This is something I have been wanting to write about for a long time and Natali's response on BOL 942 to a listener's email prompted me to finally express my feelings on this topic. This writing is to express my larger view on the subject, not just comment on Natali. Want to see a thread just on Natali then go here http://forums.cnet.com/5208-10152_102-0.html?threadID=337215&tag=forums06;forum-threads
A little background on myself. I am 46 year old male that has worked my entire adult life in the tech profession. I've done everything from programmer for a fortune 100 IT Firm, building large multi-national Windows Networks to working an .COM start-up. Presently I run a .COM site that is dominated by women and I work with them everyday.
Natali's response to the email was so genuine and real that I feel compelled to write.
I am a avid follower of technology and increasingly over time more and more women have entered the technology field. I applaud this and think it is fantastic. When I worked in fortune 100 companies in the 90's our network and programming staffs were filled with women. They were respected and treated as equals and quite often held high management positions. Not that sexism did not exist, but I believe in the corporate world it was much less tolerated than in the wild of the Internet. I enjoyed my time working side by side with women and watched them solve some of our most perplexing problems. It was an atmosphere of cooperation and understanding. Quite honestly, the women would bring a point of few that was different from men to problem solving.
Then by the late 90's the Internet evolution was upon us and opened up a whole new way of communication as well as new job market. Women in corporate environments switch to web programming but remain in the corporate IT departments where sexism is much less tolerated. But as the market for tech journalism moved from magazines to Web base reporting more and more women became involved. Back in the day of paper monthly magazines like PC Mag and PC World you rarely saw woman journalist in tech. But the openness of the Internet allowed Tech Journalism to expand a great deal. More and more women came online as tech journalist through blogs, tech sites CNET and through video reporting sites like CNET and Revision 3.
The disturbing trend I noticed is that as more female tech journalists came online the sexism became stronger and stronger. Women like Cat Schwartz, Morgan Webb and Sarah Lane first got nailed with this in forums of Tech TV. The last couple years Molly Wood, Natali Delconte, Veronica Belmont, Ariel Waldman and many other female technology journalists have been burden by sexism. They all do terrific jobs and the same jobs as their male counter parts, however, they have to put with the lowest common denominator of the Internet, the anonymous poster! I am constantly reading stupid stuff written by men like "she's hot", "nice ****", "she's not as hot as so and so" and on and on and on. You get the idea. We've all seen it. It's stupid and ludicrous.
My plead is this, respect the female tech journalist for their position on topics, their reporting and their personalities. They bring a unique perspective to tech that was not around for many many years. Everyone is entitle to agree or disagree with them based on their stance on a given topic. However, rating them based on their sexual parts is just stupid, immature and is going to back fire on us all. Why? Because if they have to put up with constant barrage of crap from a bunch of pin headed idiots that only want to rate them based on the physical characteristics then the female tech journalist will disappear! We'll be back to nearly 100% males reporting our tech news all the time. And we all know you female rating pin heads don't want that!
I will climb down all of my soapbox now and I am ready for the wrath of the trolls and pinheads. I've been on the web since before there was HTTP so my skin is thick! So let it fly.
Finally, I am male as stated in the beginning of my post. And like all males I can admire a beautiful women. But admiring a beautiful woman in your head is one thing. Spouting our sexual ratings online regarding these women to coincide with their ability to an effective journalist is just ignorant.
Sincerely,
Rob
Molly ... don't go off on my for my typos, that's why I'm not a journalist LOL!
Rob, well written, and it needed to be said!
Jonathan
All well said in your post. I agree mostly. I am a 54-year-old male who admires and supports women, good looking or not, but I still get to dislike a person's performance or interaction when it is not based on sexism. Natali just does not appeal to me, for all her otherwise wonderful attributes. I no longer listen to Buzz Out Loud, and I listened for a couple of years straight, from back in the 400's. My dislike is based strictly on my listening to Natali on Buzz Out Loud. There is a certain indefinable "it" factor that Natali's contributions do not have for me. Her presence pushes me away rather than draws me in. I do not hate Natali. I am just confused about why I should care what she says. Those who produce the show must think she adds something, and for most listeners that may be true. For me it is not true. Whenever there is a change of cast in an ongoing show, there is the chance that an audience member will be turned off by a new cast member rather than gladly accepting. I truly wish I were on the other side of this, but I am facing facts. I wish Natali well. I wish the show well. There is just no accounting for taste, as the old saying goes. That's show business!
