Mothers, however we define ourselves in terms of our employment, are not viewed by the world at large as opinion makers.
I had this sad revelation while the PunditMom family was away on vacation last week and I continued to stew about the lack of coverage or interest the media and the presidential candidates had when it came to this year’s BlogHer conference, the largest conference of women bloggers in the world.
We are the acknowledged spenders of household income. We’re the demographic that advertisers want. Exhibit A? The huge Butterball turkey sitting on one of the exhibitors tables throughout the event. So they want our opinions on Thanksgiving dinner, but not on one of the most important presidential elections of our time.
Only two presidential candidates deigned to send representatives to BlogHer, one of them being Elizabeth Edwards. Yet, when it came to the mostly middle-aged white male blogging conference the following week, the media couldn’t get enough and the Democratic presidential contenders were out in full force.
So my question this morning in my jet-lagged fog is:
Are there any ’Mommy’ opinion leaders?
If so, our voices don’t seem to be reaching any sort of critical mass. Even the one woman running for President was more interested in attending the Yearly Kos conference and making nice to the white men than she was in meeting with women bloggers. The lone representative Hillary Clinton sent to the BlogHer conference wasn’t that interested in making contact with the bloggers — she kind of hovered in the back of the political discussion rooms. When I introduced myself and told her I had a somewhat well-read political blog, she gave me the cold-shoulder brush-off.
OK, I’m no Kos or Arianna Huffington, but there’s a perfect example of the amazing short-sightedness of the candidates and the way women are viewed in the blogosphere. So what do we do about that?
Maybe part of the problem is how we, as women, view the world.
We’re great at starting and having conversations. Mulling, considering, sharing. Yet, many times we don’t want to force our personal views and opinions on others. Now could be the time we need to put them out there in the blogosphere and not hold back.
We don’t have to get into a whole big row about it. As women, often we do have a different filter on issues that cover the front pages of newspapers and take up the first minutes of cable news shows. Maybe it’s time to be less reticent and less fearful about putting other women off and start stating our case for those views in a way that would make the candidates and the main stream media perk up and pay some attention.
If a few of us put our toes in those political opinion-making waters, would other women follow?
Subscribe to blog via RSS
I’m so put off (though, sadly, not entirely surprised) to hear what happened with Clinton’s rep. That’s just ridiculous, and such a great example of good intentions that are short-sighted. I am (naively?) hoping that the BlogHers Act initiative is going to get more of our voices heard, but I guess time will tell.
Mir | August 13th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
I would love to see some real attention paid to the BlogHers Act intiative, as well. But where has the coverage been?
PunditMom
djbam | August 13th, 2007 at 4:43 pm
Drat! Whole comment eaten!!!
Okay paraphrasing myself (which is too bad since the original was better):
* that stinks about the rep
* it stinks about the lack of attention
I find that women are regarded as “household decision makers” which somehow limits our power to purchasing decisions.
I believe that the women’s move carefully distanced themselves from traditional roles such as wife and mother. I understand why they did it, thirty years ago, but it was short-sighted and left us where we are now.
How can we reintegrate?
I think there was more but drat if I recall.
Keep the fires going!
Julie
Ravin’ Picture Maven
Julie Pippert | August 13th, 2007 at 5:07 pm
In this country, we identify ourselves often by our profession first. There are mothers who are opinion makers, Huffington comes to mind, but you rarely hear about their kids.
Also, this change is only going to come from the women themselves, by talking about serious stuff. For years all I heard around the proverbial water cooler was talk about TV shows and gossip. When I left the workplace to be a mom, all that the women I encountered talked about was bodily functions, and gossip.
Now we know from the blogosphere, that women/mothers do think about serious stuff, but maybe it’s not enough.
Recently, I noticed that the “Women’s Interest” section of the magazine rack at my local Barnes and Noble was filled entirely with fluff. Why is this? Is this really what we buy?
How do we convince people that we want to hear less from Brittney and Paris and more from Condoleeza and Tzipi (Livni)? We need to talk about and write about the people we want to take us seriously. Do that, and I believe that technology will lead them back to us.
(Soccer Mom) Lisse | August 14th, 2007 at 4:19 am
It reminds me of daytime tv, pre-cable explosion. The options were: soap opera or game show. And this reflected corporate america’s conception of women. Then Donahue came along and paid women respect. He challenged us and provoked us to think.
But the truth is that women don’t need the second coming of Donahue. The internet is democratic, not hierarchical or autocratic (like network TV). I agree with Soccer Mom. Change is needed, in part, from within. When the number of women who blog about political issues reaches critical mass, then campaigns will pay attention.
Jane | August 14th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
Your tale about Clinton’s rep snubbing you REALLY ticks me off. One more check in the “I don’t think so!” column.
If society at large would stop focusing on womens’ hair (Couric), pregnancy (Vargas) and cleavage (Clinton) and instead focus on more serious issues, perhaps these candidates would take women seriously. I have been really pleased by Nancy Pelosi talking about her children, but I think more women in power need to bring their kids into the spotlight so we will have role models to look up to and examples of what realistically works (even if the hard, cold answer is retaining a full-time nanny and housekeeper or staying home for 3-5 years).
PT-LawMom | August 15th, 2007 at 8:57 pm