Teh Nacle of the Bloggers

Warning, epic navel gazage ahead.

According to this article, the “first wave” of Mormon blogs appeared after Elder Ballard’s call to blog. These were the “Mormon mommy blogs.”

“From there” sprang the phenomenon of the “Bloggernacle.”

Discuss.

Bookmark Teh Nacle of the Bloggers

Comments

  1. Clearly the writers of the article didn’t research the epic history of our blogging community.

  2. Oops.

  3. Does anyone need any further evidence of the value of studying history, and the foolishness of historical ignorance??

  4. All they had to do for a little bit of perspective was look up ‘bloggernacle’ at wikipedia.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloggernacle

  5. An unfortunate article.

  6. Steve Evans says:

    Pretty good. There’s no denying the ubiquity of mommy blogs, but to label them as the Bloggernacle is I think a bit off.

  7. John F.’s synopsis of things – in the comments that follow on the linked article – is well done.

  8. We have two bits of fluff in our navels here:

    1. What is Mormon blogging? For denizens of the Bloggernacle (TM), Mormon blogging is synonymous with the semi-intellectual blathering of which we have been so fond since 2003. Clearly “Mormon blogging” is now much more than that. The personal Mormon blogs, apparently ubiquitous since Elder Ballard’s call, are a whole new world, one which it seems for many people *is* Mormon blogging.

    2. The use of the term “Bloggernacle.”

  9. I found out about the bloggernacle via a t-shirt. I think more shirts along the super-sweet “tight like unto a dish” model to raise awareness are in order.

  10. Pete,
    On the bus to the Wienerwald? I am such a great missionary.

  11. And yes, we need more shirts. I keep nagging for a BCC shirt. So far, nothing.

  12. Cynthia L. says:

    Pretty awesome when journalists can’t be bothered to do research that isn’t roundly bested by a google search or checking wikipedia (danithew’s link above).

  13. Well, Ubahn, but yep.

  14. CJ Douglass says:

    All they had to do for a little bit of perspective was look up ‘bloggernacle’ at wikipedia.

    Or look at the archive of this very blog.

    Ronan,

    I am by no means an old timer (2005) and by any stretch of the imagination a relevant contributor – but the pioneers of Mormon blogging need to be recognized – even if they are blathering semi-intellectuals.

  15. Cynthia L. says:

    #8–If “personal Mormon blogs” are anything like personal Mormon vlogging (youtube), we’re all in trouble!!!!

  16. http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2004/03/the-nameless-mormon-blogosphere/#comment-17604

    There’s a link to the comment where the ‘Nacle got its name.

    I still think the LDS blogging community should try to remember/mark March 23rd as an important anniversary. At the least, it would remind people how long the LDS blogging community has been around.

  17. Mark Brown says:

    I think there is a potentially brilliant line of t-shirts to be realized if Ronan Head and John Hamer would collaborate. You could call your company HamerHead Productions and make millions.

  18. Although (of course) the community was around longer … the naming thing is just one helpful indicator.

  19. Markus,
    I seem to remember you coined some of the pithy slogans on the MA shirts.

  20. Natalie B. says:

    A post of the current make-up of Mormon blogging is surely called for!

  21. Blogosphere seems to be the word mommy bloggers use.

  22. Blogosphere is a term that is used to describe the entire blogging community and doesn’t have a unique identifier to distinguish an LDS blogger from a non-LDS blogger.

  23. The Mormon mommy bloggers I know identify more with that term than with Bloggernacle.

  24. Blogosphere refers to the entire worldwide blogging community, is what I’m trying to say …

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blogspace

  25. Fwiw, in our hurried conversation, she didn’t ask me about the birth of the Bloggernacle (she asked me about the name, which, quoting from the above t&s link, I told her). We talked about the growth of the Bloggernacle. The storied birth of the Bloggernacle would have been a much longer conversation.

  26. Duly noted.

  27. EmWJ,
    Don’t feel too badly. This sort of thing happens all the time.

  28. Cynthia L. says:

    Get your pitchforks and torches here, everyone! Let’s go get EmJen!! (just kidding! :-) I assumed you’d been misunderstood/etc by the author of the article)

  29. I think it’s odd that if you go to Mormon Mommy Blogs–their tag line is “taking over the Bloggernacle one blog at a time.”
    I’m a fan of some Mormon Mommy Blogs–but mostly, I don’t think of them when I think “Bloggernacle”

  30. I get the feeling from the small amount of interaction I’ve had that the “Mommy Blogs” in general would like to be the public face of Mormon blogging and they are a little resentful of our competition. I certain get that impression from the comments on the linked thread. However, I assume that it is a small subset of mommy bloggers who feel this way.

  31. I should say that Sue, one of the people behind the Mormon Mommy Blogs webring, definitely has a chip on her shoulder.

    http://mormonmommyblogs.blogspot.com/2007/07/why-we-exist.html

  32. I’m pretty sure that most mommy bloggers don’t care about “Mormon” blogging, or even made blogs because of remarks by Elder Ballard. A lot of them blog instead of scrapbook.

    On another note, last year I was asked to teach church N. Cal Public Affairs how to interact online. They want me to do again–this time maybe more focused on “How to start a blog”. I’m not sure I see the point–or think it would be a good idea to have 100’s of N. Cal Public Affairs people with blogs, official or not. What would that do to the ‘Nacle?

  33. >What would that do to the ‘Nacle?

    mmiles,
    Because, by and large, the Bloggernacle is not about personal blogging, then the answer is “nothing.” I think it’s helpful if the term “Bloggernacle” is restricted to the niche to which it belongs; let “Mormon blogs” be used to describe the wider phenomenon.

  34. Ronan,
    True. I’m am thinking of more articles like the one you linked–except explaining Mormon blogs as a bunch of blogs by PA. That would sure give the world a different perception, no?

  35. Oh John. That’s not a chip. That’s a joke.

    Sue is marvelous, delightful and a teensy bit pissy from time to time, like most great people I know. (A few blog here, I might add.)

  36. OK, I nominate Ronan to come up with a T-shirt that has a nifty flow chart showing the pedigree of the Mormon blogging world. All in favor of nominating Ronan, please show by the appropriate sign.

  37. “teensy bit pissy” is right … assuming suelikestoblog and the Sue you are talking about are the same person, you should check out her latest comment on the post linked here:

    Here is what she wrote:

    I don’t think anyone is disputing where the name the “Bloggernacle” came from. What I’m saying is that the mormon mommy blogging phenomenon didn’t stem from the same place. “Sue, here’s a tip about how blogs work.” Um… Thanks? As the owner of Mormon Mommy Blogs, with 869 blogs listed, I kind of think I get it. “Also, if you’re not tapped into a network, chances are not too many people are reading what you write.” This is laughable. If you think T&S or ANY of the old school bloggernacle blogs get more hits than CJane, you’re DREAMING. My own blog gets thousands of unique hits per day, and my technorati authority for both blogs eclipses all of the “big” ldsblogs.org. I get so irritated by the dismissive, uninformed male bloggers dismissing the mommy bloggers who are KICKING THEIR TRASH.

  38. Emily Jensen, having been misquoted by a reporter before, I, too, assumed that you had been misquoted (or perhaps “overquoted”).

  39. I think it was Rex Lee who once told us, “I believe everything I read in the newspaper, except when I have first hand knowledge.”

  40. Ronan is right – there are two separate issues.

    The term “bloggernacle” definitely came from this corner of the world.

    On the other hand, mormon blogging as it exists today has almost nothing to do with what is going on here in the old school Bloggernacle. It isn’t even on the radar of most mormon bloggers. You may have coined the term, and there is definitely a great community here, but it’s not all that relevant to the current mormon blogging phenomenon.

    I have my own largish blog. A few months ago I started the Mormon Mommy Bloggers site – mostly to prove a point. The attitude of some bloggers over here seems to be, “oh – look how cute, those mormon moms are blogging!” (and there ARE blogs that fit into the “oh look, how cute” category, undoubtedly) but the reality is that a lot of those mormon moms are absolutely KICKING YOUR TRASH – in technorati authority, traffic, and subscribers.