I have nothing against Natali, personally. How could I? I do not know her in a personal manner. Natali's contribution to BOL just does appeal to me in a number of ways.
Don't forget Amber Mac too she is another woman who does well and a pretty woman who is very intelligence too.
Very TRUE! I actually follow her on Twitter I'm surprised I forgot to mention her name.
"This is something..." Can I have the Cliff Notes of your post?
soon hopefully.
I sent this to the show, but since they won't read it, I'll post it here:
I'm a huge fan and I listen every day. I must say, though, that I was taken aback by the way Natali handled the letter from Matthew Dattilo on Ep. 942. Mr. Dattilo never once referenced Natali's gender, yet she used the term "sexist" at least twice. Even Tom insinuated the letter was sexist.
Mr. Dattilo's letter could easily have been directed to an attractive man (change the her to his). And it's painfully obvious that you were all so quick to judge him that you missed the point. The letter is very clear in pointing out his frustrations with the stereotypes and judgmental comments Natali has made. Then he stereotyped Natali to prove his point...which is that stereotypes hurt.
The sad part about this is that Mr. Dattilo had guts enough to use his real name, and to write a letter actually expressing a legitimate concern. And you dangled him out for public scorn. One would think that if you were looking for an example of the type of sexist e-mails Natali receives, you might have found one that actually mentioned her gender at all. And I bet it would have been written by an anonymous coward -- not a well-intentioned and loyal listener.
Sexism is an awful thing. But don't go looking for it where it doesn't
exist. Natali, I think you owe Matthew an apology. Unfortunately, I'm
positive he won't get it.
Love the show.
Finally, someone makes a very intelligent and well thought out response to the stupid decision to attack a listener live on the air.
Come on Tom and crew - stop making excuses for Natali being boring!
Let's all be honest - if Natali was not a pretty face with little tech substance, would we even be having the "sexist" debate?????
Molly is a pretty face and I'm sure she has received many criticisms of her work over the years, and maybe some of them have been sexist, or worse, but she doesn't stoop to the "sexism" card. She's a true professional who has achieved as much as she has in her career on merit on not on her pretty face.
BOL has had numerous women on the show who are INTERESTING, PRETTY, and INTELLIGENT without any problems. Why is the BOL audience who is currently critical of a single person who happens to be female all of a sudden being branded as sexist pigs???
Think about this BOLers - how strong of a negative opinion can a fairly substantial percentage of the audience have about someone on BOL before people realize that maybe there is something in this?
Sheesh.
I have been listening since the mid 200s and have listened to just about every show since. I haven't considered dropping the show yet, but something isn't quite right with the show lately. At first I thought I just didn't like the change but I've realized that the chemistry just isn't right. Natali seems stiff most of the time and the rapport between her, Tom and Jason just doesn't seem to be there.
I was completely bummed when Veronica left the show and I never thought Jason could come close to filling her shoes. However, Jason has filled in very well and brings a whole different perspective to the show.
My problem with Natali is her tech knowledge. Don't get me wrong, she knows more about tech than most of my friends, however I wouldn't listen to a tech podcast from my friends. I want to listen to people who are smarter than I and I always felt that with Tom and Molly. Cooley, Tong and the other guest hosts brought a lot of specific knowledge that enriched the show. Natali has rarely added anything new to the show except for her stereo types and name dropping.
The last straw that caused me to come to the forums was Natali's unprofessional reading of the critical email. Certainly she understands that you can't please all of the people all of the time. No matter what she says in responding to that email, she will not change that fact. She had to know this when she read the email in the first place. She needs to take the high road and ignore the email (even this post) and do her job.
Attacking a female in a sexist way is, I think most of the time only done because it's an easy way to upset someone. I don't think it's actually sexism in most cases but rather, just an attempt to be mean and hit a vunerable area. I would suggest it best be ignored.
as to the motivation of the "attacker", but I kind of feel like it's a difference without a difference. If I use a sexist attack, whether or not I really mean it, then I've still been a sexist haven't I? I've been hypocritical and scheming as well, but I opted to use something from that arsenal and "if it walks like a duck..."
If I use a racial slur on someone just to get under their skin, isn't it still a rascist attack? Maybe it's a subset having to do with fighting dirty to win at any cost, but it's still a subset, I think.
Just thinking out loud--your comment was an interesting angle.
that to think up or utter those types of insults shows an inherent sexism. I wouldn't think of using sexist words to insult someone, even to get under their skin. If you're choosing to do so, odds are it's because you harbor those kinds of thoughts.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |