« All in agreement on prostitution, right? (UPDATED) | Main | "Real Manhood" »

September 30, 2004


Flying Monkey

hugo, if politics weren't my profession - as well as my hobby and the subject of my blog, i would most certainly be with you, openly taking pride in my opinions...however, when opinions can shift trust with clients, give leads into my thinking, etc - it would be silly of me to openly attach a name to the madness inside my head...

just a thought...


Thanks for cluing me in about the debates. I would have spaced it out.

I have the same dilemma about how to vote. I despise Bush so very much that I will vote for Kerry, but it certainly makes a statement to vote for a third-party candidate who one believes actually has ethics...


My anonymity is definitely a work thing. I need to put a professional news reporter face for both the editors and the readers, so airing my spiritual crises on the Internet under my own name would be inappropriate. Plus, given the amount of angry mail we get as it is, I'm sure whatever views I air on God, abortion or whatever would inflame a lot more people.


Sorry about spamming you with comments, but to answer your question, I think many male bloggers do not post under their real identity for the same reason that I don't...I do not want the things I divulge about my workplace to get back to anyone, nor do I want my reputation slandered in "real life" because of something I have put on my blog, which for me is therapeutic. So perhaps it just boils down to their reason for blogging in the first place. If all I posted were political opinions, my full name would be right up there.

You do not complain about your workplace in your posts. If you wanted to blog about how messed up a system is, using your experience as an example, that could be career suicide.

La Lubu

"Does this mean I'm getting old?"

No, it means radio is getting bland and boring. Practically every station is tightly programmed to a specific demographic, and the station playlists come out of Wilmette, IL. No requests. DJs for the most part don't get to choose any music. Usta' be, the radio would be the place to hear the latest sounds. Not anymore---radio won't touch anyone not already proven to be a top seller. You certainly can't hear rock, soul, blues, jazz and reggae on the same station....commercial station, anyway. Back in the day, you could at least count on a broad interpretation of what "rock" was.

There's a reason people buy CD changers! Or get satellite services. I'm not getting old, I just insist on having taste (and broad taste, at that) in music...and radio is not providing that anymore (cue up Elvis Costello singing, "Radio Radio"...the uncut version!).


After the debates, I think I am much more confident in my Kerry vote.

Lynn Gazis-Sax

I blog under my real name, and my family, church, and boss all know my blog URL. It never occurred to me to be anonymous, given that I'd been posting under my real name to Usenet for decades anyway, so it's too late for there to be much point. Still, because I'm posting under my real name, there are certain things I simply don't write, that other bloggers do. I would never, for example, post complaints about my workplace. When I was at my last job and watching the layoffs come (eventually getting hit in the fourth layoff), I made sure not to say anything about it on my blog until I was actually laid off.

Mary Garth

"Am I a bad person because I am thinking of reneging on my promise to vote Democratic, and contemplating voting Green for a third straight election?"


Orange Hans

Why are you pessimistic about John Kerry? Perhaps you believe the polls that are deliberately biased by including too many Republicans? Have no fear; Senator Kerry will make a fine showing on Election Day, and will make a fine President. I am uncomfortable with the bellicose rhetoric about winning the 'war on terror,' but at least a grown-up will be making decisions in the White House.

On another note, I blog pseudo-anonymously; I try not to write anything that I'd regret if my name were attached to it. I don't think it wise to be too open about my political and religious views where I live. I don't want to be hassled by people that disagree with me. And I'll never post anything about my job. On the other hand, I don't try to mislead anyone about my identity. Anyone that knows me would recognize me in my blog.


You live in California. If Kerry's doing bad enough that he needs your vote, then he's a lost cause.

As for radio, I'm 24 and there aren't any commercial stations that play music I really like. The best I can do music-wise is our local classic rock station. But they bother me because all their DJ banter and ads are based on the idea that their listeners are the crude horny guys demographic -- they do all these cross-promotions with strip clubs, and their ads say that you should look at their website at work because you won't get in trouble for it the way you would looking at porn.

And some of us don't post our pictures because we don't want to scare away our readers.


I try to maintain some anonymity, but someone could find out who I was without too much trouble. The reason is because of my work. Not all of us have the same sort of freedom to express our views as those in academia. Particularly when we work for the government.

Kind of cowardly, but I need my paychecks and health insurance!


"Am I a bad person because I am thinking of reneging on my promise to vote Democratic, and contemplating voting Green for a third straight election?"

Hugo! You are not a bad person, I feel your pain and I found a nifty solution: It's called vote pairing, www.votepair.org. There you sign up as someone who would like to vote green, they then pair you with a registered green in a swing state who vows to vote Kerry and you likewise vow to vote Cobb. How cool is that? That way you can still vote your conscience and help someone else to do the same! (sort of). Anyway, i'm doing it.

