You might not think you're sexist – until you take a look at your bookshelf

[Liberal_in_LA]

But passive bias is still bias - and it has ripple effects into the broader culture. Is it really so much to ask that we pay attention to what shapes our tastes?


For example, I was riding the subway recently when I noticed my seatmate scrolling through a Twitter feed that looked remarkably like mine. I was tickled to be sitting next to a like-minded person, but as I looked on I noticed there was one thing that seemed to be missing from his newsfeed: women. He was following fantastic and smart men, but still - as far as I could tell, all men.

I got the same uneasy feeling when I listened to a podcast interview with a TV showrunner and writer that I admire. He spoke eloquently about his passions and mentors - and the people whose work he liked most. All men.

I’m sure both of these people are smart, engaged and not deliberately or actively sexist - but when your worldview is solely shaped by men, you are missing out. And like it or not, your taste in music, books, television or art says something about you: it sends a message about what you think is worth your time, what you think is interesting and who you think is smart. So if the only culture you pay attention to is created by men, or created by white people, you are making an explicit statement about who and what is important.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/18/you-might-not-think-youre-a-sexist-until-you-take-a-look-at-your-bookshelf

[haikugal]

1. This has been true since I was in HS...

I had no idea how influenced I was by the surrounding culture. It takes thought and reading, talk and OP's like this, but we can all improve. The difference between then and now is that there are many more women to look to in our culture than before. We need to keep going!

Thanks for the OP...great post!

[Behind the Aegis]

2. Same applies to racism and heterosexism (and a few other -isms).

As someone who is an avid TV viewer and has a husband who is the same, and is an avid movie watcher, I noticed this with people's viewing habits, too. How many books do people have from GLBT writers or about GLBT topics or watch programs/movies with POSITIVE portrayals of GLBT people? What about books/movies/shows about other cultures/countries?

It is a function of the subconscious, IMO, to seek out "similar". It takes more of a conscious effort to change it, and finally let it (searching out "the other&quot be something that easily appeals to you.

[cali]

4. the first LGBT book I read was a novel called The Well of Loneliness

I was around 12 and it had a huge impact on me. It was in my parents' library- which was a pretty amazing place. My much more modest library is well represented by works from LGBT authors and minority authors. I've always sought out different from me when it comes to reading.

[cwydro]

8. I named one of my dogs after the horse in that book.

I read it years ago too. My dog's name was Raftery.

That book made a huge impression on me as a young woman.

[gollygee]

10. +1

totally agree

[closeupready]

31. +1000. My loved ones often don't get why we can't see most films

together, or at least, if given an option, why don't I want to see the latest rom com or Hangover or whatever is currently hot in popular culture. Why I behave like a cat avoiding water when I am out and about.

And I give as much of a shit about their confusion as they give about respecting me and who I am.

Which is zero.

[tishaLA]

69. I personally dislike the idea of "positive" vs "negative" portrayals

I remember when Queer Eye for the Straight Guy started and most people seemed to celebrate the show as a watershed moment. Then came the critiques: it relied too heavily on stereotypes, too many of the guys were really flamboyant, some flirted too aggressively with the straight guys (and this was construed as self-loathing), etc.

Both these opinions came from within the LBGT community, looking at the exact same program, and yet one group saw the portrayal as positive and the other as negative. And for the past few years, the same kinds of opinions have surrounded shows like Modern Family.

[Behind the Aegis]

75. When I said "negative" I was thinking more pedophile, pervert, stalker...

...perpetually suicidal, rapists, and always promiscuous.

I am familiar with the split personality of the GLBT community all too well. It was much the same with Will & Grace with many hailing it as "breakthrough" and others as nothing more than a "minstrel show." Same was true with Queer as Folk.

As stated above, my "negative" was about reinforcing destructive stereotypes. I view positive as roles which are more inclusive, where the gay character is more than just gay, is integral to the plot, and isn't relegated to "best friend of the leading lady" or solely as comic relief.

[JonLP24]

3. Reading too much into his behavior simply on the twitter thing

I used it for awhile quit years ago, I don't know but this seems like assumptions and I have been the receiving end of those all the time and the assumption is always the worst motives

[Sobax]

5. Who and what is important to me or anyone else

Is really our business and nobody else's. People have a right to like what they like.

[morningfog]

16. Of course and that is not the point.

[Sobax]

21. Then what is the point?

I think I speak for most men here when I say I'll buy a book because I'm interested in what's written inside it, not because it was written by a man.

[morningfog]

22. You don't speak for most men.

The point of the article was simply to suggest we take a critical and open look at our personal bookshelves. Not to publish or share it with the world. But to ask ourselves if we are getting limited or fuller perspective in our reading choices. It is as simple as that.

[Sobax]

23. But you do speak for them?

Honestly, I don't know any man who'd refuse to read a good book just because it was written by a woman.

Who have you been talking to?

[morningfog]

29. Where did I say that? What the fuck?

Whatever chip you are carrying on your shoulder has no place here. If you are going to discuss posts with me, read and respond to what I write, not what you are project. Thanks.

[upaloopa]

61. I don't see why you need to judge other people

because of what they want to read. You are way overboard if you ask me. We use to say "get a life" but that is not PC is it!

[morningfog]

63. I never judged anyone for what they want to read.

What are you even talking about?

Did you mean to respond to me?

The dude took offense because he misunderstood the point of the post.

[MicaelS]

111. What if we read for pleasure..

And don't want politics injected into our pleasure?

Reading and listening to music are the great pleasures of my life. I get enough politics coming here. I don't need or like some fucking self-appointed busybody scolding me about my private pleasures. It's not like I am smoking, drinking or farting in the presence of others.

And Lois McMaster Bujold and J. K. Rowling are two of my favorite authors. Not favorite women authors. Favorite authors, period.

[morningfog]

112. Good lord. No one is forcing you to do anything.

So many shoulder chips.

If this article doesn't apply to you, ignore it.

[laundry_queen]

17. Who said they didn't have a right?

However, intelligent people capable of introspection and who care about the type of person they are might be interested in re-examining how their views are being shaped. If you aren't interested in examining your prejudices through what influences you...then don't bother. I really don't get how you took a flying leap into "it's no one's business". Some people appreciate this information.

[Sobax]

20. I already know that I pick books because they interest me

Not because the author is a certain gender or race. It's just not something I pay any attention to. No further introspection is necessary.

And for what it's worth, some of my favorite authors are female. There are no "prejudices" to examine.

[gollygee]

24. The whole point is that, by not paying any attention to it,

people often unknowingly limit themselves in the way the article says. It's a suggestion to start paying attention to it.

