Self proclaimed social media gurus? The very idea of it

Firstly I’ll start by saying that I am one of the organisers of the Digital Citizens event and I have no issues at all with both events being on the same night.

There is always cross-overs and events happening at the same time. Such things happen and will continue to happen.

Which brings me to the ‘Social Media Women’ group. (Disclaimer: SMW’s Kristin Rohan is a friend of mine and also one of the most amazing people I have met in my life). I was disappointed to hear it was being set up recently and my initial thoughts were what is the point of a social media group for women being set up when social media is meant to be the great leveller.

Socia Media is designed to allow all of us to share information, discuss with one another and to communicate. The moment you create a sub-sect designed to leave out men is the moment you fail to understand what true social media is about.

The press release states: “Having recognised the important role women play in social media, the group will give women a voice in all areas of social media. It’s a place to connect and share to support each other and build a community.”

Maybe it’s just me but surely men and women play an equal role in this industry? In fact the majority of people I know in social media are women – probably out-numbering the men by about 3-1.

The quote in the release states: “Social media comes naturally to women. We are networkers, nurturers, gatherers, builders of villages and communicators.”

“Women want inspiration and collaboration, support and confidence. They don’t want self proclaimed social media guru’s pushing them to the sidelines.”

Hold on a second. Let’s re-read that

“Social media comes naturally to women.” – So I guess not men then. Shit. I must be in the wrong job.

“We are networkers, nurturers, gatherers, builders of villages and communicators.” – Bugger I need to stop networking, gathering (information these days), building villages (I actually have no idea what that means cause the last time I checked stats the majority of the building industry were men, usually called Brad or Jono or something and usually showing us their asses as we walk by building sites) and as for communicating well I could have sworn I do that everyday to both men and women.

“Women want inspiration and collaboration, support and confidence. They don’t want self proclaimed social media guru’s pushing them to the sidelines.” – This is the quote that really pissed me off. I know a whole bunch of female self-proclaimed social media guru’s (and one in particular who I find to be totally useless) just as I know a number of male self-proclaimed ones. They try to push anyone to the sidelines – men and women. An asshole is an asshole to anyone.

Social media is all about collaboration and support and an organisation that is solely targeted at women gives up the right to say they collaborate if they are negating one half of the population (yeah I know that figure isn’t exact).

Sorry for the long rant, and apologies to Kristin Rohan and the rest of the SMW team but I feel that social media is about everyone and not excluding anyone.

Yeah but they aren’t men. Duh!
Whats the equivalent term to “greenwashing” when you are trying to flog something under the guise of feminism?

Good call Mumbo!

is it only me that still thinks that if there was a “Social Media Men” event there would be moans about sexism?

They say “Social media comes naturally to women. We are networkers, nurturers, gatherers, builders of villages and communicators. Women want inspiration and collaboration, support and confidence.”

Whereas obviously men want to be put down, shouted at and told they’re stupid.

Aw, Dr Mumbo, I’m going to leap to their defence. I’ve met all of them personally a number of times, and interacted with them each on Twitter over a reasonable period. I think the issue here comes down to semantics:

“Social media gurus” is a specific term which seems to have been adopted by those working in the ‘snake oil’ side of social media. The aversion to the term is not so much about the offering of professional services, but the unscrupulous tactics which people who use that term often use.

There are others out there – like these three women – who offer professional social media services with a legitimate claim to a certain level of expertise. It is done so without the elitist and often unfounded claims made by those in the former group, and definitely without the sleaze.

Anyone dealing with these women will find them down-to-earth, knowledgeable, and professional. They are all genuinely good people. I understand why they are trying to position themselves away from those who’ve given social media a bad name so far.

So, Dr Mumbo, play nicely with these women in future. 🙂

OtherAndrew – I have nothing personal against any of the women involved. They are all amazing and talented people and I have no doubt that this organisation has been set up for the purposes of good.

However, I do have an issue with the name. I can understand women’s groups being set up in other industries where women feel oppressed and want to bond together but social media is a young industry and there are, I believe, more women than men involved in it.

“It is done so without the elitist and often unfounded claims made by those in the former group, and definitely without the sleaze.”
So why is there the assumption that the “former group” are exclusively male? Not to mention the implication elsewhere that men are virtually incapable of the same kind of social networking that women are.

