Courtney, as someone much older than you, I've often given you a hard time. I simply don't think you're ready for "prime-time"---but I also think that being as good as you already are, you have an excellent chance of getting there if you don't burn out--or impeach your credibility posting things you haven't had time to think through on extemporaneous blogs in silly contests which are more about business than about finding and rewarding excellence.

Keep going, girl. While this reader has often objected to your youth and lack of experience, at the same time I've old enough to know, to have seen, that today is the only one any of us can be sure of.
Speak out while you can. I have little doubt that you will.

Any time you're given the opportunity of speaking your mind in a large forum, don't waste it on small things that don't matter to anyone or on your own introspection. It is not an exercise in self-indulgence, but in communicating---to other people, and we are real, too.

Write about what you truly care about, have a passion for, and you will make other people care about your issues,too. Often I have felt with your writing that your passion was possibly not real, that you were working up steam over something that someone else had told you to be outraged about. And I could be wrong.

Don't just tell me what you think, tell me what you've done. You say you're a teacher, but sometimes your writing gives me the feeling that you have never held a job or worked for a living. Most of the people who will read your writing do work, and you cannot possibly earn their respect unless you let them see that you have had to deal some in the "real world," too.
You aren't old enough to project gravitas. At your age, respect from readers has to be earned. You haven't achieved that yet with me.

If you win this contest, I think you'll do fine because even though you don't always know what you're doing, your youth and energy will be tempered by editors who know their craft. God bless them! They never get the credit, but this contest has shown me that often when writers are busy trying to "Be the Change" it is the editors who are actually doing it.

So, girl, if you come out of this contest smelling like a rose, thank your editors, thank your parents, for footing the bill for your education--and providing you with marketable genetic material, also the people who voted for you(not me--sorry, I'm a Gyamfi girl), and the supreme being of your choice, if any.

A good editor can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. At this point, no one will mistake you for either of those things.
This reader will be anxiously waiting
to see exactly who and what the real Courtney Martin will be when she has had the time to really bloom. I know you will.

grammatical errors, not gramnatical errors.

I "think" the gramnatical errors would be caught by an editor. This post by Martin is more complete than others she has posted. She packed quite a bit of information in a small space. Good work. Improvement! Plus, I learned something from the article.

Boomerang1 writes: The Post often asks "where are the women writers?"

Does it indeed?

Boomerang then continues: "Well, here she is. Other women are either too timid or too busy being cheerleaders for men to ask the questions she asks."

No, actually, Boomerang, other women
are wondering why on earth, out of 4800 entries, (that's 2447 other ones, by Boomerang's 51% reckoning)the Post saw fit to select Ms.Martin as a finalist.

A close perusal of the blogging judges' commentary might even lead a careful reader to suspect the Post is, right now, feeling a little embarrassed about their inclusion of Ms.Martin in their slate of finalists. I would not be mean enough to
repost some of the words those judges flung carelessly around in assessing Ms.Martin.

And let me be clear: It is not Ms.Martin-- who has loads of potential--who is at fault here. At her age, and having her particular life experiences, she's not expected to have good judgment. Post Editors and the judges of what will be placed before readers, are.

Thanks to technology, i.e., Facebook and other extraneous sites, the Post may, in fact, at the end of it all, be stuck with
Ms.Martin's inane prattle for all of 13 weeks. In a way, I kind of hope they are.

As one writer aptly put it: "I suppose the best revenge is sometimes the bottom line." Is it, now?

I agree 1000% with kjg79: "The misogyny dripping from these comments would be laughable if it weren't actually the thing that continues to keep women from being heard."

WP, Courtney Martin is exactly the voice that women need. The Post often asks "where are the women writers?" Well, here she is. Other women are either too timid or too busy being cheerleaders for men to ask the questions she asks. Let her put more questions like this out there to stimulate women's interest!

Two little things: "Apparently us lady scribes are..." should be *we* lady scribes are (nominative case). And I strongly object to the "p" word in the second paragraph.

Re Chucky-El's comment: "...next time you think about writing a poor woman column ask yourself this question - when was the last time a woman was drafted into the military to fight a war. OMG, I think I'll write a poor man column."--

When men were drafted, women would have wanted to be also but were not *allowed* to fight. They were only allowed to serve as nurses or at desk jobs. Now that there is no draft, women *volunteer* to fight, which takes much more courage than being drafted ever took. To base the worth or the rights and privileges of a sex on one factor--whether that sex does or does not fight wars--makes the false assumptions that patriotic service is a basis for recognition in other fields of endeavor, and that fighting for one's country is the only contribution that humans can make to society. Throughout history, women's contribution has been to bear and raise children--often with no more choice than men had in being drafted to fight wars. Also, when was the last time men were forced to serve as sex slaves at military camps? "Rape and pillage" have always been acts of war. And when was the last time a man gave birth to a child? Women still die in pregnancy and childbirth--even in this country--and they die every year, whether we're at war or peace. Also, historically, men fought wars because males were more expendable, as they were not the sex that bore children. The survival of a species depends on the number of females, not the number of males.