  41. John – that comment was in response to an extremely condescending comment from David, so YES, I was very pissy.

  42. I mean – see how much I calmed down between my first version of the comment over there and my second version over here?

  43. Mark Brown says:

    Sue: You’re cute.

  44. OK, that made me laugh out loud.

  45. Sue, I don’t doubt you’ve experienced some major condescension from some people – but there are a lot of us who respect Mommy bloggers – and more particularly Mormon mommy bloggers – who represent the LDS community as well as anyone.

    I’m hoping that any hostility that might be ramping up could be quelled a bit. If the Mormon Mommy bloggers are kicking trash (but hopefully not ours) then that’s great.

    I believe my sister has a blog listed on your massive database under the name Laurascoop. She clearly appreciates what you are doing.

  46. Mark Brown says:

    But is there really a sense of competition? I’m genuinely happy that many people find community in the Mormon Mommy blogs and also in the older type of blogging that is done hereabouts. KICKING PEOPLE’S TRASH might be on your agenda, but it isn’t on mine.

  47. Not hostility at all danithew – just irritation. The comment from David over on that site just made my blood boil. I’m usually quite rational, I swear.

  48. Sue,

    The name of the article being discussed was “Birth of the Bloggernacle,” and quite explicitly defines the bloggernacle as a collection of Mormon mommy blogs. David G.’s initial comment was in response to that. Then you jumped in and attacked him, and he responded in kind. Go re-read your comments and give some thought to their condescending nature.

    I would guess that what in part is going on here is that many bloggers at the larger blogs listed at ldsblogs.org pride themselves to some degree on demonstrating that Latter-day Saints are capable of intelligent, thoughtful discussion and diverse opinions on a whole range of issues. I imagine that they are a bit bothered by an article on Mormon blogging in general and the “bloggernacle” in particular that characterizes it as a bunch of Mormon moms who “proudly post photos of their children and preen about their husbands.”

  49. I like to tease my wife about the way she uses synonyms. I’ll say “why are you so mad?” and she’ll say in response “I’m not mad, just annoyed.”

    Sue’s comment about “not hostility at all … just irritation” reminds me of this kind of dialogue I’ve had in the past.

    That’s the problem with us men – we need a hefty bag of synonyms with all the accompanying nuance it can hold. Otherwise we just won’t get it.

  50. The conversation took the direction of “I’ve seen this phenomenon of Mormon blogs stemming from the Nie Nie Dialogues, can you tell me about it.” And in a 10-minute conversation I attempted to do just that.

    I have a wide definition of the Bloggernacle. Not everyone does.

    So who’s going to write the definitive history of the Bloggernacle?

  51. I’d just like to point out that I was calling attention to lame blogs long before Elder Ballard showed up and stole my thunder.

  52. Chris,

    I never attacked David, but I did not agree with what he said. I was obviously clumsy in my argument.

    My point was that the NAME the Bloggernacle came from this neck of the woods, but the mormon blogging phenom did not. You can’t take credit for starting the mormon blogging phenom as it exists today, just because you started the name. If you were to trace the biggest mormon blogs in existence today (the ones that represent mormon blogging to the outside world), most of them have no connection to the bloggernacle.

    Mark,
    As someone who has watched BCC and T&S throw competitive snowballs at each other for years, your comment amuses me. But no, normally I don’t think there is competition. We’re different niches and coexist peacefully.

  53. I wouldn’t use Technorati analytics for anything. They site is seriously messed up these days and most Web analytics minded people I am acquainted with have abandoned it as a tool.

    Not that I don’t think that Mormon mommy blogs don’t get major traffic — in fact, I have no trouble believing that they get way more traffic than even BCC and possibly FMH. By all the metrics I’ve seen, many mommy blogs do very well — better than most niche blogs other than the major tech and political blogs.

    Oh, and Sue:

    I’d be interested in hearing more about the “current mormon blogging phenomenon” — are there other aggregators other than the Mormon Mommy Bloggers Site or is that the best place to check this out? What are the biggest or the most read/respected blogs that are part of this phenomenon? And how many of those were created in direct response to Elder Ballard’s call?

  54. Ah, I see that Emily has posted some similar thoughts. I do think that an attempt at defining the ecosystem as well as its history could be quite valuable.

  55. I never attacked David, but I did not agree with what he said.

    You did say that the blogs you love could “eat the bloggernacle (as David defines it) for breakfast.” Some might qualify such statements as an attack.

    Where did the Mormon blogging phenom come from, if not from the early blogs that eventually grouped together to for the MA? When did the earliest Mormon mommy blogs show up?

  56. Rameumptom says:

    Was this article researched by the same people who do the research for Al Gore?

  57. Ah, interesting. So the Mormon Mommy Blogs site is trying to take over the Bloggernacle!

    ;-P

    [This reminds me of the LDS fiction/Mormon fiction brouhaha of a few months back]

  58. Hmmm. Unfortunate article. Really. I humble myself before the old timers and forefathers of the Bloggernacle. I started reading BCC, fMH, T&S, and BoH in March 2005 (has it really only been 4 years?? Seems like a lifetime ago!). I remember the name Bloggernacle had already been coined at that time, and I thought it had actually been attributed to someone (Could it have been Dave?)
    Anyhoo, I like MMW, but other than that, I can’t see and don’t relate the MormonMommyBlogs in general to what I know and love as the Bloggernacle. This place is the NaCl of the Earth! (for all you chem geeks out there… I’ve just been waiting so long to say that.)

  59. In general: sorry for getting a little riled up.

    Wm: “And how many of those were created in direct response to Elder Ballard’s call?” No idea. Most of the larger blogs were created by women who have been blogging for years.

    As for your other question – the answers would take up a whole post!

  60. Cynthia L. says:

    As a Mormon mommy who blogs here, I find this discussion…frustrating.

    Sue, you said “I don’t think anyone is disputing where the name the “Bloggernacle” came from.”

    This sentence doesn’t make sense to me. The article you were responding to says that the name “Bloggernacle” came from the mommy blogs. So, the article is disputing it.

  61. “You did say that the blogs you love could “eat the bloggernacle (as David defines it) for breakfast.” Some might qualify such statements as an attack.”

    I thought I was being funny. I will admit to thinking that far too often.

    “Where did the Mormon blogging phenom come from, if not from the early blogs that eventually grouped together to for the MA?”

    It didn’t come from ANY mormon source. Women just started blogging – and they started blogging years ago. When did BLOGGING start? That’s when mormon mommy blogging started.

  62. >“current mormon blogging phenomenon”

    Who knew the Bloggernacle was so uncurrent?

    Sue, I don’t think you read Christopher’s explanation. I don’t see anyone rubbishing the mommy blogs or the wider Mormon blogs; the only irritation was the article’s suggestion that somehow the Bloggernacle began with, and is characterised by, blogs that “post photos of their children and preen about their husbands.” That’s all.

  63. So let’s here it. I’m serious.

    Also: Sue’s reaction may have been a little riled, and I certainly don’t want to speak for her or Mormon mommy bloggers, but there’s a whole discourse and history around mommy bloggers that exists and that involves blogger navel gazing, media reporting, PR firms and more. That this particular article has provoked the discussion it has (and the way the discussions has proceeded) is actually not all that unusual and there is a history of condescension towards mommy bloggers in broader internet discourse (as well as of mommy bloggers getting riled up when they think that someone is talking down to them or trying to use them, etc.).

    It’s actually quite interesting — and a very different mode than the Mormon archipelago part of the Bloggernacle. For example, having your site on blogspot or wordpress.com and monetizing your site is fairly routine in the mommy blogging world whereas in the archipelago, it’s a sign of immaturity and not having arrived yet as a serious player on the blogging scene.

  64. Mark Brown says:

    There is another aspect to blogging that is coming out in this discussion. Many women don’t feel comfortable participating in the old-skool ‘nacle, due to the nature of the discourse. And many men, including moi, are interested in the mommy blogs but only lurk there. I’m not quite sure how to participate, or even if my participation would be welcome. Different Strokes, I guess.

