Yikes, it's a gender post! Yes, it's the weekend and I thought I'd go all editorial on yo' asses. This is a subject I've wanted to write about for some time, but as an article on this thorny issue came about on Shiny Shiny recently, I thought now would be the time to put my 2-pence-worth in. But, my 2-pence is new and shiny and I would like to gaze upon both sides of this particular coin.

Firstly, I will begin by stating that I am in fact a woman tech, gadget and general 'stuff' writer (the horror!) mhmm, yes I am. Further to that, I will add that I have been dubiously endowed with the physical attributes that are long blonde hair and big boobs. Does that make you less or more inclined to read what I have to say? Should I use this to further my work or make the conscious effort to hide this to the same ends? Well, I'll let you mull that one over as it is something I shall return to later in this article. For now, on with the show!

To begin with, I would like to state that I am less of a 'feminist' and more an equalitarian, though this is with an eye to recognising that there are gladly inherent differences between the sexes. However, as with so much in our society, gender is a construction, and one which takes these significant biological differences and runs a mile with them. The construction of gender is beneficial for many facets in society, and not least, sticking with the subject matter, those who wish to sell us products. Studies show women's spending power is growing faster than men's, and not only that, but they are choosing more and more to splash the cash on technology. So why, then, are women so underrepresented within the tech field?

Well, let's look to the front line, to the women who, like me, report on the ceaseless world of technology. Shiny Shiny's article rued the lack of women within tech and, further to that, the patronising attitude of men towards the few women who do exist within the field. The field of gadgets and technology is, like most others, a male-dominated one. No, that is not a whinge, it is merely the statement of fact. But, how much blame for this sad situation can we really lay on the men, and to what extent do these women have a hand in their own downfall?

When I read internet coverage of tech, I seek neither to read men's nor women's work specifically. As long as the content's good, I couldn't care less about the gender of the hands by which it was typed. Yes, I do feel a certain pride upon reading a fellow woman's work which is well-written, purely because of the underrepresentation factor, but to know that this was a woman, a credit by name at the foot of the post is sufficient enough. The problem I have with women writers within this area is that more often than not they see fit to declare themselves female i.e. women talk tech for other women etc. Why, if what you truly strive for is equality, must you insist on consitently segregating yourselves? Can you not just be writing as an interested person? Of course, this further filters, rather predictably, to the content, where pink prevails and presidence of coverage is given to that which is cute or covered in f'ing Swarovski crystals. If women persist on patronising their own kind, how on earth are the men who dominate the industry ever to take us seriously? To pander to the trappings of gender construction is to perpetuate your own stereotype.

Looking to the media, it goes without saying that this industry runs on appearances as much as actual 'talent.' Ergo, to be attractive, particularly as a female, all too often equates with hightened recognition. But, as I touched on earlier, is it right to work this to your own advantage? It is a sad fact that women are prized on their physical attractiveness, often more than for their talents. This has never been more obvious that in the world of technology, where it is a well-recognised and successful gimmick to combine beautiful women with tech. Take Stuff magazine, for example, where every single issue is trotted out without fail adorned by the image of a scantily clad and beautiful woman seductively clutching the latest must-have boys toy. Suffice to say, I doubt the model could give less of a toss about the spec of the product held within their lovely hands than the exposure and the pay cheque that will duly come her way because of it. Weirdly, there is no allusion pertaining to said woman caring about said gadget. So long as this boyish Bond-like fusion exists in visual image alone, this stuff will sell. Yes, I think it's highly sexist, very silly and really rather pitiful, but I cannot be annoyed with the magazine itself for it is a business and as such is merely working the male market with the knowledge of two facts alone: men like pretty women and men like technology. And so, we have a male-dominated industry which prizes the attractiveness of women and also the gimmicky fusion of attractive women and tech. These are very difficult perameters to work within as it is a very fine line between being considered attractive and being considered dumb because of it. So, is it right to use this to your advantage? Are the women who do this savvy players of the system, or are they, in fact, just being played? Women can, will and do use this system to their own ends, to play up the notion of sex selling. But, this is not without consequences. Even if you can back up your looks with knowledge and genuine interest, the most you can honestly hope for is for men to marvel at how you can string a sentence together whilst looking so pretty and managing what will doubtless be considered a feigned interest in the goods on hand. If you think this route will make you equal to your male counterparts, you are wrong. All you will be is even more of a gimmick than the models in the magazines. No, I don't believe you should have to consciously hide that you are an attractive female, but if you work the looks angle, then on your looks you will be judged.

The world of gadgets and technology is and will be, for the foreseeable future at least, a male-dominated industry. But, to pander to stereotypes is to uphold them. If you want to be taken seriously as a female tech writer, and you genuinely want to be equal to the men who work within this area, I do not see how a "yes ladies, this does come in pink" or the "look at me I've got huge boobs and something to say about a gadget" attitude is going to work. This is, to me, worse sexism than anything dealt out by men. If you dumb yourselves down, you dumb your audience down, and neither one of you is going to be taken seriously. This field is hard enough to work within already, but women who do this make it a whole lot harder for all of us, only to complain about it after. Where sexism is at play, you really cannot have it both ways. This really is a case of put up or shut up.