I blame Tim Footman for this, because if he hadn’t blogged his results from UrlAi.com, a site “that claims to be able to analyse the text of a blog and extrapolate the gender, age and general mood of the author” I’d never have known about it, and what’s more, I’d never have been tempted to try it.
But try it I did. And here are my results:
“toomuchtosayformyself.com is probably written by a female somewhere between 66-100 years old. The writing style is personal and upset most of the time.”
Great, that’s cheered me up no end. Thanks for that Tim.
Too Much To Say For Myself 
Tim Foreman was obviously speaking about himself when he made the claim you are a ‘female aged somewhere between 66-100 years old. Just switch ‘female to male’and that describes Foreman exactly! What? This is not science or analysis – who says because Foreman has no credentials whatsoever and instead demonstrates anyone – no matter how biggoted or women-hating can create anything they wish for circulation on the internet.
Jennifer, I think there’s been a misunderstanding: Tim didn’t create the site, he just used it to analyse his own blog the same as I did.
I got pretty much exactly the same, other than the fact I am mostly happy. Huh. Who knew?
Well on the bright side, you are looking good for someone in the 66-100 year old bracket! LOL
Sorry if I am hijacking the thread but have you all looked at the it is hard growing up gay thread on Cif?
It has made me shake with anger and fear.
Apparently being ginger or fat is the same as being gay in the teen society.
Suicide is apparently a weak response.
Does that include yer guest bloggers then? (also looking good for 66-100 if I do say so myself).
I decided to try this on a blog from the torygraph.
blogs.telegraph.co.uk-news-tobyyoung is probably written by a male somewhere between 66-100 years old. The writing style is personal and upset most of the time.
CiF is full of idiots Jennifera30. The thread on the new ‘lesbian drama’ lip service is full of males saying how much they’ll enjoy masturbating to it.
Actually make that ‘the world’ not just CiF.
I know that Cif is full of hate but it generally doesn’t make me actually tremble in fear and hatred.
The growing up gay thread did, I think it is time for me to give up reading it.
You’re right, that thread is full of ignorant tossers jennifera, but try not to let them get to you.
LOL!
wewillnot.wordpress.com is probably written by a female somewhere between 66-100 years old. The writing style is personal and upset most of the time.
Looking good, looking good…
I got exactly the same result as you, Cath!
Here are MY findings:
urlai.com was probably created by a male somewhere between 11-100 years old. The analytical style is patriarchal and uninspired most of the time.
urlai.com is obviously devised by the sort of person afflicted by moronic- aggressive-disorder who haunts the Cif site in order to be the first to write a hate-filled comment.
The good thing about CiF though Cath, it’s always first with the really pressing social issues of the day….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/09/facebook-like-dislike
(Sarcasm, thats a very high form of wit that is )
@ polly
That article has 110 comments!
It’s a key social issue Valerie. Why DOESN’T Facebook have a whole range of options such as ‘can’t really be arsed one way or the other’ ‘mildly enthusiastic’, ‘think it’s a bit icky’ and ‘this kind of thing makes me want to bring back the death penalty!’. Eh, eh?
Think you’re so smart Mark Zuckerberg, just because you’re a multi billionaire, and you can’t even give people a proper choice of ways to waste their time! Well CiF are going to throw a spanner in the works of that and no mistake…
That’s what keeps me off Facebook, polly. Well that, and the fact that I can barely keep up with posting once a week and commenting on 4-ish blogs.
Well.
“hangbitching.com is probably written by a male somewhere between 66-100 years old. The writing style is personal and happy most of the time.”
Arse.
But Facebook’s got Farmville, and Mafia Wars…..
*Covers ears and goes la la la * nooo, I am trying to go cold turkey from Farmville and Mafia Wars and Cafe World and Fishville and freakin…! Damn you, Cath!
Hehehe
I have to admit I’ve never actually played (is that what it’s called?) with any of them Butterflywings. I was put off from signing up to Farmville when the woman sat next to me at a conference, who’d been very preoccupied with her laptop (and I assumed, engrossed in v v important work) for hours leaned towards me, tilted her screen my way and whispered “Do you want to see my farm?”
When I realised that it was in fact Farmville that had been distracting her, I vowed then and there to steer well clear of it.
Ok TOTALLY off topic here, but it really annoys me when you see those wankers hanging around coffee shops with their laptop, or on trains, in a ‘look how busy and important I am and I’ve got this mac which cost 5 zillion pounds’ way when you’re just reading the metro. And now I’ll just assume they’re playing with their imaginary farm. Aaaah sweet.