  65. Cynthia L. says:

    It didn’t come from ANY mormon source. Women just started blogging – and they started blogging years ago. When did BLOGGING start? That’s when mormon mommy blogging started.

    Sue, if this is your perception of mormon blog history, then you should be just as puzzled by the revisionist history of that article as the rest of us. The article seems to credit Ballard’s relatively recent encouragement with starting the whole thing. Both Mormon mommy blogging, and the ldsblogs.org blogs predate Ballard’s talk by years.

  66. Ronan,

    The irritation I expressed here and over there came directly from David’s extremely condescending comment. (Unfortunately, as someone else already pointed out, he was responding to MY comment, which misinterpreted his comment, which blah blah blah blah blah). I’ve already said I misinterpreted and overreacted. I still think the conversation is an interesting one, or would be if I didn’t have to sign on to a conference call.

    (Working really interferes with my blogging time. I find it very unfortunate.)

  67. Sue,

    I’m sure there were Mormon mommys blogging from the beginning … but at a certain point they become much more of a presence. I distinctly remember when Tales of the Crib and Mormon Mommy Wars came out (though I don’t know if it was in that order) and it seemed maybe a year or two later many of my relatives (who happen to be Mormon mommy bloggers) started actively blogging about their families.

    I think you would help your cause or do it some justice if you would give us specific names of the first/earliest “Mormon Mommy blogs” that you know about – particularly ones that are still active and that have been running continuously the whole time. You’ve got a huge database, so I’m sure there’s some interesting statistics and examples there that really deserve to be highlighted.

  68. When I mention that many of my relatives (who happen to be Mormon mommy bloggers) started actively blogging – I’m saying that’s when I personally got a sense that the movement was out there, so to speak. I’m not saying these particular bloggers (who happen to be my relatives) are any more prominent than others.

    At that point, I had been a very active blogger and commenter for a period of years and I got the impression that the same people I am talking about had been hesitant to jump in. They had good reasons, I am sure – but I felt that there was a whole wave of mommy bloggers who emerged on the scene at almost the same time – and in general, for whatever it is worth, it seemed to me, that this wave was later rather than earlier.

    That doesn’t mean they are less real, less important, less legit. It’s just an impression I had of how, in general, I thought it developed.

  69. Sue, you will also note that links to other blogs raise “technorati authority,” not readership. Further, hits are not readers. BCC, for example gets many tens of thousands of hits a day.

  70. I’ve always found the label “Mormon Mommy Blogs” a little strange, because most don’t really post about Mormon topics, except in the way that their Mormoness is the backdrop of their lives. The posts are about life, and kids, and family. To me the OG bloggernacle has the real “Mormon blogs” as they consistently blog on purely Mormon-centric topics.

    —As a totally unrelated sidenote, in typing “Mormon” several times, it occurs to me how rarely I use that term anymore. It seems “Latter-Day saint” has really ascended in common usage. Way to go PR department.

  71. This prideful “my Blog is bigger than your Blog” and “My BLOG can beat up your BLOG” is an embarrassment to the LDS community. From the famous words of Rodney King, “People, I just want to say, you know, can we all get along? Can we get along? Can we stop making it, making it horrible for the older people and the kids?…It’s just not right. It’s not right. It’s not, it’s not going to change anything. We’ll, we’ll get our justice….Please, we can get along here. We all can get along. I mean, we’re all stuck here for a while. Let’s try to work it out. Let’s try to beat it. Let’s try to beat it. Let’s try to work it out.”

  72. Also, it’s interesting to see how long this discussion can go on without a mention of the blog Feminist Mormon Housewives. I don’t typically think of it as a ‘mommy blog’ but it’s creation (and the fact that the NY Times noticed it) also, I think, marked some kind of landmark in the history of LDS blogging and women.

  73. (71) That’s quite a few more of Rodney King’s famous words than we usually read.

  74. haha, excellent. I was just doing a little research on the history and origins of the bloggernacle so to see this article is a good laugh.

  75. Wow. The warning on this post should have been in a larger font.

  76. I know that lots of people roll their eyes at such “navel gazing” but in my experience meta-discussion of electronic modes of communication and forming community are inevitable — and can be valuable if they make transparent some of the history, motives and aspirations of the people involved.

  77. danithew – I will try to compile a list.

    J. – I understand that. I was hurrying, but I was referring to unique visits, meaning visits from different IP addresses to my blog – not counting the same visitor returning twenty times per day. Technorati authority, while undoubtedly flawed, measures unique links to your blog, so it’s a decent measurement of a particular blog’s reach. I never said it had anything to do with readership.

  78. Although it’s already been articulated by others here and on RD, I think I need to be clear that my initial comment was not intended to slight Mormon mommy blogs (I specifically said, “Not to marginalize…”). I confess that my second comment was condescending, not necessarily of Mormon mommy blogs, but of the juvenile way Sue had responded to me. I recognize now that I was wrong in my assumptions, and I apologize for setting her off.

    Since my second comment was so misinformed, I echo the comment above about wanting some actual data on when the Mormon mommy blogging phenomenon started. It would also be interesting to see Staples and Sue compare notes between their respective blogs, but that would probably just perpetuate the juvenile nature of the “MY BLOG KICKS YOUR BLOG’S TRASH” mentality. And really, who cares? Like john f. said, we’re in kind of alternate universes, serving different audiences, so why do we feel the need to compete?

    But competetion is not the same thing as wanting an accurate picture of how this all started, which the RD article utterly failed to provide.

  79. Steve Evans says:

    Sue, I am pretty confident that we do just fine for uniques compared to your little start-up.

    But here’s the point: traffic is meaningless. Seriously. None of us are making money off this or anything, so who cares? It’s about reaching the community you want to reach, and communicating the message you value most. With this in mind, there is basically zero overlap between the Bloggernacle and traditional mormon mommy blogs. So competing over traffic is not just meaningless, it is quite literally irrelevant.

    Wm, I agree regarding navel-gazing and continual examination of aspirations and motives. Any healthy community does this on a regular basis.

  80. David, this is the first time in my blogging life that I’ve engaged in that kind of playground boasting, and I’m embarrassed that I did. Yes, it was juvenile. I was irked, and I’ve admitted it and apologized.

  81. Steve Evans says:

    BTW there’s a strong argument to be made that the LDS connection to the mommy blogs is tenuous at best. Most mommy blogs rarely mention the Church.

  82. Steve, what amazing self-restraint you are showing.

  83. Steve Evans says:

    I’m just getting warmed up, Jami.

  84. I caught the first draft of your comment. I was just impressed by your revisions.

  85. Oh never mind. I thought you had taken 79 down.

  86. heh

  87. See more discussion of the article here.

  88. I think an argument could be made that LDS Mommy blogs with their pictures and expressed love for husbands and children, their discussion of practical family problems and how they decide to deal with them, etc., in some ways present the gospel as well as (perhaps at times better than) any scholarly theological treatise, intellectual essay or scriptural exegesis.

    I hope I’m not over-generalizing the presentation of Mormon Mommy blogs – if anything I’m trying to say they have as strong and appropriate place in LDS blogging as anything else that is going on.

  89. What about Blogdom of God? I’ve always thought that made more sense for more devotional blogging within Mormonism.

  90. Interesting discussion. I appreciate both worlds–the bloggernacle community and Sue’s very helpful aggregator.

    Steve, I kind of see Blog Segullah as an overlap between the Bloggernacle and traditional Mormon mommy blogs. I realize not everyone perceives us that way. But we combine an journal with essays, poetry, interviews, and art, with a blog that discusses issues relevant to female Mormon life. We have regular commenters who are Bloggernacle denizens, and regular commenters who are more mommy blog types.

  91. that would be “a journal” not “an journal.”