“Having recognised the important role women play in social media, the group will give women a voice in all areas of social media. It’s a place to connect and share to support each other and build a community.”
The social media they claim to be experts in, already gives them that voice and community.

“Social media comes naturally to women. We are networkers, nurturers, gatherers, builders of villages and communicators. Women want inspiration and collaboration, support and confidence. They don’t want self proclaimed social media gurus pushing them to the sidelines.”
This is just ridiculous, the implication that social media is somehow a “womans job”.

@Scott Rhodie,

You’re correct re the gender bias towards women. I wrote my comment before any of the others went up, including yours, but by the time I hit send I was in at #4 position.

I know it’s Dr Mumbo’s style to be snarky, and it’s often entertaining, but… Attacking ideas = acceptable. Attacking people = unacceptable. 🙂

When I know the people personally and they’re worth defending, I’ll be there every time. 😉

@Michael,

I don’t believe it was anyone’s intention to imply that only males fall into the ‘sleazy social media guru’ category, although I understand how you may think that is implied.

If you think females can’t be sleazy, we should go out one night. 😉

so much fuss over the Seinfeld of digital media … ‘nothing’

Pick an industry, any industry, and there will be at least one special group “just for women” relating to it. Personally, I’ve never seen the sense in turning the exclusion of an entire sex into a key selling point. As earlier posters have said, can you imagine if it was a social media group for men only? LOL, would such a thing even be allowed to get off the drawing board? Somehow I think not. Much like social media itself, I stand for breaking down barriers between people, regardless of race, colour, creed, marital status, orientation, disability, religious or political affiliation, age or… drumroll please… sex. If someone out there wants to tell me that’s a bad attitude to approach life with, go ahead, but it’s the most balanced and healthy way to be, in my opinion.

@OtherAndrew

“They are all genuinely good people”

As opposed to whom?

@Peter Williams,

It’s not a statement that I was seeking to qualify against any other set of people. Come to think of it, it’s not against a defined set of criteria either. Does it need to be?

I agree with Scott,
social media is the great unifier? there is (should be) no male bias, no old school network, no funny handshakes (unless you include that scrum alliance lot with their agile methodologies and their woof woof secret greeting)

The need for a Women’s group seems… well superfluous and almost creates a polarisation where one doesn’t currently exist…

Of course anyone has a right to organise an event, but its seems a shame a sector (social media) that is intended to be open and free… becomes segmented!

on a lighter side lets all just reflect on our sector with this funny as the world surely
doesn’t need more doucheness!

‘The 5 Ways To Become A Social Media Douchebag’ http://bit.ly/cpn3zZ

Well said Scott. I especially like the part where you defined social media, then told a group of people who wanted to do something in a way that makes them feel comfortable that they were wrong. How social media expert of you. It even sounds like something the (female) self proclaimed useless social media guru would say.

Anyone want my ticket to Digital Citizens tomorrow night? I shan’t be needing it.

I don’t get the hysterics really. http://www.shesays.org.uk/ has been going in the UK for quite a few years, and is apparently quite a useful event (co-founded, in fact, by an Aussie – Laura Jordan Bambach). In an industry still completely dominated by men I welcome any efforts that might bring about a bit of gender rebalancing.

However this whole obsession with ‘social media’ in the Australian market is a little irritating. It’s as if the real digital industry here has been infiltrated by a bunch of marketing / pr hacks who are quite happy with an echo chamber designed to feed their own online personas.

I’m sure things will improve though.

Hey Mr/Mrs/ (no idea cause you didn’t use your name) IWD,
I just spoke about the general idea behind social media and what it is about. I’m not telling them not to set up the group I’m simply giving my opinion on the group – which is what Mumbrella and other forums are for.

I do take offence to you calling me a social media guru though. I’ve never called myself that. I call myself a social media jedi master on my Twitter account for shits and giggles cause anyone who knows me knows about my Star Wars obsession.

I’m not speaking at the event simply one of the organisers – by giving up your ticket you are missing out on a really good night but that’s your choice. Have fun what ever you choose to do instead.

Oh look yet another article about how women come second to men on pay and promotion across the world.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03.....esbusiness

While this exists, there should always a place for women to get together to share their experiences without fearing criticism.

Happy International Womens Day everyone.

From what I could tell, the SMW group is aimed squarely at the n00bs to social media market as distinct from the Digital Citizens market. And is really just a womens networking group that leverages social media to connect.

