Folks, is your enjoyment of the bloggernacle at a bit of a low? Are you sick of rehashing all the same old topics over and over again? At BCC, we are striving to make your Mormon blogging experience more pleasurable by admitting that we are really very sick of these topics, too. If only there were some means (aside from self-discipline) to make us stop talking about things that we are tired of discussing.
Luckily, there is. Thanks to advances in blogpoll technology, we can now determine which topic is most getting on your nerves and then not talk about it (for a month or so; unless something really important happens (or unless we get bored of not talking about it)). Odds are good that, for a month or so, BCC can provide you with the sweet release of knowing that you won’t have to read people talking about that one thing that you hate here. Sure you could stop reading blogs entirely, but we don’t want that, and neither do you.
You’re welcome.
Please vote and then explain why your desire to censor some topic is more compelling than someone else’s in the comments below.
May 4, 2011 at 9:22 pm
I chose haircuts, but it’s a cheat because we only ever talk about them when it’s Conference time. Really, it’s the Book of Mormon Musical (which is great, I’m sure, but listening to everyone note with surprise that South Park finds some value in Mormonism has gotten old really, really fast).
May 4, 2011 at 9:24 pm
Dang it! I forgot to add porn. Just say “I vote for porn” in the comments. I’m sure nothing bad will happen as a result.
May 4, 2011 at 9:34 pm
John, The Book of Mormon Musical may be the topic du jour, but it stands pale in comparison with the others in terms of epic sickness. I say ban all those topics. Forever.
May 4, 2011 at 9:36 pm
Before voting I need to know what will happen to those who break the vow of silence. Ignominious death? Bannination? Called as Stake Dance Festival chairperson?
Knowing the possible outcome will help me determine whom of the possible offenders associated with the above topics I would like to see suffer the wrath of the Bloggernacle gods.
May 4, 2011 at 9:36 pm
I insist that this post be removed until Porn is added.
May 4, 2011 at 9:37 pm
Sunny,
Get real. We all know that you’re never going to post.
May 5, 2011 at 7:13 am
I vote everybody come over to Keepapitchinin where we find plenty to talk about that never involves at least nine of those topics.
Uh-oh. Did I just get myself banned along with a topic? … hello? … hello? …
May 5, 2011 at 7:18 am
I voted “Other: Say what you vote for in the comments.” since Polygamy was not on the list. Unless you count it as part of the gender inequality topic. I’m just sick of all the posts and comments on polygamy, Big Love, the shock and horror experienced when someone discovers that Joseph Smith practiced it too!, etc, etc.
May 5, 2011 at 7:42 am
How can I choose just one of these?
May 5, 2011 at 7:44 am
Why can we only pick one?
May 5, 2011 at 7:54 am
Can the poll be re-organized to implement a ranking system, where we rank these topics from least annoying to most annoying? I am sure Scott B can do a Borda Count afterwards to find the most commonly hated topic.
May 5, 2011 at 8:06 am
My vote was split between Gay Marriage and Gender Inequality but I voted Gay Marriage for the simple fact that I don’t think anyone has contributed anything remotely new on the topic since I first came to BCC (whenever that was).
May 5, 2011 at 8:07 am
If I were forced, I say the BoM musical. But I’m really not sick of any of these options.
And I’m tremendously sad to see gender equality winning, for a few reasons. I’ll just leave it at that.
May 5, 2011 at 8:10 am
1. If we banned all of these, we’d never talk about anything.
2. Rank’em defeats the purpose; we want to choose one thing to ban.
3. We can revisit this in a month and ban something else for a month.
4. Polygamy isn’t on the list, because I figured Church History/Gender Inequality covered it, but if you want to focus on it, putting it in the comments is how to do it.
At present, Gender Inequality leads, with Gay Marriage and The Book of Mormon in second and third respectively. I shocked and appalled that you all aren’t as jealous of John Hamer’s life as I am.
May 5, 2011 at 8:11 am
Ben,
Don’t go revealing my secret reasons for doing the poll in the first place.
May 5, 2011 at 8:23 am
I usually don’t mind a rehash of old stuff, and if I do, then I just don’t read it. So I voted for haircuts.
You forgot immigration reform/border control/illegal –uh, trespassing.
And gender inequality needs to be talked about until the resistant ones get their consciousness raised. Which could be a long time.
May 5, 2011 at 8:38 am
I would be interested to know the gender of those who voted for “gender inequality” lol.
