SadieMAG has an article about that female blogger thing, which includes a nice little Feministe shout-out, as well as links to some of my favorite blogs (Shakespeare’s Sister, Rox Populi, Suburban Guerrilla, Pandagon, Bitch PhD, Majikthise, Culture Cat, Wonkette). The article is interesting, although I take issue with parts of it. Right-wing blogger Kathy is quoted as saying, apparently about Wonkette, “Any woman blogger on the web can use her sexuality to gain readers. But is that what we want?” I’m not sure if Kathy actually reads Wonkette, but (a) much of the blogging there is done by people other than Ana Marie Cox, and (b) while Wonkette makes sex jokes, it’s usually something crude about ass-fucking, and not at all referencing her own life. She definitely doesn’t do the “I’m hot, read me!” Washingtonienne-style blogging (sidenote: Check out this month’s NY Mag for a strange bit on Jessica Cutler).
That said, I do agree with Lindsay Beyerstein:
Yet mainstream media pundits and academics regularly invite the dirty-writing Wonkette to comment on issues of blogging or blogging ethics. She “was invited to represent not only women but the liberal blogs. That [annoyed] the hell out of everyone,” Beyerstein says.
Wonkette is a DC celebrity/entertainment/political blog, the way Gawker is for NYC. Wonkette is a female who blogs, but doesn’t represent female bloggers as a whole — that’s just not what she’s about (and as far as I can tell, it’s other people who seem eager to paste the Woman Blogger sticker onto her; she doesn’t seem to feed into it herself, beyond her possession of a vagina).
Right Wing Sparkle blogger Kathy pretty much got on my last nerve throughout the entirety of the article, as she fed into every possible stereotype about women bloggers:
“Females certainly have a different voice than men when blogging,” says Kathy. “I think that’s why a lot of the big male bloggers ignore us. Women view politics through the same prism that they view life–one that is colored by emotion.”
And
“I think it’s fairly easy to tell if it is a man or woman blogger. We are different, after all, even in the way we write.”
…right.
On the contrary, I’d be willing to bet that once a blogger identifies herself as female, what she writes is perceived differently — if what would be considered righteous anger in a man is “shrill” when it comes from a woman; arguing pointedly is acceptable when the arguer is male, bitchy when they’re female. I don’t blame bloggers who hide their gender, or who ghost as men. It makes sense.
And like Amanda says in the article, blogging rules — like the rules in politics in general, and in the mainstream media — were made by the boys. A blog that focuses on feminism and reproductive rights is “soft” and silly and too narrow, while one that focuses entirely on the Iraq war is perfectly valid and serious. But I ultimately agree with what she adds here:
…as people become more aware that there’s no enforcement of the rules, there’s less inclination to treat the top bloggers as the ultimate authorities on who counts and who doesn’t. Also, as it is becoming more clear that the very blurring of the personal and political, as well as the political with other interests–the very things that were supposedly “feminine” blogging behaviors and therefore somehow unappealing–are in fact exactly the things that bring people back to their favorite blogs.
Anyway, read the whole article. The quotes from Amanda, Lindsay and Clancy, among others, are really great.
UPDATE: Deanna at Alternet makes the point that the term “woman bloggers” really sucks. Right on.