As for you and Radio, I don't know if I can comment on the "old" part, as we are roughly the same age, but I hate radio too. (with the exception of the excellent KPCC (NPR) and a couple of classical stations). Recently I have found myself struggling with a most stressfull dilemma: my cd player died in my car. Now I can find the exact same cd receiver on ebay for around 50 bucks (which means I could install it myself, since there would be no need for rewiring), but i'm sort of strapped for cash lately. That being said I went out and bought one of those iRock fm transmitter thingys for my ipod. I've heard the sound quality was pretty bad, but I was thinking "come on, how bad could it be"? It is SOOOO bad! Has anyone had any experience with these things? Is there one that is better or are they all bad? It just sucks (sorry Hugo, I know you hate that word)! So now i'm stuck listening to music that used to sound so good on my cd player, but that now sounds like a radio station with really, really bad reception. So i'm thinking of holding out for the new alpine cd-ipod-car stereo whatchamahoogie, but thats going to set me back like 500 buckaroos (and if i'm going to buy such an expensive stereo, I really should buy new speakers as well. But that seems like a waste of money. I could buy a brand new car stereo that doesn't work with my ipod, but whats the point to that? I'm so confused. Me thinks I need male input on this one, at the risk of hijacking Hugo's comment section ...fellas... Whats a girl to do?

I didn't watch the debates, I was in class, but I caught of it on cspan after I got home. Did anyone else notice that George's podium was a good half a foot higher than Kerry's? What's up with that?


Ironically, just now, while vacuuming the house, I realized, how wrong was it of me to assume that only men could understand and offer advice on my lust for technological gadgetry? Sorry folks, i'm still learning :) Also it occured to me that it was inappropriate of me to solicit said advice on Hugo's blog, so just disregard the whole above rant altogether. Sorry Hugo!

However, I still am curious as to whether or not anyone noticed the difference in size of GW's podium as opposed to Candidate Kerry's. This served to make GW look taller and bigger than he actually is. These things have a subconscious effect on people, I wonder if that was intentional?

La Lubu

I blog semi-anonymously; anyone in the building trades in my area would instantly recognize me. I don't post anything (anywhere) that I wouldn't say in person, and I don't use my blog to 'vent'.

But I don't put my name out there, because I have been victimized by identity theft. Not a pleasant experience.


Hugo, why so down on Kerry? Realistically, we're not likely to have a more progressive ticket in this country.

And I stopped listening to commercial music radio at around 23, so I think you're fine.


DJW, you said it "realistically" is the key word. Sometimes, I don't want to be realistic.


Yes, I noticed, surely it was intentional!


Hey, I spent last night doing exactly the same thing…debate and bills.

Like Flying Monkey, I, too, am in politics, specifically, the election industry. You would think that being in the industry, part of the job is to be opinionated, but no. It’s not good policy to rant and rave all over the Internet and have your name (and reputation) attached to it. And, I suppose, it’s bad in any industry if you use your blog to complain about your work…which, sadly, I do. Actually, I think that it would be a more freeing experience to be able to attach my name and photo onto my blog. It kind of saddens me that I really can’t because of the fear that people might question my ability to leave my opinions at home and remain bipartisan while at work.

Not listening to the radio is not indicative of old age but good taste.

Our vote is a private matter, each of us are accountable only to our own conscious. Because our candidate does or does not win, does not negate our responsibility for voting honestly and with conviction. The notion that a vote for a third party is a vote thrown away is one of the hindrances to election reform. If you are interested, look into Instant Runoff Voting that will be taking place in San Francisco on November 2. IRV places new importance on voting for a third party.


Hugo, fair enough, like you, I'm pretty far to the left of Kerry and Edwards. I do think, though, that we should guard against allowing the inevitable and electorally necessary run to the center, and attack on Bush from the right on security issues and so on to cloud our judgment. A look at Kerry's record shows that he is squarely to the left of the Clinton/Gore wing of the Democrats, as well as all the other candidates (except D.K.) in the primary. Those who supported the very centrist Dean over Kerry because they thought Dean was more progressive were making their judgment on campaign rhetoric and not actual governing records.

And Edwards does have a more centrist record, but that (I suspect) reflects his home state more than his actual convictions. Furthermore, during the primary, he distinguished himself as the only serious and mainstream politician since the mid-90's welfare reform debacle to actually talk about poverty as a political issue, and propose some pretty impressive and innovative policies to address poverty. This alone was enough for me to support him in the primaries; the fact that domestic poverty is so far off the political agenda in this country is one of the things that disgusts me most about the bulk of the Democratic party, and Edwards deserves real credit from progressives for addressing this issue.

I have no idea how effective they'll be should they reach office, but this isn't Clinton/Gore II, no matter how much they try to sound like it sometimes.

Trish Wilson

Even if I was a Republican I wouldn't be able to take four more years of Bush. The war in Iraq is already a mess. With four more years of Bush it would only get worse. Plus there's all the domestic damage he could do with four more years that makes me very uneasy.

I post with my full name and I've mentioned the state I live in but I don't get any more specific than that. I think a lot of people on the Internet actually say and post more than they would let on in public because they're fooled into thinking what they say is read by only the small number of people who respond to them compared to the scads of lurkers they aren't even aware of. They're lulled into a false sense of security because they sit around in their sweats and t-shirts, writing in the privacy and safety of their homes. That said, I think people blog anonymously for reasons already mentioned - they want their privacy, they don't want their jobs and blogs crossing paths, etc. Even people who somewhat identify themselves online don't completely open themselves up. I don't think it's particularly safe to turn yourself into an open book on the WWW.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Regular reads

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004