May 5, 2011 at 8:39 am
I would like to ban talking about polls on blogs. Because only nut-cases with nothing better to do spend time voting on blog polls and then writing comments about their votes.
May 5, 2011 at 8:52 am
I choose other; posts with polls.
May 5, 2011 at 9:31 am
Well, I tried to vote for “Other”, but I got an error message. Apparently, we will continue to talk about all of those “Other” topics incessantly. Whatever they are.
Oh yeah, I was thinking the new Handbook, along with immigration. And all those others.
May 5, 2011 at 9:33 am
I too would love to know the gender of those who voted for gender inequality.
And, how about a poll of topics we would LIKE to see discussed? I would vote for earth stewardship/environmentalism and people with disabilities.
The bottom line is that we all have our pet topics and the wonderful thing about blogs is that we can read what I like and skip what we don’t.
May 5, 2011 at 9:34 am
gender equality and gay marriage tops? More posts on fiddling while Rome burns, then, please.
May 5, 2011 at 9:35 am
errr…”we can read what we like and skip what we don’t.”
May 5, 2011 at 9:36 am
I voted for Other once in order to test the other button. So, use that in your data analysis.
I find it fascinating that we are repeating ourselves so much in this particular thread.
May 5, 2011 at 9:41 am
One last thing for this pass,
Ideas wherein we feel like there is a good chance that we are wrong cause us more psychic pain than ideas where we are confident that we are right. So, if being tired of a topic is a sign of psychic pain…
May 5, 2011 at 9:45 am
I like all of these topics.
May 5, 2011 at 9:54 am
As a girl I voted for gender inequality because nothing new seems to be said when it does come up. It’s an issue that could use addressing, but it mostly comes across as airing grievances without offering much constructive criticism, which si really getting to be beating a dead horse.
On the other hand, it’d be nice to discuss the role skeptical thinking should/could play in our faith and everyday lives as people with testimonies, but that’s because I’m a huge nerd and am interested about such things. :)
May 5, 2011 at 10:58 am
I voted for porn (which sounds really wrong to say it that way) – but only because I didn’t think of the immigration-related topics.
May 5, 2011 at 11:24 am
Wow. 31% are tired hearing about gender inequality. You poor souls. I bet the suffering is similar to those who actually experience gender inequality. We can’t say that there is nothing new to be said, because the bloggers at ZD have come up with a string of absolutely fantastic and incisive posts in just the last week regarding gender equality.
And, as John hints at in 25, it is easy to become “tired” of ideas that make us uncomfortable, even if that discomfort is necessary to bring needed change. It’s just the easier route.
That’s all.
May 5, 2011 at 11:35 am
To be fair to our commenters, in #25 I pretty much made that subtext text.
May 5, 2011 at 11:39 am
Ben Park (29) and others,
I’m kind of tired of gender-equality posts lately. In fact, I’d be so bold as to say that I could pretty easily endure 30 full days without reading another one. I personally hope–and request all of your prayers for assistance–that my commitment to treating women and men equally, and toward advancing policy that encourages such, doesn’t wane too far in the coming 4 weeks. It’ll be tough–who knows what might happen, really?
May 5, 2011 at 11:40 am
Or maybe we are a little burned out on a topic that even though we feel passionate about it, we’ve used up too much energy and thought in the last couple of weeks/months/years. There are more reasons to be tired of a discussion than just “these ideas make us uncomfortable”. It is possible to be tired of talking about a topic and be in favor of said topic. Ease up on the judgementalism.
May 5, 2011 at 11:56 am
Jacob and Scott,
I don’t disagree, but I don’t think that the two approaches or beliefs are mutually exclusive. We can be uncomfortable with the church’s approach to gender inequality and still be tired of talking about it because we perceive it all as wasted time (the church doesn’t listen to us) or because there is nothing new under the sun.
May 5, 2011 at 11:56 am
Why did we include Jon McNaughton and the Tea Party in the same category? I’m pretty tired of the Tea Party, but can we ever get too much of McNaughton?
May 5, 2011 at 12:04 pm
John C., I was more responding to Ben/CatherineWO/Olive, who seem to be questioning the moral compass of those who voted for Gender Inequality. And before I’m asked, I voted for Gay Marriage, for pretty much the same reasons as Alex.
May 5, 2011 at 12:13 pm
I voted for the gender inequality issue. The topic has been beat to death and the proponents act as if those that disagree with the progressive view on this topic are somehow morally deficient. That is why I don’t comment on those threads.
