My goodness. Sometimes I'm embarassed I'm a man.

I'm not sure what a "babelog" is, but I'm glad I haven't encountered many of them.

Thanks, Doc. I needed to start my day that way.

NOT!

I think it's sexist of you to call Doc a sexist. So there!

I know Doc, he ain't no sexist. He's the last guy on the planet that that label sticks on.

Try again.

Dave, I don't think Doc is sexist -- I think he was tired and didn't know how unbelievably sexist that statement came off. Tech and war/politics are "male" shit; and what, sex and love and family stuff is "female" shit?

So what am I and every other woman who writes about "male" shit, such as on politics and technology -- unnatural manifestations of androgynous webloggers?

However, my posting was lighthearted, and even tried to have a little bit of fun (i.e. reference to 50's). To be honest, I was pretty sure Doc would laugh at it and say "touche".

And then you tromp in with your oversize boots and post this comment.

Sorry, you try again yourself.

(Edited to remove swear words and change to a more reasonable tone of voice in Burningbird's new self-help program of being a calmer, more reasonable firebird. After all the Phoenix only goes up in smoke every 500 years -- I poof daily. You may request edits to your own comments, in interests of fair play.)

"unnatural manifestations of androgynous webloggers"

Hey, I'll be happy to resemble that remark. ;)

(But you're right, Bb. And put a leash on RageBoy while you're at it, hm?)

Oh my goodness. Oversize boots. Hmm.

Serves me right for saying anything at all, or even existing.

Dorothea, should we put it as taglines somewhere in our weblogs? I will if you will ;-)

Dave, lighten up.

Was that a dare, Bb?

Okay, what the hell. I have to tweak stuff anyway.

You betcha. We only blog once.

I took it as light-hearted, and I'm a man. (checking) Yes, I'm a man. I laughed, I cried, it was better than cat pictures.

You have to admit, though, that "babeblog" has a nice alliterative ring to it. Alliteration. Chicks dig that. I read that in Maxim.

It was light-hearted, it was funny, it was moving, it was alliteration. But it wasn't better than cat pictures.

"Wasn't better than cat pictures"? That's a pretty stern verdict. . . . Now, I would have to admit that it doesn't quite come up to sopay-dishwashing-implement pictures.

Nothing's better than cat pictures. Twenty lashes with the wet noodle for you, Mark.

So, interesting -- you guys saw it as light hearted fun? Hmmm. Could be. Regardless, I'm thankful for it, otherwise how could I have come up with "unnatural manifestation of androgynous weblogging". That just wouldn't come up in regular conversation.

RageBoy favors BlogBabe rather than BlogBabe. Personally, I prefer NetHunk, myself.

(Or maybe BlogStud. Or BlogBoy. Oooo. BlogBoys. That works. Or better -- BoyBloggers!)

Sorry, RB favorst BlogBabe rather than BabeBlog.

No, I saw /yours/ as light-hearted. I saw Doc's original post as avuncular.

"BoyBloggers" has a nice ring to it too, but it's taken. http://www.davidgagne.net/main/dictionary.shtml#GBBC

Hmm. BlogStud is OK, but I miss the alliteration. Virile Vebloggers? Sounds German, in a Sgt. Schultz kind of way. Bachelor Bloggers? The hunt continues.

Testostobloggers?
Y-Chromobloggers?
PermaDinkers? (sorry, very sorry)
W5ers? (Weavers of the World Wide Weiner Web)(really, really sorry)
Broggers? (like brother + blogger, but just ends up sounding vaguely Asian-accented : "I am Brogger! I post you happy fun brog now!"

OK, I give up.

Gee, I saw Doc's post as a kind of tribute. Maybe some people view it as sexist, but I sensed that he really respects both ladies, as I do. His closing line read: "Love them strong wimmin".

I notice that neither of the ladies in question have complained here.

How is it that when a man associates sex or love or whatever with females, it's a sexist thing to do.
But when women do it, like the "rackbrowser" thing it's some sort of independent powerful women thing.

When a guy associaties technology and war(politics) with male behavior, sorry, but that's sexist. As I said, I don't think Doc meant to come across sexist, but that was a very sexist line.

As for the two women, they most likely don't even read this weblog, or perhaps they think Doc's post was "cute". I don't know. I know that I didn't, and was disappointed in Doc for posting it.

As for sex and love being associated with women, not a problem--as long as technology and politics are also associated with us. And I would think that the guys would get a bit tired of being disassociated from things such as sex and family and love.

The whole statement creates a unnecessary dichotomy between the sexes. Why couldn't Doc just say something along the lines of "I'm tired of talking about war and technology. Time to talk about something else such as family and sex and ... and here's two very strong women who do, and while we're at it, I want to point out a couple of guys who aren't bad at this, either."

