<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why So Few Female Pundits, Redux</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:23:30 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: James Joyner</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-37477</link>
		<dc:creator>James Joyner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:21:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9369#comment-37477</guid>
		<description>The self-promotion thesis looks promising.  A casual scan of my recent Traffic Jam posts shows almost no female bloggers linking themselves, even though I get 10-15 linkers a day on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The self-promotion thesis looks promising.  A casual scan of my recent Traffic Jam posts shows almost no female bloggers linking themselves, even though I get 10-15 linkers a day on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Henley</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-37476</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Henley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9369#comment-37476</guid>
		<description>Someone in some comment thread recently (Crooked Timber) wrote that &quot;The higher you look in the blogosphere ecosystem the more assholes you see.&quot; So there&#039;s that. Some of the rest of it is Kathy&#039;s point about self-promotion. But I also think there are other factors. Frex, some men may feel uncomfortable &lt;i&gt;lambasting&lt;/i&gt; a female blogger over something she&#039;s written with the same gusto that, say, The Poor Man will lay into PowerLine. But I think there&#039;s also a default tendency of men to read men and link to them. As Samuel R. Delany once said in the heyday of the science-fiction fan press, &quot;There are no sexist editorial decisions to be made, only non-sexist ones.&quot; That is, when sexism is the default, it takes a conscious effort to break out of it.

A double-nested irony. I&#039;ve always thought that you, James, went out of your way to find female links for the Traffic Jams. (I think it&#039;s important to distinguish the links you select from the trackback opt-ins.) But I&#039;ve also always put that partially down to your flirtatious nature.

You can&#039;t get no respect!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Someone in some comment thread recently (Crooked Timber) wrote that "The higher you look in the blogosphere ecosystem the more assholes you see." So there's that. Some of the rest of it is Kathy's point about self-promotion. But I also think there are other factors. Frex, some men may feel uncomfortable <i>lambasting</i> a female blogger over something she's written with the same gusto that, say, The Poor Man will lay into PowerLine. But I think there's also a default tendency of men to read men and link to them. As Samuel R. Delany once said in the heyday of the science-fiction fan press, "There are no sexist editorial decisions to be made, only non-sexist ones." That is, when sexism is the default, it takes a conscious effort to break out of it.</p>
<p>A double-nested irony. I've always thought that you, James, went out of your way to find female links for the Traffic Jams. (I think it's important to distinguish the links you select from the trackback opt-ins.) But I've also always put that partially down to your flirtatious nature.</p>
<p>You can't get no respect!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cassandra</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-37473</link>
		<dc:creator>Cassandra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2005 14:20:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9369#comment-37473</guid>
		<description>I agree with Jen.  In my experience, female bloggers aren&#039;t as aggressive about promoting their sites, and networking counts.  I don&#039;t promote VC at all - if I did I would probably have more traffic and more links.

On the other hand, I&#039;m doing what I want to do: writing because I enjoy it. I refuse to spend time sending posts to other bloggers because traffic and linkage, in and of themselves, aren&#039;t important to me.

A great example of this in action is that the two greatest spike in traffic I&#039;ve had have resulted from MALE READERS sending my posts to other bloggers.

I also think there are fewer women writing about politics.  Although it grated on me a bit, I can&#039;t argue with Tig&#039;s observation. I rarely write on those subjects, but then I don&#039;t write about what I had for lunch or my last hairdressing appt. either.  I don&#039;t run a personal blog, but if I did I&#039;d expect only those interested in personal journal-type blogs to tune in.

And yes, I think there&#039;s a bit of chauvinism on the part of male bloggers, but for every one who never links to female writers even when they turn out great content, there is one who actively promotes good writing when he sees it, regardless of the writer&#039;s gender.

I wouldn&#039;t have half the traffic I do have if it weren&#039;t for John Hawkins of Right Wing News, and I&#039;ve never sent him a single post or email asking for his help.  Frankly, I consider it a greater compliment if someone - reader or other blogger - finds you on their own and voluntarily reads or links you. 

But that attitude is mystifying to most male bloggers I&#039;ve talked to: they point out that people won&#039;t read or link what they can&#039;t find.  And almost to a man, they are more competitive than I am - they are actively trying to increase their readership.