That said, while I see Dr Mumbo’s point, I can’t help but feel that the post is flame bait more than anything, I mean..

And Sassy SEO’s Kristin Rohan lists the services she offers as:

“Investigating and recommending new strategies and tactics in Social Media”

– “Investegating” sounds like Kristen is not a guru at all, merely a facilitator to help clients achieve what they want in the space, learning and investegating is very un-guru like.. guru’s already know everything..

But yes.. I’m with Scott.. and prefer a model more like the Geek Girl Dinners, that while focused on geek girls, is non exclusionary and happy to accomodate all.

Thanks for pointing out the Geek Girls @DDsD, I’ve been to two of their events and found their chat and comments to be really interesting.

So if I have this right, there are events that men and women can come to — and then there are to be these events that only women can attend. And that’s “gender rebalancing”? Pardon me, but, huh? It would be rebalancing if there were events that only admitted men to actually balance against. But I’m not sure how you can “rebalance” events where both males and females are already invited as *equally important* to proceedings. Seriously, how does that work? Let’s not mince words here — the term “rebalancing” makes no sense whatsoever in this context.

And I’m curious about Kate’s comment on women getting together, “to share their experiences without fearing criticism.” What does that actually mean, Kate? Are you saying you would never be criticised in an all-female environment? Because I’d call BS on that immediately — it’s *entirely* possible. And, further, does that mean an environment with men in it is automatically going to be an environment *with* criticism? I’d call BS on that, too — it’s *not* a given.

Just as a men-only social media gathering would be in absolutely poor taste, I find a women-only social media gathering to be in much the same mold. This is an industry where men and women mix freely. To segregate the sharing of ideas outside of business hours between the sexes is just… odd.

Wow – who knew so many people would comment on the Social Media Women’s event? Thanks to all of you for your thoughts – all intriguing and provocative.

Thanks especially to my friends who defended us (and me in particular). Now I know why I admire & respect you so much.

There are several events on Tuesday – and we wanted to launch as close to International Women’s Day as we could. It’s a pity there are only so many days in the week. I am looking forward to popping into Digital Citizens as it’s being organised by 5 of my favourite people.

Now for the good part…none of us are claiming to be gurus or experts. This article seems to attempt to bait us into defending ourselves and our group. That’s fine – no matter what I say or what anyone else says, our event will still happen to bring women together to learn, share, discuss & support.

Why no men? That’s not the focus or the main point. But here’s a story…I sat in on a meeting to discuss the future of a women’s group that is open to men, and the men made jokes and took over the conversations. I think many women didn’t speak because they were intimidated. Would be nice for them to have a place where they could build their confidence and own their accomplishments. That’s why I support Social Media Women.

As for the rest of it — the personal attacks on us and our businesses, and criticising our verbiage & reasons — thank you for expressing yourselves. We want to do the same. I attend a lot of events and support every one of them, but see the lack of equal participation. This is one group to compliment all others.

Thanks for the attention and the media coverage. I may now be spoiled and expect celebrity treatment. Or maybe this will all blow over in 15 minutes.

Either way – cheers!
Kristin Rohan

Rob – no not exactly. Sorry if I wasn’t clear: I mean rebalancing in terms of overall industry participation. If some women feel the need to organise like this, and it creates an environment where more women participate in the wider industry, then that’s excellent.

I also don’t have a problem with boys nights out, girls nights out, informal/formal mens and womens nights out in professional situations – it’s just not something worth getting upset about really.

so … what expertise do any of these people (gender aside) have to offer in the world of ‘social media’

same with all the other groups.

like, erm, what have they actually done outside of talking about things? like execute campaigns etc that have delivered demonstrable real world results for clients. Consistently – across various categories.

Can’t help but think some of these groups are mainly business development for those involved that have a sales role, and self promotion for the others looking to forward their career in areas that are topical right now.

@Larry,

Geez mate, your questions seem to be rhetorical. I’m sure you’re not really looking for answers to them, are you? If you were, you could try at least clicking on the links in the article above, at which point you’d realise things like Catriona Pollard’s blog was shortlisted as Mumbrella’s Media & Marketing blog of the year for 2009. Not a bad achievement, really, is it? (You’ve probably got something to say about ‘the types of people that read mumbrella’ now, without realising that you’d indict yourself in the process).