With this statement, we all would have read the same thing, found the same statement.

Stavros, personally I prefer permadinker myself.

Sorry, Mark. Didn't mean to ignore you there. So, BloggerBoys is taken, eh? Too, bad. Sounded good.

How about WeblogWeinees? It's alliterative, and has interesting connotations associated with it.

However, no reason that BlogBabe can't apply to both men and women, if you look at the term as a term of endearment (per dictionary.com).

I'm very disturbed by the phrase "screwed the pooch". I can't explain it, I just am. Maybe I'm too literal.

Yeah, "screw the pooch" is definitely speciesist.

Don't laugh, I knew people in college (OK, it was Earlham, so you have to expect a certain fringe element, but still) who went around berating people who used language that was deemed denigrating to animals, like "screw the pooch". I see the point, I guess, but after a while you run out of words. What, do you just going around saying "the" all the time?

As a test, I just said "screw the pooch" to my dog, and she wagged and went back to sleep.

The the the.

Funny

BlokeBlogs?

thank you thank you thank you Shelley. RageBoy seems to set the tone for the the good ol' blog boys, and then they all fall in line. Sure, they have a right to do that. They also have the right never to take a bath and never brush their teeth (and still think they're sexy! not!). Just having the right to do something doesn't mean you have to do it. And it doesn't men that we have to pretend that we think it's OK. It's not OK with me. Why can't men treat us the way we treat them. We can be funny and clever and flirtatious and even sexy without being sexist. What's their problem? If they can't tell the difference between the alliterative and metaphorical "screw the pooch" and the manifestation of ingrained sexist attitudes, I say screw 'em all.

Shelley: "very strong women"?
How would he know that? Or must they simply be "very strong" to talk of the topic at hand?
If i post a link to a female, or male, on a given topic, must I also find a link to a person of the opposite sex aswell? Well fuck that.

Elaine of Kalilily: "Why can't men treat us the way we treat them. We can be funny and clever and flirtatious and even sexy without being sexist."

"Sexist": promoting stereotypical beliefs about gender roles.

That whole sentence of yours is pretty well-stocked on sexism.
Oh, I'm sorry, it's only sexism when a man does it? Right, I must have missed that.

Tomas, clarify what's making you angry. The fact that I said Doc's statement was sexist? Well, in my opinion, it was. Very much so. Regardless of his intent, it came off sexist, and this interpretation has been read by more than one person, of more than one sex.

This whole posting was never meant to say "Doc is a sexist", nor was it meant to be anything other than a note to say, "Wow, I don't know about anyone else, but that statement came out sexist to me. Like something out of the 50's."

Agree, disagree, it's all cool as long as it doesn't get personal. And it's even more cool if we all have a chance to express our personal viewpoints, or even to have a little gentle fun with it. As we have, I think.

Sorry, weblog authors should be seen and not heard in the comments at times.

And that was an interpretation on my part that Tomas is 'angry'. Sorry Tomas.

tomas-I never said our way of relating was "right." I just implied that it tended not to foster destructive stereotyping. And actually, that seems more "right" than "not right." It's not that women can't be sexist in a way that men feel is destructive. (hmm. I can't seem to come up with an example, but i'm sure there are some.) The point is that many men don't seem to be realizing that they are contributing to a destructive environment for women when they publicly display sexist attitutes. Take a look at the disturbing stories on Blog Sisters by women struggling to survive in a world set up by men, a world that makes it so easy to dismiss the human worth of women.

Shelley: I'm not mad, not the least. And I'm only half-disagreeing too. It was a bit clumsy of Doc, maybe, but nothing to get all fired up about.
When I post links, it's because of their merit, not because of the sex of the author.

Elaine: you really don't get it, do you?
You say "men" does or doesn't do this, and, "women" does or doesn't do this or that.
That in itself is sexism by definition.

Let's try another definition of sexist/sexism, just for fun. Tomas offers a very general definition--"promoting stereotypical beliefs about gender roles." But we need to ask--who is promoting them? In what context? What are the social, political and economic relations in which this promotion takes place? In a world in which power relations still tend to be stratified by sex, race, and economics, who says what matters. When Elaine says "in a world set up by men" she's not just saying men do "this" and women do that. She's saying, in the world in which most of us live, men as a group have more power than women as a group. That is sexist oppression, by definition. I don't know Doc, or why he said what he said, or what he meant. If on my blog, I referred to male webloggers as boytoybloggers or bubbabloggers, or bootycallbloogers (I wouldn't), would men be kicking up a shitstorm? I don't know; I'm not a man. I do think that the women who think Doc's comments were sexist were speaking from their own intellectual and personal and material experiences and points of view which folks might at least consider as having some validity.

