John Bates
Charlie
injaynesworld
debbie_suburbsanity
GregI’m back again with part two of today’s post. Except, I’m not. No, Dear Reader you may think you are reading this blog, but you aren’t, you see women don’t blog. Therefore, I can not possibly have written the words you are now reading, because I am a women and I don’t blog. If you don’t believe me read this post, which includes an article which was published in last Thursday’s Independent.
OK read that? Are you like me a little puzzled by some of the remarks the writer makes? What decade or even century is this woman living in? This section I found particularly perplexing:
“How many homes are there – here, or in tech-savvy Finland – where the man will think it quite excusable to shuffle in late for dinner because he has been reading or writing his online diary, but would greet with ridicule or fury the prospect of dinner being late (or non-existent) because his partner had been delayed in the blogosphere? “
Umm, not many. This is 2006 not 1901. Mr Blogs is perfectly capable of cooking his own dinner, and wouldn’t dream of reacting with “ridicule or fury” at the idea that I had spent time posting to my blog. I accept we may not be typical, but I believe we are closer to the norm than Ms. Dejevsky thinks.
This would be a suitable juncture at which to give my opinion of the above mentioned article and it’s writer. I could denounce Ms. Dejevsky, as a middle class intellectual, who knows about as much about the lives of real women as I do about the process of oil refining. I could say, she is one of those patronising pea-brains who feel all women (except her) are in some way downtrodden, and only she can enlighten them to their plight.
But, what would be the point? No one will ever read my thoughts on the subject, because I don’t exist. You see, women don’t blog.
Technorati Tags: Women don’t blog, Mary Dejevsky, women bloggers
powered by performancing firefox
I appreciate you dropping by,
Please leave a comment, don’t be shy
Find me on: Twitter | LinkedIn | Google Buzz | Friendfeed
Follow this blog on: Facebook | Google Connect | Networked Blogs
Pete
/ July 6, 2006LOL
I have 18 bloggers linked to mine. Did a quick count 16 women 3 men…………………
Pie
/ July 6, 2006Had this blog existed I would have agreed with you wholeheartedly. Unfortunately none of this is real, you women are just part of my perverse imagination.
Pete
/ July 6, 200616+3 = 19 doh!!
Stegbeetle
/ July 6, 2006Like Pete, most of the blogs I read are by women. Or at least they would be if they actually existed. Does this make them figments of my imagination or someone else’s?
Now my brain hurts again.
parnellpr
/ July 6, 2006Non existent woman blogger here.
What a load of of (insrt rude word of choice here).
I’ve just done a rough count from my blogroll and 30 were done by women. They are blogging on to name a few sports, cinema, poetry, art, their lives, and politics and the 7/7 attacks. Not one mentions gynaecology. Seriously what research did this woman do? Oh and furthermore alot of them mention their lives, ie kids, jobs, husbands and most of them blog everyday! God I would so love to give this woman a good shake! She’s a columnist on a national newspaper and she’s allowed to perputuate such shameless male and female stereotypes? Oh and her research skills are obviously apalling!! I’m going to link to your post and the original post on my blog and see how much outrage I can generate. Pippa
Kate
/ July 7, 2006Pete – I started counting in my blogroll, but there are so many I gave up. Even so I would guess that over half are by women. Someone ought to tell the silly moo to do a bit of research before she make such sweeping statements.
Don’t worry about getting your sums wrong. I often tell people to look in the column of the left for things. You will notice there is no column on the left LOL
Kate
/ July 7, 2006Pie – I would like to respond to you, but I’m not really here so I can’t. I am in fact chained to a stove serving a man who reacts with fury and ridicule if I even mention using the internet. Oh, and giving children high tea – despite the fact high tea went out with Workers Playtime and hoop skirts.
