« So far, U.S. bailout not helping in Asia and Europe. | Main | So what do we do now? »
October 06, 2008
"Women good, men bad."
Ah, the utter tragedy, and injustice, of Nature, of biology--and of the girl and boy thing. Where will it all end? "Where Are All the Female Law Bloggers?" has been getting lots of press--but we can't figure out why. The best, brightest and strongest bloggers--and writers, speakers, corporate lawyers, business owners, actors, humans, etc.--we know are "females" and regularly trounce us "dudes" in most endeavors in work and life. And there's a lot of these creatures. The author of the piece, obviously talented and well-meaning but trying to set the women's movement back about 40 years, is invited to impress us all in the future with a better choice of topics.
UPDATE: Some serious and comprehensive coverage by our betters and friends: Simple Justice, Legal Blog Watch, Diane Levin (all with links to dames who blog).
Ms. Gish is one of many "females" in the WAC? Pantheon. Gish is said to avoid whiners and weenies.
Posted by Holden Oliver (Kitzbühel Desk) at October 6, 2008 11:59 PM
Comments
We can sing the praises of women blawggers without gratuitously dissing men?
Perhaps the deprecation of men was:
a) unintended;
b) an attempt at some sort of neo-chivalry;
b) an attempt at sarcasm; or
c) an attempt at humor.
In any event, it's unfortunate. I don't seek out blawgs based on the sex of the author or publisher. I look for topics and content that interest me. Don't most reasonable people do that?
Posted by: Steve Imparl at October 8, 2008 11:32 AM
Talented? Well-meaning? Thanks! But as for trying to set the women's movement back 40 years -- definitely not my intention.
I was simply presenting a question that bubbles up with metronomic regularity. And that question isn't whether women are better or brighter bloggers than men; it's why the ones who write about law aren't as prominent or easy to find as their male counterparts. Just try a Google search for "law blogs" and you'll see what I mean.
And by the way, the theories espoused in the article aren't mine; they were advanced by the law professionals and academics I interviewed.
Of course, in the future, I will try to impress you with my writing on other topics as well. Thanks!
Posted by: C.C. Holland at October 8, 2008 12:39 AM
Holden, thanks for the update with the link to my round-up of legal women who blog. Stephanie may not know the gang at WAC? as well as I do, but no one does a better job of giving props to legal bloggers of all genders (not to mention nationalities and geographic coordinates) than you guys. Cheers!
Posted by: Diane Levin at October 7, 2008 03:04 AM
Holden, I am not into affirmative action quests at all, believe me. Just thought it was curious that mostly men had commented and wondered why. Not faulting you, just wondering about why more women had not commented. That's all.
Posted by: Stephanie at October 6, 2008 08:01 PM
Stephanie: Because no one else we could find on a simple Google search this morning wrote about that subject recently. We weren't on an affirmative action quest. It was a search for articles about what law firms should do in bad times. Make sense?
Posted by: Holden Oliver at October 6, 2008 02:07 PM
I thought it was interesting that 7 of the 8 bloggers listed in the last WAC? post were men. Wonder why? I have no hypothesis. Just wondering.
Posted by: Stephanie at October 6, 2008 01:45 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)