Comments on: Newsflash: BlogHer Supports Women

By: graywolf

graywolf — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 13:21:26 +0000

Ok @anthony I accept your challenge! let me know what topic YOU would like me to talk about or YOU feel would be valuable to the community, and I’ll get on it within a week.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 09:40:23 +0000

@Anthony: I wouldn’t go that far. Though I don’t agree with Michael on the BlogHer issue, I still think he brings an ENORMOUS amount of value to the industry with his blogging and insight. Unlike a lot of others in this space (myself included), he’s earned the attention that he garners. It’s not a network of friends keeping him anywhere. It’s his smartz.

By: Rhea

Rhea — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 06:51:09 +0000

.....I think my comment would have me cut from the guest bloggers schedule. It involved anatomy.

This whole topic seems silly to me. It's a non-issue since Michael spends a ton of his energy throwing verbal barbs and fashion advice around with the girl crew. This isn't serious and if it is he needs a good kick to the head, but nothing more than that. Where's Threadwatch when you need it?

By: Anthony

Anthony — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 06:33:16 +0000

Why does anyone even care what Michael Gray has to say anyway? His blog provides virtually nothing of value at all. Maybe he’s a great guy in person and I guess he has built up a network of friends in the industry that keep him popular… but I just don’t see the appeal of his one trick pony act of crying about anything and everything Google.

By: David Temple

David Temple — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 23:31:44 +0000

I think if BlogHer didn’t allow men to attend that would be worth a rant, but not having men speakers that’s a different story. Hey Matt Cutts was there, I bet he wasn’t treated like a second class citizen. I mean this is a conference for women bloggers. That would be like letting…say, Jason Calacanis speak at an seo event. Okay that’s not a good analogy but you know what I mean.

It’s no secret that I prefer the female species, probably because I grew up with 4 sisters but more likely because my wife of 30 years never ceases to amaze and inspire me. My favorite blogs are written by women , my favorite seo’s are women and I happen to think they’ve been taken for granted for far too long.

Okay that ends my ode to women. Go ahead and have a BlogHim. I won’t be there, I’ll be…… somewhere else.

By: Jane

Jane — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:47:01 +0000

Not entirely sure what to make of this yet, but here’s some initial reactions I have. Some are relevant, others less so.
1) In the two years I’ve been in SEO, the ratio of men to women has changed. There are way more visible women now, both as SEOs, bloggers and conference speakers / attendees. At my first Pubcon in 2006, there was a far lower percentage of women than there was at, say, SMX Advanced in Seattle last month. An increasing number of commenters on our blog are female. ONLY taking into account female writers our blog and this one, we have: Lisa, Rebecca, Susan, Virginia, Sarah Bird and me.
2) The debate about why people can stage events targeting some members of society and not others is probably beyond the scope of SEO blogs. It does seem unnecessary that, after years of white people, males, straight people, etc moaning about this, we take it up again here. We won’t uncover the sociological secret as to why we “accept” women-focused events but would frown upon BlogHim. There are sociology students and professors spending their entire lives doing it.
3) I don’t notice that there are more men than women at tech shows either, not because it’s not obvious, but because I never really notice such things. Unless I’m in the women’s locker room at the pool.
4) The increased visibility of women may, in fact, be adding to how heated we get about this. Any situation that involves changing dynamics usually comes with some controversy and debate.
5) Personally, I’d not object to a male version of BlogHer. I’d love to hear what attendees and speakers at such a show discussed. Someone should do it.
6) Michael should pitch to start contributing to http://www.seo-blokes.com/, as its current collection of writers are lazy gits who’ve not updated it since January SEO-Chicks, on the other hand, is doing a roaring trade!

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:42:33 +0000

Wow, I hope Dave above was kidding. Throwing a sexist comment into a discussion on sexism is certainly not going to win you any brownie points.

I was on Twitter and noticed Michael's rant on BlogHer. He rants quite a bit - it's part of his character and part of the reason he's so popular.

That said, I don't think anything was gained through his rant in this case.

I certainly understand the motivation to have a conference like this, and I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it. I'm certainly not offended by the idea.

However, and I realize I'm going out a limb with this one, I don't think all-women conferences are going to do much to create equality among the sexes (assuming that is at least part of the goal).

Social equality can only truly exist in the minds of people - men and women whose behaviors are based, or at least informed, by their environment. I would make the case that creating a women-only conference could serve to emphasize segregation between the sexes, which may be counterproductive to the goals of this conference to some degree.

I also have to be frank in saying that I don't know of any other social group (if we can call women a social group) that could throw such a conference without drawing negative response. I don't think I need to cite possible examples on that point.

That said, I know full well the inequality that still exists in the workplace. I grew up with three sisters, the smartest and most capable people I know, and saw their struggles first-hand with everything from inequality in wage to sexual harassment. I fully support any initiative that would effectively move us towards equality in social and professional environments.

But I must be frank in saying that when I first learned of BlogHer my reaction, although quite muted, was to think of it as the logical equivalent of a "no girls allowed" SEM conference. The topic is the topic, and all opinions/assertions/observations are welcome (at least in my mind). To exclude a social group for activist reason turns the focus away from the topic at hand and toward the social problem - and for that reason the benefit is tempered.

But who am I to judge, in all honesty? If it truly helps to have such a conference, I'm all for it. I was not there and I am not a woman, so to a large degree I'm quite removed from the experience.

By: pat

pat — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:39:41 +0000

I’m glad you wrote this, not cause I agree or don’t agree or something, but more because I like your opinion. Rebecca is like a god to me because of her ability to quickly and off the cuff give her views on a subject with very little mental editing. It is huge valuable to me, and is the main reason I respect her. I don’t always get that from you. It is nice to read this. I will probably write about this and probably get slammed for it, but I am glad you wrote this.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 15:39:03 +0000

"Though seriously outnumbered, there were men present in every session."

Wow! - It sounds like a slice of heaven for your average, single, male blogger. Where else can a guy find himself in a situation like that?

By: Susan Esparza

Susan Esparza — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:54:30 +0000

In my mind, the nice thing about BlogHer is that you don’t have to prove you’ve got a right to be heard in spite of your rack.