I have this idea – more of an observation than a fully-fleshed out structural theory – that the how-to-make-money-online blogging conventions are pretty male.
The model:
person has a question/problem, types it into Google, follows links to pages that rank high for those query keywords, lands on a page of an ‘online authority’, who ultimately provides – for sale – a ’solution’ to that problem
and so, to capture that traffic and convert it to a sale, probloggers aim to rank highly on Google (authority), structure themselves as likeable, trustable experts (authority), and offer infoproducts that solve problems
the bloggers, then, who will be successful, are the ones who follow this model, exploit it, and provide solutions
that’s how you monetize. You capture the questions and provide the solutions.
and, as a result of this process, and as a function of how people read online, effective blog posts are structured in a particular way:
- pithy headlines
- short sentences and paragraphs and just short, in general
- body text carved into sections using Headers to facilitate scanning
- lists
- brief, lean and to-the-point (the solution, the tip, the hack)
my observation: the information-finding model and the genre conventions are linear, analytical and about problem-solving and solutions
my beef: the websites that provide solutions are the least bewitching and entrancing to me (with an exception or two, and usually that’s due to a relationship I’ve got with the blogger, or by how deeply they’ve embedded their personality in their prose)
and…A-list solution bloggers = men
probloggers tend to be men
hell, bloggers, it seems, tend to be men
this linear, solution-hunting model and attendant blog-writing genre just feels very male to me
and so lots of the advice – even the basic genre conventions – about how to be a successful problogger just plain put me off
and that’s it. That’s my observation.
I don’t think that making some money directly off of a blog (as opposed to in conjunction with a blog) is bad or impossible. But I do concur with you that, a lot of the time, I feel like the quality of the blog goes down.
Even on a good blog that has very good content, I feel like sometimes I have to turn on my “salesperson filter.” It’s fine to promote a service you have (you yourself put a “hire me” section on your blog quite prominently), but when you are “making money” 10 different ways and they involve some kind of advertising, sponsored posting, random double-underlined words, and the like, it makes me feel like the person writing it is kind of in hock when their site is unbalanced.
Males get trained to be logical, mechanical, and “masters” of their domain. I think this has to do with why so many of the “pros” are men. They get a headstart in this kind of thinking.
Men are also solutioneers. We “fix” things. That’s fine… as long as you know that isn’t everything. I offer plenty of solutions on my blog… but I also have posts that have no “solution” to offer, just some food for thought or a personal musing. It’s good to mix it up.
[Reply]
Thanks for this, Kelly. I’ve been contemplating this, too, recently. I can’t quite put my finger on what it is that makes it seem male — though, often, it seems to be in the sort of hey-look-at-me-and-what-I’ve-done voice or the endgame (“make as much money as me!”). The structure used to get there might be part of it, too, though. It’s hard to say because the short, pithy sentences, bolded points, and bullet points don’t just exist in the blogosphere — they’re also sometimes the stuff of women’s magazines, so it’s tough to trace it exactly or identify what is and isn’t male about it. Anyway, just some random, disorderly thoughts:)
[Reply]
Kelly Diels
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 10:07 am
@Laura, good point! It is often the stuff of women’s magazines.
I don’t like it. Every time I try and carve my thoughts into the blog post structure, I resent it.
Sometimes it is effective, though.
What I’ve been thinking about though, is the why. Why do blog posts have to be written like that? Where does that come from?
And like you, I’ve been thinking about the tone and the language of solution-based blogging. Lots of world domination stuff. Lots of crushing it. Lots of competition and challenge and alpha-ish posturing. The striving for authority. Lots of balls-out, testosterone fueled language.
And that’s fine, and even a lot of fun sometimes. I’ve got a real soft spot for cocky men. *impish smile*
And it’s not all like that, either. I’m sometimes touched by the sincerity of lots of solution-based bloggers.
But sometimes I wonder if all the handwringing about personal writing is really, implicitly, a caution about being too feminine. Don’t be too emotional. Don’t be too woo. Don’t be such a girl.
And sometimes I think that there are probably other ways to do it, too. I’m not sure what they are, exactly. I’m alternating between embracing and resisting the formula while I’m figuring it out.
Thanks for thinking this through with me.
