Comments | randy_byers: It's a man's man's LJ

randy_byers

It's a man's man's LJ

Oct 13, 2010 13:14

On the flight back from California, I read Claire Brialey's piece in the latest Banana Wings about feminism and (amongst other things) fandom. Claire was polite enough not to finger me as the unnamed fan who, in worrying about the lack of LOCs from women to his fanzine, attributed Claire's article about the same issue in an earlier Banana Wings to ( Read more... )

feminism, fanzines, livejournal, facebook

Comments 13

bugshaw October 13 2010, 22:15:44 UTC

112 female, 120 male (approx) here...

kate_schaefer October 13 2010, 23:44:10 UTC

169 female, some number male, of 258 (there are a few whose genders I don't know, a few who are in trasition, and a rather depressing number who are dead. Maybe it's time to drop the LJs of the dead. They won't be reading my LJ any time soon.)

randy_byers October 14 2010, 04:56:08 UTC

I'd argue for keeping the dead amongst your Friends. They're still part of the community, even if the connection is static now.

kate_schaefer October 14 2010, 16:29:01 UTC

Yeah, that's the thing I think each time I intend to delete them, and I end up leaving them alone. Maybe this time I'll follow through.

I used to go look at Anita's LJ every once in a while, and then at Anita's Book of Days. The only way you can read the Book of Days now is by using the Wayback Machine, because Anita's domain has lapsed. Some kindly administrator has parked a YouTube video by Chris Pirillo paying tribute to Anita there in the midst of the spammy ads, having figured out (correctly) that someone looking for Anita's content might watch the video and therefore see some of the spammy ads for a few seconds more.

kate_schaefer October 14 2010, 16:33:41 UTC

And I was just now reminded, as I was aobut to follow through, of the real reason I can't drop my dead friends: they are unable to reciprocate. There I'd be, refusing to read the journals of the dead, while they loyally go on reading my journal. I had managed to forget that until confronted with the little red and green arrows.

It's a damn good thing I'm mostly able to throw out the physical stuff of the dead.

Thread 5

holyoutlaw October 14 2010, 03:14:40 UTC

I have 80 male, 79 female, and 44 don't know. But I missed 17 somewhere along the way.

The most surprising thing is I the number of people I had no clue who they were. I must have added them at some point, but who were they?

bibliofile October 14 2010, 06:36:37 UTC

I resist your apparent insistence on a gender binary. So there!

Also, if I start stuff like this I'll never get the trash out tonight....

randy_byers October 14 2010, 15:00:19 UTC

True. Kate hinted at the same point in her comment about "a few who are in transition". Also, I fully support making the trash a priority over arbitrary gender counts for mere fannish purposes!

jophan October 14 2010, 07:19:24 UTC

41% female, 59% male in my case. However, why are you surprised that the ratio is about the same on FB and LJ. Isn't that rather what you would expect?

randy_byers October 14 2010, 15:05:19 UTC

To be honest, I thought there would be a higher percentage of women on my Facebook list if only because of all the family members there (none of whom know of my LJ), almost all of whom are women. Also, three ex-girlfriends (and one ex-crush), who also aren't on LJ. Apparently that's only enough to make one percentage point of difference!