BlogHer and Weight Watchers

Honestly, conferences like that just sort of make me roll my eyes. They're not for people like me--someone who doesn't make any money from blogging, who isn't well-known, and most of all, who can't afford to go to such a conference. And I can't think of a single "big name" female blogger who isn't attractive by most of society's standards. I'd like to be mistaken in this impression, but I've been around a long time, and it seems to me that the women who get large readerships tend to be young, white, and slender. Female success in the blogosphere (ugly word) is predicated on appearance, just like it is in meatspace. The presence of WW and other weight loss companies isn't surprising to me at all, sadly enough. (This sort of makes me grumpy. Not because I want to be a famous blogger but because I never see anyone who looks like me become a famous blogger.)

Actually, it's not like female bloggers sit around eating caviar. I know Lauren from Feministe had to hold a fundraiser to go last time. Plenty of dirt-poor single mothers in the female blogosphere. Lots of popular female bloggers, especially feminist bloggers, blog under pseudo-anonymity and don't post any pictures. Because it's not what we look like that matters, believe it or not, it's what we have to say. When female bloggers do post pictures, people tend to focus on whether or not they're attractive, which just detracts from taking a woman's ideas seriously. So there's another layer of ugly to Weight Watchers being a sponsor, the message that it's not what we have to say, it's how pretty we look while we're saying it.

I know there are plenty of dirt-poor single mothers in the blogosphere. Lots of fat, middle-aged women, too. And a lot of psueudo-anonymity, for very good reasons. I've been blogging/journaling, in one way or another, for 6 years this month. I am just not particularly good at articulating the vast amount of unease I feel when I see conferences like BlogHer advertised and promoted--I get the very strong feeling that they're Not For Me and that I'm not the sort of person who the organizers want to attend. You're right that the message is that it isn't what we have to say, but how pretty we look while saying it--but to a certain extent, a WW sponsorship isn't the cause of that, but a symptom. More interesting, I think, is the fact that the types of sponsors were very different than you'd see at a more traditional (i.e., male-dominated) tech conference.

" people tend to focus on whether or not they're attractive, which just detracts from taking a woman's ideas seriously" and "it's not what we have to say, it's how pretty we look while we're saying it." Damn, that's sad. But it's also true. also true in real life, unfortunately. And - I don't want to start a firestorm here, but in my experience, it's often other women who are the worst critics of appearance or who are the most likely to ignore what another woman is saying and focus on how she's dressed, or how she does her hair, or "she could stand to lose 20 pounds," whatever. Not exactly the sisterhood feminists were hoping for...

I'm pretty new to the whole blog thing in general, but it strikes me there are one hell of a lot of female bloggers who devote their blogs to their weight loss trials and tribulations. While I can't believe any of them have made it to rockstar status I'm wondering if this might be the reason WW have gotten involved?

That's a good point buffpuff, I've noticed the same type of thing. I've also never heard of Weight Watchers being involved in sponsorship of any tech type event. Tha

Sleazy? Check. Predictable? Check. Presumptive? Check. That's Weight Watchers in a nutshell!

it strikes me there are one hell of a lot of female bloggers who devote their blogs to their weight loss trials and tribulations I find it hard to imagine a more boring blog topic. Unlikely to have made it to rockstar status, indeed!

DeeLeigh, some of these blogs make for such boring reading it's almost like being on a diet or traipsing back and forth to the gym oneself - endless laundry lists of counted calories and Weight Watcher points, laps run, lengths swum, circuits completed, day after frigging day. Others, however, make for actively depressing reading; women so completely mired in self-hatred, castigating themselves for their shape, their weaknesses, weight regain, donut lapses etc; seeing fat where there isn't any, despairing of fat they probably wouldn't even have if they hadn't spent their entire lives trying to lose it. I just want to hug them all and say "stop beating yourself up already - it doesn't have to be this way!" but I don't want to come across like some foaming fundamentalist nutter, (and once I get started I invariably do). I'm sure it's only a matter of time before Weight Watchers start sifting through the "success stories" and electing their own blogging superstars.

This may be a bit off topic, but I would dearly love to have an addendum to the truth in advertising law that requires all product claims to use "typical results." Have you ever seen a diet program or drug ad that didn't have a disclaimer in nano-print saying "results not typical?" Programs like Jenny Craig and Weight Watchers puts their four success stories per year in full-page, full-color advertisements. I wonder how much fat bigotry is generated by people's missing or ignoring said disclaimer.