[Sobax]

26. In what way am I limiting myself?

As I've said, I'll read anything if it's good and it appeals to me. Over the years, that has included books by women and people of other races and other countries.

[gollygee]

27. The article wasn't written specifically to you

So maybe you specifically aren't limiting yourself. I have no idea. But it's common for people to think of men as neutral and women as different, so books by men about men are just books, and books by women about women are "identity books" and people tend to shy away from them, or even just not notice them. The article has merit.

People are responding to you because your original reply missed the point, not because of your reading choices.

[kcr]

49. If you don't read only books by men, then why are you objecting to the OP? n/t

[Sobax]

52. Well I haven't sat down and worked out exactly what the male-female ratio is

But I'd guess 70-80% of the books I read are written by men, which apparently could mean I'm unconsciously sexist according to Jessica Valenti.

[kcr]

53. Well, yes. That's the point.

It's not conscious. But once it's pointed out, one can either respond by making a conscious effort to search out other authors to diversify their tastes more, or reject the premise as if it isn't possible and remain deliberately ignorant. But once it's been pointed out it's no longer unconscious. It's a choice.

[Sobax]

55. Like most men, it's just not something I consider

Either consciously or unconsciously. If I like the sound of something, I'll read it. I don't care who wrote it.

[kcr]

67. Okay. But the point of the OP is it is something to consider.

The fact that many do not is the problem and why many women and minorities are too often shut out of media.

[Sobax]

68. I don't agree that they are shut out, to be honest

There are many widely respected female authors.

[kcr]

71. But the point of the OP isn't that there are no widely respected female authors

So you think sexism doesn't exist?

[Sobax]

72. I don't think it's preventing talented female authors becoming successful

And if a person happens to prefer books or music written by men, maybe that's just a matter of taste. Not every gender disparity has to be caused by sexism.

[kcr]

73. But if it isn't something you consider, is it possible you're wrong?

That's the point of the article. It's unconscious. Tastes are influenced by many things. Our social circles, our jobs, where we live, our culture. We aren't born with fully formed sensibilities. Making a conscious choice to consider those things is a good thing. I'm not sure how you can claim that you don't do that, yet be confident in your opinion that everything is just peachy.

[Sobax]

74. I accept that our tastes are influenced by our environment

And I'm happy with my tastes. If it means most of my books are written by men, so be it. It doesn't mean there's any sexism involved.

[kcr]

100. A perfect example of what the author was talking about.

You're perfectly happy to not examine why your tastes are how they are. You don't think it means any sexism is involved. You haven't even considered if it might be the case. Because you don't care.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

78. Like most men? When did you do a poll of all men in America? Is it just men in America?

Or in the world?

[Sobax]

80. Men in the Western world

I can't speak for men in some parts of the world who won't even shake a woman's hand.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

83. So you are saying you know that most men in the western world are not at all misogynist?

[Sobax]

85. We're making a bit of a leap here

Is it misogynist now to prefer books that happen to have been written by men?

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

86. I think I have made my point. But my bet is you wont see it.

[Sobax]

87. Well if I was to say no, I don't think most Western men are misogynist

And you disagree, what evidence for that is there? Have you taken a poll of your own? It's just not true in my experience.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

88. You just suggested that making a conscience decision to only read books written by men

would be a reasonable, unbiased position to take. Or that you would prefer books by men.
This is misogyny. This is the definition of misogyny

Because, as a man, you have it built into you, all men, myself included.

I cant seem to find your words that I was sure I saw, I thought you said

"do you mean to say if someone preferred books by men this makes them misogynist?"

I thought I saw that, regardless, why do you think a man born in a misogynist culture WOULD prefer books or music by men?

Think about it for a while.

It's OK to admit all men have these tendencies because they grow up in a misogynist society, which pretty much all societies are, maybe with a couple exceptions.

[Sobax]

89. I didn't say there was anything conscious about my own preference

As I've said, I don't care who wrote a book. It just so happens that most of the stuff I read is written by men. That doesn't mean I hate women, and I don't know how you could make that leap.

What misogynist culture/society are you talking about anyway?

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

91. Did I say you hate women?

We are wasting our time, it is clear USA is a misogynist society, has been since day one.

Many other countries are.

We are also extremely racist.

All men born in an extremely misogynist society, as USA clearly is, have built into them misogyny.

all men, myself included

Some may work at not being so to the point that they almost never are, but it is an undeniable reality of human nature.

The mere mention that you, personally, might have the characteristics that you are CERTAIN to have by virtue of living in this soceity, brings out the denial and arguing, I get it....trust me

[Sobax]

93. How is it misogynist exactly?

[laundry_queen]

102. Oh lawd

[jonno99]

103. You wrote: "All men born in an extremely misogynist society"

In my experience all blanket statements tend to be incorrect...

[kcr]

109. Wait a minute. Are some men hatched out of eggs? n/t

[Orrex]

153. What happens if an intelligent person re-examines how his or her views are shaped...

and yet he or she determines that his or her views are correct and valid even if they conflict with yours?


Is the hope that people will engage in introspection, or that they will revise their views?

[Skittles]

165. why is it an either/or

chances are very high that engaging in introspection WILL lead to a revision of views

[Orrex]

176. It isn't an either/or, which is my point

It's entirely possible that each of the two parties could have views that are incompatible with one another's and yet still be wholly valid. But the way the matter is presented here, it comes across as a statement that one party's views are inherently wrong and must be revised.

Conveniently, the party making that assertion appears to think that further introspection is not required, or that such introspection would only confirm prior conclusions.

[Skittles]

181. you just completely negated your point

you act as if introspection is a one-time deal, not an on-going process

[Orrex]

194. Not at all.

I'm simply asserting that all introspection won't lead to the same conclusion, and what are we to make of that difference?

[Skittles]

164. it is AMAZING how many people miss this point

in some cases, OVER AND OVER

[Orrex]

177. It's pretty clearly a passive/aggressive insult, though

It addresses "intelligent people" who are "capable of introspection" and interested in improving themselves. Ergo, anyone who doesn't accept the assertion must be unintelligent, incapable of introspection and/or uninterested in self-improvement.

If the person says "I'm intelligent, introspective and eager to improve, but I don't accept that my library demonstrates me to be sexist," what might one conclude, and on what basis?

[Skittles]

179. um, no, that's not what it is, not at all

NOWHERE have I asserted I am more intelligent.......I know even intelligent people can miss the point.......honestly, forget it.......just not worth it

[Orrex]

193. I think perhaps I was unclear.

I was referring not to your statement but to the statement in the post to which you replied:

However, intelligent people capable of introspection and who care about the type of person they are might be interested in re-examining how their views are being shaped.