[Reply]
Justine Musk
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 11:27 am
@Kelly Diels,
Well that’s the thing, isn’t it? — it’s a ‘formula’. There’s something very comforting about a formula. It can be broken down, packaged and sold. It can be replicated. And the whole thing about solution-based blogging is that, so long as there’s a solution, there’s obvious value.
For some reason I’m thinking figure skating (maybe because I just learned that Sasha Cohen is going for gold again at next Olympics and I’m psyched. but nevermind). The short program is about the athletic stuff — nail the jumps, the spins, don’t fall on your ass, and you’ve done a good job. It’s an easy way to measure and rank success.
The long program gets tricky, because that’s where artistry comes in…Nancy Kerrigan skates a perfect program but the Olympic gold still goes to Oxsana Baiul even though she two-footed a landing (or two) because the girl had amazing style, artistry, unique to her, whatever natural talent she was born with developed through years of deliberate practice…And there was an outcry over Oxsana getting the gold, because you can’t cut, measure and quantify artistry the same way you can with technical demands & ability, so even though Baiul had superior artistry and it’s called, after all, the ‘artistic’ program, people still thought Kerrigan should have won. Properly landing a jump is a much easier thing to understand and also to communicate to other people.
So I think personal writing is a lot like the artistic program…It calls for flair and style and craft, otherwise it devolves into the self-indulgent crap it has the reputation for being in the first place. It’s difficult to do *well* and it’s hard to break down into a formula and teach/sell. Also, voice is important in a way that it doesn’t have to be when the emphasis is on delivering some kind of answer or solution. When a personal blog post is done well, it delivers a rich, deep satisfaction that can’t be explained simply by saying, “Cool, I learned the 5 secrets of the 7 ways of crafting 100 different headlines to boost my reader traffic and make 6 figures while I launch the crap out of my ebook”.
In other words, good personal blog writing comes perilously close to being art. Or artful. Or full of art. Or something.
I think to be a good personal blogger, you have to be a good writer, period. And most bloggers aren’t: that’s neither their focus nor their goal. Which means they also don’t have that developed sense of craft that comes through lots of reading/writing. So they think that the bad personal stuff is what the genre *is* (instead of just recognizing it as bad writing) and reinforce each other’s views, etc.
I for one could use a little less blogging-as-marketing (the athletic program) and a lot more blogging-as-art.
I’m going to take my personal, feminine self away now and go put on something hot-pink.
[Reply]
What’s that now? I was busy hunting buffalo.
As the formula becomes more formulaic, there will be opportunity to grab attention by being different.
I hope.
[Reply]
Kelly Diels
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 9:58 am
@Deacon, me too.
[Reply]
It’s true and it’s very used car saleman like. I thought this was supposed to be about conversation and relationship – which are absolutely FEMALE from head to tail.
And look at people like Dooce. She did the absolute opposite. And she’s a bazillionaire. I could point you to a LOT of women and some men who are doing it ‘our’ way and succeeding.
When I see the ‘way’ you identified above, I turn and RUN.
[Reply]
Nathan Hangen
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 7:06 pm
@Juile Roads,
Do you really run or is it more of a jog?
[Reply]
Kelly Diels
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
@Nathan Hangen, she’s too busy drinking vodka and posing nekkid to do either.
[Reply]
Nathan Hangen
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 7:12 pm
@Kelly Diels, haha women…always drinking and posing naked.
[Reply]
Thanks for writing about this, Kelly, you know this is something that I have ranted about more than a few times (in fact I wrote up a big response to your post yesterday and then decided not to submit it as I’m starting to bore myself on this topic).
But, I do believe this is something worth talking about. In the same vein as Clay Shirky writing that women need to be more like men to get ahead- http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/01/a-rant-about-women/ -and some of the wonderful responses women wrote to that claim- http://www.deannazandt.com/2010/01/18/shirky-to-women-ur-doin-it-wrong/
There are way more women making money blogging than most people are aware of – they just aren’t as visible because they are not making money by trying to tell others to how make money. I have given my money to many female bloggers for their expertise in areas from writing to photography to creativity to cooking, and they became known to me through their blogs.
Frankly, I am a grown-ass woman, I’m not interested in listening to young guys talk about world domination via collecting air miles so they can make pit stops in foreign countries as notches on their belt. Nothing wrong with it, and I love young guys, but as someone who spends some of her time teaching young guys – I’m not looking for more of that.
