Meta

The lovely and talented Slackmistress commented earlier this week about blog readership, content, and presumed gender roles. Seeing as how I haven't been posting a lot lately, and when I have been it's usually all about projects and whatnot, and not about my inner emotional turmoils, it made me think about my own blogging history. Back when I first began writing an online journal in 1997, I was very emotionally transparent. I wrote as much about matters of the heart as anything else. In the last few years, I've made a very conscious decision to keep my entries more tied to information about actions than meditations on feelings.

My reason for doing so was largely because of how the online culture has evolved. The development of Livejournal and similar communities where there is no shortage of people willing to open a vein for the world to see led to to reconsider the value of my old writing style. The rise of emo music, and an entire subculture that seemed to scream "look at me! I'm in pain! Look! LOOK!!" caused a reaction in me that continues.

Maybe it's also that I'm just getting older. My personal sadness and frustrations seem much less important than they did back then. I remember telling Joseph once that I was a bit more emotionally guarded than I used to be, and he laughed and said that a guarded Dan was still way more emotionally open than any other male. Still, as the years have gone by I'm definitely emotionally much less open than I was when that crack was made.

So, is it "ok" for women to be emotionally revealing in their blogs while men can talk about politics and robots and video games? I don't really subscribe to gender roles in most matters, let alone this one. But I know that I'm less and less interested in emotional exhibitionism.

And I want to go on the record that Slack is not an emotional exhibitionist. She's actually been extremely controlled with what she puts out there, but also brutally honest. I just found it an interesting question.