Home > Blogosphere, Humour > Yay! The Voice Inside My Head Is Winning The “Secret” Expert Judge For The CBA’s Feminist Category

Yay! The Voice Inside My Head Is Winning The “Secret” Expert Judge For The CBA’s Feminist Category

December 19, 2008

This is nice news.

Since I help organize the Canadian Blog Awards, I don’t participate in it, so I don’t get to compete in online voting contests often. However, the voice in my head is winning the “who is the Secret Judge for the CBA’s Feminist category” poll over at A Creative Revolution.

So, go vote for me, and make sure I win the poll.

Oh, and I’m fully expecting a graphic of a cartoon beaver after I win this.

P.S.: Should I tell them that the judge of the CBA feminist category was somebody I knew that had a Women’s Studies minor, and doesn’t have a blog, just reads them.

Nah!

I want the reward. Besides, until I produce an address, telephone number, dental records, and DNA samples, they won’t believe me anyway.

Update 12/20/2008 2:17pm PST: Yay! I won the award! But only by 35%, which is sort of disappointing. Only a pluarity! The graphic isn’t of a cartoon beaver, so I’m not going to put it up.

Advertisements
Categories: Blogosphere, Humour
  1. December 19, 2008 at 6:14 pm

    Ummmm … Having a “Women’s Studies minor” qualifies someone to judge who is a feminist and who isn’t?

    Sheesh. We got a world of trouble here.

  2. Toe
    December 19, 2008 at 6:18 pm

    Isolated and bewildered. Yep, the usual stance.

  3. December 19, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    ‘. . .and doesn’t have a blog, just reads them.’

    With obviously insufficient attention if s/he mistook the pink at CforC for feminism and the ‘I’m pro-choice and I shoot back’ logo at JJ’s for un-feminism.

    Ah, well, a Women’s Studies minor. Short attention span problem, perhaps.

  4. Toe
    December 19, 2008 at 6:52 pm

    You mean like the 5 guys in my WS’s in 75 before it was a credit? Wow, such discipline.

  5. December 19, 2008 at 6:58 pm

    Well, we had to get a neutral party who understood what feminism was, to be fair to everybody.

    For the most part, the judge did a good job.

  6. Toe
    December 19, 2008 at 7:03 pm

    patience is tried = tried that already, done. Ignorance is the mantra of all ideologies, no?

  7. December 19, 2008 at 7:08 pm

    Toe, I’m not sure what you are trying to get at.

  8. December 19, 2008 at 7:18 pm

    I think this bears repeating:

    This is how it was explained to me by the judge.

    First of all, this was the best feminist category, not the best blog written by a woman category. Therefore, a blog would not be accepted into the category simply because the writter was a woman.

    Second, the blog had to, for the most part, talk about feminism or issues via a feminist lens. Feminism generally being defined as “belief in the political, social, and economic equality of women”. Of course, there were probably some subtleties that somebody in Women’s Studies would know about.

    So, using that basis, there were a few blogs that were removed. JJ’s was one of them.

    Since this category tends to be explosive, the CBA Operators are not going to overrule the judge, unless the big rule of the CBA’s are broken, being the blog must be based in Canada or written by a Canadian.

  9. Toe
    December 19, 2008 at 7:21 pm

    What am I trying to get at? Well gee suspiciously your swimming upstream with the salmon eh? And menz ideology tis to Never Brook Anything a woman might say, no? Continue to ignore, it is actually more entertaining. Just ignore us and continue the great escape. Such entertainment for you.and me.

    You can’t produce the 3rd party, it would be such an embarrassment to mankind.

  10. December 19, 2008 at 7:27 pm

    Toe,

    Nope, sorry, I’m still not getting you. You are a little too cryptic, there.

  11. December 19, 2008 at 7:41 pm

    OK, booting JJ could have been a mistake. What I want answered is how the hell Choice for Childcare could have been deemed feminist. Nobody has addressed that, except for ‘da wolf’ at the CBA site, who nominated her because we feminists dissed Sarah Palin, or something, I dunno, it hurts my head.

    I ask again: Why was Choice for Childcare deemed feminist? Please ask your expert and relay her/his answer.

  12. December 19, 2008 at 7:45 pm

    Fern Hill,

    I’ll get that for you.