Gay marriage is a close second for me.
May 5, 2011 at 12:14 pm
You could also add the white shirt topic to the list. I would be tempted by that as well.
May 5, 2011 at 12:23 pm
I, too, am sad to see Gender Inequality winning out. I can see getting tired of talking about angels on a pin head–a purely intellectual exercise…but I don’t know if everyone realizes that this isn’t just a intellectual bauble we like to toss around for a while and then set aside.
This is my life and my soul and my eternity we’re talking about. And if you think that sounds melodramatic, then you are “baubling” (v. to make into an intellectual bauble) something incomprehensibly more important than white shirts at the sacrament table or a broadway musical.
May 5, 2011 at 12:25 pm
I believe, though I don’t have the stats in front of me, that more men than women participate in nacle discussions.
May 5, 2011 at 12:28 pm
Just one? That’s rough.
May 5, 2011 at 12:34 pm
For me, talking about gender inequality is like eating a bagel every morning. I never get tired of it. And fortunately, bagels come in a lot of different flavors, so you don’t have to have the same bagel every time.
I get that some people get bored of bagels, or maybe don’t even like them in the first place. I think it would be a little much, however, for them to start stealing bagels from other people.
I know this is a terribly analogy. It’s because I’m hungry. Also because of gender inequality.
May 5, 2011 at 12:45 pm
I vote for more polls, because they are fun. And Police Beat.
May 5, 2011 at 12:54 pm
Lynnette,
Fear not. I assure you that, if it comes to it, there are a lot of other excellent bageleries out there (I believe you work at one). Our going without here for one month should not significant decrease your input, just our output.
May 5, 2011 at 1:01 pm
But Lynnette, there are entire blogs dedicated to your bagels. Blogs aren’t restaurants. They’re soup-kitchens. They only serve one or two things on a given day, and usually only a few truly outstanding meals a month. You don’t want those to be bagels too often.
I like bagels too (if they’re not stale), but too much bread makes you constipated.
May 5, 2011 at 1:07 pm
May 5, 2011 at 1:07 pm
Ah yes, one should always refresh before clicking “post”…
May 5, 2011 at 1:14 pm
Apame (38),
I don’t know if you realize that different people deal with pain in different ways. I find discussions of gender inequality very important, but also very painful. I experience that pain precisely because it’s not just intellectual bauble that I “like to toss around for a while and then set aside.” Indeed, it’s my own inability to simply set it aside which requires me to forcefully disengage myself from it now and then so that I don’t equate the issue with the entirety of life and the Gospel and forsake all other needs. More power to those who are able to flip a mental switch and not let gender discourse in the Church affect their disposition toward their fellow Saints. I’m not one of them, I guess.
May 5, 2011 at 1:19 pm
And it’s true that as a visitor to your restaurant, it would be rather presumptuous to dictate your menu. (Though then again, you are taking a poll.) But since I can cook bagels every day at my own fabulous bakery, I can’t complain too much.
But I am curious: do other people read posts on topics they find boring? I’m so overwhelmed with all the blogs that I have a hard time reading the ones I find interesting. Or is it more, I’m exhausted by this topic and yet I somehow can’t resist reading the latest post on it? (I ask because I find myself doing that, and then wondering what insanity possesses me to do that to myself.)
May 5, 2011 at 1:20 pm
I can empathize with 12 , 27, and 35 & their basic dissatisfaction with GE/GM posts. My own reasons for this is that I’m more sensitive, in my constrained subjective way, to being subjected to misinformation upon a theme in which I feel subjectively entwined, being gay. For similar reasons, then, I’ve suggested, too, a moratorium on gay essays in journals on passing occasions. But then, we recently printed an essay in Dialogue’s spring issue which changed my mind on whether there could ever be anything new said under the sun on the subject. My friend Gary Bergera, too, told me he thought this essay was ahead of its time; meaning, I guess, that it had said something new on the subject. Hopefully though continued hard work we can continue to achieve new insights into more ways to widen the gospel’s scope.
Otherwise, my general sense of BCC trending is that GE/GM OP’s have not been over-exposed. Although the fact that they have drawn more comment easily easily may have lead to such a perception. Most typically, though, opening BCC is like a box of chocolates–made by the finest artisans.