While you’re snarking at people, have the guts to put your real name or profile to your comments. (Mine’s associated with my Twitter profile and linked to my website, but if you want to shortcut the effort then it’s Andrew Wilson).

Hey @Larry you seem to have missed the point that the Social Media Women group is about not being experts rather it’s about sharing experiences and knowledge in a collaborative way. It is also a place where women, who might feel shy about asking questions in a larger group dominated by men, can learn & share and ultimately build confidence in using and talking about social media.

On the other hand, Digital Citizens is about creating an “open forum which encourages free and frank debate” about digital issues. I suspect this one will attract slightly more self confident participants than the other one.

I wish both groups all the best – interesting people with a diversity of experience and opinions are involved in each. Isn’t it cool that Sydney has such a dynamic digital community that groups are proliferating like this?

FFS Sydney is a city of over 4 million & I suspect we can support more than 1 social media group. Let’s not be too precious!

BTW just to clarify my allegiances here – I know & respect the organisers of both Social Media Women and Digital Citizens. I’ll be at the Digital Citizens session since I signed up for it earlier. But plan to get along to some of the Social Media Women events as they evolve.

I’m against it. Social Media that is. Especially in the sense that it is about creating successful measurable campaigns. I call this thing called social media “online conversation”. The social part of this “online” media being the facilitation of the conversations with a huge new channel. Yes you marketers use it, sometimes successfully. But don’t tell me you have some ownership of it. I’m against it. We all “own” social media. And we’ll do what we damn well please with it. 
Kudos to the SMW crew. I’m looking forward to catching up with them tomorrow and into the future. This isn’t a competition. It’s a party. 

Not sure why I came across as an “AnonymousCnut” in the previous comment. So hopefully you can kind of see who I am this time

Does Sydney need a group specifically for women to meet up and discuss social media? I wouldn’t have thought so until I read all the snarky male ‘I’m not sexist but…’ comments above. It seems even in the comments section of a blog post blokes dominate the conversation, hence the need for a group like this maybe?

Happy International Women’s Day

Welcome to the inaugural meeting of the No Homers Club.

@Consumer_Wire research says in some social media areas men have caught up and outgunning women.

‘Who Uses Social Media More, Men or Women?’ http://ow.ly/1fdv9

my comments aren’t limited to this particular group – moreso all of these sydney social media groups and the idea of the self appointed experts at the helm.

what have they done to be an expert? i think it’s a relatively valid question.

saying loudly and publicly you’re an expert in most areas doesn’t necessarily make you one … it’s generally the doing that qualifies someone.

Hey Larry,
I don’t believe I am an expert in ‘Social Media’, or even ‘Online Networking’ 😉
I’m a user and keen to help others contribute and share what I know. I believe everyone in the other groups are the same.
As I wrote before I’m against self appointed Social Media Expert Gurus (SMEG) and feel free to slap me hard tonight at Digital Citizens if you think I am behaving like a SMEGhead
Leslie, I know technically the Bank still kind of owns my house, but I still like to call it my home. My wife and kids might like to think I do too.
Many regards

Although there’s been some anxiety about his comments, Larry has a point. There are definitely people whom seem to be regarded as experts simply because they have marketed themselves and put themselves about at every opportunity and function, despite having far less experience than people who eschew being a “big name”, choosing to fly under the radar and just get on with their day jobs.

I think that’s what you’re getting at, Larry?

I’m not sure whether anything can actually be done about that, however. There will always be a body of people who want to go along and listen to people pontificate about life, the universe and everything in their industry and, if the “under the radar” types don’t want to do it, the self-promoters are going to always take that spot, come what may. So there’s probably little to do except grin and bear it.

There seems to be an assumption in this debate and the proposed forum that women are more supportive and less competitive to their female colleagues or peers. And that they (women) are nervous / intimidated by their male colleagues.

I can accept their may be some truth in the latter, but regarding the former, my observation of women in the professional workplace is that they are more competitive and ruthless in how they deal with their female colleagues.

absolutely rob – spot on.

there seems to be 2 ways of becoming an expert

1/ do great work, consistently over time, that is recognised as excellent and be humble, focusing attention on doing the work and becoming better.