  13. Toe
    December 19, 2008 at 7:59 pm

    The expert has been incognito since the beg. of the bullshit. I don’t think t hey even have one. Woops.

  14. December 19, 2008 at 9:27 pm

    Fern Hill,

    Here it is, straight from the judge:

    I felt the reason’s that Choice for Childcare was initially considered a feminist blog was because it pertained the issue of both choice for women, and for dealing with daycare (an issue that affects both single and married women). Unlike Small Dead Animals or some of the other conservative ‘feminist’ blogs, the arguments were based on economic principals under the assumption that these would benefit women, not something like religious reasons (that Suzanne provided for her arguments about abortion) or the simple fact that she was a woman. In fact, some of the ones eliminated were women, but appeared to me to be anti-feminist (a contradiction for the category they appeared in). One was a stripper, the others argued for free speech – which may have been a compelling argument for having them included in the feminist category if it was so heavily in favour of hate speech. Many didn’t seem to display an understanding of feminist logic. Choice for Childcare was using economic arguments for her position. In many of the classes I’ve attended, both in economic and women’s studies, this was the single most advancing portion of the feminist movement other than historical arguments themselves.

  15. December 19, 2008 at 9:32 pm

    ‘One was a stripper. . . ‘ Where to begin?

    But thanks, Northern BC Dipper. Is that a direct quote?

  16. December 19, 2008 at 9:43 pm

    That’s a direct quote.

    I’ve believe that the blogger the judge is referring to from the “One was a stripper. . . ” was this one.

  17. December 19, 2008 at 10:23 pm

    Toe,

    Now, I’ve got you. You are basically trying to accuse us, in so many words, of not having a judge.

    Well, then, I’ve got to say, vote for me at the poll them 😉 .

  18. December 20, 2008 at 7:19 am

    Well, that semi-literate message from the judge tells us quite a lot, doesn’t it. It is written from the pov of an outsider looking in — in other words, it is written by a guy.

    I do believe that men can be feminists, but that guy isn’t. Male or female, taking a few courses in women’s studies doesn’t teach you all that much about feminism and certainly doesn’t make you a feminist. Living as a woman who knows she’s being discriminated against gives you a head start over someone who’s just taken a course.

    The economist logic is also just weird, the kind of thing a pretentious young student might write. Feminism is a human-rights issue, just as anti-racism is, just as advocacy for any marginalized group is.

    I’m not eligible for this award for obvious reasons, but I am a feminist and it still works away at me that feminists are being snickered at when we inform you that you’ve still got this wrong. The very title of this post — teh wimminz is causing trouble again! ain’t I cute? — harks back to one of the oldest sexist lines there is: What do women want? Every man who has ever asked that question expects to get a laugh from it and to be loved yet again for being so cute.

    We all recognize how much work it is to run these awards, but it’s hard to be grateful if there is a continued implicit insult to one substantial group of bloggers.

  19. December 20, 2008 at 8:38 am

    “…we had to get a neutral party who understood what feminism was…”

    So why didn’t you get one?

  20. December 20, 2008 at 9:14 am

    a neutral party who understood what feminism was

    Good grief, where to start.

  21. December 20, 2008 at 2:50 pm

    The very title of this post — teh wimminz is causing trouble again! ain’t I cute? — harks back to one of the oldest sexist lines there is: What do women want?

    BS. The title of the post is Yay! The Voice Inside My Head Is Winning The “Secret” Expert Judge For The CBA’s Feminist Category It means exactly as it says on the tin.

  22. December 20, 2008 at 2:54 pm

    “…we had to get a neutral party who understood what feminism was…”

    So why didn’t you get one?

    We did.

    Methinks some of you wanted an unneutral judge, but I’m afraid that the CBA’s are a event for everybody, not just one single group. As Saskboy says, its poor sportspersonship.

  23. December 20, 2008 at 3:12 pm

    Copied from Saskboy’s comments section, cuz I’m too lazy to say it in different words:

    Preamble: I think the CBAs are great. The process is well designed and transparent, you engage actively with the readers/voters/nominees all the way through, you manage it all with humour and aplomb. You’ve kicked it up a few notcheds in professionalism and credibility, and I can only see it getting better.

    Now about the feminist thing. The category was swarmed by Conservatives who wanted to either make a mockery of it by freeping the vote, or force you to boot them off, giving them the opportunity to cry martyr.