  92. A side question: do Mormon Mommy Bloggers consider themselves part of the bloggernacle? Do they refer to themselves as such? I read some mommy blogs (though somewhat sporadically, reading many many posts at once, rather than staying on top of a particular blog), and there are two different places I’ve started from to find them. One way I’ve found them is by following links from commenters at MA blogs (like Sue, or c jane). I also read some that are the blogs of family or friends I know in real life. As far as I know, none of the mommy bloggers I know in real life think of themselves as part of the bloggernacle. In fact, most of them have never heard the term. So I ask some who are more experienced in the ways of the Mormon Mommy Blogs: do you consider yourselves part of the bloggernacle? Do most? Some? A few?

    (Of course, I think Mormon Mommy Blogs are a valid and important part of the Mormon blogging phenomenon/experience. I just don’t know that I would consider them part of the bloggernacle per say, which to me is a much more limited phenomenon. But I wonder what their perception is.)

    Oh, and Sue, perhaps we could get Ziff to sort through some of your numbers and stats and give us some rough history and stuff for Mormon Mommy Blogs. Because we all know Ziff loves his stats. (And also, as a completely tangential side-note, I’m glad you read ZD, and I read your blog, but I never comment because then I’d have to own up to my real-life identity, and I like being Vada around the blogging world.)

  93. So far on my poll (7 votes strong) no one calls their blog world the Bloggernacle.

  94. After all of the reading I just did, I simply want to echo danithew’s #88 and the following sentence from Steve’s #79:

    “It’s about reaching the community you want to reach, and communicating the message you value most.”

    I love both communities, since, overall, they do what they are intended to do very well.

    Fwiw, I love the Mormon Mommy Blogs aggregator, and my favorite personal Mormon blog aggregator right now is “Mormon Blogosphere”:(http://mormonblogosphere.blogspot.com/)

  95. It seems unfortunate that the term ‘nacle was used in the article, because it didn’t seem to actually focus on the ‘nacle as defined here with it’s birth in 3/04 (cjane identifies the bloggernacle as Mormon Blogging in her post about the article, but that still wouldn’t explain the real “birth” of it). It seems from Emily’s comment here that what got the article going was the huge phenomenon occuring with the Nie Nie Dialogue and cjane this fall and winter. The money raised and coming together of people who have never met is a wonderful testament to the real life implications of an on-line community.

    What’s interesting is that in all the brew-ha-ha, Mommy blogs are getting such disrespect, being identified as merely scrapbooks for women who love their husbands and kids (I’m sure they do, and many use their blog to show that to the world). This frustrates me as a follower of both types as the ones I read are written by intelligent, humorous, interesting women who try to find meaning in the mundane. Many of their posts could be compared with J’s most recent post on stillness and music – easily described as enlightening and thought-provoking.

    If the intent of the article was to actually define the birth of the ‘nacle, then T&S and BCC and all the others were robbed of the lime-light and recognition. But I think it was just a misunderstanding of terminology.

  96. Ray, I checked out that aggregator you mentioned and the header picture is really cool but the layout looked really confusing. How do you find the blogs you want to read on it?

  97. What seems even less fortunate is besides the deserved attention given to Mormon Mom blogs, the other site singled out is some monstrosity that seems to feature misogynist humor directed vaguely at single Mormon women.

  98. This is hilarious!

  99. (97) Yeah, that was nasty.

  100. Dare I call the original article “ham-fisted”?

  101. I think an argument could be made that LDS Mommy blogs with their pictures and expressed love for husbands and children, their discussion of practical family problems and how they decide to deal with them, etc., in some ways present the gospel as well as (perhaps at times better than) any scholarly theological treatise, intellectual essay or scriptural exegesis.”

    Because non-Mormon mommy bloggers generally post pictures of themselves passed out on booze and valium, kids selling matchsticks on the street.

  102. The original author responded to our comments on RD:

    Thanks for all the great comments regarding this story. While the LDS church (and most religious and faith movements) have a cadre of bloggers who focus on doctrine and academic issues. The focus of this story are those blogs that have large readerships outside the LDS church and interested academics.

    It’s not a story that there have for years been blogs looking specifically at church/doctrinal issues (such as Times and Seasons), but it is a story that this new wave of mommy, design and lifestyle blogs are taking the blogosphere by storm. It’s true that the initial trend in Mormon blogging was in the realm of academic and religious issue blogs, but that’s true of most faiths. I opted to focus on the several “waves” of Mormon blogs that are unique among faith-based bloggers. That was by design – it’s what makes Mormon bloggers different. Sure, there are mom and lifestyle blogs by people of all faiths, but the Mormons have created a distinctive community.

    As for the word “Bloggernacle,” it seems there is debate as to when it took root. I heard several versions during the course of my reporting, but went with that explanation because it was most often echoed among others I interviewed and was confirmed via other sources. However, as with all things internet (the blogosphere being the prime example), certainty, as proven by these comments, is elusive. Clearly, there is more than one explanation floating around.

    Keep ‘em coming!

  103. Meanwhile the Mormon daddy blogs go on in marginalized silence… we’re such martyrs.

    :)

  104. I would hate for my personal blog to be classified as either “Mormon” or “Mommy.” I’m perfectly happy to refer to my Mormonness when it suits me, but only my kids are allowed to call me Mommy.

  105. I along with Emily must say that I had no idea the term Bloggernacle was going to be used in the article. As far as I was questioned, the article was about how Mormons with blogs were answering the call of Elder Ballard.

    Now I am reading how Sue is now asked to start a comprehensive list of Mormon Mommy Bloggers who have been around for awhile. This is what frustrates me most about the “Bloggernacle Fundamentalists” (did I just coin something?)

    Where have you been?

    Having blogged for the ‘nacle and my own site for four years now, I am always baffled by the apparent ignorance of those in the genre to acknowledge outsiders. Though I am not generally considered a Mommy Blogger (I only just recently graced the world with an offspring) I have never felt comfortable swimming in the Bloggernacle pond either.

    You don’t want to compare stats, fine. But at least acknowledge that some of us are writing about the principles, concepts and doctrines of the gospel without using any labels to do so, with no blog co-contributors and with audiences that are not primarily Mormon. And we’re doing it now with national attention. At some point I hope the Bloggernacle will appreciate our efforts.

  106. Steve Evans says:

    c jane, I’m sure someday it will.

  107. Shut this down, I don’t like when Mommy and Daddy fight!

  108. I had an editor back in the early 1990s when I was a “professional” journalist working for a big city daily newspaper who once told me that all articles are like a sausage — you don’t want to know how they are made. The other thing that has become clear to me is that journalists very often refuse to admit errors, even when they are right there in front of their faces.

    I have been blogging and involved with the Mormon blogosphere since at least 2004, and I remember clearly how the Bloggernacle its name because the Grasshopper (Christopher Bradford) was one of the founding members of M*, although he has not blogged there in a long time.

    I am happy to see that blogging has taken off in the Mormon community, but I would submit that there are many different types of blogs and many different types of subjects that are discussed.

    The main point I think most people are trying to make is that the article has serious errors and that those errors should be corrected rather than ignored.

  109. Steve Evans says:

    Emily (#90), Blog Segullah I’ve always viewed as sui generis – it exists in part as an expansion arm of the journal to which it pertains.

  110. At some point I hope the Bloggernacle will appreciate our efforts.

    Hmm. I would think that the repeated praise for Mormon Mommy blogs throughout the comments on this thread would qualify as appreciation for your efforts. Am I missing something?

  111. Natalie B. says:

    Let’s please not coin the term “Bloggernacle Fundamentalists!” Like Geoff, I think that people were objecting to the erroneous etymology of the term “Bloggernacle” in the article, and were in no way trying to diminish – or even suggest that we compete – with the “Mommy” blogs. I simply see the blogs as different genres with different audiences and purposes.

    However, since this discussion is obviously raising hard feelings, I am wondering how the “mommy” bloggers chiminig in on this conversation would look to be perceived. What do you see as the goals of your writing, and how would you like (or not like) to be seen as Mormon in your writing? To what extent are these personal blogs, and to what extent do you see these as part of a movement? I’m just genuinely curious, because until today I didn’t know that these concerns existed.

  112. Natalie B. says:

    like to be perceived

  113. Cynthia L. says:

    What Natalie said in #111. All of it.