That's the passive-aggressive insult. If a man had posted that in reply to a woman, he'd have rightly been called out for "mansplaining."

There's an undeniable air of superiority in that post, effectively stating "if you were intelligent, Sobax, you wouldn't be afraid of a little introspection." This assumes that Sobax hasn't already bothered with introspection, or else surely he'd have reached a different conclusion.

It's a dog whistle.

[MisterP]

37. it's The Guardian: "33 new ways to flagellate yourself about how you never suspected

Last edited Sun Aug 9, 2015, 08:57 PM - Edit history (1)

you were secretly in the BNP"

handy distraction from real issues I'd say

and my shelf is pretty female

[kcr]

50. You don't think it's a real issue that people often don't think about how their tastes are shaped?

So how should one go about framing it if they do?

[Sobax]

57. Apparently Jessica Valenti in particular already has a reputation for this kind of thing

Even the Guardian commenters seem sick of her.

[MisterP]

64. oh, it IS Valenti, I should've checked

she's like the ones who say transwomen are "infiltrating" women: I mean, are they reporting back to some Secret Men's Council?

[Sobax]

70. Julie Burchill was another one if I recall

Nasty piece of work. I think they eventually got rid of her.

[hifiguy]

173. Burchill was already perfectly ghastly when she started as a music reviewer

in New Musical Express back in the 1970s. Like a rotting fish, she did not improve with time. As Capote once said (unfairly IMO) about Kerouac, her "work" is not writing, it's barely typing.

[Skittles]

106. you again

the point just sails right over your head, just like it would for a teabagger

[lovemydog]

6. If you look at your bookshelf and there's no books,

you just might want to read a book.

[kentauros]

15. Unless you have a Kindle or a Nook!

Or several external hard-drives, for that matter

[lovemydog]

120. True dat, my friend.

Are you reading any good books lately? I'm still reading a book called Black Against Empire. It's about the Black Panther Party, a riveting read. Next I'm going to read Going Clear, about scientology (the hbo documentary was based on that book). And I always have some fun reading too, like Simpsons comics. What are you reading these days?

[kentauros]

130. I have a backlog of books to read,

most of them on my Kindle

I was going to go back to one I haven't finished ("Beyond Past Lives" by Mira Kelley) during lunch today. One book I bought recently for my Kindle was because I couldn't find my print copy at home was "Boomerangs: How to Make and Throw Them" by Bernard S. Mason. I pulled out my one wooden pinwheel-type boomerang while my gf was here last month. We had some fun with the cardboard ones, but she wouldn't try the wooden version as it does come back to you, while still spinning. It's pretty lightweight, so no fear of getting injured

[lovemydog]

133. Ah, you're like me. You like to read one serious book

and another totally awesome fun book at the same time.

Now for some humor. Make sure you read the sequel, Beyond Beyond Past Lives, in which Kelley goes so far beyond past lives that they are now in the future!

[kentauros]

136. Actually, she covers "future" lives in "Beyond Past Lives"

Because she went beyond the past

Basically, it falls into the concept of simultaneous time, that all lives are happening simultaneously, there is no past, present, or future, just now. Mind blown yet?

I've got a good sprinkling of reference books on my Kindle, too, including:

The Ultimate Bar Book
Decorative Knots
On Food And Cooking
The Encyclopedia of Spirits
The Encyclopedia of Mystics, Saints, and Sages
Gaining Competency with GIS
AutoCAD: Secrets Every User Should Know
Arabic Geometric Pattern and Design

Sure am glad to have them handy at all times versus having to use a dolly to carry their print-book equivalents with me

[lovemydog]

137. LOL, nice.

Yes, I like living in the present!

I like the Kindle too. I had one a few years ago and loved it. It was the cheapest one they had at the time and I stupidly didn't get the one that was easiest to download stuff from my home computer. Gave it to a friend who likes it. I assume there's a better and cheaper one now that I can just easily plug in to my mac and download books pretty easily?

[kentauros]

138. I don't know the different models any more.

I have an older "keyboard" type, that has a little qwerty keyboard at the bottom with the navigation buttons. I've used it to log into DU at wifi hotspots (because I don't own a laptop.) It works fairly well for that, but it does take up room that would otherwise go to making the screen bigger.