You are already grabbing attention by being different – it’s happening.
[Reply]
Nathan Hangen
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
@Lianne,
So you’re talking about Chris. Is that a pride thing or just dis-interest?
Like him or not, he’s doing a lot of things right and I admire his journey.
[Reply]
Lianne
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
@Nathan Hangen,
Hi Nathan, I’m not sure what you mean by “a pride thing” but as I said in my post it is definitely disinterest. I am not his audience, and I don’t relate to the whole “world domination” thing. When I was right out of university and traveling and sleeping in airports to save money, I probably would have loved it. Right now, I find his wife’s blog much more interesting than his.
Not everybody has to love his blog, right? I don’t even know the guy, so this isn’t an issue of liking him or not liking him. It’s about his writing.
[Reply]
Nathan Hangen
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
@Lianne, Lianne, I admire you for being honest, I just couldn’t tell if your point was borne out of animosity or just lack of interest…it’s obviously the latter. The “notch in the belt” line was confusing.
I relate to it because it’s my style of thinking. I’ve never read his wife’s blog…I bet it is interesting.
There’s an audience for every opinion, and that’s what makes the web so wonderful
[Reply]
Joseph Dowdy
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 2:20 am
@Lianne,
Yeah, so check out momsrising.org. Lots of stay-at-home mommies blog and make money.
[Reply]
Firstly on the short sentences and pithy headlines point, it has become popular blogology that the only way you can get and keep attention is by writing short sentences.
Secondly, as to why it appears male. I think it has to do with the whole hunter-gatherer wiring. The hunter always took the most direct route to his prey (and it is a traditionally masculine role). The gatherer on the other hand, had the opportunity to look around and be less linear in their activity.
Thirdly, I think we are moving away from the type of blogging that you identified above. People have smartened up – it is now becoming more about real connections and relationships.
I might be wrong…Those are just my random thoughts.
[Reply]
Why? My guess would be the time factor.
Even though I know the following example is stereotypical, it’s often true:
Men go to the store, they get what they need, they leave. Direct. Linear. Goal acheived.
Women go to the store, they (we) browse, we get what we need but we might look elsewhere first, and we might pick up a few more things on the way.
Directed. Flowing. Goal eventually achieved.
Time is short. There’s a lot of intel out there and people are looking for the answers they need quickly. Idle surfing is usually NOT what brings a person to a solution-minded blog. In using the “male” approach, the relevant info is given in easy to swallow chunks, facilitating the direct sale.
The thing is, whether you look at it as male/female energy, yin and yang, testosterone vs estrogen whatever–we all contain both within us, we can choose to employ that which is best suited to our needs and our audience. Which is why some folks can “do it wrong” yet make it work.
On the other hand, I recently read (though I can’t cite where so may have hallucinated this) that adult women form the largest growing segment on the Internet. So it’s curious that the male-energy tactics are still so adamantly employed.
Maybe it’s just what we’re used to? And maybe we can get used to something else.
[Reply]
Interesting observation Kelly. I thought I’d start with a short, pithy sentence, and if I possessed any technical skill at all I would have worked out how to bold it as well.
I think Mitch is spot on. We are trained to be logical, clear and concise – pick up a car magazine and you’ll see what I mean.
Our minds just work differently – don’t be offended – I love your writing and Penelope’s for example. But it’s hard for me to read sometimes (which is not a bad thing) because to my bullet-point ridden brain, it seems to wander all over the place.
You may have stumbled on something here. I suspect most men might be from Mars.
[Reply]
Yup, problem is, I write like a girl. : )
[Reply]
Randi Buckley
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 6:27 pm
@Sean Platt,
Lucky you!
[Reply]
Justine makes a few very, very good points.
I’m not sure all the handwringing is about the fear of being too feminine. We need only look at the success of “bloggers” like Danielle LaPorte or Gwen Bell or Aidan Donnelley Rowley to understand that a little femininity and woo-woo ain’t hurt anybody. But I do agree there’s a distinct formula to the “successful” blog writing process and one in which I’m loathe to adopt regardless of my intentions. Do I plan to write content for the purpose of driving visitors to my site? Sure I do. But I also plan to connect and create a community of like-minded thinkers who appreciate getting to know one another through unique and unrelentingly authentic writing. Formula and paycheck be damned.