2/ start a group and appoint yourself an expert, hoping that if you say it loud enough someone will believe you and eventually you’ll be regarded as one

“White male” also makes a great point. I have lost count over the last couple of decades how many times I have consoled a female colleague found crying in an empty boardroom/the fire escape/the stationary cupboard/etc, and 99.9% of the time it’s because of how another woman in the workplace has treated them. It’s why I asked Kate what she meant earlier, but she never replied. Because she seems to be saying that women would never be criticised in an all-female group yet I think it’s *entirely* possible, especially behind-the-scenes and between meetings.

Dear Tim,
Interesting response. I’ll let Kristin and her colleagues digest. For mine though I’d really like to ‘know’ who is actually commenting on your posts. Understand the logic some people have about being anonymous, but it hardly leads to the rest of us understanding the motivations for their comments.
Of course, tonight there’ll be some ‘experts’ in their fields put some thoughts out in Public on what is Private in the Social Media Environment tonight. I’m sure some of the commentators here would be familiar with those peoples “great work, consistent over time, that is recognised as excellent”. Of if not, come and challenge their expertise.
I like that Scientific idea of peer review and scepticism, maybe I’m being arrogant, but I think a frank open conversation facilitates something like that in this space. at the very least, I hope it’ll make people think.
Gavin

Rob – tell me about the ones you consoled in the staionary cupboard

Ha, you’re right, that didn’t come out right. You folks know what I mean, though. You sometimes come across colleagues crying in the strangest spots in an office. My usual reaction is to take them out of the office altogether; usually for a coffee. It gets them away from where the hurt was caused for a bit, which is good in general, and also gives them a chance to speak their mind and talk it through without feeling that people are going to eavesdrop. And some of the stories I’ve been told over the years about how women have treated other women… wowsers.

That’s it, I’m starting a breakaway group too. Social Media Blokes with Really Short Haircuts.

As “follicly – challenged citizens” we understand how to use social networks to make friends and create a pretense of popularity. No longer do chrome domes need to be shunted to the periphery of the conversation by the cool kids with hair.

Join SMBw/RSH today!

@the_git @trib I’m looking at you 😉

There’s mileage in that Craig. Cunning Users of New Technology is another possible working title.

Hmmm, doesnt have quite the same ring to it Chris.

Seriously though, all the best to all the new groups launching tonight.

So @Rob, you’ve lost count of the times you’ve had to console a female colleague but have kept the stats to know that 99.9% of the time it’s because of another female? To get the latter % you have to have the former #…

I can’t believe all this negativity and fuss about a few women getting together.

I certainly don’t think women are less critical or more supportive than men – the criticism I’m referring too is in reference to all the comments on this post which take umbrage with a female gathering in the first place.

I attended a women in leadership weekend recently (nothing to do with social media). The purpose was for women to come together to share their experiences in leadership and talk about some of the issues which are specific to women in the workplace.

I find it hard to imagine that people would have had a problem with that, so not sure why this has raised the shackles of so many.

i actually had the word facetious in html end brackets after my comment above…to my surprise mumbrella comments don’t support nerd humour.

That or facetious is actually an html command these days.

Scott, I’m sure you’re smart enough to figure out that saying 99.9% is another way of saying virtually every time I’ve consoled a female colleague after a workplace incident, it’s been at the hands of another female. If you have an actual comment to make on what I’m talking about, rather than trying to make some kind of pointless comment, go for it; the floor is yours.

Congrats to my friends @ SMW. Really need some tips on PR when next we chat. There is a very interesting debate that hasn’t really had a valid run here and that is about people and why we flock together with those we relate to. “Tribes” (yes, in the Seth Godin context) form presicely because there are those they do not include. Some of these posts touch on “workplace bullying” – a very interesting discussion in itself. For those suggesting that no redress to male exclusionary practice is required – obviously you have little experience of GOLF clubs and have never walked into a Chamber of Commerce event to name but two. Though the latter does not claim to exclude woman it needs to be recognised that we do operate differently and many of the established business communities (because more broadly that’s what we’re talking about) still have a male oriented modus operandi. There is so little concept of 100 or so years worth of discourse on re-dressing the gender imbalance in these posts that it seems difficult to begin without this becoming a longer essay than it already is. Getting away from the feminist debate I’d like to note that men have started joining the Australian Businesswoman’s network because it does operate differently. There is alot of talk about this “nurturing” side of woman but granted that ignores the polar instinct which is “touch my cubs (trans. what’s mine) and I will kill you”. I am a woman and I’ve never felt “intimidated” in male domains although I have simply been shut down in them, but I do appreciate that some woman do. Conversely, much has been written about the disinfrancised men of Gen X in particular. It goes both ways these days and is not finished yet. While our gender should be irrelevant here in cyber space we all seem to be rattled by a non gender specific avater and these groups transend the notion of “online community” by taking it into the real world anyway so isn’t this more about woman meeting over a topic – that could be anything. So the notion that social media should transend gender barriers I think is an underdeveloped arguement. And I’m sure we all know that if you ever want your ideas and sometimes yourself seriously attached online is the place to cop it because here the gloves are off. People’s inhibitions are shed behind the safety of their keyboards. Wow. So many interesting lines of debate to follow on this one.