A friend has one of the Paperwhite versions and he likes it. His only complaint is that the screen-lighting tech doesn't truly cover the whole screen. The e-ink technology can't be backlit, like with LCDs, but that's a good thing; you don't get eyestrain from looking at a brightly-lit screen all the time.

~~~

Been skimming the thread here, and may have to read the article. Because, just from memory, most of the genres I like are lopsided in the sexuality of the majority of authors. That is, most of my cookbooks are written by women, most of the science fiction books I have were written by men, most of the professional cooking manuals and magazines were/are written by men, the few romance books I've got were all written by women, and most of the spiritual books were written by women. What's interesting with regards to the spiritual authors is for those that have radio shows, they are often lamenting the lack of male callers and listeners.

So, basically, there are many major genres and fields that are lopsided in the sexuality of their authors. And if I were to attempt to balance the books I own and will buy to better represent the opposite sex, I'd probably end up severely limiting my choices just to accomplish that. I'm not going to do that. Content is more important for whatever reason I'm buying/reading a particular book

[lovemydog]

139. Cool. Interesting point about the sexuality of authors.

I actually try and balance my reading. I love Naomi Klein, have recently read books by Elaine Brown, Angela Davis & Assata Shakur. I don't read a lot of science fiction but I've loved some stuff by Madelaine L'Engel & Margaret Atwood. You sound like a voracious reader like me. I usually read nonfiction & humorous stuff. I can speed read and like doing that sometimes too. My great aunt told me that when you have a book you're having a conversation with a friend. I like hearing from different kinds of friends. I don't think the author of that article was speaking about you, 'cause you like reading all kinds of stuff too.

[kentauros]

140. Honestly, I'm a slow reader.

That's partly why I have so many unfinished books on my Kindle

I used to read a lot more, and mostly science fiction. But also comic books, the non-superhero varieties, mostly autobiographical types, like American Splendor, but also funny adult comics, like Xxxenophile

I'd probably not want to meet/talk to the author of that article, though. I don't truly get her point, as it's pretty meaningless when you're more focused on pertinent content than getting into the author's head and body. I'd say the latter is really only important if you're reading their biography

I like your great aunt's quote. Seems like I've heard that before, but it's still a good one. It's also how I tend to write when I do work on my fiction (hopefully, it will pull me back to it soon, and I can finish enough to send to an editor...)

[jonno99]

114. Good one! Thanks for the smile!

[lovemydog]

119. Glad you smiled,

Welcome here jonno99. Have fun!

[1939]

7. Book burning party!!!!!!

Everyone has to burn their copy of the collected works of Shakespeare to show we aren't bigots.

[gollygee]

11. Oh yeah, that's totally what it says

It just suggests adding in some things written by women, people of color, etc. Not avoiding and certainly not burning things written by white men.

[laundry_queen]

18. That's what you got out of this?

Maybe the article is too advanced for you - perhaps you could start with a course on reading comprehension.

[LanternWaste]

38. I imagine it can often be difficult to accurately infer a simple point.

I imagine it can often be difficult to accurately infer a simple point. It's much more convenient for the simple minded to draw a spurious conclusion and pretend that instead, is the actual point.

Not that I would ever allege you to inaccurately infer, draw a spurious conclusion, pretend a fictitious point or are simple minded. As of course, you are guilty of absolutely none of the above...

But wouldn't it be easier (and much less guilty of being a fire hazard) to both keep your collection of Shakespeare, and enlarge your library with authors of various demographics? However, should you desire to burn books, that is (in addition to being illustrative) your choice.

[bettyellen]

44. If you're so desperately afraid of having to prove you're not a bigot-

Some self examination might not be a bad thing.

[Liberal_in_LA]

98. oh stop it!

[Oktober]

9. This person is reaching...

... And trying really hard to take offense.

[cyberswede]

28. I don't think they're offended. Just suggesting people could be more aware.

[Monk06]

113. How about someone being aware of someone else reading their twitter feed over their shoulder on the

subway. How's that for awareness.

The latest generation of feminists are no better than the Red Guards during Mao's Cultural Revolution. Political activism has devolved into waving the little red book in the air, putting the cone hat on the bourgeois revisionist males and drag them to the public square for a dose of reeducation.

Feminism used to be a call for fairness and equality. In reality it has mutated into an attempt to dominate public discourse and push all men including male feminist allies off the train. Or is that subway?

[cyberswede]

115. You seem upset.

[Monk06]

116. I am upset. I'm tired of being called an endemic rapist because I was born a male. Rape Culture

is the latest polemical fad in American Universities. Title IX lawsuits are multiplying like dandelions and are being used as a cudgel sew a scarlet letter on the chest every male on campus.

The last three most publicized charges by women of rape, two involving gang rape, were based on out right lies. The women in question were not raped and used the media and university anti discrimination policies to target their victims. Sorry, I mean bring their rapists to justice. Forgot men can never be victims.

Rape or sexual assault as they call it in Canada is a criminal offense and should always lead to a criminal investigation not an administration tribunal conducted by academics who have careers to defend.

Now we are being told that we are passively sexist regardless of any attempt to agree with feminists on issues because we have male authors and artists in our libraries, music and art collections.

[cyberswede]

117. The article merely suggests we might want to look at what shapes our world view

Laundry Queen says it better:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026692695#post17

[Monk06]

118. Valenti is not just indulging in an exercise of gentle persuasion that we should be more reflective

about the subtle bias in our literary choices. She makes no bones about what she thinks of the nature of 'Man'

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/27/why-are-some-men-so-angry

Note the set up is a quote from Margret Atwood, "Men are afraid of being embarrassed. Women are afraid of being killed."

As you say I seem to be angry, well more miffed actually. According to Atwood and Valenti my anger makes me a potential murderer because I'm a man.

What makes me angry, sorry miffed, is women who make these sorts of specious generalizations and then pretend to be puzzled when men get angry at the insult. But never mind, I'm a man and the only way I can deal with embarrassment is beat the crap out of someone. Usually a woman.

This may seem off topic but it is part of an ongoing theme that men are weak, biased and violent because it's in their nature but they can rise above this manifest destiny if they change their reading habits and read more women's books.

How does supporting the careers of comfortably well off women writers change any of the fundamental problems in society? The most important problem with society is not the fate of professional women's careers. It's the the fact the the world is controlled by a few hundred anonymous billionaires.

[jonno99]

128. +1000

[bettyellen]

190. Lol at comfortably well off women writers. Many women could not be published with a woman's name....

So bullshit to your theory that they are just fine, and we should worry about YOUR bottom line first.
You seem really upset that women don't know their place and discuss things that bother you. Well boo fucking hoo. The conversation is better off without your petty resentments.

[Monk06]

195. I'm just as entitled to wallow in my resentments as Emma Sulkowitz and I'm not trying to get anyone

thrown in jail.