  114. Natalie B.,

    How very academic of you to frame questions like that. This may be the “bloggernacle” way of approaching issues, but don’t assume Mormon Mommy blogs give a rip about that kind of thing.

    c jane,

    You don’t want to compare stats, fine.

    The whole argument about traffic makes me laugh. Mormon Mommy sites could conceivably be “kicking trash” but keep in mind that there are tons of porn sites that make your traffic look laughable. If only we could all be as cool as porn sites. Anyway, I thought half the point of the bloggernacle was that we are elitist SOBs, which would be totally defeated if we were overrun by all the lesser people on the internet trafficking our blogs and making lame comments.

  115. Natalie,

    I think the goal is largely to entertain, inform and connect. Some of us don’t talk specifically about mormon topics, but many do. (I don’t – although I’m open about my religion and it comes up frequently – for good or ill. I get a LOT of email about what I believe.) I don’t know that it’s part of a movement, but I know that its very frustrating to see our blogs continually dismissed as “scrapbooks.”

    This obviously is no longer on topic, but since you asked…. The irritation expressed stems from the fact that there has traditionally been a lot of derision in the ‘nacle regarding personal blogs written by women (not on this thread, but I’ve seen it over and over again).

    Whether or not Steve and J. want to believe it or not, many of these personal blogs are much larger than any of the traditional ‘nacle blogs. CJane’s blog is not just one of the largest mormon blogs, it’s one of the largest blogs in the WORLD. I don’t say this to start a playground fight, but to point out that to the larger world, these personal mom blogs DO represent mormon blogging. We exist, even if you don’t acknowledge that we exist. It’s like Horton in reverse. We’re Horton, and you’re the people on the speck of dust, and we’re telling you, “we are here.”

    (I realize that now someone is going to feel the need to point out that wasn’t the point of the original comment on the article. Yes. I realize that. (A little LATE, but still.) I’m just explaining where it’s coming from. )

    I’m not trying to compete, despite my rude little snit this morning. It isn’t about competition. I don’t have time to comment much anymore, but I’ve been reading the traditional ‘nacle for years. The ‘nacle more or less kept me in the church when my faith was shot. You may not know me, but I feel I know most of you. (When Steve showed up on the thread today I knew I’d better pack it in or I’d get soundly comment spanked.)

  116. Sue, I appreciate your comment. You’ll notice that my previous comment wasn’t an attempt to compare or contrast, simply pointing to what I perceived as a peculiarity in something you wrote. I wouldn’t doubt that there are skads of personal blogs that are much larger than the old stand-by ‘nacle blogs. I don’t follow them, mostly because I devote my time elsewhere, but I recently heard dooce interviewed on NPR by a correspondent who is apparently an active reader. I’ve not looked at her, but I understand there is a Mormon connection there of some sort.

    The reality is that BCC content, at least the stuff I write, isn’t going to be of interest to just about everyone. I do appreciate our community history though, as, I imagine, do you of yours.

  117. Since I made the scrapbook comment allow me to clarify. It was in no way made to be demeaning. The majority of mommy blogs are scrapbooks. That’s just fact. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that if that is what you like. I don’t think if you make real scrapbooks you are somehow inferior simply because I don’t. It’s just a different genre. Sure, there are tons of Mormon Women’s blogs that aren’t like scrapbooks—and I’m not sure I would call them all Mommy Blogs (CJane, Navel Gazing). But it doesn’t really matter what I call them, and I’m not sure why anyone cares.

  118. Cynthia L. says:

    I don’t know that it’s part of a movement, but I know that its very frustrating to see our blogs continually dismissed as “scrapbooks.”

    Somewhere a scrapbooker is feeling frustrated at how their craft, in fact a multi-billion-dollar industry, is always treated so dismissively. :-(

  119. #96 – john f, I like that it’s separated into categories. I take a little time each week and click on whichever links catch my eye – a name or title. I also look for ones that seem to post regularly, and it’s easy to find them since they update hourly.

    It’s amazing how many I’ve been able to check out over the months I’ve been aware of it – and I’ve found some pretty cool ones. The “Liberal” section (far right) is quite fascinating.

  120. Just as a sidenote, I don’t think having a widely read blog (cjane) or starting one site that combines some mormon mommy blogs (sue) qualifies one to speak for all LDS personal bloggers. I’m just sayin’ all this “we” stuff that’s getting thrown around isn’t speaking for me or even, I’d venture to say, most Mommy bloggers. Being territorial about something like, uh, THE INTERNET, is sort of silly. Maybe we all have some pretty big e-egos that are easily bruised? The Internet or even the “Mormon internet” doesn’t have a sheriff and it’s plenty big enough for everyone and their wonderfully varied conversations.

  121. Steve (109), I think it started that way, as an extension of the journal. But we have discovered that many people read the blog for its own sake, and don’t pay much attention to the journal. I see it as a bloggernacle/mommy blog bridge.

  122. Steve Evans says:

    “We’re Horton”

    Way to avoid a playground fight. Stay classy Sue.

  123. Steve Evans says:

    Emily, I think you are probably right re: Blog Segullah, but I didn’t mean my linking you to Segullah to be derogatory. On the contrary I consider your site to be better than much of the complete drivel content I personally find less interesting found in the mommy blogs.

  124. I thought that at several points on this thread that my head might spontaneously blow off (which would leave my children in unequaled Dickensian squalor.)

    As a Mormon ‘mommy’ who has been blogging for nearly six years (and online for sixteen) I don’t even know how to answer some of the more condescending and pejorative statements, so I won’t. I was here before the ‘nacle; I hardly feel like justifying my origin.

    111. However, since this discussion is obviously raising hard feelings, I am wondering how the “mommy” bloggers chiminig in on this conversation would look to be perceived. What do you see as the goals of your writing, and how would you like (or not like) to be seen as Mormon in your writing? To what extent are these personal blogs, and to what extent do you see these as part of a movement? I’m just genuinely curious, because until today I didn’t know that these concerns existed.

    I use my blog as a way of writing what I want, when I want, and how I want. I love having a place to be able to experiment with writing styles, to hone my storytelling, as a personal expression, and most importantly, to interpret the fine art of conversation. I can’t tell you how many conversations cjane and I have had about the purpose of blogging over the years and what we’re hoping to accomplish (there goes the vapid quotient.)

    A private, and previously unspoken, goal is to normalize perceptions of Mormonism in the mainstream—blogging for Segullah and pointing my readers there helps with that goal as well. Regarding the ‘movement,’ I feel a little like I’m surrounded by a bunch of whippersnappers. I know where I fit in the phenomenon: in a restrictive sense my blog is not part of the ‘nacle, but perhaps in an expansive sense it is part of the ‘nacle.

    Do I blog about my kids? Yes. About my husband? Sometimes. About my life? All the time. Do I sometimes participate in the ‘nacle? Sure, until it causes my blood pressure to rise to unhealthy, head-splitting levels.

    I first noticed an explosion in ‘mommy’ blogs about three years ago, and it’s been snowballing ever since. Ballard’s statements were a legitimization for many bloggers—what they were doing served a dual, even important purpose. Have we seen even more of an increase since Ballard? I doubt anymore than there would have been without the article (the momentum already existed.)

    How did women hear about blogging? The same way they’ve heard about everything else since the dawn of time. A friend told a friend, a sister told a mom, she slipped her a URL, encouraged her to post something, share a picture, keep in touch. It’s not rocket science; it’s the life’s blood: communication.

    Do I think all of the ‘mommy’ blogs are relevant or interesting? Of course not.

    But neither are most blogs, full stop.

  125. Steve Evans says:

    Azucar, love your site design.

  126. “The Internet or even the “Mormon internet” doesn’t have a sheriff and it’s plenty big enough for everyone and their wonderfully varied conversations.”

    What makes you so sure there’s not a sheriff? I happen to know a few…

    “(When Steve showed up on the thread today I knew I’d better pack it in or I’d get soundly comment spanked.)”

    The image of Steve spanking Sue just made this thread a whole lot more interesting.