Perhaps to some extent women&#039;s relatively smaller market share in the blogosphere reflects their own internal priorities?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Jen.  In my experience, female bloggers aren't as aggressive about promoting their sites, and networking counts.  I don't promote VC at all - if I did I would probably have more traffic and more links.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I'm doing what I want to do: writing because I enjoy it. I refuse to spend time sending posts to other bloggers because traffic and linkage, in and of themselves, aren't important to me.</p>
<p>A great example of this in action is that the two greatest spike in traffic I've had have resulted from MALE READERS sending my posts to other bloggers.</p>
<p>I also think there are fewer women writing about politics.  Although it grated on me a bit, I can't argue with Tig's observation. I rarely write on those subjects, but then I don't write about what I had for lunch or my last hairdressing appt. either.  I don't run a personal blog, but if I did I'd expect only those interested in personal journal-type blogs to tune in.</p>
<p>And yes, I think there's a bit of chauvinism on the part of male bloggers, but for every one who never links to female writers even when they turn out great content, there is one who actively promotes good writing when he sees it, regardless of the writer's gender.</p>
<p>I wouldn't have half the traffic I do have if it weren't for John Hawkins of Right Wing News, and I've never sent him a single post or email asking for his help.  Frankly, I consider it a greater compliment if someone - reader or other blogger - finds you on their own and voluntarily reads or links you. </p>
<p>But that attitude is mystifying to most male bloggers I've talked to: they point out that people won't read or link what they can't find.  And almost to a man, they are more competitive than I am - they are actively trying to increase their readership.</p>
<p>Perhaps to some extent women's relatively smaller market share in the blogosphere reflects their own internal priorities?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jen</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-37463</link>
		<dc:creator>jen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2005 12:28:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9369#comment-37463</guid>
		<description>I think part of it is the self-promotion angle. For instance, James, I sent you that link earlier this week and said that a link back to me wasn&#039;t necessary; therefore, you didn&#039;t link to me. The traffic would have been nice, but I couldn&#039;t say much about that particular story myself and it would have been pointless for you to link to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think part of it is the self-promotion angle. For instance, James, I sent you that link earlier this week and said that a link back to me wasn't necessary; therefore, you didn't link to me. The traffic would have been nice, but I couldn't say much about that particular story myself and it would have been pointless for you to link to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kathy K</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-37440</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathy K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2005 02:50:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9369#comment-37440</guid>
		<description>Oh... a disclaimer here: I do NOT consider it spam if someone sends me a link to a blog post they think I&#039;ll be interested in (in fact, I like that). I DO consider it spam if they send me an e-mail notification every time they make a blog post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh... a disclaimer here: I do NOT consider it spam if someone sends me a link to a blog post they think I'll be interested in (in fact, I like that). I DO consider it spam if they send me an e-mail notification every time they make a blog post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kathy K</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-37439</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathy K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2005 02:47:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9369#comment-37439</guid>
		<description>(Appying my foot to Tig&#039;s ass -  I think that&#039;s a female site you reference, James, though I can&#039;t explain why.) Tig: please find more than a very few posts in which either I  or MommaBear refer to a child or a cat? And most of those were refering to an Islamist  habit of wanting to stone girl-children to death for the &#039;crime&#039; of being raped. 

I still think the disparity in &#039;celebrity&#039; is  mainly because female bloggers (including me) don&#039;t push for links. I have put e-mail spam blocks on 8 blog sites for little annoyances like signing me up for &#039;notifications&#039; without my cooperation. I&#039;m considering doing the same for several more. Not ONE of those sites is run by a female. Oh yeah, and several of them are now &#039;large mammals&#039; or above, so the &#039;spam the other blogs&#039; technique they used did work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(Appying my foot to Tig's ass -  I think that's a female site you reference, James, though I can't explain why.) Tig: please find more than a very few posts in which either I  or MommaBear refer to a child or a cat? And most of those were refering to an Islamist  habit of wanting to stone girl-children to death for the 'crime' of being raped. </p>
<p>I still think the disparity in 'celebrity' is  mainly because female bloggers (including me) don't push for links. I have put e-mail spam blocks on 8 blog sites for little annoyances like signing me up for 'notifications' without my cooperation. I'm considering doing the same for several more. Not ONE of those sites is run by a female. Oh yeah, and several of them are now 'large mammals' or above, so the 'spam the other blogs' technique they used did work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bryan</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-37434</link>
		<dc:creator>bryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2005 01:39:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9369#comment-37434</guid>
		<description>Name recognition prior to blogging also helps, re: lashawn barber, hugh hewitt and michelle malkin. &lt;s&gt;anal sex jokette&lt;/s&gt; Wonkette is also an outlier, because it&#039;s part of the gawker media stable, and so had instant cache (and capital investment to boot)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Name recognition prior to blogging also helps, re: lashawn barber, hugh hewitt and michelle malkin. <s>anal sex jokette</s> Wonkette is also an outlier, because it's part of the gawker media stable, and so had instant cache (and capital investment to boot)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tig</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/why_so_few_female_pundits_redux/comment-page-1/#comment-37421</link>
		<dc:creator>Tig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2005 23:05:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=9369#comment-37421</guid>
		<description>With a few exceptions, I find the female bloggers have a much higher regular incidence of posts relating to children or cats than male bloggers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With a few exceptions, I find the female bloggers have a much higher regular incidence of posts relating to children or cats than male bloggers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