Danielle’s post for the day suggests we express our admiration. I continue to read your words because they’re provocative and engaging and they leave me thinking long after I’ve read them. Even if your over-arching intentions are to promote your work, I leave with the sense that you write because you NEED to. And because of that, you’re first-in-mind when I think about hiring a copywriter.
So blogging for money? Think about this: while I didn’t join in on Jonathan’s discussion stream about blogging for money or paying for what I currently read for free, I would pay to read yours.
And how closely do YOU follow the formula?
[Reply]
Penelope does use lists sometimes. And it is true, lists are a bit easier to skim through and get the gist of. Good for pageviews.
But like anything else, too much of a good thing ain’t good. Sometimes the blogging world gets a little too listified. We’ve got Kelly to balance things out.
A good mix is always nice. Make some listy material (with a strong personal flavor to it) and keep it handy for the skimmers. Then, those who like what you write can feel free to browse a bit deeper into your blog and read for a while. And then, using the best of both worlds (list-format and unfettered prose), you get a nice variety that prevents you from being typecast… you create your own type.
[Reply]
Of course, the above is my style. The fact that mine is not the only style out there is quite refreshing.
[Reply]
Justine said: “I for one could use a little less blogging-as-marketing (the athletic program) and a lot more blogging-as-art.”
I would just like to Hallelujah! and Amen! that.
[Reply]
I do agree with you Kelly.
It definitely feels and is set up to be a male driven niche. I do appreciate their points of views and I appreciate the models they’ve set up for someone who wants to jump into the blogging industry.
However, I would LOVE to see a huge amount of women included in the “top” field because we deserve it and we have a ton of stuff to say that’s pretty important.
Shooooot!!
[Reply]
Thanks for writing this; hell, thanks for *observing* it so clearly! The closest I’ve gotten, as I decide between going with the “normal” full-time job or trying to make it as a freelancer/blogger/what-have-you, is that it feels like to make money blogging and writing on-line, I would be bucking the conventional model to…follow another conventional model that’s already been set up. And I don’t feel completely comfortable with either, to be honest.
I agree, it does seem like most of the “probloggers” making bank are dudes. But I have to point out that the vast majority of blogs I read are written quite wonderfully by women. I love that most of them clearly write because they love it, because they *have* to communicate with someone. They don’t necessarily care that they’re not following those guidelines you point out because they’re being true to themselves.
[Reply]
ok, BIG caveat here – at some point I will start marketing. To all of you. It will be artful, of course, but JUST A HUGE HEADS UP.
I’m soooooo NOT criticizing marketing and selling stuff. Don’t wanna train you to think I’m above filthy lucre. I’m planning to roll around in it. With you. xoxoxoxoxo
[Reply]
Lianne
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 7:29 pm
@Kelly Diels,
You already are, Kelly, everybody is – but that’s incidental, not fundamental. It seems to me that you’re fundamentally about making meaning.
[Reply]
Randi Buckley
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 8:54 pm
@Lianne,
Hear, hear!
[Reply]
Writing like a pro-blogger is boring, which is why I’m going to spend less time making sense and more time being absolutely insane.
Who’s got a drink?
[Reply]
Lianne
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
@Nathan Hangen,
Nathan, up in Canada we have this awesome drink called a Caesar – I’m making you up a nice, spicy one right now.
[Reply]
Yeah. But then, business (including marketing) in general is male-derived, male-oriented. Sonia Simone does an excellent job of feminizing a guy’s platform (copyblogger). It takes rare skill. The feminine in blogging is not simply a rambling, lacy soul search: check out people like Valeria Maltoni, perhaps, for a different take.
[Reply]
Kelly Diels
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 6:40 pm
@Mary H Ruth, you’ve nailed it. And now I’m off to check out Valeria Maltoni.
[Reply]
Kelly, I’m sure there are at least three women probloggers out there. Let’s just call them Mary, Jane and Louise. I think Mary, Jane and Louise can do just fine in problogging circles as they are different for a start just by not having male genitalia. Most guys are attracted to that.
Secondly, I’m sure approximately 50% of people doing searches are women. You’re a woman, and what a woman!.