  127. Because personal name calling is so classy. Please, Steve, point the way.

  128. Sue, permit me to point you the way. Let me know when I’ve called you any names pls thx.

  129. You call that a spanking? Sheesh.

    Steve, she said:

    “Whether or not Steve and J. want to believe it or not, many of these personal blogs are much larger than any of the traditional ‘nacle blogs. CJane’s blog is not just one of the largest mormon blogs, it’s one of the largest blogs in the WORLD. I don’t say this to start a playground fight, but to point out that to the larger world, these personal mom blogs DO represent mormon blogging. We exist, even if you don’t acknowledge that we exist. It’s like Horton in reverse. We’re Horton, and you’re the people on the speck of dust, and we’re telling you, “we are here.””

    Come on! Spank her Steve! Spank her hard!

  130. um, I am “less” comfortable with the direction this is headed…

  131. MCQ, I am not here to indulge your sadomasochist fantasies.

  132. You’ve never had a problem with it before…

  133. I’ve moved on. I’ve matured. I no longer seek solace in the spankings of strangers.

  134. “We’re Horton, and you’re the people on the speck of dust…”

    Mmmmm… Suddenly I find myself with feelings about this…

  135. As for the word “Bloggernacle,” it seems there is debate as to when it took root. I heard several versions during the course of my reporting, but went with that explanation because it was most often echoed among others I interviewed and was confirmed via other sources. However, as with all things internet (the blogosphere being the prime example), certainty, as proven by these comments, is elusive. Clearly, there is more than one explanation floating around.

    Yeah, except all but one of these explanations are demonstrably wrong. Lame.

  136. So, I’ve been reading most of these comments and I have trouble relating to the passion within the comments. It’s a pretty small issue, isn’t it? (No, of course it’s not. I knew that. I mean, yes, it’s small. Geesh. I mean, I didn’t really mean that.)

    I agree that a LOT of Mormon mommy blogs don’t really talk about the church much at all.

    I know a few people who started blogging in response to Elder Ballard’s talk. I was one of them. (Had blogged before but not about religion.)

    Whoever gives that presentation to the church about how to blog, please emphasize that blogging exclusively about the church will, for the most part, only be interesting to people who are a) already members or b) anti-Mormon.

    I really dislike most mommy blogs. I’m a mom all day, why do I want to spend my free time reading about it? Sue is an exception. She’s flippin’ funny and adorable. I also read Dooce.

    Can anyone suggest to me some funny/interesting/well-written Mormon blogs I might like? Keeping in mind I don’t much care about play-by-play journal entries of mommy days as posts?

  137. “The whole argument about traffic makes me laugh. Mormon Mommy sites could conceivably be “kicking trash” but keep in mind that there are tons of porn sites that make your traffic look laughable. If only we could all be as cool as porn sites. Anyway, I thought half the point of the bloggernacle was that we are elitist SOBs, which would be totally defeated if we were overrun by all the lesser people on the internet trafficking our blogs and making lame comments.”

    Ohhh. I get the issue now. I think.

    The point about porn sites made me giggle. Like comparing apples to steak, though. Or balogna, more appropriately.

    I second Natalie’s question. I think I know the answer but I really want to know what Mormon mommy bloggers would have to say.

  138. Tracy and Ronan,

    All I was trying to get at with the Horton comment was that there are thousands and thousands of mormons blogging out there in the blog world at large, compared to the relatively much much smaller number of mormons blogging here at the ‘nacle, and yet it seems that many folks in the ‘nacle seem to think other mormon bloggers don’t exist in any meaningful way (thus the “we are here” bit). The ‘nacle is insular.

    And with that, I’m bowing out of the thread.

  139. Sorry, that was just to Tracy, actually.

  140. Because I would never expect Sue to sink to this level, here are a few blogs you should check out, Natasha:

    Kacy’s Every Day I Write the Book.

    Lisa’s Oh Judy!

    Jen’s El Paso Represents Yo

    Emmie’s Downstage Left

    Fig’s DizzleFig

    Nemisis’ Voice of Reason

    Gurrbanzo’s Gurrbanzo

    Dalene’s Compulsive Writer

    Of course, and my inadequate offering at the altar.

    There are a dozen others I could list off the top of my head.

  141. Sue, I’m a mommy blogger.

  142. Cynthia L. says:

    I am a mommy and a blogger. I only blog here, not on a dedicated mommy blog, but many of my posts are mommy blog type stuff: infertility pregnancy and birth, more infertility, more infertility, family vacations. I think the divide is not as wide as many are making it out to be.

  143. Cynthia, you are on a speck of dust. Don’t anger Horton! He might drop your pitiful speck and wreck your whole world.

  144. >yet it seems that many folks in the ‘nacle seem to think other mormon bloggers don’t exist

    I honestly don’t know where you are getting that from. Remember again that the *only* complaint here is that the article was claiming that the mommy blogs invented the Bloggernacle. That is all. If anyone is being marginalising, it’s that article wrt the Bloggernacle, and you with your Horton talk.

  145. Back in comment #120, Rach wrote:

    Being territorial about something like, uh, THE INTERNET, is sort of silly.

    AMEN.

  146. What I don’t understand is if the Mormon mommy blog “phenomenon” is so vast and overwhelming (and trash kicking), why they (you?) are trying to associate yourselves with that whose trash you are supposedly kicking? If you are getting the high traffic you seek (and presumably ad revenue) why do you care about what us low-traffic wannabe Mormon intellectuals think?

  147. Hey, the teeny tiny poll is up to 11 votes with only one person calling their blogging world The Bloggernacle. (So far I like the name Bloglandia best.)

    I laugh when Steve and Sue get into it, but Tracy and Sue can’t fight or I’ll cry.

    Tracy is indeed a mommy blogger. One of my favorites actually. The first person who came to mind when Steve suggested “there is basically zero overlap between the Bloggernacle and traditional mormon mommy blogs.” (Ray was the second as an avid reader of both.)

  148. Steve Evans says:

    Jami, yes — Tracy is an important person to me. And she was/is one of the best mommy bloggers in the business. But I still don’t know that there is a significant overlap. Compare Tracy’s content (which she continues to produce) at MMW or Dandelion Mama with what she writes for BCC. I think you’ll agree that there are some important thematic differences.

  149. Sue’s not just cute, she’s relevant.

    I’m not. (But I am a relatively smart blogger who occasionally blogs about her family–not that there’s anything wrong with that–since July 2005.)

    But I don’t really care.

    Now I think we should quit fighting and all head over to C Jane’s for breakfast burritos.

  150. That cjane — why, she’s the whole enchilada!

    mmm…enchiladas…

  151. On Enchiladas….red or green sauce?

  152. Breakfast burritos. Yum. I was thinking about enchiladas this morning when I saw this recipe:

    SOUR CREAM CHICKEN ENCHILADAS

    1 chicken
    4 cans Cream of Chicken soup
    1 white onion, chopped
    6 jalapeno pepper slices, chopped
    1 small can mushrooms, drained and chopped
    1 pkg. flour tortillas
    16 oz. sour cream
    1 large package Mexican-style shredded cheese

    Boil chicken in a large pot. While boiling, chop onion, jalapenos, and mushrooms. Sauté in a skillet until flavors are mixed well. Set onion mixture aside.

    In a large bowl, combine 3 cans Cream of Chicken soup and the sour cream. Mix well and remove enough of the mixture to cover the top of the 9’x13″ baking pan. Set aside. (You should have a small bowl and a larger bowl set aside with the chicken soup and sour cream).

    Once chicken is done, cool and debone chicken into small pieces. Put chicken pieces and onion mixture in with the large bowl mixture. Mix well.

    Get your baking pan and tortillas out. Cover the bottom of the baking pan with a thin layer of the small bowl mixture. Put about 2 large spoonfuls of the large bowl mixture into each tortilla and roll it up and place it in the pan until full.

    Cover enchiladas with the mixture from the small bowl. Cover with a thick layer of cheese.

    Bake at 350°F for 30-40 minutes or until cheese is melted and mixtures are bubbling.