Sorry Craig,

Your hair isn’t short enough and @trib is tooo intelligent. So I’m setting up a splinter group called SMBw/RSH/WTF and I’m off to play with my bald spot!

“Gurus”…was that not what the population had a bunch of???….yep and they went belly up as they coudn’t turn a $ profit

Any of these Guru’s turing a profit from Social Media???

Good debate on here, and good to see that a lot of people are not afraid to share their opinions.
I am not, nor do I pretend to be a social media guru, however i am an very opinionated female (as some of you are well aware).
I too hate the term social media, and have ranted and raved about that on different occasions. However, as this argument looks at the very nature of being social vs segmentation… i am happy share my opinion on both sides. I am not a fence sitter… but i do see points for both!
I think its important to empower women to be everything can be, and I think that was the intention of SMW and the glorious Kristin Rohan. I think that women supporting each other and having a forum that is non-confronting for them and sharing women specific stories is not a bad thing. After all we all know that sometimes men and women don’t talk the same language.
Whilst I do not think that the particular women that set up this group, nor the ones attending it, are necessarily scared of men, or afraid to speak their mind around men, some women are (I am not one of them).
However in saying that, I do believe that creating a women’s only club tends to pigeon hole women in general and create a divide, and this is not a smart way to push equality. I am not a feminist by any stretch and I do believe that although there are definitely still glass ceilings in existence – be it in social media or any other walk of life, widening that divide will not solve that.
The men who have commented that if there was a “men’s only club” that some women in social media would have an issue with it – i agree with you. I think that there would be a huge uproar about why women would not be invited… i also think you guys would be darn bored… cause lets face it, we make things interesting for you! (just a joke).
Everyone is free to set up any group they please, who are we to decide what is right and wrong… but ladies make sure you do it for the right reasons, and don’t be afraid to speak your mind – especially in front on men… they are really not that scary!

The only real “reason” the organisers seem to be able to come up with for making this group single sex is to help along all those little wallflowers who get spooked by deep voices?

All of us have been intimidated at some point in our business career. Are the three women concerned implying that women need more help? Exclusion by gender to any organisation is sexist.

@rob And here i was thinking the Social Media Blokes with Really Short Haircuts was a pointless comment…

As roundabout as it may seem, I was trying to point out that, in my opinion, your comment came across as a little naive and condescending. Every time you’ve had to console a woman the cause has been another woman? I just doubt a) things are as simple as that, and b) the position of women in the workplace can be encapsulated by a single person’s experience.

Scott, I’m not sure how “naive and condescending” comes into it. I’ve lived it. If a woman has had a go at another woman in a workplace and she’s upset, it’s far from “condescending” to go and offer an ear. It’s actually called being human. As for being naïve, I put it to you that I’ve had other blokes and indeed some women on my teams go and do similar — and the stories I’ve heard back from them have been along the same lines. And so the point remains: women can be absolutely vile to each other in business. Much worse than they treat men and, indeed, much worse than men treat other men. I’m sure there are women reading this right now, whether they choose to speak up or not, who have been harassed by other women in the workplace.

Meanwhile, well said, Vanessa. And while we’re talking about women in business, I’m going to make one final point: all the top women I have ever worked with — whether they were working under me, alongside me, or above me — have all had one thing in common. And that’s been an ability to treat men and woman alike as business colleagues without fear or favour. So my greatest concern, quite frankly, with any group that’s designed “for women only”, is that it reinforces any fears or negativity women have in dealing with men and actually tries to make that negativity “OK”. For example, “You don’t like talking to men? That’s OK, come to this special group instead, and you won’t have to talk to men.”

