Women Bring More than Beauty to Technology’s Table

I just got back from The BlogWorld Expo in Las Vegas, which was quite good despite some mix ups with the speaker roster.

Thankfully, one of my favorite vloggers — Justine Ezarik — was on hand to fill in for some of the folks who were unable to make it.

Silicon Valley gossip rag Valleywag had this to say about Justine’s last minute podium appearance:

For attendees who were disappointed by the switch, we offer one consolation: The comely video blogger is far, far easier on the eyes than Arrington or Malik.

I’ll admit that I wasn’t actually there for Justine’s session, but I’ve been a fan of hers for long enough to know that her considerable beauty is the least of the wonderful qualities she brings to the table. Why is it that when a woman is as stunning as Justine, we seem to forget all about the fact that she’s articulate and interesting? Why is it that Valleywag has to focus exclusively on her physical appearance?

Yeah, she’s not as prominent and powerful as Michael Arrington or Om Malik…yet. But she’s clever, hardworking and a brilliant self-promoter. Give her a few years.

This attitude is nothing new. Last week, I pitched a fit over a stupid website that allows users to rank women in the technology industry based on looks. I wrote more about why in an e-mail to a friend:

I see the site as deeply misogynistic because it groups women by their industry (technology) and then comments on their looks. It creates a microscope wherein professional women are analyzed primarily for our appearance rather than our professional contributions to the community. What’s more, this is taking place in a community that is notoriously acerbic toward women.

One of the more egregious features of the site is that it allows users to categorize as being either “geeks” or “bimbos.” That breaks out unfair stereotypes about appearance and intelligence. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to fight to be taken seriously because I’m young and reasonably attractive. The implication is that attractive women can’t be smart and that smart women — and especially geeky women — are ugly.

And of course, when we bring the u-word into things, we get onto truly dangerous ground. Because that word really stings. Whenever people want to shut women up, or distract us from serious issues, they tell us we’re ugly. They refocus our attention on our looks. The hope is that we’ll spend so much time worrying about our appearance that we’ll forget to change existing power structures.

I’m certainly not trying to speak for Justine here. She’s likely got a much thicker skin than I do about this stuff. How could she not with all the crap she has to put up with?

I’m just trying to point out the essential problems with some of the anti-woman garbage that still passes as appropriate in our society and in the tech industry. I know this blog is rapidly turning into the place where I point out all the misogyny I see in the world, but I think I’ve hit my saturation point in dealing with it.

Maybe this is part of the reason I’m so keen on Hillary Clinton right now. I keep thinking that if we just had a female president, things might start to get better.

Am I wrong here?