    Feeds family of 4.

  153. mmm…breakfast burritos at c jane’s… I’ve got some Canadian bacon that I could bring over to throw into the burritos. And I hope c jane has potatoes that aren’t green because I don’t want green potatoes in my breakfast burrito.

  154. Of course, enchiladas could also be good, but since I am a fool for breakfast, then I would like to throw in breakfast enchiladas.

    INGREDIENTS (Nutrition)
    1 pound cooked ham, chopped
    3/4 cup sliced green onions
    3/4 cup chopped green bell peppers
    3 cups shredded Cheddar cheese, divided
    10 (7 inch) flour tortillas
    5 eggs, beaten
    2 cups half-and-half cream
    1/2 cup milk
    1 tablespoon all-purpose flour
    1/4 teaspoon garlic powder
    1 dash hot pepper sauce

    DIRECTIONS
    Place ham in food processor, and pulse until finely ground. Mix together ham, green onions, and green peppers. Spoon 1/3 cup of the ham mixture and 3 tablespoons shredded cheese onto each tortilla, then roll up. Carefully place filled tortillas, seam side down, in a greased 9×13 baking dish.
    In a medium bowl, mix together eggs, cream, and milk, flour, garlic powder, and hot pepper sauce. Pour egg mixture over tortillas. Cover, and refrigerate overnight.
    The next morning, preheat oven to 350 degrees F (175 degrees C).
    Bake, uncovered, in preheated oven for 50 to 60 minutes, or until set. Sprinkle casserole with remaining 1 cup shredded cheese. Bake about 3 minutes more, or until cheese melts. Let stand a least 10 minutes before serving.

  155. Does anyone have a recipe that features SPAM?

  156. Researcher says:

    It looks like this already peculiar discussion just dissolved into farce.

  157. Ronan, Steve, surrender. BCC — this thread at last — has just become a mommy blog.

  158. I invented enchiladas, and I built the bloggernacle with my own two hands.

  159. Does anybody have that Cafe Rio Pork Salad recipe?

  160. 4 cans Cream of Chicken soup

    Sacrilege.

  161. b., you can find one here, but I have actually made it, and there’s too much of a roasted? flavor to it. There’s something there I don’t like, however, it was pretty good. http://heidikins.com/2008/08/29/whippin-it-up-cafe-rio-pork-barbacoa-salad-with-tomatillo-dressing/

    I’m trying to find the other recipe that I want to try.

  162. “Ronan, Steve, surrender. BCC — this thread at last — has just become a mommy blog.”

    …I feel spanked.

  163. Norbert (160),
    You left out “1 small can mushrooms, drained and chopped.” (And I won’t even talk about store-bought tortillas.)

  164. Steve, have you ever banned anyone for using inferior ingredients?

  165. Cynthia L. says:

    I love it! Drowning out objectionable conversations with lots of recipes. Is that a tradition on the Mormon mommy blogs? You know, that tradition originated at what is probably the #1 blog on the entire internet, the liberal political site DailyKos. Here is documentation of that tradition dated 2004. DailyKos even sold a cookbook as a fundraising tool once, called the TrollHouse Cookbook, a compilation of recipes community members had posted in dysfunctional/trollish threads.

    I present this historical tidbit in honor of Mohistory goddess Ardis. Tip-o-the-hat to you, Sister Parshall.

  166. I don’t know, I kind of think the comment subversion is cute. Like mommy blogs. And scrapbooking. And our intellects.

    Grüß Gott aus nicht der Wienerwald.

  167. Steve Evans says:

    SB2, agreed. Why feed the trolls when they are very capable of cooking their own meals?

  168. I feel hat-tipped.

  169. Face it, recipe blogs invented mommy blogs.

  170. Thomas Parkin says:

    Boil 2 cups of water
    Add noodles, breaking up if desired.
    Cook three minutes, stirring occasionally.
    Remove from heat.
    Stir in seasonings package. *

    * preferably Oriental Flavor. Ha Ha. Oh, Oriental flavor kills me on so many levels. ~

  171. So this (sharing recipes) is the secret strategy behind “taking over the Bloggernacle one blog at a time.”

    So simple … and so effective.

  172. Aw, shucks. I’m blushing.

  173. Secular Mean Mommy says:

    I only let my children eat enchiladas after they have sold all of their matches for the day. And bought Mommy some Joy Juice.

  174. Hey, is there a way I can post a picture of my enchiladas on here?

  175. The thing that amazes me about all of this is the amount of haughtiness and pride found here amongst all of us who are claiming to be part of a religion that is taught to beware such characteristics, so good job!

  176. Steve (#123) I didn’t find any link to of Segullah to mommy blogging derogatory–I suggested it myself :-). I just want there to be a link to the bloggernacle too, I think.

    Great recipes, guys.

  177. To the people of Whoville:

    I am bigger than you. I am more relevant than you. Stop ignoring me and not taking me seriously.

    As a token of my big-relevant-seriousness, have some recipe troll-spam on me.

  178. Thomas Parkin says:

    Liz,

    Who are YOU to say I’m not a mommy blogger!!?

    Cami,

    I don’t think so. But you can post it to someplace like Flicker or Photobucket, then post a link here. ~

    PS. Sorry, Liz, I thought I was over at FMH for a second.

  179. Secular Mean Mommy says:

    Speaking of proud, the other day little LaKawan sold all of his matches to a hobo, and then rolled the hobo for his change. Also, he went peepee in the potty! I am posting pictures on my blog.

  180. The passive-aggressive streak here is astounding.

  181. Tracy, I wasn’t arguing with you at all! I was just trying to clarify my Horton comment. (And of course I know who you are and where you blog. I think you know that.)

    For the record, I wasn’t calling myself or other mommy bloggers Horton. I was saying that compared to the vast number of other mormons blogging (Horton) the number of bloggers here in the ‘nacle is much, much smaller. (Individually we’re ALL specks of blogging dust, come on. That isn’t a slam.) But it does seem as though you still like to think of yourselves as the face of mormon blogging. All I’ve been trying to say is that this isn’t the reality. But by all means, continue to go for the easy Horton jokes.

    “Where we’re getting this from” – I don’t think I need to get into the years of silently sitting here saying nothing when as folks make derisive comments about the intellect of mommy bloggers. For crying out loud, it’s still sexist enough that they won’t let FMH run in the same blog category as T&S and BCC during the annual blog awards.

  182. Thomas Parkin says:

    Secular Mommy,

    You just made me blow my Folgers Postum Abuelita Brand Authentic Mexican Cocoa (TM) all over this keyboard. Thanks, meanie.

    Tracy – I hope it’s all in fun. eeeep. ~

  183. 63. Wm. Morris was prophetic

    “there is a history of condescension towards mommy bloggers in broader internet discourse (as well as of mommy bloggers getting riled up when they think that someone is talking down to them or trying to use them, etc.).”

    You called it.

    “It’s actually quite interesting — and a very different mode than the Mormon archipelago part of the Bloggernacle. For example, having your site on blogspot or wordpress.com and monetizing your site is fairly routine in the mommy blogging world whereas in the archipelago, it’s a sign of immaturity and not having arrived yet as a serious player on the blogging scene.”

    I think that’s one of the statements that stuck in my craw. Do I own my own domain? Yes. Have I bothered to switch from blogspot? No. Haven’t cared enough to.

    Plus, any time I start hearing about monetization being immature and ultimately a lack of gravitas, although I think that Mr. Morris was merely reporting a sentiment, I start rolling my eyes. Please. Avert your eyes! Filthy lucre!

    The call to assemble a list? It kind of seems as if we’re being asked to prove our worth to the ‘nacle. Then I gave in last night and provided a list in a comment (which is either in moderation somewhere or was deleted.)

    116 admitted to not even really knowing Dooce? Man, now that’s insular when we’re talking about blogs that influence the perception of Mormonism.

    120 cjane never said that it qualified her to speak for all personal bloggers. But her sentiment, we’ve been here, where have you been, holds water for me.