I think your feminine style of writing may in fact be found by women doing searches on Google, etc.
I think you’ll find that the whole reason that men tend to dominate the problogging niche is because they have discovered a career that allows them to stay on their computer most of the day where most of their porn is kept.
[Reply]
Kelly Diels
replied:
on January 28th, 2010 at 9:35 pm
@Gordie, porn is one of my keywords. Maybe that is why things are going well. I’m gonna OWN google, soon.
[Reply]
I feel inspired to brush up on my bullet points.
Try Ali Brown for some “go for throat” feminine style money-making.
Other than that, so many labels and stuff. Masculine this, feminine that.
Where would Proust, Joyce, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, or Solzenhitzen or Pound fit into this perspective? Into this rigid polarity?
[Reply]
Lianne
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 9:09 am
@Dave Doolin,
They wouldn’t fit into it. Neither does Kelly, nor most artists – that’s the problem. That’s why Kelly struggles with the rules. The rules express a polarity that ends up doing everyone a disservice.
“The masculine intention, the desire to know, often overlays the feminine, the not-knowing, the mystery…A whole part of ourselves is lost, buried under our knowledge. And so we lead half-lives, yearning for wholeness…often not understanding what is missing.” ~ Wendy Palmer
Loving this discussion.
[Reply]
Dave Doolin
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 9:30 am
@Lianne, I love polarity. So hot. It’s the rigidity I loathe.
[Reply]
Lianne
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 9:36 am
@Dave Doolin,
Aha! Gotcha.
[Reply]
Hmmm. Online – in forums for example – I am often addressed or spoken about in the third person as ‘he.’ I chalked that up to the gender-neutrality of my usual screen-name Gaelen and my given name Pat – and that I seldom use a personal head shot as my avatar. I told myself that my writing voice synergizes masculine and feminine.
Maybe people get confused because I think like a girl but really, I write like a guy…
[Reply]
It’s funny to me to read this, Kelly. In my niche, art/craft/design blogs, the probloggers are almost exclusively female. We’ve made it our business to make others successful and advocate for quality and beauty. Sure, there’s lots of stat checking and keyword research. But it’s mostly about connections.
Like you said, most of the problogger info you read doesn’t apply to this women-centric blog style. But I think we kind of fill in the blanks for each other.
[Reply]
Kelly Diels
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
@tara – scoutie girl, “we kind of fill in the blanks for each other” – how gorgeous.
I’m going to check out your world. It sounds like my kind of place.
[Reply]
Why are you all referring to great women’s blogs by the blogger’s personal name?
I’d like a link to look, but even the title of the blog would be helpful. I tend to steer clear of “women’s blogs” because I’m not interested in mommy stuff, arts and crafts, boyfriends, or homemaking. But even a boring topic like cooking can be made interesting; see my friend’s start-up blog http://choiceword.com/simplygoodfoodblog/. So how would I find these wonderful women’s blogs?
[Reply]
Fantastic conversation – thanks for writing this post. Over the past few months, I’ve read many of these “male blogs” you speak of, and bought a few of their books in the name of research. It’s almost all the same stuff, and it boils down to the problogging formula, which I agree feels manly / solution-oriented.
I also bought and read Linchpin, though, and feel there is an opportunity to differentiate by NOT following the problogger formula. Kelly, your site is different. I was annoyed at first, but now I’m intrigued and look forward to your works.
[Reply]
Kelly Diels
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 6:42 pm
@Paul Kaiser, Linchpin is on my list of things to do this weekend.
And of course I am dying to know what annoyed you…and glad you’re now intrigued. Thanks.
[Reply]
Paul Kaiser
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 8:42 pm
@Kelly Diels, Annoyance? I think it was just an “in-the-moment” thing. I was reading all these blogs and books and everything read like a journalist wrote it… inverted pyramid and such… then I came to your blog through… maybe a link from Problogger. I was reading some posts and was like “what’s the point?!” But now it looks like the point is… whatever’s on your mind at the moment? Not sure, but I’m intrigued because I like your writing, but don’t feel like I can easily predict what you’ll write next. (“Sign up tomorrow for my limited blog webinar” is probably not on your list right now.)