Oh and many women can't get published because they have a woman's name.

Why don't the try applying to this list of dedicated women's publishing houses.

Aunt Lute Books (San Francisco, California, 1982–present)[1]
CALYX Press, Inc. (Corvallis, Oregon, 1976-present)[2]
Cleis Press (Berkeley, California, 1980–present)[3]
The Crossing Press, currently general publishing imprint of Crown Publishing Group, historically a women's press (U.S.A., 1963–present)
Elly Blue Publishing (Portland, Oregon, 2010-present)
The Feminist Press (New York City, New York, 1970–present)[4]
Magnetewan Publishing (Vancouver, Canada, 2010-present)
Modjaji Books (Cape Town, South Africa, 2007–present) [5]
HerBooks Feminist Press (Santa Cruz, California, 1984Grizel Niven2002)
Honno (Aberystwyth, Wales, 1986–present)[6]
Inanna Publications (Toronto, Canada, 1972–present)
Linen Press Books (Edinburgh, Scotland, 2007–present)[7]
Kitchen Table: Women of Color Press (New York City, New York, 1980–?)
Pandora Press (London, UK)
Persephone Books (London, UK)
Press Gang Publishers (Vancouver, Canada, 1970–2002)
Red Letter Press (Seattle, Washington, 1990–present)[8]
Second Story Press (Toronto, Canada, 1988-)[9]
Shameless Hussy Press (Berkeley, California, 1969–89)
Sister Vision: Black Women & Women of Colour Press (Toronto, Canada, 1985-)[10]
Spinifex Press (Melbourne, Australia, 1991–present)[11]
Sumach Press (Toronto, Canada, 2001–present)[12]
Virago Press (London, UK, 1973–present)[13]
The Women's Press (London, UK, 1978–present)[14]
Women Unlimited (an associate of Kali for Women; New Delhi, India, 1985–present)[15]
Zubaan (an imprint of Kali for Women; New Delhi, India

[bettyellen]

196. Wallow away, forgetting actual history and supplying pointless lists in it's stead.

Don't reflect for a moment on your resentments toward feminists. Have fun with that!

[Monk06]

197. I have no problem with feminists as long as they are intellectually honest about the progress

that women have made in academia since I graduated 30 years ago and cease with the simplistic agit prop antics of the Title IX culture warriors like Emma Sulkowicz and her friends. She graduated to the other day so hopefully she will go on to do something useful.

[closeupready]

129. Agreed. I've begun puting most of them here on ignore.

Some really damaged people who are seeking to get outraged over petty stuff. Tediousness. (Or perhaps that expression, 'consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds...').

[gollygee]

12. This might be more societal than individual

A year or two (I think) ago, I remember reading a list of books from some publication or another that were supposedly the best books of the year - must reads. The list of 10 books had 4 books by women. I was suprised by how many of the comments said the list was too woman-centered. Fewer than half of the books were by women, yet people saw the list as woman-centered. Only one of the books was by a person of color - who was also one of the women - and I didn't see any comments at all about the list being too white-centered.

[Nye Bevan]

13. Anyone who has all the Harry Potter books gets lots of brownie points in this regard.

Female author, non-US-centric viewpoint, and JK Rowling herself said that Dumbledore is gay.

[frylock]

35. *raises hand*

I also really enjoyed The Cuckoo's Calling.

[Nye Bevan]

36. Fantastic, and The Silkworm too.

I'm really looking forward to the next Cormoran book.

[frylock]

39. I just learned a couple of weeks ago about The Silkworm..

I'm about midway through DFW's 'Infinite Jest', and I'm going to pick up The Silkworm once I'm finished. Cormoran is cool!

[Retrograde]

90. I even enjoyed The Casual Vacancy

because it was about something I knew nothing about - small town British life.

[hifiguy]

142. I absolutely loved the Potter books.

The pickiest reader I know - she's a history Ph. D. who spoke five languages - told me I HAD to read them. She was right. She also insisted I read Robertson Davies, Tom Sharpe and Wodehouse. She's 4 for 4. Loved 'em all.

[mercuryblues]

198. A her publisher's request

JK Rowling used her initials to avoid the gender bias. A fiction book written by a female author would not sell as well to young males.

In The Cuckoo's Calling, she chose a male pseudonym to hide her identity entirely. She wanted the book to be separate from the HP series. It is also assumed the male name was chosen to boost sales out of the gate.

[One_Life_To_Give]

14. Now I'll have to ask On-Semi, Int'l Rectifier etc. who wrote their Catalogs (male or female)

Is the PNP or NPN inherently Male or Female? What about MOSFET's and IGBT's?

While it certainly doesn't help that some field's are male dominant. I would hesitate to use a term with negative connotation for someone displaying an interest in such a field. It can contribute to a sexist world view but that doesn't make someone a sexist.

[hifiguy]

143. That is about as nerdy a post as I can imagine.

[RobinA]

19. Maybe When I

exhaust the supply of books that interest me I will be able to start reading stuff that doesn't on its face. I am a white female and my bookshelf probably leans toward white male because I read a lot of nonfiction in areas of history and politics - areas not dominated by female writers. Psychology is my field and that leans somewhat more female. Frankly, in nonfiction I don't pay much attention to the gender of the writer. I tend to prefer, although not exclusively, male fiction writers. Has more to do with what different people write about, which may losely fall along gender lines.

One thing I don't read is "identity" books, no matter who writes them. This may be a reason my bookshelf tends to be more male.

[99Forever]

25. ...

[closeupready]

30. I attempted to start a discussion about sexism in sports,

but was shouted down by many here claiming I was being antagonistic, or that the discussion ITSELF was unnecessary because of the OBVIOUSNESS of why things were as they were.

But K&R anyway, as I think this oped is interesting.

[bettyellen]

42. Oh- must have been your "tone"- right?

[closeupready]

51. I want not to hijack this thread, but here's the post:

"Why are sports teams segregated by gender? Discuss."

If one can be any more antagonistic than that, I fail to see how.

[bettyellen]

105. Ah, I saw that you ignored all the reasonable replies and went on to insist it was sexism, lol.

[Bluenorthwest]

32. Oh my God, it applies to all minorities as well. Example, it's obvious from the posts about LGBT

issues from many straight posters that they have never, ever read any LGBT political books or speeches, they have no idea what, for example, Harvey Milk actually talked about nor what ACT UP did and worse, they don't want to know. They want to assume. So that's what they do. Smugly and with great certainty, they assume.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

81. +1000000000000000000000

[FLPanhandle]

33. I read books based on topics, not authors

I usually read history and non-fiction. I doubt I could even name 6 of the authors of the hundreds of books I read.

How does the history of the building of the Panama Canal change if the author has/doesn't have a penis?

[gollygee]

34. History books can be different depending on who writes them

I don't know about the Panama Canal, but maybe if it were written by someone from Panama, it would be different than if written by someone from America. Certainly a book about slavery in the US or the African American civil rights movement might be different if written by an African American. A book about the history of the southwestern US might be different if writen by a Latino author. And lots of books might be different if written by women. I also enjoy non-fiction and some books about historical events or eras ignore or don't much discuss what was happening to women during that time. It is possible that a woman might include more about women's experiences if she were writing the book.

But at the same time I get your point. If you're looking for a book about a subject, what will attract you is obviously if the book is about that subject. The OP is probably more relevant in regard to fiction, though as I wrote above, I do see some relevance even in non-fiction.

[LanternWaste]

40. As history is not static, but repeatedly and consistently interpreted.

It can be as enlightening to read, compare and contrast an early-twentieth century history of US slavery by a white professor and a black professor (however, I do realize that both enlightenment and an additional perspective can be a real drag for the dogmatic)