Hi Cath,
Coincidentally, I have been looking at the CiF archive to determine the gender disparity (that widget is much easier), and how it influences the dominating view. It probably won’t surprise you that men outnumber women, 3:1 on gender issues, and oppose everything, no matter the subject or writer. By contrast, women are supportive, almost unanimously.
This situation has existed more or less since CiF began and is self perpetuating – women turn up, are confronted by hostile regulars in overwhelming numbers, and bugger off again. Moderation of sexist comment is not enforced and the regulars, the core opposition, are given huge latitude to pursue agendas.
I’m sure this is a tired subject but why is this allowed to persist? It seems wholly contrary to all those high-minded founding principles. What is your opinion of the value of joining in the fight, weighed against the risk of legitimising a rigged game that effectively excludes most women?
I left a comment on one of Julie Bindel’s posts (a recent-ish one about prostitution) which just basically said that I agree with her. It was removed.
Angie, that’s interesting.
During the endless abuse thrown at me during the hooters reporting in our local press, we noticed that when you ‘report abuse’ you can’t report the comment has being sexist. it was a northcliffe paper.
which reflects the actions on cif that the moderation of sexist comments is not enforced.
the sooner we get sexism recognised as a hate crime, the better.
in terms of cif tho, this is the first thread on gender issues that i have seen ever ever that didn’t descend in to the usual playground insults and what about the menz and feminists are all ugly/men haters/out of date blah blah
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/06/feminism-gender1
It can happen! i think it is because maybe this subject is of special interest to feminists, as opposed to those who want to bash feminism?
I think you’re right about that post being only of special interest to feminists Sian, hence why it didn’t attract the usual misogynists. I also think the response (or lack of trolls) it got is to do with the fact that it’s a CiF America piece, and it didn’t stay on the CiF main front page for long.
Hi Angie. My own view is that the fight is still worth having. I’ve said before that I don’t blame any feminist who chooses to stay away from the CiF bear pit; it can be and often is dispiriting and depressing dealing with so much open hatred. But personally I refuse to allow the misogynists to win this one. CiF is the website of a major left-leaning newspaper, I think it’s a space worth fighting for, and not one we should be prepared to readily handover to knuckle dragging Neanderthals.
Sianushka,
You may be right, certainly that thread wasn’t as easy to derail with one of the standard lines. It might have required an original thought (beyond most of them). I do think the target is identity politics in general – you can see race issues being subjected to the same dismissive repudiation, often by the same people. So I think the discussion subject is more likely to be determinative of the choice of target, rather than its oppositon materialising, but really I don’t know.
Cath, they were too dim to find it? That makes sense!
I agree with you that CiF is too important, and necessary, a platform to abandon. I just see these unsubstantiated “rad fem” motives, scare stories and plain lies being continually repeated and think this propoganda is really damaging (see D Mail). It is also dispiriting to watch others getting mauled, even if you don’t participate. I am mystified as to why it isn’t closed down or cleaned out, the online readership can’t be that lucrative (I mean look at them).
I really wouldn’t go anywhere near any of those CiF rape threads. Can’t be arsed and pointless.
No the online readership isn’t lucrative, but I reckon they’ve inherited a lot from the Times since the inception of its paywall.
I don’t come here often, preferring to conduct my battles on CiF’s threads. However having been banned as bitethehand from that place by a concerted group containing some vicious anti-feminists, about my support for opinions with which they disapprove and suffering the same fate several times under different names, I thought you might be interested in the wit and wisdom of one of the more feminist leaning members of the group Mr Ally Fogg. The following comment appeared on a CiF thread about women’s support for The Tea Party.
“I find this article moronic, offensive, reactionary, dishonest and a clear example of false consciousness. I am a staunch feminist, but the reactionary nonsense of the tea party loses their women the right to the advances made by their ‘sisters’. In which spirit – “Get back in the kitchen, bitch and stop talking about men’s stuff!”
To which Mr Fogg’s response was:
“I mean he even puts the offensive words in quotation marks, FFS. What else do you need, a big flashing neon sign saying ‘this comment may contain traces of irony’?”
So there we have it from one of CiF’s leading feminist men, “Get back in the kitchen, bitch and stop talking about men’s stuff!” is just a bit of irony.
Haha – off topic and late, but yeah, Cath, you’re better off never experimenting with Facebook games. Once you try, you’re hooked. It is sad. I agree playing them while supposed to be at a work conference, or in fact in any way working, is not OK. I only play them because I’m bored to death right now, and when I can’t sleep.
I wouldn’t play them when out in public either…I almost never take my laptop out, and if I do it’s because I’m working from home and can’t stand being in the flat…Polly, of course those wankers are playing Farmville, or talking to their friends on whichever social networking site, or e-mailing their partner about what to have for dinner…they just want you to *think* they’re doing Very Important Work Type Things.