hoo boy, can’t wait..

Yahoo launches site focused on women

I hate stuff like this. See, to the best of my knowledge I am in fact a woman, and yet it’s a sure bet that anything targeted to women is going to have zero appeal for me and many of my female friends. Case in point, Yahoo is going to launch “Shine”, “a site for women between ages 25 and 54.” After admitting that this is all about targeting advertising to this group, Yahoo pretends they have a nobler mission..

“These women were sort of caretakers for everybody in their lives,” she said. “They didn’t feel like there was a place that was looking at the whole them — as a parent, as a spouse, as a daughter. They were looking for one place that gave them everything.”

Everything? So this site is going to have world news? In-depth political analysis? Science and technology? Well, not exactly:

With Shine, Yahoo plans to expand its offerings in parenting, sex and love, healthy living, food, career and money, entertainment, fashion, beauty, home life, and astrology.

Sigh. So in other words, the usual lineup for anything prefaced by the word “Women’s”. Now, I have nothing against many of these things in isolation, but why is it that “Women’s” issues/magazines/websites/etc always focus exclusively on these and only these topics? Sadly, I think the answer has nothing to do with the oppression of the patriarchy or whatnot, but rather has to do with the fact that on the average, this is what most women are interested in. Women probably still do most of the grocery shopping, and if they tended to buy the Economist or Atlantic Monthly or even something like Wired as impulse buys, then those magazines would be next to the checkout instead of Cosmo, Good Housekeeping, and People. But they aren’t.

Thing is, I spent last Saturday evening hanging out with five people I’m reasonably certain are women, and I don’t think we talked about any of the above topics. I don’t remember everything we discussed, but I know politics was huge, and other topics included mice, blogging, batshit insane neighbors, and how to immobilize an ostrich. I ask you, when will Yahoo make a website for women like us??

The Internetz, Part I

Salon recently ran this story on how we shouldn’t fear that the internetz is making our kids dumber. It’s only so-so; for one thing it makes unsubstantiated accusations against people with concerns (they’re insecure and jealous? acting like “mean girls”? and you base that on..?). And then you get to this whopper:

Twenty-plus years ago, high school students didn’t have the Internet to store their trivia. Now they know that the specific dates and what-was-that-prince’s-name will always be there; they can free their brains to go a little deeper into the concepts instead of the copyrights, step back and consider what Scout and Atticus were really fighting for.

Two points: 1. If kids are grateful that they aren’t being asked to memorize facts, it’s because they’d rather not memorize facts. Are they using all that extra time to dig deeper into concepts? Unlikely.

2. I’m tired of people confusing the potential of the internet with reality. Sure, the internet has the potential to be used as an educational tool, as does TV. Or even video games. But that’s not how these things are being used. The internet has had a profound impact in many realms (entertainment, commerce, social interactions), but I’m not sure we, collectively as a society, are any better informed than before.

Case in point- the internet really took off in what- the late 90s? Well, since then we’ve voted into power (twice!) what is possibly the worst and most damaging administration ever in US history. So much for power to the people.