention.

Phhbbbttt to that, James. For real.

Women quit accepting that role about the time racial minorities quit believing they should sit on the back of the bus.

First of all, yes we certainly can criticize how or where the NYT covers something. Acting like it's so special to be in NYT that you should never dare to question their decisions is just absurd.

And yes, you can make money blogging. I could make a pretty long list of women doing it, both directly on their blog or through book deals and simply landing gigs as consultants. But I won't.

But really, all of this is about perception. When women blog, it's cute. It's about wiping asses. It's about sleepless nights. Why is that ALWAYS all some of you men see (I have griped about this before on Mashable too).

Moms who blog are not just people keeping a journal about the nuances and trials of motherhood. Some are political, some are geeky, some are trend-setters. Some are doctors and lawyers and accountants.

Bottom line: EVERYONE, including New York Times, you, everyone, needs to stop pretending all moms are the same. Or all women who blog are the same. It's insulting. When I was pregnant the first time, I despised it because it seemed all anyone wanted to talk to me about was the BAYY-BEEEE. Like my mind devolved to Jello when I became empregnated. This is the same thing. Just because we are moms who blog does not mean all we talk about is our children.

So let's be clear about something: the piece that was written? Arguably that piece, as it stands, belongs in Fashion and Style. And I say "arguably" there because as Erin has pointed out even the most mundane, daily-life kind of blog stuff gets included in Technology when men do it. But there are two culprits here: first, the author of the piece, who misrepresented BlogHer in some ways by charicaturing it a bit as a big mommy-blogging group hug. Second, the editor who opted to put the piece in Fashion and Style instead of Technology. Fully four-fifths of the sessions at BlogHer had nothing to do with mommy-blogging, except where mothers, like everyone else, might take an interest in general interest blogging topics. Four-fifths. A puff piece that makes the conference out to be all babies and nipples isn't helping BlogHer in any way: not all publicity is good publicity.

Now, for you to criticize those who don't appreciate the Times' coverage as, essentially, needing to just put their big girl pants on and gracefully accept whatever crumbs the NYT is willing to give them for their meaningless little mommy-blogs-of-insignificant-interest, well, that's what we in the business of critical thinking like to call a "straw man fallacy". You see, while the blogHers are concerned, just as everyone else in the blogosphere is, about revenue, that isn't the guiding force of the outrage against the NYT piece. It's an easy target to pick on, and to point out that hardly anyone makes money from blogging; but the brunt of the criticism so far has just been that the NYT misrepresented the BlogHer conference in its myopic article.

Condescendingly patting these bloggers on the head and telling them that they should be thrilled to get any mention at all in the NYT is insultingly patronizing and does nothing to further discussion. It just makes you look like you are so devoid of substantive replies to the critical blogHers that you need to dismiss instead of engage them squarely.

All blogHERS are not Mommybloggers and many of us, in fact, are making money. QueenofSpainBlog is my personal site, where I blog about everything from parenthood (as you noted) to politics.

As a blogHER I also contribute to the Huffington Post and I am the political director for BlogHer, as well as the Election '08 producer and BlogHer in Second Life producer.

I an not sure if you noticed, but when male bloggers discussed health and heart attacks, they were placed in the 'technology' category of the NYT.

Technology.

I'm curious if the SXSW interactive conference was discussed in Fashion and Style? I attended panels there that ranged from how to make money to race and gender.

Guessing that's under the 'Technology' heading too.

I'm plenty successful on the fame and fortune scales thanks, but many of you continue to ignore us. Can't imagine it has anything to do with us being pushed off into the Fashion section, now can it?

Erin

The secret of being a top blogger is easy:

1. Start in 2001.
2. Have name recognition before you start blogging.
3. Post lots and lots.
4. Confirm the biases of your target audience.

If you're a woman, posting about your sex life seems to be a sure-fire path to fame and fortune. Washingtonienne is being made into a TV program. It may depend on whom you're having sex with.