Let's ask the Merriam Webster dictionary

1 : prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women
2 : behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex

It does say "especially : discrimination against women", but that doesn't justify sexism coming from a woman.

Elaine's comments easily qualifies as sexism, just as easy as Doc's.

Yeah, it does, and somehow, tomas, that got missed. "Why can't men treat us the way we treat them" is a sexist remark because what it says is that men DON'T treat women the way women treat men. Which of course is also sexist, because it says women treat men in a certain way.

This generalization shit is tried and tired, on both sides.

I wonder how much of this is generational. Most people my age and younger seem to do the day to day balance of giving as well as you get, and standing firm about who they are just fine. For most women I know, Doc's comment would probably not have even been noticed -- and NOT because they've somehow become "used to" a sexist culture. But because they are so certain of who they are as people and as women, that they can simply deal with the fact that some shit is stupid. Much as I've come to accept that some shit -- like women sitting around going "men are this, men are that," when I'm none of those things and yet they are saying it right in front of me, as if I'm somehow not actually a man -- is just stupid and you have to understand where it's coming from and move on.

Move on.

Hey B!X, that's an ageist comment. ;->

People are people. Forgive Doc his transgression, if he made one, he was just caught being himself. Nothing wrong with that. Same with Shelley, same with me.

Being politically correct is exhausting. Here's a toast to the next generation, maybe you can avoid all the entanglement my generation is having trouble disentangling from.

I can't speak for Doc's self--one of the problems with writing is that the writing's all you've got. He's not the first or last one of us who will say something sexist, or racist, or ageist, or who will make a generalization, or whose irony will be missed. We all do this sometimes b/c we are all part of the same system. For me, a 40 year old feminist, reading Bb's post was helpful--a confirmation that I'm not alone in responding to language the way I do. Some of you responded differently. I don't think the dialogue here has to be reduced to political correctness. What's exhausting (to me) is feeling unheard, or misunderstood, or feeling unable to say what I mean with precision and clarity. Still, I think this conversation is valuable. I think it confirms that human beings respond to language in vastly different ways, that we experience reality differently, that we can't always control the way other people understand what we write, or say, or believe, and that it's good to be able to keep talking.

Deb, extremely well said.

This was also contained in a thread at BlogSisters at posting.

Good points made all around, I think. At the least, interesting ones.

I wonder how the conversation would have gone if it wasn't Doc that made the statement? If it was someone totally unknown to all of us?

Ah, well. Topic for another day.

And I do want to go on record as saying, one more time, that no, I don't consider Doc to be sexist.

I'm with Dave Winer on this one.

You start trash talkin' chickens, though, and there'll be hell to pay.

Rather than male and female, lets look at this in terms of the Greek pantheon.
Thus Warbloggers are followers of Ares, Techbloggers of Athene, and Babebloggers followers of Aphrodite. Rageboy gets ot follow Dionysious (or maybe Pan).

Of course then we get into to 'Men are from Mars women are from Venus'...

I'm one of the bloggers involved.
Doc's comments were not sexist, rather part of an inside joke between the three of us. Dawn and I were quite amused by that post. We love the Doc.

moxie, bb never said the babebloggers comment was sexist. close reading shows that she is mainly objecting to technology (and war/politics) being considered the province of males.

bb can you spell overreacting ?

BTW warblogging definitely isn't exclusively male; doc knows that. women can equally be bigots, have a look at Jennie Taliaferro http://jenlart.blogspot.com/) to give but one example.

Per Jonathon Delacour: "xian put her firmly in her place:

"'moxie, bb never said the babebloggers comment was sexist. close reading shows that she is mainly objecting to technology (and war/politics) being considered the province of males.'

"Well, no. Close reading of Burningbird's actual sentence reveals nothing of the sort. One could equally be left with the impression that it's the term 'babeblog' to which Burningbird objects.

"But if we apply the 'close reading' not to Burningbird's post but to her own comments on that post, xian is absolutely correct. The main source of her frustration and annoyance is the assumption that technology (and war/politics) is the province of males. (I don't think that's what Doc meant, but it's the inference that's been drawn.)"

I appreciate the correction and apologize for my misstatement, especially for giving the impression I was trying to put moxie "in her place" (not really sure where that is :')...

Also, apologies to Jonathon for spelling his name Jonathan in his own comments section.

I feel better now.

xian commented: especially for giving the impression I was trying to put moxie "in her place" (not really sure where that is :')

I'm not sure how to take that...I guess it's sufficient to say i don't really know where xian's place is either. Warblogging is so 2001... ;)

wow, i just keep putting my foot deeper in my mouth, huh?

can i just say "sorry" and leave it at that?

yes sir!

we can kiss and make up. no hard feelings, I get irritable speech syndrome a lot myself ;)