Huh? What happens to that person on Monday morning at 9am when there’s a boardroom meeting… and it’s full of men? I think one of the smartest things a woman can do, if she has issues of some kind when it comes to dealing with men in a business environment is actually to join a social group that INCLUDES men! Wow, what a way out concept! That way, they can feel their way in dealing with men and become more empowered in certain situations — such as men hogging the conversation, as was mentioned earlier.

Because if there’s a social issue to be worked through, it’s much better to learn how to say, “Hey, mate, when’s my chance to talk?”, or whatever might be required, in a social setting of businesspeople than it is to try and learn that in a real boardroom. Because, again, experience shows me that the best women in business treat men and woman alike as business colleagues without fear or favour and, to get to that point, a woman who has issues when it comes to dealing with men needs to face them eventually.

I’ve never been called a Sexist phallocentric oppresssor before… 🙂

I think MuMbo was having a bit of a joke actually – obviously got everyone going though

perhaps check out this recent post of mine?

“Why I’m probably not a social media expert and neither are you” http://bit.ly/dpVqV5

Rob. I don’t think consoling people is condescending, nor do i think your latest comment is. But I did think your original comment came across as condescending. If you don’t, we’ll have to agree to disagree.

As for naivety…what you say above “women can be absolutely vile to each other in business” is true. But saying that 99.9% of women’s issues in the workplace are caused by other women? This may be your experience (and if it is where on earth are you working??), but i think it’s naive to assume your pretty distinctive experience is applicable across all workplaces.

Well said Scott. I don’t agree that most women’s issues in the workplace are caused by other women too.

58 Comments.

This is the most popular subject on here.

It does suggest that social media does quite like a chat. Still it is ‘social’media.

You’re right Liam.

And everyone, after all this to-ing and fro-ing between camps, I am pleased to declare the winner… MUMBRELLA! 😉

Creating a gender ghetto is not the way to redress imbalances and increase integration.

proud to say the wonderful Kristin Rohan arrived to #digicitz last night while the conversation was still happening. As I thought, there is room for everyone! (Who would’ve thought it!)

Jeez, Tim, ‘ever think of changing “mUmBRELLA” to “Solipsistics Daily”…?

Aren’t all gurus self proclaimed? Doesn’t self proclamation attract followers who then “second” the self proclamation? I mean all websites are essentially a form of proclamation. And social networking is group-facilitated self proclamation.

I am considering setting up a social media group purely for men. The meeting will take place every evening in a pub. In the bar where the meeting occurs, women will not be allowed in that bar. I might organise for a dart board and a pool table to be included so that us blokes can occupy ourselves further, perhaps some cribbage too?

We can crack jokes, chat about how our day went and generally kick back without any women asking silly questions and ‘breathing down our necks…’

(Have a look at the video I am linked to.)

This reminds me of a group that was set up in New Zealand a little while ago called WIFT (Women in Film and Televison).

A mate of mine who is a leading TV producer over there promptly set up an alternative, informal group called MIFT (Men in Film and Televison).

A surprising number of people failed to see the humour in this …

C

I’m Tarzan, you Jane!

“Me Tarzan…”

metarzan dot com – would be a good name for a dating site…

There’s no doubt these are intelligent women who command a great deal of respect in thier own right. But I can’t help but feel that defining themselves as a womens group will work against them as it smacks of prejudice against men who have to be 50% of thier market, no?

Shame on you Mumbo!

These people do not claim to be Gurus yet you bait a conversation to get some traffic, of which I am now a participant.

None of these people you mention claim to be Gurus. As others point out, and I’d like to reiterate, there is a difference between Guru, and Professional. I come here to read professional “journalism” (ok, gossip) about this industry, which many professionals vociferously comment on. Gurus don’t have discussions, they dictate and lead through cryptic riddles. I challenge you to show me where these people claim Guru-ness.

I guess you’ll bait us with some Mac/PC comment as soon as the iPad comes out?

OMG. I have just read through this entire debate and can’t believe so many people have their knickers in such a twist about SMW and the definition of a guru.

The people who are clearly hottest under the collar about it all should perhaps take a deep breath and relax…. I mean, seriously… too much time on your hands?

Ann, I agree with you –
Aren’t all gurus self proclaimed? Doesn’t self proclamation attract followers who then “second” the self proclamation? I mean all websites are essentially a form of proclamation. And social networking is group-facilitated self proclamation.

Everyone else…. go and do something useful! This navel-gazing is killing me.