As history is not static (as anyone who alleges to read history would know), but repeatedly and consistently interpreted. Who is interpreting is just as critical as what and how the interpretation may vary from one another.

[bettyellen]

41. Historians have consistantly downplayed the accomplishments of women and POC

Last edited Wed May 20, 2015, 01:18 AM - Edit history (1)

As well as touted the "good intentions" of colonialists and painted the white man as a savior for centuries. The texts in our high schools are often skewed to this POV. Every month is white dude history month in America.

[gollygee]

43. This is a ridiculously good point

I was thinking of books I've read where I've felt the authors had good intentions but still missed the experiences of women and people of color. But YEAH I totally didn't even think of this issue, and it's huge.

[FLPanhandle]

45. All true

I also enjoy reading war accounts from the losing side (winners write history) such as the Confederate soldiers, Japanese, Germans, etc.

[bettyellen]

46. It's stuck me as funny how people even here assume that non-fiction= accurate portrayal of history..

Wowsa- that is a huge assumption!

[hifiguy]

144. Which is why everyone should read Howard Zinn.

If I ever taught a US History course, "People's History" would be required reading.

[bettyellen]

145. Great book! But I am puzzled by so many being offended by asking to just pause and reflect about

The choices in the media they consume.
I wonder if they are afraid to find out their choices have been heavily biased. It happens to good people!

[hifiguy]

147. As I posted downthread, I just follow my interests.

I generally read nonfiction, and my recent reading has included Stephen Kinzer, Greg Palast, Nomi Prins and Naomi Klein as well as Brian Greene's books on theoretical physics. I dig into particular topics and only consider the writer's ability and credibility.

For some reason I don't know the fiction I read is generally British - Wodehouse, Patrick O'Brian's sea stories, the Harry Potter books, R.F. Delderfield, a couple of historical novelists, and Robertson Davies, who is Canadian.

[bettyellen]

148. Well it sounds like you're pretty well rounded but I don't doubt that there are some

Who blindly turn away from anything written by a woman. Like there a stigma or annoyance factor at anything women have to say. (and there are women, for sure who ignore anything not chick-lit, which is kind of sad).
My favorite advice columnist - when advising men having a very hard time relating to women-
offered up the advice to explore media created by women, to get used to being exposed to a different point of view sometimes- and to get accustomed to the idea of women as valuable and complex creators as worthy of being known as any man. It really could only help some respect and build rapport with women, instead of thinking of us as odd creatures existing only to be their companions.
I've met loads of men who have no idea how to talk to a woman like she is a complicated human being, and I gotta wonder how they got there. Interesting topic, anyway.

[hifiguy]

149. A female friend - the wife of a now-late friend of mine,

with a Ph D in history and the pickiest reader I know, insisted that I read Davies, the Potter books and Wodehouse. Loved 'em all. I wouldn't bite on James Joyce, though. Joyce was too hard to get through back in college when I had to read him.

[bettyellen]

169. Davies sounds like something I would like- thank you! And here is where

I admit my own bias- cannot read anything that every single person at work won't STFU about. Also I'm not much into fantasy stuff with a zillion characters that will never ever end! Reminds me too muchnof LoTR in high school.
Thanks for he Davies rec though. Sounds promising!

[hifiguy]

171. He has been called Canada's greatest "man of letters"

He's sharp, witty, a remarkable observer of the human condition and blends in a little magical realism now and then. Uses language beautifully as well.

He's well worth reading. I'd start (and in fact started) with the Deptford Trilogy and wing it from there. I wound up reading all of his fiction and I am not a big fiction reader.

[bettyellen]

172. I was thinking the Cornish trilogy- which one starts off better?

[hifiguy]

174. Cornish is lighter in tone, IIRC

but it's hard to go wrong with Davies. Enjoy!

[bettyellen]

175. Will definitely check him out- thank you greatly!

[bettyellen]

182. Wow- can you imagine what kind of troglodyte would get so offended by my post

That it was auto removed. Lol, this is why I learned to regret using a woman's name on the net.
Gotta be one of those people who never ever wants to hear what a woman has to say, LOL!

[hifiguy]

184. How that post of yours could inspire a troll is quite beyond me.

MIRT does an amazing job. They're so good now they can nuke the trolls after only one or two posts.

I find it easier to talk to women than men about ideas and always have, with a few exceptions in grad school. My PhD friend and I always chat about books, movies and ideas. I've always preferred female counselors as well. But I am not a guy who is bothered in the least or afraid of his feminine side.

[bettyellen]

185. I wish I knew what the troll said, lol. for some reason people really open up to me and I've

Listened to a lot of people tell me their fears and struggles. I think people find it very cathartic.
My mom had the same talent, I guess it's just about being- and really listening- in the moment.
I only really tune out when people do that shallow recitation of what they have (very literally) been doing, buying and watching. But there are a lot of great stories and things to learn, if you just listen for them.

[The2ndWheel]

47. The important thing is, people are reading

[Beaverhausen]

48. My book and CD collection are mainly female

I'm female for the record.

[FLPanhandle]

56. Was that done on purpose?

Do you pick books because the authors are female, or are the topics/stories you are interested in just happen to be written by women?

In other words do you buy books because of the authors sex?

[upaloopa]

54. Geez, are we to the point we criticize other

people's choice in what they look at on their phone? Intrude much ?

[ProfessorGAC]

58. My Bookshelf Is Loaded With. . .

. . .chemistry, mathematics, economics, finance, and organizational structure/behavior text books.

Don't think this applies to me too much.

[KittyWampus]

122. as a purely intellectual exercise you might note how many books are written by women-

If the majority are by men, one might posit that women are under-represented in those fields and then ask why that might be.

Because women inherently don't gravitate towards chemistry, math, economics, finance?

Because women are systemically discouraged from entering those fields?

Because women who do go into those fields are not receiving same support?

My post isn't intended to take a dig at you or anyone.

It's just a plea to look beyond the surface reality and see if maybe there is more going on.

[ProfessorGAC]

123. I Get Your Point, But I'll Pass

Chemistry is chemistry, and math is math. It is inherently dispassionate.

Now, the econ books; i buy your POV.

[KittyWampus]

125. Well, just so you know I wasn't labeling you sexist. More that society is and can influence

what fields women go into and how well they do there.

Now I am remembering a Barbie doll with pull string whose voice box said "Math class is tough".

Have a good day!

[ProfessorGAC]

135. Fair Enough

And i didn't infer any name calling from your post earlier. So, no worries.

Clearly, you're right about occupational biases in many fields.

[el_bryanto]

59. It's worth considering

Sexist is a strong word; but it's worth considering engaging with a range of authors and creators.

Bryant

[gollygee]

77. Sexism and racism don't have to be strong words

There are MRAs and skinheads, but there's also a base level of racism and sexism that are just part of our culture that we aren't always aware of. This is talking about that kind of sexism - allowing the culture to creep into your reading list without being aware of it. Opening our eyes to it is the best way to combat it, because it's so based on being a cultural norm and not being obvious.