    And to show you the level of apprehension I have about even speaking about this whole intellectual vs. mommy thing (which may not have been the intention but is how it feels [no synonyms needed],) after Steve Evans’ comment 125, I emailed Sue to ask if he was being serious or facetious.

  184. Sorry, that should’ve been,

    ““Where we’re getting this from” – I don’t think I need to detail all of the derisive comments I’ve heard over the years about the intellect of mommy bloggers.”

    Got distracted by the recipes.

  185. “I don’t think I need to detail all of the derisive comments I’ve heard over the years about the intellect of mommy bloggers.”

    For the sake of those of us who have never encountered such comments, maybe you should.

  186. the PassAgg streak only arrived with “the cute trolls?”

  187. 183. I took his compliment to be facetious. It never crossed my mind that in this context Steve would be seriously complimenting a simple design.

  188. Chupacabra (it’s been kicking people’s trash since 1987).

  189. Anon on topics relating to my MIL says:

    The passive-aggressive streak here is astounding. (180)

    It is, Tracy M? Both my mother and mother-in-law are experts at passive-aggressive behavior. Particularly my mother-in-law. World class. I’ve always assumed they were fairly representative of Mormon women. (Since I’m posting anonymously, I’ll note that I’m also female, also Mormon, but don’t blog about my children, husband, moods, or food choices. Nothing personal against those who do.)

    Being passive-aggressive can include ambiguity or speaking cryptically, complaining, avoiding conflict, blaming others, resentment, chronic lateness, compulsiveness, expressing hostility in roundabout ways, fear of competition, making excuses, fostering chaos, victim mentality, etc.

    I’m sure not every Mormon woman (and hopefully not many) uses these behaviors, but you’re right, Tracy M, they sure showed up in this discussion. For example, under the topic of “fostering chaos” would be the posting of irrelevant recipes.

    In order to avoid anything that resembles a personal attack, I won’t try to categorize the comment in 184 as one of the manifestations of passive-aggressive behavior.

    By the way, b., who said “the cute trolls”? I can’t find that term anywhere in the discussion.

  190. >But it does seem as though you still like to think of yourselves as the face of mormon blogging.

    Straw man alert.

    >folks make derisive comments about the intellect of mommy bloggers.

    Evidence please.

  191. Mark Brown says:

    Oh sure, Justin.

    You think you are soooo much smarter than everybody and just show up to SHOW OFF!!!!!

    I want nothing to do with you click.

  192. Azúcar, perhaps not following Dooce is evidence of insularity; but in my case, at least, it is evidence of lack of interest. I do find, however, that the comments on this thread are extraordinarily peculiar. It seams to me that all the heat is coming from what have the appelation, at least for purposes of this conversation, mommy bloggers. I sense a great deal of antipathy. Sue’s comments about “derisive comments” over their “intellect” is especially odd. I don’t think I have ever read such a comment, let alone by one of my associate contributors here at BCC. I would very much appreciate being made aware of them, if they are indeed extant.

    Also, Azúcar, your comment was automatically held because it had more than three links (spam protection). I released it from the mod queue.

  193. Anonymous when responding to anonymous comments says:

    “I’ve always assumed they were fairly representative of Mormon women.”

    Nice.

    Is commenting anonymously passive-aggressive, or just cowardly?

  194. Steve Evans says:

    Azucar, you could have just asked me, instead of emailing someone who probably would not have known the answer (the answer is yes, I really do like your site design).

    Jami, shame on you. I’m not that horrible.

    Regarding the monetization, I think Wm. is pointing out a difference in perception, not an absolute right or wrong way to do things. BCC does not monetize or do freebies or anything like that because it’s vitally important to have some independence, akin to an independent academic journal. In the abstract, I see nothing negative in monetizing one’s blog, and I think it works well for those who do. But (speaking only for BCC anyways), for our site ads or promotions would tend to detract from our overall goals.

  195. Sorry Steve. I’ll do better.

  196. I’ve turned down the few ad offers that have come my way, too, because shilling for pennies on a blog is — well, the answer to that would be offensive to cute trolls, I’m sure.

    Oddly enough, there are still many ads on my blog.

    But then, my readers are all ninnies.

  197. Mark, you are nothing but a rabid Bloggernacle fundamentalist!

  198. It’s cute that you think it’s pennies, Ardis. It would be nice to be in a position to turn my nose up at the thought of blog income, but I, for one, need the extra money. I make hundreds of dollars a month from my blog. Plenty of mormon friends are making a lot more than that (gotta love BlogHer ads). It’s money that helps my family. I understand some people think it’s immoral, but I don’t think it’s any different from a newspaper running ads. People like what we read, and advertisers pay us for our readers.

  199. Anon on topics relating to my MIL says:

    Second anon in 193: Yes to both. Believe me, I was well trained in this kind of behavior, and the fact that my comment included at least six of the types of passive-aggressive behaviors that I listed is indicative of my weird sense of humor and amusement at this thread. I could have tried to stuff more “dysfunctional” behaviors into my comment, but I ran out of time. I do have work to do, after all. [Snicker]

  200. Anon 198, I don’t think anyone’s saying that blog ads are immoral.

  201. There’s a lot of fascinating and inspiring and highly intellectual stuff in the ‘Nacle; there’s quite a bit of interesting but not compelling stuff, as well. Sometimes, very rarely, there are some real duds.

    There’s a lot of fascinating and inspiring and highly intellectual stuff on Mormon mommy blogs; there’s quite a bit of interesting but not compelling stuff, as well. Sometimes, very rarely in comparison to the overall quantity of posts, there are some real duds.

    Sue, I frequent both worlds, because I am inspired and made to think often in both worlds. Personally, I love browsing the mommy blogs, and there are more individual blogs on my blog roll than group blogs – including that overlooked group of individual, male, Mormon blogs. (How’s that for irony?) Having said that, I agree with the core argument of the “Nacle denizens here:

    The article was wrong. Al Gore didn’t invent the internet, and that should be pointed out and corrected by those who did. Doing so doesn’t automatically constitute an attack on Mr. Gore; it simply is correcting a fallacy – and, frankly, there was no real censure or ridicule in the correction that occurred in the original comments. The sparring started when you and others took offense where none was intended and started getting aggressive and sarcastic.

    This thread has been amusing in many ways – and sad in one important way. Of course, that’s pretty typical of threads in both worlds, as well.

  202. Not immoral, perhaps, Anonymous, but ugly. Certainly that.

  203. I know Steve. I was recognizing a common sentiment. Putting it out there.

  204. How is it ugly? Is Robert Kirby’ column ugly?

  205. 204. Yes.

  206. And like that, suddenly the Bloggernacle is also the design mavens of the Blogosphere as well. What with their sage/cream-colored blogs and non-existent aesthetics.

    Move Over, Design Mom and Oh Happy Day there are new Mormons calling out ugly.

  207. chris, huh? You might have misread things there.

  208. Sage and cream, chris? Are you talking about BCC? It’s definitely sage and white with gray sidebars.

  209. Robert Kirby’s column is no uglier than mine. Just more frequent.

  210. So why is it ugly to take ad income?

  211. I’m assuming you are paid for your column, right? Is that ugly?

    What’s the difference?

  212. The difference is that the Trib column I write for money, and my blog I write for Mormondom. Both types of writing are done honestly, but my constant awareness of who I’m writing for, and why, colors what I write, and how.

    There are other things that some do for love and others do for money as well.

  213. 1. There are many blogs written by Mormons.
    2. Some Mormon blogs fall into the so-called “mommy blog” category.
    3. Some blogs have traditionally been labelled as members of the “Bloggernacle,” one portal into which is ldsblogs.org.
    4. The term “Bloggernacle” was coined in relation to the blogs that coalesced around Times and Seasons, BCC and others in 2003.
    5. A recent article suggested that the Bloggernacle began with, and is characterised wholly by, the mommy blogs.
    6. This article was wrong.
    7. Those that pointed this out were passing no judgement on the mommy blogs.
    8. Accusations to the contrary have been rather unfortunate. As has been some of the counter-snark.
    9. The End.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 9,463 other followers