    To your credit, you tried to address the issue – you didn’t just ignore it. But as has been repeated endlessly, through the process you elected to follow, one blogger who was clearly eligible got dumped, and one who was clearly not a feminist, and says so, got retained, and won.

    By your definition of “feminism”, Right Girl, Kate and Kathy Shaidle are all “feminists”. So let’s not rely too much on that argument.

    So instead of blaming the folks who think that there was a problem – and there was – convene a group of folks NOW, before the heat builds up for next year’s award and you’re stuck making another ad-hoc decision in mid-contest, under pressure. Enlist the assistance of a couple of credible conservative bloggers PLUS folks like April Reign and JJ to define a workable set of criteria and a process, and enforce it.

    I don’t think I’m exhibiting “poor sportsmanship”. I’m reacting against a semi-successful attempt by the URQs to scuttle an importat category, and I am trying to make the awards even better than they are. I’m on your side here.

  24. December 20, 2008 at 3:37 pm

    Balbulican,

    The thing is comprise and appeals for cooperation have already been tried. Unfortunately, it never works.

  25. December 20, 2008 at 3:47 pm

    Was it tried BEFORE the categories were announced? In other words, were selection criteria established BEFORE nominations were open?

  26. December 20, 2008 at 4:02 pm

    It’s been tried for two years now.

    Last year, somebody asked for a feminist category, others didn’t like the idea at all. A compromise category was created. Before we had the chance to gather feedback (and find out that the compromise category in question was unacceptable), the CBA’s received threats, so we decided not to have a feminist category that year.

    This year, we tried to correct the mistakes of last year by having a feminist category from the get go. Unfortunately, the category came under contention as both progressive and conservative blog were nominated. To try to compromise, we brought in a neutral judge (as I figured people would find it unfair if Saskboy or I judged it because of the events of last year. We also placed an appeal of cooperation with some feminist bloggers, and we were quite soundly rejected.

    So, to be honest, I’m feeling rather… negative about the feminist category right now. I’d like to see it next year, but the question is: is it really worth doing, especially as the community that it tries to highlight emphatically disapproves of it.

  27. December 20, 2008 at 6:38 pm

    Sorry, I will rephrase the question.

    Did you define what a “feminist” blog was BEFORE nominations opened?

  28. December 20, 2008 at 8:29 pm

    Well, this is what I wrote for the nomination page of the feminist category:

    Those blogs that are devoted to gender equality, write about women’s issues, or write from a feminist perspective are eligible for this category.

    It’s also handy to pair that up with this rule

    In order to meet a category’s criteria, 50% of the blog’s postings must meet the requirements outlined in the list of categories below.

    I’ll admit, that’s is probably not that best definition, which is one of the reasons why we got a judge that knew the subject matter at hand.

  29. December 20, 2008 at 10:59 pm

    “poor sportspersonship.”
    I’m surprised that some people didn’t insist I change it to “Sportswomanship” actually. Even though there are a lot of poor sports who are men in this situation, so for simplicity’s sake (and not misogynist reasons I opted for sportsmanship).

    And these people then spell women “womenz”. It’s enough to make my eyes roll right out of my head.

  30. December 21, 2008 at 7:16 am

    BC Dipper, under those criteria, Right Girl and Kathy Shaidle would both be eligible for consideration – they both write about “women’s issues”.

    You tried, I absolutely acknowledge that: and you were victimized by folks whose intention was simply to sabotage the category. But part of what I do for a living is formal evaluation, and one of the golden rules is that you have to define who and what you’re measuring BEFORE you start the process – you CANNOT retrofit an assessment after the horses are out of the gate.

    So I respectfully suggest that you develop clear screen criteria for contentious categories. (This might include the science category, which I note was also invaded by aliens). Use bona fide subject matter experts willing to put their name to the criteria: also involve intelligent Conservative bloggers, who understand what you’re trying to achieve, and what you’re trying to prevent, and who are willing to work with you in good faith. I would suggest Candace and Last Amazon for starters; both smart, honourable Conservative bloggers.

    I reiterate: I think the CBAs are great, I applaud you guys for the tremendous effort, and I think it gets better every year. I’m not making these points out of sour grapes: I’m doing it because I think you’re building something that will matter, and I support that.

