This entry was posted
on Monday, June 15th, 2009 at 9:19 am by Radley Balko
and is filed under Monday Morning Poll.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
I recommend this site to everyone I have serious discussions with elsewhere. Yup, they are all men. A lot of them say their wives/GFs aren’t interested in politics, current events, reasoning/critical thinking, etc.
If I were still dating, I could have a field day out there.
Cowboy Dan hit the nail on the head. One week’s free admission to the Agitator for Cowboy Dan.
I have to be honest, though. If the name isn’t obviously female, I’m inclined to think the poster is male. It’s nice to know that the statistics bear me out and that I’m not just the shallow sexist pig.
Just because your inclination is correct doesn’t mean you aren’t a sexist pig, just saying…
You’re absolutely right. In fact, I’m keeping my eye on this thread hoping it degenerates into a discussion about whether big boobs is an indicator of intelligence. My wife told me “no”, punctuating her opinion with a lightning-speed face slap.
Here and female, but already married (to another agitator reader, at least!). We do have a little girl we’re trying to raise with a healthy skepticism of authority though, maybe she’ll be reading in 10 years…
I was the 50th female to vote. Do I get a prize for that?
I had no idea this was such a male-dominated area. I actually assumed posters without obvious gender references in their names were woman. I am the Anti Dave Krueger.
My opinion is that most women are hard wired toward collectivism and don’t really care about individual liberty. My wife couldn’t understand my “government activity is to be looked upon with skepticism” stance until she recently was pulled over by a rude cop and accused of behavior she was not engaged in. Plus the Agitator logo looks like the site is for 13 year old skaters, that may drive a few to other news and commentary. ( I met tag because there’s not font for sarcasm.)
Regarding women being predisposed towards collectivism – I think that is only true to the extent that they agree wit the party in charge. Getting them to see that power given to their party will be abused by the other party as well is the problem. But it does happen now and then – the CPSIA issue was a biggie, also homeschooling laws, etc. Things like that tend to raise awareness among women who typically lean Democrat.
Seriously, though – I was at a party Saturday evening and was amazed by how quickly the mere mention of politics reminded the women there dressed like hookers and cussing like sailors of *manners*. I was barely through a sentence bemoaning the socialist tendencies of the Seattle City Council before I was cut off by a broad who had been chewing gum with her mouth open all evening who reminded me that, “politics doesn’t make for polite conversation.”
I was too amused by the irony of the situation to offer a dissenting opinion.
I don’t think women are “predisposed” or “hard-wired” toward any political stance. Cultural pressures may tend to push different genders in different directions, but I’m going to be pretty skeptical of any statement where a man claims, with no evidence, that women are “hard-wired” toward a position that he thinks is wrong.
Also, most celebrity gossip sites are read overwhelmingly by men. I assume PerezHilton fits this model, but I’m not 100% certain.
Radley posts a lot of bad stuff about cops and we all know how women love big strong guys in uniform and the crisp staticky sound of the velcro being peeled off as they remove their body armor in the shadowy half light of the partially open drapes…….
On the other hand, Radley posts pictures of puppies. How can anyone not like someone who posts pictures of puppies?
I’m not overly fond of men in uniform or puppies. Next guess?
I was purposely and facetiously invoking the the calamity of stereotyping. Actually, the part about the velcro was related to me by a young Asian women who really did have a thing for cops. I thought adding it it was a nice touch. :)
In all honesty, I suspect women who frequent this site are anything but stereotypical. I’m disappointed by the ratio, but am clueless as to the actual cause. I’m an engineer and I find that women are unfortunately underrepresented in that area as well. Maybe the reasons, whatever they may be, are similar. Whether they’re cultural or something else, I don’t know. Do you?
maybe most women are like me, they get their news (including agitator articles) from an rss reader and don’t have the time or inclinaton to answer random web polls. of course we could all be mindless, boob-having eye candy but honestly, suggesting things like that doesn’t help you attract those of us who aren’t.
and to #14 – as a chick, if you’re attractive and read blogs like this you don’t stay single for long so you’d have to be very quick to catch one.
At the risk of tooting my own horn, I guess I would agree that I am not stereotypical. (Funny, I always translated that to being a freak of nature…)
With degrees in math and science, I would say your assessment of under-representation of women in engineering (and their participation here) is probably accurate, which is why I prefer having meaty discussions with men. Even bright women, with really happening jobs, just don’t seem interested in this kind of stuff.
I just hope Radley doesn’t do anything different to try to change the ratio. Keep on keepin’ on!
Yep, another female here, 65 and absolutely not your stereotypical older woman. Been interested in politics most of my adult life, been libertarian ever since my first memory — always straining against the chains with which authority tried to bind me, regardless the nature of that authority (parents, teachers, bosses, government). Never have voted for a Democrat nor a Republican (until Ron Paul). I visit a lot of libertarian sites, Lew, FFF, here are merely three. Also visit a lot of Dem sites and GOP sites, mainly to test their mettle and yank their chains, tho I do find some sympathy on Dem sites (for drug law reform), and some on the GOP sites (for limited government, privacy and property rights). Figure I need to know my enemies, also good to know who can be counted on to help on a particular issue even if we don’t agree on much else. My #1 issue is the so called “war on drugs”, what I call Prohibition 2.0, but it is not, by no means, the only issue on which I “agitate”. It is my opinion that we wouldn’t be suffering under the early stages of a police state if there had never been a Harry Anslinger and W.R. Hearst to create the idea that some drugs should be banned from use.
feminazi poll-watcher |
June 16th, 2009 at 6:39 am