Sometimes, when people here at DU talk past each other, that seems to be the place where communication isn't happening. One side hears a word ending in -ism and think they're being called horrible, and the other side is just trying to point out a part of our culture and society that we might not be noticing.

[el_bryanto]

92. I understand where you are coming from

I try to be charitable about language and assume that nothing offensive is intended. Those words are used in a many different ways, even here at DU. We are all swimming in racism and sexism, that's certainly true. That said, we are also, particularly if we participate here, conditioned to see racism and sexism as evils - awful things that shouldn't be allowed to endure. And sometimes they are used to seize the rhetorical high ground.

Bryant

[haikugal]

94. A personal example...

A woman of color stopped by when I was out in the yard working. She introduced herself and asked if I could take a free horse her friend couldn't afford to keep anymore as she had lost her job. I wished I could but I had two Cushings horses and with my illness was having difficulty keeping up with the work and cost...

We proceeded to talk about families we knew in common (there are very few people of color in this area) and I don't know some peoples last names so had to go by discription and where they lived.

I said "mixed family" as part of a discription. I should have said blended family because it was a better, more accurate description. She didn't blink but I've regretted it ever since. On reflection it was my own cultural bias that caused that. I was using mixed race family as a description by way of identification. As it happens we know people in common. I hope we can get past the need to use race as an identifier. I'm working on it.

I never went to school with anyone who wasn't white. When we moved here over 30 years ago there were even fewer people of color than now. I have no prejudice consciously but can be awkward do to lack of experience.

I did work with a lot of people of color when I worked for the state in Harrisburg, so I was able to learn.

I try to overcome my background but it's a continuing process. My son is much further along in this than I am due to his experiences. My father was a terrible bigot and my mother was too. The thing that was odd was they were bigoted about different people and things that reflected where they grew up. We as a culture have a long way to go. That can be applied all over the world.

[Behind the Aegis]

82. The first sentence is much better.

"Passive bias". That word, IMO, describes the situation much better. Sexism is usually considered more active and overt, with microagressions being less active and not overt. When we surround ourselves with the "same", it becomes very difficult to understand, or even have compassion for the "other" because we can't understand their point of view, which is completely unfamiliar to us. When we work to understand another person's POV it helps move us past compassion onto empathy. It is the difference between understanding a person's hurt and feeling it yourself.

[KittyWampus]

126. Very good point. Thanks for that. Passive bias. I'd prefer subconscious bias but that's cause

I tend to look into psychological factors and weight them more heavily than most on this board.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

60. I read books because they're well writtin, informative, amusing, dramatic, etc.

The gender, nationality, ethnicity, of the author is a a matter of indifference to me.

[Quantess]

62. This is very true, but only if your collections are extremely lopsidedly male.

If your collections are only slightly lopsided, then that's really pretty balanced on your part, considering that most of what gets promoted is male dominated. It is understandable if your book and music and art collections are proportionate to what is out there on the market.

But it gives you something to think about!

[tishaLA]

65. Sorry, but that's entirely too facile

I teach literature and women's studies at a fine university. If you looked at my bookshelf, you would find a good number of books about feminist theory and sexuality, but the vast preponderance of my books are written by the dreaded dead white men. Is there a contradiction here? No. It doesn't matter that dead white men wrote so many of the books on my shelf, but in how I encounter those books and the questions I ask of them. And I read them as someone invested in constructions of subjectivity, including questions of gender, sexuality, and race, not as a passive recipient of knowledge.

[MisterP]

76. "passive recipient"? that, plus "massive desperation" is Valenti in a nutshell

[hfojvt]

66. Is it sexist if I have "Brother John" and "Father Huntington"?

Two books by Vida Dutton Scudder.

But yeah, most of my favorite authors are male - Isaac Asimov, Kurt Vonnegut, Poul Anderson, Clifford Simak, John Brunner, Douglas Adams, Roger Zelazny, Dean Koontz. I think all of them are white men too.

"It says something about you."

Really? People are supposed to go around checking out the gender or race of authors before they read something?

I am not making an explicit statement at all, not unless I deliberately decide that I am not going to read books by women and minorities BECAUSE they are written by women and minorities. No Ursula LeGuin for me. No Harry Potter. Better look for a jacket photo to make sure Isaac Asimov and Poul Anderson are not black.

Damn, I screwed up. Turns out S.E. Hinton is female. Here I thought it was written by Pony BOY!!!

[geek tragedy]

79. I would say the bookshelf may reflect society's perisistent biases moreso

than the reader's biases.

Unfortunately many subjects have been dominated by male writers such that if one wants to have them on their bookshelves, it's going to be male writers taking up that space, even if the subject matter (e.g. ornithology) is gender-neutral.

[LittleBlue]

84. What are people supposed to do if they find their bookshelves dominated by one gender?

Buy random books to even the score? Jesus. How do people go through life thinking like this?

Content is all that matters. My book buying decisions are based on genre, written reviews and review scores.

Some genres are dominated by one gender. Those readers shouldn't feel bad about liking their genre. Fwiw I can think of about 12 women authors on my bookshelf off the top of my head. But my reading is mostly history, economics, classics, sci-fi, and fantasy, so I probably have a greater number of men.

[kcr]

101. Why would they have to be random?

You don't think there's a possibility you could find some you'd like?

[Skittles]

108. it's strange how the point can be so completely missed on a progressive board

[LittleBlue]

152. The point isn't missed

Disagreement isn't the same as misunderstanding. I won't make the author's gender or race criteria for book buying, that's all. Politicizing personal taste is touchy. No one wants to have their book shelf judged politically correct or incorrect

[Skittles]

158. you missed it again

[LittleBlue]

162. Interesting

It fascinates me how people believe an opinion is so true that it should be obvious to anyone, therefore anyone who disagrees must be misunderstanding the point rather than simply disagreeing.

[Skittles]

163. triple!!!

[LittleBlue]

166. For what it's worth

When one person is making an attempt to engage another after being called wrong , and the other is making flippant one-word replies in response, refusing to explain why that person is wrong, it makes the flippant one look like he/she cannot defend his/her position. Similar to super religious types, really

It must be rough seeing a progressive board roundly reject the article's assertion, and a much more progressive nation like Britain also reject it in the comments section, readers of the most progressive major paper in Britain. That gives me satisfaction.

Goodbye

[Skittles]

167. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

when people don't get it, I lose interest quickly....by the way, I spent a great deal of my childhood in England

over and OUT because this is BORING

[LittleBlue]

151. I like good books

That is the only motivation I have to read books on my free time. I'm not about to pass on the best looking book and choose another just because the author is a certain gender or race.

It will never influence by buying decision, no matter what

[romanic]

95. Who cares?

As long as people are reading, good for them.

[bigwillq]