May 5, 2011 at 1:29 pm
How about we just ban the Bloggernacle for a month? That way we ALL get a break from the mundane and silly impishness that we all think is so crucial for salvation and our sublime version of notoriety.
May 5, 2011 at 1:29 pm
I read all of ZD’s bagels, tho I comment rarely.
I voted for Gender Inequality, but not because I find it boring. If I could read only the posts on gender inequality, whether at ZD or BCC or elsewhere, I’d have voted for something else. But I can’t stop myself from reading the comments following the posts, and *that’s* what I’m tired of. Posts are almost always well thought out, with new perspectives. Comments may sometimes be insightful, but too often they degenerate to angry anecdotes that may or may not be too skewed for belief, or may or may not reflect more on the pathology of the commenter than on gender inequality in the church.
I like posts where I can participate in the discussion, and I find that I can seldom participate in threads about gender inequality, or gay marriage.
May 5, 2011 at 1:30 pm
Oh my goodness. Don’t ban the discussion of McNaughton. A few more shenanigans on his part, and your haiku thread could reach the coveted 1000 comment status.
May 5, 2011 at 1:32 pm
Just so long as you don’t forget, Martin, that bread is the staff of life.
Scott B., I appreciate that explanation of where you’re coming from, and can somewhat relate to it. Even an obsessive feminist blogger like me can’t do all feminism all the time, and there are a lot of other religious topics that I also find fascinating and worthwhile, and often which remind me of other aspects of the church which I find more positive. (Bagels are prominent on the ZD menu, obviously, but we do have a variety of other things, and I’m glad we do.) That said, I can’t ever really get away from the gender inequality–it’s always there in the background of my experience of the church, even when I try to take a breather and focus on other stuff for a while.
May 5, 2011 at 1:39 pm
Reading comments on a post about topics we are tired of defending why people should not be tired of those topics… Interesting.
May 5, 2011 at 1:45 pm
Ardis, we’ve often discussed that problem. Even if we try to cook up something new (which can be challenging, given how much certain topics have been discussed), it seems that regardless of the original topic, we frequently end up having the same arguments in the comments (and even often with the same people). Though not always, and I suppose that’s part of the reason we keep doing it. (Also perhaps because we like to hear ourselves talk, but on a blog that should go without saying.)
And Ben Park, thanks muchly for your #29.
May 5, 2011 at 1:49 pm
Lynnette (53),
Eggzactly. It’s always there–it never goes away. Sometimes though, I need it to be in the background for a bit so that I can get my home teaching done.
May 5, 2011 at 2:00 pm
So much word to Scott @ #31.
May 5, 2011 at 2:28 pm
I voted for gender inequality because that will eliminate other discussions as well such as; the Church and it’s relation with the BSA, ward budgets, Young Men’s vs. Young Women’s activities, and so on.
If there’s room for another analogy; Railing on about Gender Inequality is akin to Ron Paul’s obsession with abolishing the Federal Reserve. Yes, it should be abolished (Gender Inequality and the FED), but it is NOT one of those things that is seen as “This needs to change right now”.
It will be a glorious day when the Lord reveals that all worthy members of the Church can receive the Priesthood AND that countries of the world return to sound money.
May 5, 2011 at 2:33 pm
Since Ron Paul’s commentary on the Fed is rooted in complete and absolute insanity….what are you saying about discussion on gender equality?
May 5, 2011 at 2:34 pm
I admit that I can totally sympathize with Scott’s #47. It’s perhaps the well reasoned approach. I just fear that when putting something temporarily on the back-burner that there is always the risk that it won’t come back up. I find with myself that if I am not constantly vigilant, I always find into the very same pitfalls that make me cringe—a sense of entitlement is always tempting and oh-so-easy to justify.
And Ardis makes a very important point in #51, though I guess I would always continue to push for more dialogue–things should eventually break through. I know some topics took me dozens of posts to finally realize that I was being stubborn in my own ways and finally saw the light. But boy does it get galling. (Though, Ardis, wouldn’t we “eat” all of ZD’s bagels? I am successfully discombobulated with the whole metaphor…)
May 5, 2011 at 2:35 pm
I think we should all refer to Ben Park as the Duke of Cambridge. It would be fun.
