Your Sunday morning rage-on

[sabotabby]

Listening to CBC's Sunday Edition on the lack of female writers in magazine publishing. All of the women they're interviewing have interesting and relevant things to say on the subject. For some reason, they felt the need to interview John Macfarlane, editor of the Walrus, who has nothing interesting to say, beyond reminding me of why I never read the Walrus.

For example, he says that when one assigns articles, one wants to be gender-blind (what?) but sometimes it is just more appropriate to assign a certain gender. Like you wouldn't assign a man to write about parenting (double-what?).

I can't believe, in 2011, there are people who say this shit. Though I think this has a lot to do with why the magazine publishing industry is dead in the water and I only read blogs now.

Comments

[zingerella.livejournal.com]

Oh GAH.

Okay. There are certain articles I would be less likely to assign to writers of certain genders. As mentioned above, I think most men are less able to discuss menstruation and its overall effects on one's life as authoritatively as most women can. I am more likely to want to read an article on bras (especially on bra shopping), that is written by a woman. Articles on being a woman carry more weight when written by women. Articles on being a man carry more weight when written by a man. I'd be more likely to accept the authority of a man on, say, erections, too. I'd be less likely to read books on fatherhood if they were written by women. However, parenting is a subject on which many parents and some quasi parents or parental adjuncts can write interesting and engaging material.

Yes, this is why I don't read the Walrus. Or, really, listen much to CBC. However, I am going to have to listen to that show, in order to discuss it with my students.