96. I am male. Read mostly fiction crime thrillers

The authors are pretty split between the two sexes. I do like a few of the authors a lot, and will buy each book they write. Really never gave much thought to buying books based on gender. I just buy what I like. Sometimes they're male authors, sometimes female.

[hifiguy]

97. I read where my interests lead me.

Lately that has been lots of books on theoretical physics as well as a couple of Nomi Prins' books, some Palast, Kinzer, and the most recent Naomi Klein. Couldn't care less who writes good books and never consider anything but the author's writing ability and credibility. I overwhelmingly read non-fiction.

[LWolf]

99. I haven't gone through my

5,000 or so titles to count titles in sub categories based on gender, race, or sexual orientation, but I can say without hesitation that there are many great authors, men and women, on my shelves; that there are characters from a diverse variety of backgrounds, ethnicities, etc.; and that there are books with gay protagonists as well as supporting characters. I don't think I've got a transgender character. I have a transgender niece, though, so I wouldn't hesitate to include them on my shelves.

Mentors? In my (long) life time, ONE was a man. The rest were women.

People whose work I like most? What kind of work?

I have to admit that men are definitely in the majority when it comes to music I like to listen to.

I have to say though, that I've never really stopped to take inventory before reading this. It's a good thing to think about.

[Violet_Crumble]

127. When it comes to music, I've got the bases covered....

The Pixies are one of my favourite bands. And Sonic Youth. Though I think Sonic Youth did display some gender bias by not name-dropping any females (apart from a fleeting mention of Superchunk) when they did Screaming Skull...

[kentauros]

132. But, do you have the basses covered, too?

[Travis_0004]

104. So if my friend reccomends a book, I have to find out the sex of the author first?

I've been reccomended books before, and said it sounded interesting without even knowing who wrote it.

I guess I should ask who the author is first, and if it was man, then say "I'm not interested"

I think it would be a lot easier to just find what sounds interesting, and read it (or watch it, or listen to it)

If its all white men, so be it. If its all black women, thats ok too.

Right now I'm reading a book by Michio Kaku. Even if the name didn't ring a bell, you could guess he is Japanese. I don't see how that matters. What matters is he is a great writer.

[GoneOffShore]

107. The comments section is so Brit.

And the author is so earnest.

It is to laugh.

[Monk06]

110. She's been spending too much time reading Griselda Pollock. Yes the world would be a better place

Ms Valenti if we all had your thoughts and read only the authors you find interesting.

Oh and definitely no male authors because women are more compassionate caring and inclusive than men. Except when they are excluding men.

[The2ndWheel]

121. Don't put the author's name or picture on books or articles anymore

[KittyWampus]

124. IMO, article errs in saying "YOU" are sexist if main literary intake is male. It may very well be

more linked to societal influences.

Reading- I've always enjoyed magic realism and there are both good male and female authors in that genre.

Historical Fiction- Both male/female authors although it seems more female interestingly enough.

But if someone is interested in reading about physics and most work is by men one might question why that is.

[Buzz Clik]

131. I have a good friend who claims the only book he ever read was Bruce Jenner's biography (1977)

I guess he was a sexist until this year. Now he's not?

[hifiguy]

141. LoL!

[Blue_Adept]

134. I'm a white male. Everything I do is wrong. I get it.

[bettyellen]

146. If you say so- has nothing to do with the OP but....

If you feel some sort of guilt, perhaps you should do something to rectify it!

[Blue_Adept]

150. It's just the blanket thing from the header/subject

My reading stacks are pretty mixed and varied since I'm an entertainment writer and that means exposure to a lot of stuff. And those that tend to be into entertainment generally get into a variety of material from different sources. As we see with the thread, many don't even know who wrote what.

But mostly the whole thing just feels like a chance for the original article author to feel entitled and try and shame people for their reading choices.

[bettyellen]

159. Not sure where you see the entitled thing

Lots of people do close themselves off to a lot of sources in media. Surely you're familiar with the fact that many publishers have - for many years- had women authors use just their initials to reach a "wider audience". They don't do that because everyone is without bias. It is an existing phenomenon that sucks- not sure why anyone who claims to read widely would get offended by noting it.

[Liberal_in_LA]

188. no one said that

[lumberjack_jeff]

154. Would not the same logic hold true in voting patterns? If you vote for men, you must be sexist?

Or in fact is this the very point you're trying to make?

[lumberjack_jeff]

192. I actually think this question deserves a response. n/t

[Android3.14]

155. Maybe, but there is more than subconscious sexism going on

According to Vida, a woman writers advocacy group, the number of books that papers and magazines review are predominantly of male authors.

It seems a bit of a stretch to call a person sexist based on the gender distribution of their reading list if the reader has to extend three times the effort in order to find books by women authors that are equivalent in quality to the work of male authors.

I want to know how many women go into writing compared to men, especially the distribution of men and women who decide to become novelists and/or write book-length non-fiction.

[Android3.14]

156. And this looks interesting. can you tell the gender of an author from their writing

A test from The Guardian

Based on this test, I am unable to guess the gender correctly 60 percent of the time.

[Android3.14]

157. Apparently men submit writing at a rate two times women

According to this PBS opinion piece.

But he points out — and this is going to be a familiar refrain as I talk to more editors and publishers — that the number of submissions by men heavily outweigh the submissions by women. Men send their material to magazines more frequently than women. Wiman reports, “The last time I did a formal count, the numbers were something like 65 percent to 35 percent. I don’t know why this is.”

Based on the bit of research I am doing, it seems that if the number of female writers on a bookshelf of contemporary work is about a third of the total books, then the person who purchased the books is not exhibiting sexist behavior. If it includes older books, the distribution would tilt even further towards male writers, and still be without a bias towards women authors.

[bettyellen]

160. So - publishers advised women to use their first initial only why exactly?

I'm guessing they acknowledge the historical bias and don't want to lose money over it.

[Android3.14]

161. No argument there

I'm speaking to the assumption of bias on the part of a bookshelf with more male authors when there are many-many more books by male authors than female authors.

[bettyellen]

170. I think it's more like few to none women authors, rather than an equal number...

But the initials thing is a good reminder of how crappy it can be for women authors. The very people hiring them suggesting that they hide themselves. Hopefully, that's changing.

[Snow Leopard]

168. I try not

to be sexist by not caring WHO creates the interesting entertainment/art I enjoy. If it is all women...great, if it is all hetro white men...fine, if it is some interesting Dinka tribespeople, rock on. And I try to catch myself from judging other people based on what they find interesting.

[GoneOffShore]

178. Read the article, read the comments there, read the comments here.

It's a Monty Python skit in all respects.

And sometimes a cigar, is just a cigar.

[Dont call me Shirley]

183. Thank you, Liberal_in_LA!

[Liberal_in_LA]

187. '

[Dont call me Shirley]

189. ...

[NightWatcher]

186. Not true. I just picked up a copy of Moby Vagina over the weekend.

[DesMoinesDem]

191. You might not think you're a sexist - but I'm going invent a reason to accuse you of being one!