We've had "poor man columns" forever. Time to let the other 51% of the population have their say.

The blogger presumes that the quality of a publication's evaluations of literature can be quantified by determining whether or not it allocates accolades equally between male and female writers - and nowhere offers any argument tending to support that presumption.

RJM242: They certainly did. I caught that, too. Good eye, lady.

Hey Dixie Darlin--

I have no problem with smart women. In fact, I'd like to think that I am one (your branding me as an idiot notwithstanding). The Post's editors removed the offending apostrophe subsequent to (and presumably because of) my post. But make no mistake--it was originally "it's". And maybe I'm too hung up on grammar, but first impressions count and in this case colored my view of the author and the piece.

Dear God- someone mobilized the women-hating mobs against you. There's so much more unfounded negativity on your column than any of the others and it's obvious it's not your writing style or your content; it's you and the fact that you're a smart, savvy woman writing about feminist issues and that terrifies them (especially that idiot who didn't know that "its" IS grammatically correct in the first sentence. Remember: in the future make sure you're correct BEFORE assuming irritating condescending tone. Thanks.)

To the other commenters who don't seem to understand what the function of a 500 word column is: It is not Courtney's job to write you a thesis of the publishing industry, create new standards of judgment and summit suggestions and reviews of women authored books to be considered. Get real. (Even though she did provide you links to sites who would explain that to you.) It is her job to highlight an interesting issue (the fact that there are no women authors in the top 10 list), tell you how she feels about it (it kind of sucks), and why this may be the case (internalized patriarchal values) and then she sets you free to use your (admittedly narrow- yes, I'm talking to you, ARNNYC) brain to go do the rest of the work and form your own opinions (even though it frightens me to think what some of you will come up with.)

Okay, I'm done with y'all now but someone needed to call y'all out on your misogynist text vomit.

Finally, great post Courtney! You are truly inspiring.

I agree with those who point out that this post needs specific examples of worthy female-penned books that were overlooked, to really carry any weight. But, I have to say, I'm a bit puzzled by the general dislike that Courtney seems to engender from a larger number of readers (or at least commenters).

I like Courtney's lively writing style, her willingness to engage in nuanced personal reflection, and the variety of topics on which she has written. In the event that she doesn't make it to the next round, I would like to say that I do feel the contest has benefitted from what she has brought to the table, and wish her the best with her future writing endeavors.

Courtney:
Virginia Woolf, Mark Twain,Edgar Allen Poe,
Art Buchwald, Balzac, Patricia Cornwell,
Goethe, Strindberg, Abbie Hoffman, Kate Millet, people who get up and write when they can't sleep.

You're so prolific.....take care of yourself, girl.

Well there is another way for women to get on a book list. At Amazon, they have this concept called best seller. You know, where people put their hard earned money down to buy a book, and whoever sells the most, wins. This is an equal opportunity competition, in which your objective value to the book buying public is measured.

On that list right now I see

1. Sarah Palin: Going Rogue- An American Way of Life
2. Kathryn Stockett: The Help
9. Sapphire: The Push
11. Barbara Kingsolver: The Lacuna

Why get all worked up about PW's opinion of what the best books are, when you have something like the Amazon best seller list?

I have a hard time taking anything in this post seriously after the glaring grammatical error in the first sentence. I understand you are under time constraints, and don't have the benefit (I'm assuming) of the Post's editors. But please at least know the difference between "it's" and its.

"but wait, notice anything strange about this elite little club? That's right. Apparently us lady scribes are still just penning fanciful reflections for our diaries. We didn't say anything top-ten-worthy all year according to the most important publication on the publishing industry."

"but wait, notice anything strange about this elite little WP contest? That's right.
Apparently, among some 4750 losing entries there was not a one written by a non-Nobelist over 55 that said any top-ten-worthy thing.

Lucky for you you weren't held to that standard, Courtney. What should we do about it?

