[Roger Slater]

I was referring to Shaun's comment directly above mine. Shaun's last line was "Rather, I think it's more common to see women subjugating themselves by not sacrificing for the art." Read what he wrote for the context.

[David Landrum]

"The prevailing climate of poetics"?

The author's statistics are noted, but it seems to me that there are no lack of women poets. I pick up Poetry, Contemporary Poetry, Poets and Writers or any other number of publications, and find women publishing books, winning prizes, publishing poems, editing journals, judging contests. In fact, in some of the listings of prize-winners in Poets and Writers (which includes photographs of the winners), you'll be surprised to see a male face in the crowd.

I wonder if the statistics are selective. I wonder if the author of this article has looked broadly enough at her area of study because it does not seem to me that there is this sort of "prevailing climate" (of exclusion of women) in the world of poetry.

dwl

[Shaun J. Russell]

Originally Posted by Roger Slater

Are you saying that women are less willing to sacrifice for art than men are?

Not less willing, per se, but a common theme I've seen in many of the married, working mothers I know is that they feel they have to be completely selfless -- that they have to give up their interests for the sake of raising a family. I think there's a pervasive sense (one that is fostered by tabloids, talk shows and advice columns...) that you are a bad mother if you take time for yourself.

Any good husband should be able to pick up the slack created by his wife's need to have her creative time. Support and nurturing should go both ways...and if there is ANY merit to female empowerment, then that is it right there: all women have the right to some of their own time, no matter what the circumstances are in life.

I'm not a father yet, but will be getting married in less than a month. I know that when I am a father, I will be more than willing to share the responsibilities of raising a family, and thereby allow my wife to have some time to herself to do whatever it is she wants to do.

Basically, I think it is every woman's right to say to her husband / partner, "Honey, I need you to look after the kids for an hour while I get some writing done in the study." Any husband who doesn't respect that is, well, a jerk. I'm dead serious. It's every human's inborn right to have some time to oneself.

[Janice D. Soderling]

Janice -- I agree that there's a difference between reading Erato for fifteen minutes and polishing a poem, but I hope you know I wrote that particular sentence tongue-in-cheek. I still stand behind my point, though, insofar as one can MAKE time for art. If it matters to you enough, you have to make the sacrifice of half an hour a day...or a couple of hours on a weekend.

Right Shaun, we're cool.

Every writing woman know that you have to pay more attention to polishing the poem than to polishing the windows. That's an easy sacrifice and that's how she makes time.

Sorry if it seemed all of my previous post was directed at you. I am editing to clarify. We're friends, we're cool.

PS Because we are friends, I am adding this about your:
Basically, I think it is every woman's right to say to her husband / partner, "Honey, I need you to look after the kids for an hour while I get some writing done in the study." Any husband who doesn't respect that is, well, a jerk. I'm dead serious. It's every human's inborn right to have some time to oneself.

Congratulations on your impending marriage. Here is my unasked for advice. Don't wait for for your wife to ask "Honey, I need you to look after the kids for an hour while I get some writing done in the study." Shouldn't that be "our kids", or maybe an hour and fifteen minutes or maybe how about the husband asking, "Honey, etc."

I'm so glad I'm not young anymore.

[Lisa Roche]

As for the male/female submission/acceptance rates, I believe that while there will always be varying degrees of bias in the hearts of men (and women), a good set of quatrains beats a good set of balls/breasts anyday.

Shaun:

Having long believed your picture was actually your own image, I was impressed when you revealed your pursuit of fatherhood.

Best of luck in your marriage -- your chosen one will be lucky, indeed.

-LR

[Shaun J. Russell]

Originally Posted by Janice D. Soderling

Congratulations on your impending marriage. Here is my unasked for advice. Don't wait for for your wife to ask "Honey, I need you to look after the kids for an hour while I get some writing done in the study." Shouldn't that be "our kids", or maybe an hour and fifteen minutes or maybe how about the husband asking, "Honey, etc."

Oh, absolutely. For me, that's not even an issue, as my fiancee would attest. We've made "give and take" an art. I was speaking more to the Jills of the world, who feel they are too busy with mothering and wifing to have any time to write. Obviously in those situations, those women need to ask / tell their husbands that they require some alone time to ply their craft. And like I said earlier, any husband who feels affronted by such a request deserves a swift kick to the you-know-where.

By the way, I wasn't offended by your earlier comments in the least!

