So my dear colleague Kristen Loveland, the mastermind behind www.deborahsiegel.net, my new customized WordPress site, is currently engineering the look of the new Girl w/ Pen group blog launching later this month. I can’t say enough good things about this gal, who is joining me as co-Girl w/ Penner-in-Chief as we relaunch in group form. Her work speaks for itself.

And lucky for others, she is branching out with her customization services, and offering a 10% discount to anyone who comes to her through GWP! Ladies and gents in need of a website, I give you: Kristen. Here’s a description of how it works:

Need a website—fast—but don’t have vast resources to invest? Kristen Loveland, a WordPress customization consultant and web site builder, offers a unique solution. Skilled at using WordPress’ free and open-source platform to build personalized websites for authors, thinkers, feminists, and really, anyone else, Kristen is a writer/feminist blogger herself who understands how to create that unique internet presence in order to mainstream your blog, advertise your workshops, or highlight your latest publications. Because Kristen uses WordPress as a platform, her websites are cost-effective and easy-to-use. Once built—in only four to six weeks after consultation—Kristen will teach you how to make most updates to the website yourself.

Mention GWP and receive a 10% discount! For more information, contact Kristen at Kristen.Loveland@gmail.com.


SOS from my friends at the fabulous magazine Bitch: Feminist Critique of Pop Culture:

The print publishing industry as a whole is staring into a void. Across the board, newsstand magazine sales are in a slump, subscriber numbers are down, and paper and postal costs continue to rise. But it’s not magazines like US Weekly or Vogue that you’ll see disappearing from the newsstands—they have the parent companies and the resources to weather industry ill winds. It’s the small, independent magazines like Bitch that will disappear, because the odds are already stacked high against us. And simply put: We need to raise $40,000 by October 15th in order to print the next issue of Bitch….

Read the rest.

For those looking for an insider’s explanatory take on what’s happening over on Wall Street, I refer you to Purse Pundit’s blog. For those of you who don’t yet know Jacki Zehner, the pundit behind the punditry over there, she’s a frequent media commentator on women’s success in the workplace, women and wealth, investing, and philanthropy. She was the youngest woman, and first female trader, to be invited into the partnership of Goldman Sachs. The woman knows her sh*t.

And for a lyrically philosophical take on the Wall Street catastrophe as played out in Times Square, from the perspective of a visual observer, check out Marco’s latest at OpenSalon, titled “Dystopia Now.”

Check out this new shirt from feministing, based on a phrase Ann Friedman employed in an American Prospect article titled “McCain’s Sexist VP Pick.” Nicely done.

See also: Eve Ensler, “Drill, Drill, Drill”

Couldn’t not post these. Enjoy!

As the election heats up and women’s role in politics becomes even more important to discuss across the generations, we’re headed to the heart of it all for two exciting panels. The first, unfortunately not open to the public, is an evening talk at George Washington University where we will be speaking to the young women and faculty of their wonderful Elizabeth J Somers Women’s Leadership Program. We’re excited to hear what the community there is thinking and feeling, and to share a bit of our own experiences and passions.

The second stop in DC will be The Association for Women in Communications Annual Conference where we are the lunchtime keynote address. This will be a fun change of pace for us, as we most often speak with college audiences. We can’t wait to hear what professionals of all different ages are thinking about, especially with regard to communication in our complex times. We hope to see you there!


So surprise, surprise: In spite of the Palin-o-mania that seems to have taken this screwy nation of ours by storm, it appears not all women of Alaska all agree. Check out WaPo’s coverage of the Palin Protest held in Anchorage, and the footage posted on YouTube, above. Some memorable slogans from the march:

Bush in a Skirt
Jesus Was a Community Organizer
Palin: Thanks But No Thanks
Smearing Alaska’s Good Name One Scandal @ a Time
Candidate To Nowhere
Rape Kits Should Be Free
Barbies for War
Sarah Palin: So Far Right She’s Wrong
Coat Hangers for McCain
Sarah Palin, Undoing 150 Years of American Feminism
Hockey Mama For Obama
McPalin Out of My Uterus

Some of the protesters–in particular, two organizers of a group named Alaska Women Reject Palin–have received threatening and abusive phone calls, instigated by KBYR talk radio host Eddie Burke, who shared the names and phones numbers of the two contacts on-air. More about all that here.

And meanwhile, Women Against Sarah Palin put up a blog asking women to send in their thoughts about Sarah Palin and have received a whopping 120,000 responses.

Keep an eye out for a post here at GWP soon on what all this “Women Against” business is REALLY about.

Monday greetings!

Ok, so it’s not Nov 4th yet and this current poll is of far less magnitude, but the votes over here at this month’s GWP poll (–>) seem to be favoring keeping the current tagline vs. changing it. Interesting. 5 more days remaining to throw your 2 cents into the pool.

We’re also playing with a title for the group version, which is launching real soon. Girls w/ Pen? Girls w/ Pens? Something else? We’re open to suggestions! If anyone’s got one, please share in comments. Thank you!!

Sex and Sensibility
Sex and Sensibility is a weekly column from Kristen Loveland that seeks to put the reasoned voice of a young woman in her 20’s into the “sex wars” fray. Sometime member of the “hook-up generation” and frequent skeptic of the social, cultural, and sexual messages young women receive from the religious right and national media, Kristen provides a voice for a much-discussed generation that has had little chance to speak up for itself.