To Courtney Martin: Thank you for providing a link to the Publishers Weekly’s “Best Books 2009" list. Without the link, I probably would not have discovered that your column does not accurately state what Publishers Weekly actually did. The “Best Books 2009" list, which has 100 entries, contains many books by women authors. So, contrary to your column, women authors did make PW’s cut. If Kamy Wicoff, and you want to show your displeasure by buying books by women writers, PW’s selections provide a shopping list for you.

However, no books by women authors made PW’s top ten list. An introductory note stated that the judges wanted the top 10 list “to reflect what we thought were the top 10 books of the year with no other consideration. . . . . We ignored gender and genre and who had the buzz. We gave fair chance to the “big” books of the year, but made them stand on their own two feet. It disturbed us when we were done that our list was all male.” The introductory note is signed by novelist Louisa Ermelino.

You apparently disagree with the judge’s criteria for the top 10 list, or perhaps the exercise itself (this is apparently PW’s first attempt to make a top 10 list within the broader Best Books list). That is your prerogative. But please accurately reflect what you are objecting to and hold the sarcasm. Ms. Ermelino and her fellow judges deserve better.

I wasn't aware that PW is the most important publication on the publishing industry. That is significant. I haven't seen statistics which indicate how many best-selling books were written by women or how many women have received awards or critical acclaim in 2009 (I know there is a Pulitzer in there somewhere, right?) but I would think that there would be at least one woman author worthy of high praise in 2009. I am interested to see their criteria for choosing entries as well as how far down the list do we need to go to find women authors.

I find it interesting that people are so incensed about Martin's "poor woman" blog. They think she should feel "shame" for writing a blog that is "angry". They think she should give them more "evidence" of bias. Where is HER list? Why didn't she analyze the lists from the last ten years?

The misogyny dripping from these comments would be laughable if it weren't actually the thing that continues to keep women from being heard. These commenters seem to lack any self-realization that there ignorant attitudes are part of the problem. Their quickness to dismiss her post is EXACTLY why we need more feminist voices in the media.

Martin could have given statistics and examples, and these commenters would have found something wrong with them, too. The call for more information is just a red herring. The underlying issue is that these folks are fans of the patriarchy and feel threatened by those who question it.

I find it interesting that people are so incensed about Martin's "poor woman" blog. They think she should feel "shame" for writing a blog that is "angry". They think she should give them more "evidence" of bias. Where is HER list? Why didn't she analyze the lists from the last ten years?

The misogyny dripping from these comments would be laughable if it weren't actually the thing that continues to keep women from being heard. These commenters seem to lack any self-realization that there ignorant attitudes are part of the problem. Their quickness to dismiss her post is EXACTLY why we need more feminist voices in the media.

Martin could have given statistics and examples, and these commenters would have found something wrong with them, too. The call for more information is just a red herring. The underlying issue is that these folks are fans of the patriarchy and feel threatened by those who question it.

How about offers some ideas for which women should have been nominated and for which books? That would tell me something I don't already know.

Also, sarcasm is tough. It's an easy turn off.

Disappointing, poor women column. I expected better from you Ms. Martin. I have no idea if a women wrote a better book than any of the men, but you didn't even name one. Shame on you for writing a them against us column.

BTW, next time you think about writing a poor woman column ask yourself this question - when was the last time a woman was drafted into the military to fight a war. OMG, I think I'll write a poor man column.

OK, you've tried the "anger and outrage" blogstyle twice. It isn't you.

I realize you probably have enough votes in your pocket to advance to round three. After that, the WaPo judges will hold sway. Do you honestly think they would be impressed by this sort of post?

For your sake, find a writing style that leverages all those grey cells instead of shutting them down.

Ugh! You haven't proved women have written books currently worth the list you cite, just that they buy more books. This seems to much like an interest group's call for quotas, rather than merit. You would have been better served if you cited books eligible for this award written by women, and proof of their literary worthiness.

I have no doubt women are great writers and laud the inclusion of them in classrooms since women's lib and the feminism movement called attention to it.

But you need evidence to convince me of bias in an individual contest for 10 books published in 2009. Why not look at their lists over a 10-year-period?

Once more, you offer us blah blah blah politically correct hot air rather than insightful food for thought. Courtney, why not suggest some women authors & their books you believe were unfairly overlooked. Arguing that women being the buyers of books equates with selecting female writers is so foolish that it is hard to believe that you offer that as a reason for selecting female authors (it smacks of tokenism rather than being selected on merit).Are you arguing that since 65% of book sales are to women they should have received 65% of the awards? Selecting them on the basis you sight would mean that white writers should only be chosen because the majority of book buyers in America are white.I think it is time for some substance in your offerings or otherwise it is time to go.