  31. December 21, 2008 at 7:21 am

    “I’ll admit, that’s is probably not that best definition, which is one of the reasons why we got a judge that knew the subject matter at hand.”

    No you didn’t.

    And your definition of feminism should have begun and ended with gender equality. Nothing else. No “women’s issues,” which includes the very anti-feminist issues that the Bloody Bellowing Wingnuts of the world are so pleased to spew.

    Sask, when you don’t want to work toward something in a positive manner, you call it names and deride it? That’s very mature. I thought you were better than that.

    But maybe you’re tired. It’s the time of year. Why don’t you move the CBAs to a different season, when you’re not so over-committed to other things, and you can actually spare some brain cells to work efficiently towards a solution with which everyone can agree?

  32. December 21, 2008 at 10:08 am

    “call it names and deride it? ”

    Call what names?

    I agree, next year I think the nominations should be through Dec. into January, with judging done as/before nominations are posted (moderated comments, or preferably a submission form system that automates the posting of polls, and announcement of winners).

  33. December 21, 2008 at 4:26 pm

    And your definition of feminism should have begun and ended with gender equality.

    The thing is, most justifications for having SDA et all tended to use the “gender equaility” terms rather than the “women’s issues terms.”

    And, yes we got a good neutral judge for the category. I mean after all, the people who are disagree with the judge tend to only use to use grammar to discredit the judge, not real arguments.

  34. December 21, 2008 at 4:33 pm

    “I mean after all, the people who are disagree with the judge tend to only use to use grammar to discredit the judge, not real arguments.”

    You’re not listening, are you?

    Yes, your judge cannot write.

    He/she also seems to think that being a stripper means a woman isn’t a feminist. He/she also seems to think that promoting free speech means that a women isn’t a feminist. He/she provided the lamest analysis of economic feminism i’ve ever read.

    Clearly you’re feeling a bit bruised, and a little too sulky to hear what’s being said to you. So I’ll shut up now, and maybe when you cool off you’ll figure out what people are trying to tell you.

    Put your ego aside, acknowledge you screwed up,

  35. December 21, 2008 at 5:18 pm

    No, Balbulican, you misunderstand at what the judge was saying.

    The judge was referring to, with that free/hate speech thing, about the Conservative nominees that fight for “free speech” one day, and then attack Muslims the next. The blogger who used to be a stripper fell into the above category.

    Unless of course, the judge made a mistake in not letting SDA and Blazing Cat Fur et al compete in the poll.

    You must understand what the core of the complaining is all about. A certain in-group is angry that an outsider won 2nd place. That is all, and that is why we got a fair, neutral judge.

  36. December 21, 2008 at 7:01 pm

    “You must understand what the core of the complaining is all about. A certain in-group is angry that an outsider won 2nd place. That is all, and that is why we got a fair, neutral judge.”

    Yeah, goddam broads, eh? Whine, whine, whine.Prob’ly all on the friggin’ rag, right?

    Well, thank God you’re there to explain to me what “the core of the complaining” is all about. As one of the people complaining, I’m extremely grateful. Here I had a completely different impression of what I was angry about. Thanks for setting me straight.

  37. December 21, 2008 at 8:24 pm

    No problem.

  38. December 24, 2008 at 11:48 pm

    I suspect the problem you have pretty much goes with the term “feminist” as that term has become freighted with a lot of culture war baggage.

    What one side wants is what I might call “progressive feminism” which takes as axiomatic that feminism=socialism and that anyone who disagrees with this equation has not a clue about feminism so defined. On the other, and rather larger side, you have a spectrum of women (and a fair number of men) who are egalitarian feminists and believe that objective equality and rights equality are all that can be provided. This side also believes that there are a variety of equally valid choices for women to make about their lives. However, this side accepts the current social and political structure as the matrix in which women are making their choices.

    No matter which way you jump you are going to irritate people. If you jump the egalitarian direction socialist feminists will accuse you of false consciousness (that end of feminism is one of the few places on Earth where that hackneyed phrase still resonates) and if you jump the other way the vast majority of women who are not and never will be “progressive feminists” will tune you out.

    Basically, you’re screwed.

  1. December 19, 2008 at 11:21 pm
  2. December 20, 2008 at 9:58 am
  3. December 20, 2008 at 11:05 am
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: