Comments on: Wanted: Emerging/Missional Chick Bloggers

By: Diana

Diana — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:33:31 +0000

Hey everyone, I just started…. some years behind… and I try to learn from you all ;-D
I noticed that some of the women in our group do the work their guys talk about in numerous meetings ;-D but hey: this is The Netherlands, we are wicked good in talking, there’s even a name for our way of talking: Poldermodel… yeah… translates something like poldermodel … ???
So, here’s maybe a thing about blogging: my lovely hubby blogs a lot, talks a lot, and I’m not, just starting…

Remember: we missional/emergings (f) are out there -> doing the job

;-D

By: Nadia

Nadia — Sat, 05 Aug 2006 12:24:45 +0000

I’m a few months late for this discussion, but I thought I’d chime in. I recently saw a listing of emerging church blogs, 200 in all and 8 were from women. This is pretty f**ked up, so I started my own:
http://www.sarcasticlutheran.typepad.com

Let’s go girls….
Nadia

By: yasminfinch: biblioblogs and all that

yasminfinch: biblioblogs and all that — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 05:46:27 +0000

[...] Links: http://www.subversiveinfluence.com/wordpress/?p=340 http://www.subversiveinfluence.com/wordpress/?p=362 [...]

By: erickeck

erickeck — Thu, 24 Nov 2005 12:51:59 +0000

gotta give props to my wife who has been a faithfull blogger for about 4 years now

http://www.bethkeck.com :)

By: cheryl

cheryl — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 20:47:44 +0000

i’ve just started a blog… it’s angled more towards alternative worship (as part of a project i’m working for)…

By: dan

dan — Fri, 02 Sep 2005 00:57:40 +0000

Brother Maynard. Yes, Dan is short for something – Danielle. When signposts started I was a little opaque about my identity, partly because I have a job elsewhere. But I also found it interesting that most people who read the blog assumed that I was a guy, until I “came out” a little while ago.

I think that women, like men, participate in a whole range of different ways in this conversation. There is definitely a difference in the way that Phil and I blog and what fires us up. This is one of the reason I like having a “co-blogger” – we each tend to cover different areas and perspectives.

By: sliverzgirl

sliverzgirl — Mon, 22 Aug 2005 20:31:19 +0000

Unfortunately I think that there is the implication of “shaping” in your post. I also think this one could get ugly though SO I think I will step back and not respond right now – we do have a few barriers here to note as well, text lacks the ability to always form the sincere impression and the fact that men and women honestly do think and process differently. Maybe I’ll tackle it at a later date!
I’d like to note however that it is appreciated and refreshing to see the desire is being voiced to hear what God is impressing on the hearts and minds of His daughters.
2 cents.

By: Brother Maynard

Brother Maynard — Mon, 22 Aug 2005 13:34:27 +0000

Sliver; respectfully, I think you may be reading in some ideas and motives that aren’t there. I don’t think I have the “power” for what you’re suggesting, and I wouldn’t want it. This entire thread is largely about making sure there’s space in the conversation for the female voice, and if someone — especially men — try to “shape” it somehow, it’ll stop being the voice we need it to be. I wouldn’t invalidate your conversation at all, even though it takes a different format than the way I “talk.” That’s the point here: I think the one thing that this thread has highlighted more than any other is the fact that men and women converse differently and see their practice of emerging / missional (perhaps church generally) in a different way. Nothing wrong with that, but for a guy reading a large number of blogs which are more article-type, it helps to be reminded that some of these blogs are going to take a different shape simply because they’re by women, and that this different shape is critical to keep in the conversation. At a glance, we might think it’s not a part of the same conversation (because of our tendancy to want to categorize) and I think the conversation in this thread has probably demonstrated that it is part of the same discussion.

General comment — as Scot suggested, I’ll be compiling a list of the blogs we’ve listed and will add a few thoughts summarizing the conversation here. Hopefully I’ll get some time for it and have it posted next week.

By: SliverzGirl

SliverzGirl — Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:05:48 +0000

I’d like to know where you think you have the power to be giving me a set of rules on how to have the ‘conversation’ – What right or authority do you have to invalidate my ‘conversation’? I mean no offense but merely would like to point out that perhaps the reason you see so little women talking about ‘it’ more is because of the general opinion and attitude we get from the “men’s club” putting us down for talking about families, day to day life. Accounts of Chrsit himself are day to day life…do you think they had a script each day on how to share? Women are multi taskers who write about what goes on in our lives,men are more common to write article formatted thoughts. It is no better nor worse than the way we at least I , share my life. I am driven by relationship because God created that part in me. I find that comments like yours shoot women in the head and drown us out so we don’t bother speaking out in the first place..unless angered or wounded enough to be prompted to yell out.

By: Brother Maynard

Brother Maynard — Wed, 17 Aug 2005 04:43:25 +0000

Sushi, thanks for dropping in on this conversation. I'm not sure what emergentspeak I'm attached to, but I won't even try to deny it ;^) Funny how people can be saying the same things and both call it "plain English" yet it doesn't sound alike sometimes. Sorry to hear about the response from Resonate, but I couldn't begin to address that — I do hope you'll join in on this conversation though. I would like to see some women involved in the Emergent.ca discussion from the outset... helps make sure we keep our eyes on what we're about rather than bulldozing ahead to conquer the goal. Good addition, Alan.