May 5, 2011 at 2:37 pm
Ben (60),
With all due respect, I’d invite you to take a look at the author list here, peruse the archives for a few minutes, and decide if you think that, by imposing a 30-day ban on posts related to gender equality, we have much risk of never bringing it up again. :)
May 5, 2011 at 2:47 pm
It’s a good point, Scott; perhaps I’m just in a foul mood today ;). And my “fear” mentioned in the comment is not so much that BCC wouldn’t pick the the topic back up (ha!), but more that people in general can forget issues by simply putting on blinders. I’m obviously reading more into this thing than there really is, and compounding that by not expressing it well.
I think I just have a more knee-jerk reaction to the idea of people being “tired” of discussions on gender inequality, for the reasons outlined above. (especially by Apame and Lynnette) So, my comments are meant more toward a common mindset within the Church than just what BCC will post about in the next month. (I’ve been wondering if John has similar motives with this poll as well.)
For the record, I bear my testimony that BCCs are awesome.
May 5, 2011 at 2:48 pm
Some people may feel the same way about gender inequality issues within the church, in that complaining about gender inequality is rooted in insanity and/or unrighteousness. That is not my position, but the position exists.
I don’t think I fleshed out the comparison enough:
Both the Fed and Gender inequality are the cause of some harm.
General membership (both of the nation and Church) are subject to both the Fed and Gender inequality, without recourse for affecting them.
Both the Fed and Gender inequality are declared by fiat. The institutions cannot change unless those in authority change the policy surrounding the two.
Thus, having general membership rail on about the harm and pain of gender inequality is akin to having someone rail on about the harm and economic misery caused by the Fed. People will notice, words will be exchanged, but nothing will come of it, unless it comes from the top.
Chris, you and I can debate the pros and cons of monetary policy, but it is not insanity to ask that the means of exchanging goods and services be grounded in a system of tangible value, not paper fiat.
May 5, 2011 at 2:53 pm
Chris (#61): I think Wills just got that spot. Probably a better choice.
May 5, 2011 at 2:59 pm
I think Gender Inequality is such a huge topic. I may be sick to death of people whining that women should have the priesthood, but it doesn’t mean that I am tired of discussions about date rape or how to raise girls who will want to get married and have children but also feel confident in getting educated and enjoying a career (for the years that they work which might be many) or discussions about how women need to get more involved in planning for their retirement and saving in 401Ks, Roths, & IRAs (Oh, wait, nobody does talk about that because their husbands will take care of it and they don’t need to worry their pretty little heads about it).
May 5, 2011 at 3:02 pm
Fletcher,
I agree, it can seem like an exercise is futility sometimes. But, Lester Bush gives me hope.
I still voted to temp. ban GE posts for a different reason: I’m tired of watching people talk past each other. Maybe just close the comments – that’ll do.
May 5, 2011 at 4:27 pm
We could refer to Ben Park as the Duchess of Cambridge.
May 5, 2011 at 4:28 pm
It may interest some to know that I don’t think there is a single post in the history of BCC where the OP argues for women to have the priesthood. There may be one somewhere–but I don’t think so.
May 5, 2011 at 4:46 pm
Gender Inequality is ahead at 30%. Okay, you can take a month off here, as long as I can get bagels at ZD, FMH, and assorted other blogshoppes.
P.S. I have noticed remarkably little whining for women to be ordained to the priesthood throughout the bloggernacle, but particularly at BCC.
May 5, 2011 at 6:30 pm
could we never talk about Glenn Beck? The time I hear and listen to him most is when I’m reading about him here. now sure i could develop some sort of click resistance, but as of yet I am weak.
we could talk about sidewalks and it would still end up gender inequality in the comments
May 5, 2011 at 7:55 pm
What Ardis said in 51.
Topic I would like to see more discussed: I’d really like to know more about how the church is managed and how its finances are run. I just don’t know enough to actually write on the topic. Because, really, if we ban gender, porn, and gay marriage discussions then we’d have to engage in actual research.
May 5, 2011 at 8:02 pm
Vanity of vanities, sayeth the Preacher….there is nothing new under the sun.
Why else do we cover the same old stories?
May 5, 2011 at 8:08 pm
#69: I think it is very rare for Mormon women to advocate for the priesthood, because there is a feeling that the proposal is too radical. Easier to make little strides.
May 5, 2011 at 8:09 pm
Wait–has this conversation descended into gender? Yikes!
May 5, 2011 at 9:36 pm
#34 Kevin F.
Well, speaking for myself, even a little Jon McNaughton is WAY too much…..
May 5, 2011 at 9:38 pm
I’m tired of gender arguments of all types. It is not intellectually stimulating.