[Reply]
Just a quick observation – note your use of ‘male’ or ‘masculine’. I think there are two things that are coming up: 1) male privilege – a system that positions men as authority figures and 2) masculine – an approach or expression that has a certain set of traits (having little to do with sex of the person).
The terms male and masculine are often incorrectly used interchangeably, which tends to just perpetuate gender/sex stereotypes instead of challenging them.
[Reply]
Kelly Diels
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 6:43 pm
@msmelis, point taken. I need to be more precise with my language. Will do. Thanks for the reminder.
[Reply]
I could not agree more. In fact, minutes earlier from receiving this post in my inbox, I had gotten an internet marketing email from a big internet marketing guy with an offer and I thought, why bother, it’s so male, I’m not going to do those things, the whole field is so male in its outlook, delivery, and focus, that it’s just not that relevant to me and my business goals online. It’s not good or bad, it just has little resonance for me.
Also most “problogging” info is about how to make lots of money online–so they make money teaching about making money–did they make money any other way? I’d like to see more “making money online” lessons about selling something other than how to make money.
[Reply]
It’s great to see a post where the comments are as long as the post itself!
I think that alone says something about the quality of the work. You wouldn’t see this on one of the “Make a Bazzillion Bucks” blogs. Although they tell you to use your authentic voice, they generally come of as salesmen more interested in the sale than sharing ideas. Not that the technicalities should be avoided, but you don’t go to an auto supply store to talk about the wife and kids. That’s the difference between the art and the tech.
This post wouldn’t appear on one of those because you offer a community not just a class. Once we’ve read though the “lists” and “solutions” a few times we need to go out and see how this all applies to real readers.
I have to say that female bloggers tend to engage their readers more than males.
[Reply]
Well said, darling. The formula part is what got me. Maybe we create another formula? I used to work for Google, so I know a lot about SEO and what it takes, but sometimes, I just don’t really care. I just like to write. xo
[Reply]
Kelly Diels
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 6:48 pm
@Laura Cococcia | The Journal of Cultural Conversation,
“sometimes, I just don’t really care. I just like to write.”
ME TOO.
I’m approaching a conclusion, though, outside of this whole discussion but directly related to it: my blog is not my only medium. All the things that I want to do – write long, thinky, deep, crafted, researched essays – might belong somewhere else. Like magazines.
Formula is another word for genre. Maybe if I start thinking about these conventions as generic, then I can start pushing and transcending them and think about that as both academic and arty.
Or maybe now I’m just way over-thinking things.
[Reply]
Dave Doolin
replied:
on January 29th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
@Kelly Diels, No, you’re not overthinking things.
I have about a half dozen articles in queue, and no time to work on them. They’re all for technical publication. Each requires about a month of 1/2 time (at least) commitment. I may never finish them.
Frankly, anyone who says “writing is this” or “writing is that” is too clueless to engage with. Smile and nod, smile and nod.
If I had to limit myself to the kind of writing espoused by the blogoscenti (that’s a hard “c” because I was born in Dixie, dammit) I would shoot myself. Or drive off a bridge.
They just say that crap because it’s all they know.
Some of D. Rowse’s newer articles are really good… because they are long and packed with information. They break all the rules. The irony, of course, is Darren being one of the propagators of said rules.
Still avoiding my email, yesiam.
[Reply]
But Kelly, your brilliant over-thinking is precisely why all of us are here.
[Reply]
There are an awful lot of women blogging and by awful I am not talking about their writing. The real question in my mind is how many so called pro bloggers are making enough money to live on.
I suspect the number is smaller than people think.
[Reply]
well, like i taught my chiclets: know the rules so you can break them intelligently. (yes, i have authority issues.) married into a family of engineers and doctors (the lightbulb’s beginning to go off about the authority issues, now, isn’t it?). they are fluent in linear formulas, and speak with great authority, but like i keep telling them till i’m hoarse: there’s a place for that, but it’s not everywhere and not for everybody. it’s not the only way to think, talk, write. i mean, who likes homogenization (except in dairy circles, of course)?
[Reply]
It is true that there are more balls in blogging than say other bits, and I’m not sure why balls are somehow authoritative. I would be happy to read more female pro-bloggers as they would likely have a different perspective and intuition on the matter. Most of the “advice” out there is fairly banal regurgitated stuff. I like your blog though. Keep up the great work!
[Reply]