Removing the Kid Gloves
by Kristen Loveland

In an article appearing in Wednesday’s New York Times titled “Girl Talk Has Its Limits,” the lives of young girls are once again put under the microscope for inspection by a pack of inquisitive adults. Not content to explore the sexual landscape of Miley Cyrus, cultural scrutiny now delves into female friendships and asks whether girls really should be talking, or “co-ruminating”, with each other so much, because “[s]ome studies have found that excessive talking about problems can contribute to emotional difficulties, including anxiety and depression.”

First of all, this is old news. My roommate’s abnormal psychology textbook from 2004 notes, “It is known that rumination is likely to maintain or exacerbate depression, in part by interfering with instrumental behavior.” Notice the terms “maintain” and “exacerbate”—the depression derives not from the rumination itself but from another source.

Unsurprisingly, one of the not-so-hidden assumptions of this article is that girls have an unhealthy obsession with boys:

“I could see it starting already,” she said, adding that she has made a concerted effort recently not to dwell on her own problems with friends and to try to stop negative thoughts. “From sixth grade, it’s boys are stupid, boys have cooties,” she said. “And then it progresses to boys have cooties but 20-year-old cooties. So you might as well change it when you can.”

Ah yes, the fragile female psyche. I might ask why the author wasted over 1,000 words devoted to a question bound to lead to a dead end. After all, will you ask your daughter to bottle up her worries instead? I might also ask why the author used fictional models from Heathers, Mean Girls, Sex and the City, and Gossip Girl for female friendship. Sure, I’ll admit that I talk to my girl friends—a lot. I get a feeling of distinct pleasure when I look at my cell’s phonebook, considering which of my good friends I should call next to ruminate about “so-and-so who failed to call” or “you’ll never guess who showed up last night” or “is it just me, or does she seem a bit self-centered lately?” But these exchanges have never quite reached the dramatics of a Lindsey Lohan-led cast, though they might be a lot more interesting if they did.

While I’d like to say that the article’s author clearly hasn’t seen enough Woody Allen movies, it’s true that females are more prone to clinical depression than males. Nonetheless, it seems rather facile to place 1,000 words of emphasis on co-rumination as explanation—even irresponsible as I watch the article trek up the New York Times “Most Emailed” list. Because in the end the article (note its placement in the Fashion & Style section) is simply another of those proprietary “What’s wrong with our young women?” pieces that will make the rounds of forwarded email and provide all too simplistic answers for questions that really deserve more complex consideration. What’s wrong with our young women? They talk to each other too much. What’s wrong with our young women? They’re too superficial. What’s wrong with our young women? They give away the milk for free.

While newspapers and magazines are understandably aching to draw readers in, we can’t ignore the implications of such incessant prying into young women’s lives. It’s noteworthy that so many articles focus, or place the blame, on the actions of young women themselves (friendships, sexual relations, drinking habits, college experiences, etc.), instead of on the society in which they are raised. But perhaps we aren’t so much interested in solving “the young women problem” as in lifting back the curtain to sneak a covert glance at that object of intense public fascination: the Miley Cyruses, the Britol Palins, and all the other bright young female things that seem so troubled. As one writer notes, “The modern American female is one of the most discussed, most written-about, sore subjects to come along in ages.”

The funny thing is, that was actually written back in 1957, which means the new ain’t so new. A young Nora Johnson was talking about “Sex and the College Girl” in the 50s, the era of the domesticated and constrained female, who kowtowed to the reasonable, responsible expectations of society. Yet Johnson’s description of her generation struck me as so relevant to today:

We are deadly serious in our pursuits and, I am afraid, non-adventurous in our actions. We have a compulsion to plan our lives, to take into account all possible adversities and to guard against them. We prefer not to consider the fact that human destinies are subject to amazingly ephemeral influences and that often our most rewarding experiences come about by pure chance.

Those are my italics. I emphasize that last line, because I think it is something we often forget as a society, perhaps in an effort fill the news feed, perhaps in an effort to re-corset our daughters. Depression and anxiety are, of course, conditions to be treated seriously. But efforts to analyze each and every aspect of young American women’s lives, (always premised, of course, on a concern for those young American women’s well-being), is a form of the strictest regulation, and ignores the intense wonder of unknowing and chance.

Whenever I read stories implying that we should worry about such-and-such an aspect of young women’s behavior, I picture an invalid who lives to be a hundred by lying on her sofa all day. But does she live? And is she any more psychologically sound for having been removed from experience all these years—or has her mind warped in on itself, obsessively concerned with the minutiae in life because she has never known the larger things? Shouldn’t we… wait, sorry, I had to catch myself there for a second. I’m afraid I was getting rather alarmist.

Anyway people, remove the kid gloves.

Passing along info on an event in NYC this Saturday that I sadly can’t attend — but maybe you can (and can tell me about it!):

Mating in Captivity: Sexuality and Monogamy Roundtable

Participants: Michael Kimmel, Pamela Paul, Esther Perel, Owen Renik (moderator)

September 13, 2008, 2:30 PM

This roundtable will address the ways in which monogamous partnerships affect sexual desire, sexual function, and sexual need. How do secrets and risky behaviors play a role in undermining domestic stability and trust, while potentially enhancing sexual activity? Does domestic partnering imperil our inherent sexual drive? Is it more beneficial to preserve the stability of the family unit than to explore one’s sexuality to the fullest? Is it possible to do both? What are the chemical and structural influences that play a role in this dynamic? The multidisciplinary panel will examine these questions and the way that imagination can play a role in the sexual dynamic of marriages and long-term sexual partnerships.

Sponsored by THE PHILOCTETES CENTER FOR THE MULTIDISCIPLINARY STUDY OF IMAGINATION (how’s that for the name of an institute?!) at the New York Psychoanalytic Institute.

If anyone goes and wants to blog about it here, door’s WIDE open 🙂