Kate
/ July 7, 2006Steg – It’s you I’m afraid. As I am imaginary, I do not exist and therefore can not be held responsible for your strange delusions LOL
It’s the 80s catching up with you mate
Kate
/ July 7, 2006Pippa – My flabber was gasted, then I was furious. I am sure that even a basic search of Google would have revealed the complete inaccuracy of her theory.
It is a shoddy piece of work for someone who is payed hundreds of pounds per column and who is published in such a high profile paper.
You know it annoys me that even now, women are still seen as down trodden little muppets in some circles, and even worse the people who have that view are the ones who are most likely to claim to be feminists and to have womens interests at heart. Personally, I think I would rather deal with a sexist pig, at least they wouldn’t pretent to be on your side.
Stegbeetle
/ July 7, 2006OK, so I’m sat here commenting on a blog that cannot exist, written by an imaginary woman who not only posts regularly on her non-existant blog (impossible) but replies to my comments on it (patently ridiculous).
Now, the original article that brought on all this foolishness was in The Independent, yes? The Indy is my newspaper of choice and I usually set a fair bit of store by what’s said in it. It boils down to this I suppose – either one of the columnists at the Independent has made a large-scale tit of herself by writing, well…bollocks really or the temple of my reason has finally begun to crumble.
*sigh* Anybody know the number of a good scaffolding firm?
PS: Kate, as you rightly surmise, I fear the 1980′s have come back to haunt me. Perhaps I’ll remember them this time round!
Kate
/ July 7, 2006Steg – I usually favour the Indie too. I have a feeling that it is a case of a (usually) good writer suffering from a lapse of judgement. And, from the reading I have done this morning, it seems she is back tracking and saying she was a little hasty when she made such a sweeping statement. So, hopefully, the crumbling hasn’t started yet (phew)
My legacy from the 80s is slightly dodgy hearing, as result (I think) of standing too near the front at too many gigs LOL
The Boy
/ July 7, 2006I posted my comment on PETE’s blog.
I never get over the dumbity of people, both male and female.
Kate
/ July 7, 2006Dumbity, I like that word
I’ll pop over to Pete’s and see what you have said.
Rob
/ July 8, 2006Before I started blogging I was a regular reader of little.red.boat, meish.org, Boob Pencil, Rullsenberg Rules, Dooce, Petite Anglaise. My Boyfriend Is A Twat… in fact almost the only maoe blogger I read regularly was Mike at Troubled Diva.
So I was inspired to blog by those no-existent blogs I still read almost every day. Funny how things turn out.
Diddums
/ July 8, 2006For the record, all my links added to my regular feeds:
.
Men: 10
Women: 52 (including one bear and one cat)
Uncertain: 2 (including one bear)
I didn’t study my bookmarks
Kate
/ July 10, 2006Diddums – Looking at your list, if Mary ever decides to say there are no animals blogging you will have her banged to rights. Anyway, why am I talking to you. You imaginery female blogger you LOL
Kate
/ July 10, 2006Rob – It really was such a stupid statement for her to make, when some basic research would have told her she was wrong.
Thanks for the link BTW
I like dyour quip about Mary not existing, you know, I think you may be right.
Attila The Mom
/ July 10, 2006Great analysis. I don’t JUST Blog about gynecology and childcare. I blog about boogers and farts and ingrown hairs too.
I’m so insulted!
Kate
/ July 11, 2006“I don’t JUST Blog about gynecology and childcare”
LOL And when you do blog about those subjects, it’s certainly not in the sense that Mary means.
Kate
/ May 22, 2009Pippa – My flabber was gasted, then I was furious. I am sure that even a basic search of Google would have revealed the complete inaccuracy of her theory.
It is a shoddy piece of work for someone who is payed hundreds of pounds per column and who is published in such a high profile paper.
You know it annoys me that even now, women are still seen as down trodden little muppets in some circles, and even worse the people who have that view are the ones who are most likely to claim to be feminists and to have womens interests at heart. Personally, I think I would rather deal with a sexist pig, at least they wouldn't pretent to be on your side.