Lisa -- thanks for your very kind comments. Not to sound twee, but so far as I'm concerned, both my fiancee and I are lucky to have each other. I know a lot of young-ish couples say this, but...we really are perfect for each other.


P.S.: The avatar is wise, old, wrinkly Auden. Janice actually started a thread to that effect once when she happened upon his picture elsewhere and made the connection.

[Janice D. Soderling]

Whew! Shaun, that is a big load off my mind.

I will sleep well tonight, not having THAT to worry about in addition to all the bad stuff on the newscast.

[Kate Benedict]

35 years ago the new woman-only publishing venues were needed as a corrective in a male-dominated publishing climate. Very few poems by women were being selected for publication then, certain of women's themes were not considered important, and very few woman poets were considered canonical, either. At Harriet recently, Annie Finch made the astonishing point that those dubbed canonical were almost, to a woman, spinsters or lesbians. Moore, Bishop, that lot. I hadn't previously smelled that particular elephant in the room. Then again, anyone who's read Sylvia Plath's journals realizes what a furious interior struggle Plath had, committed as she was to being a flaming heterosexual (I be wry) in that not-so-distant past when the less like a "traditional" woman you were, the greater your chances of success.

Times have changed and it's legitimate to question whether woman-only ventures aren't perhaps superfluous, in the U.S. especially. But then, read Annie again, over at Harriet. Evidently, sexism is alive and well in the UK publishing community. Other places on this earth are only beginning to rethink women's traditional roles. Acid is thrown on the faces of young girls just for studying! Recently some work of mine appeared in an international anthology titled "Not a Muse" and subtitled "The Inner Lives of Women." The editors intend the book to be a beacon for women everywhere, and especially in countries where the gender divide remains rigid and women don't yet have a voice.

Maybe soon this planet of ours will stop putting obstacles in the way of woman's full potential but until that happens women will continue to organize for justice, poetic and otherwise. One can hold that idea in the mind while still acknowledging the positive changes that have already occurred and celebrating the vast improvement in publishing opportunities for women.

[W.F. Lantry]

Originally Posted by ;110517

Please, ladies, tell me - do these figures and statements mean nothing?

It's NATURE, not a male conspiracy to keep the women artists down.

Guys,

Honestly! Why such a strong reaction if there's nothing there? Why the huge reaction about a certain other controversy? Why are many of the names the same? Maybe it would help to put it in another context?

So, for several years, I taught at HBCU's (for people in other countries, that means "Historically Black College or University"). It was good work, and some of those schools, despite the obstacles (like lack of endowments, etc.), are quite good. One of them was *very* good. And yet, they were always having to defend themselves. Fortunately, their opponents often made the case for them. One just had to let them talk, and they quickly started to say unseemly things. Like, "why do they" (it was always "they") "need their own school? I thought we were all equal?" Well, maybe in the world you know. But in the one I've known, we've got a long way to go.

Case in point. My darling bride is a Director of Music and also a cantor in a church, and cantors at several other churches on any given weekend. There's this huge theological fight going on right now. You need to know that most music directors are also organists, and most of them are men. They've decided that 'the people' need to sing more (based on some rather substantial theological arguments about prayer) and so they're reducing the role of the cantors (who, I'm sure just by chance, are often women). They never say "we're men, and we're organists, we want the organ to be the star, not the women singers." Instead, they say "It's all about the prayerful approach of the congregants." It's just collateral damage, I'm sure, that it pushes the women aside, and heightens the role of the men. Like the Church needs more of that!

When women are winning most of the Nobel (and other) prizes, when the prize selection committees are actually representative, then you might have an argument. When people stop saying things like "It shouldn't matter if the poet's a man or a woman" then people will have more patience for some of the statements we've seen here. Again, in another context, Cornell West came out with a book "Race Matters." In fact, it matters very much. And so does gender. That's not a bad thing.

OK, go ahead and shoot me. Just please don't use your statistics gun to do it. And before you head for any "nature" argument, try to remember how the whole "natural law" meme has been used over the years.

Thanks,

Bill

[Quincy Lehr]

Bill--

Informative, useful post, but the reason I posted the numbers I did was not to defend the journal with which I'm associated against charges of sexism (and I'm the junior member of an ed board with a woman as the editor), but rather to indicate why the journal comes out disproportionately male so often. It does not mean that there isn't a problem, but rather that the problem, at least with two form-friendly journals, isn't that the editors aren't taking women writers seriously.

Quincy