May 5, 2011 at 10:36 pm
Haven’t had time to read all the comments, but I voted other, and my other is Mormon presidential candidates.
Actually, all presidential candidates. You could call this a preemptive banning of sorts, since the topic is just starting to heat up, and I can feel my vast annoyance getting ready to settle in.
May 5, 2011 at 10:44 pm
Okay, comments are shorter than they seem.
I agree with jks in 66. Gender equality needs subdivisions. Is it all feminist topics in general? Women’s place in the structure of the church? Unequal sexual mores? Women’s history? Stories about homemaking? Plan of Salvation/Temple stuff? Heavenly Mother?
Does a ban on gender equality just mean we have to talk about men for a whole month? Booooring. :D
May 6, 2011 at 1:30 am
Sort of off-topic, obviouisly–but I think McNaughton is just incredibly gifted.I’m not going to convince many here of that, obviously. They’d sooner buy velvet paintings and hang them in their living rooms. But, in my opinion, if we were in Wm. Blake’s day, McNaughton art would, in a way, = Blake’s…whereas the scholarly, more-typical “Bloggernacle denizens’” tastes in art would tend to = that of Blake’s many Rationalist contemporaries.But, alas, nowadays, it is Blake whose art is appreciated for what it is–despite it’s, say, “Anglo-Israel”-ism… without folks bothering nowadays to worry about its “Brits-anciently-mixed-with-travelling-Israelites” component.Rationalists have won, in many ways, so many of the culture wars over the centuries–so people can take Blake’s work within the context presented. (Probably nobody can parse my statement here. O well.)
, so basically in so many ways won so much of the cultural war over the centuries. In a way.) was waay out there. But nowadays we dig B’s art, despite its (Or, rather, And partly due to it, I believe.)
May 6, 2011 at 1:31 am
Last paragraph in comment above is stuff I forgot to erase.
May 6, 2011 at 1:39 am
Mention of “velvet paintings” was supposed to be in ironic tone. (That is, I’m not trying to say your taste is middle-brow and McNaughton is highbrow; no, I’m saying that your tastes are high brow but that the very nature of what is high brow can be subjected to deconstruction.)
May 6, 2011 at 1:50 am
Ooo — if somebody would just print McNaughton’s masterworks on velvet, I’d take down the dogs-playing-poker over the fireplace and hang McNaughton there instead!
May 6, 2011 at 4:27 am
Can’t the poll go into effect already?
Seriously, I enjoy the posts about history vastly more than contemporary social issues.
May 6, 2011 at 6:16 am
Yeah, wouldn’t it be great if there were a blog or two devoted solely to exploring Mormon history?
May 6, 2011 at 6:41 am
mapman, I get what you are saying, and I agree with you, mostly.
But still, a big part of the appeal of studying our history is because it helps me discover and understand how we got to where we are. LDS understanding of contemporary social issues didn’t just happen magically overnight. It helps me tremendously if I can see our current interpretation of an issue against the backdrop the 19th century church’s interpretation.
May 6, 2011 at 7:39 am
I would find exploring opinions / ideas / research conclusions on: approximations of how long till the second coming; what the millenium would really be like; actual gathering to either Salt Lake OR Adam Ondi Ahman; Calling and Election; the “Inner Church”; difference between sacred revelations and pre-cognisence; visits to the spirit world upon near death….returning to tell experience; visits from relatives from spirit world; time warp experiences; meetings with beings where important information about genealogy work was conferred; and more !
May 6, 2011 at 7:43 am
Left out boundaries of……..must be PERSONAL experience, not a rumor or story overheard, or recount from book or movie…..must be true FIRST hand account to be reliable.
Any second hand telling , although plausible, risks dilution or change or fallible memory. IF you want more ideas, I have plenty.
Love to all.
May 6, 2011 at 9:02 am
Thanks Christopher, I already follow those blogs.
Mark Brown, what I said was probably insensitive. No doubt social issues are important and interesting to some, but I don’t really enjoy reading about it. I think that the history posts have been the highlight of BCC and I have immensely enjoyed reading many of them. Oh, and I also like the Matsby ones.
May 6, 2011 at 9:09 am
Folks, I’m calling it. No Gender Inequality posts for a month (well, until June 1 (also, unless something really interesting happens or someone forgets about this poll (also, unless someone wants to, really (I certainly don’t hold any authority to enforce this)))).
I don’t know if we’ll do this again, but it was an interesting experiment.