Hey, it’s been two years — let’s talk about gender and op-eds again

One of the assignments for my Stafecraft class this term is that the students must draft a cogent op-ed submission on a policy issue they care about. “In this case,”cogent” not only means well-written, but written in such a way that would actually pique the interest of an op-ed page editor. With this assignment in ...

By , a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School at Tufts University and the author of The Ideas Industry.

One of the assignments for my Stafecraft class this term is that the students must draft a cogent op-ed submission on a policy issue they care about. "In this case,"cogent" not only means well-written, but written in such a way that would actually pique the interest of an op-ed page editor. With this assignment in mind, I see via Tom Maguire that the New York Times' Patricia Cohen is writing about seminars designed to encourage female participation on the op-ed pages: Uproars over the sparse numbers of women in newspapers, or on news programs, in magazines, and on best-seller lists regularly erupt every couple of years. A doozy occurred in 2005, after the liberal commentator Susan Estrich and Michael Kinsley, then editor of The Los Angeles Times?s opinion pages, got into a nasty scuffle over the lack of female columnists. That dustup is what motivated Ms. [Catherine] Orenstein to take her op-ed show on the road, which she has done with support from the Woodhull Institute, an ethics and leadership group for women. ?It?s a teachable form,? Ms. Orenstein said recently over coffee and eggs. ?It?s not like writing Hemingway. You show people the basics of a good argument, what constitutes good evidence, what?s a news hook, what?s the etiquette of a pitch.?.... Over the past 18 months several hundred women and men (though in fewer numbers) have taken the seminar, which can cost a group up to $5,000, Ms. Orenstein said (although she has also donated her services). She has not kept records, but said about two dozen former students have sent her clips of their published essays to say thank you. Suzanne Grossman at Woodhull didn?t have comprehensive statistics but said that the first pilot session for a dozen women at a Woodhull retreat produced 12 op-ed articles. (Some participants wrote more than one.) ?I try to convey the idea that there is a responsibility,? she said. ?Op-ed pages are so enormously powerful. It?s one of the few places open to the public. Where else is someone like me going to get access? It?s not like I can call up the White House: ?Hello?? ? About 30 women who also are not in the habit of calling up the White House gathered Monday evening for one of Ms. Orenstein?s seminars.... Ms. Orenstein asked: Could every woman at the large rectangular table name one specific subject that she is an expert in and say why? The author of ?Little Red Riding Hood Uncloaked: Sex, Morality and the Evolution of a Fairy Tale,? Ms. Orenstein began by saying, ?Little Red Riding Hood? and writing the words in orange marker on an oversize white pad. Of the next four women who spoke, three started with a qualification or apology. ?I?m really too young to be an expert in anything,? said Caitlin Petre, 23. ?Let?s stop,? Ms. Orenstein said. ?It happens in every single session I do with women, and it?s never happened with men.? Women tend to back away from ?what we know and why we know it,? she said. Next she asked the participants why they thought it important to write op-ed articles. Women shouted: ?Change the world,? ?shape public debate,? ?offer a new perspective,? ?influence public policy.? ?You are all such do-gooders,? Ms. Orenstein said laughing, ?I love this.? She then proceeded to create another kind of list that included fame, money, offers of books, television series and jobs. The Rev. Dr. Katherine Hancock Ragsdale, an Episcopal priest and the executive director of Political Research Associates in Boston, frowned. ?It?s not why I do it,? she said. That, Ms. Orenstein declared, is a typically female response: ?I never had a man say, ?That?s not why I do it.? ? ?What I want to suggest to you,? she continued, is that the personal and the public interests are not at odds, and ?the belief that they are mutually exclusive has kept women out of power.? Don?t you want money, credibility, access to aid in your cause? she asked. Cristina Page, a spokeswoman for Birth Control Watch in Washington, leaned forward. ?I?ve never heard anyone say that before,? she said. ?What you?ve just said is so important. It?s liberating.?Two thoughts. First, after describing the assignment to my Fletcher School students -- who are generally perceived as a group of idealistic, altruistic overachievers -- their immediate reaction to the prospect of publishing an op-ed was, "How much do we get paid for it?" I might add that this query transcended gender. Small sample issues aside, I'm very dubious about the notion that women don't seek out the things that Orenstein says they don't seek out. Second, think about that "Little Red Robin Hood" line in the excerpt, as well as this paragraph: A bunch of women joined together on one side of the table to discuss an op-ed piece by Ms. Orenstein that appeared in June 2004 in The New York Times on the remake of the movie ?The Stepford Wives.? Orenstein's expertise raises a question about the ways in which women seek to get op-eds published. Is the problem that women write on topics similar to men but face a glass ceiling at the op-ed desk? Is it that women do not write about "hard news" issues that are generally discussed in op-ed pages (politics, economics, foreign policy, social policy, ec.)? Or is the problem that what is defined as appropriate for the op-ed essays overly gendered? I tend to think it's the middle one (does Orenstein seriously think that op-eds about Little Red Riding Hood or the Stepford Wives will influence any White House?), but I'm open to suggestions from the readers.

One of the assignments for my Stafecraft class this term is that the students must draft a cogent op-ed submission on a policy issue they care about. “In this case,”cogent” not only means well-written, but written in such a way that would actually pique the interest of an op-ed page editor. With this assignment in mind, I see via Tom Maguire that the New York Times’ Patricia Cohen is writing about seminars designed to encourage female participation on the op-ed pages:

Uproars over the sparse numbers of women in newspapers, or on news programs, in magazines, and on best-seller lists regularly erupt every couple of years. A doozy occurred in 2005, after the liberal commentator Susan Estrich and Michael Kinsley, then editor of The Los Angeles Times?s opinion pages, got into a nasty scuffle over the lack of female columnists. That dustup is what motivated Ms. [Catherine] Orenstein to take her op-ed show on the road, which she has done with support from the Woodhull Institute, an ethics and leadership group for women. ?It?s a teachable form,? Ms. Orenstein said recently over coffee and eggs. ?It?s not like writing Hemingway. You show people the basics of a good argument, what constitutes good evidence, what?s a news hook, what?s the etiquette of a pitch.?…. Over the past 18 months several hundred women and men (though in fewer numbers) have taken the seminar, which can cost a group up to $5,000, Ms. Orenstein said (although she has also donated her services). She has not kept records, but said about two dozen former students have sent her clips of their published essays to say thank you. Suzanne Grossman at Woodhull didn?t have comprehensive statistics but said that the first pilot session for a dozen women at a Woodhull retreat produced 12 op-ed articles. (Some participants wrote more than one.) ?I try to convey the idea that there is a responsibility,? she said. ?Op-ed pages are so enormously powerful. It?s one of the few places open to the public. Where else is someone like me going to get access? It?s not like I can call up the White House: ?Hello?? ? About 30 women who also are not in the habit of calling up the White House gathered Monday evening for one of Ms. Orenstein?s seminars…. Ms. Orenstein asked: Could every woman at the large rectangular table name one specific subject that she is an expert in and say why? The author of ?Little Red Riding Hood Uncloaked: Sex, Morality and the Evolution of a Fairy Tale,? Ms. Orenstein began by saying, ?Little Red Riding Hood? and writing the words in orange marker on an oversize white pad. Of the next four women who spoke, three started with a qualification or apology. ?I?m really too young to be an expert in anything,? said Caitlin Petre, 23. ?Let?s stop,? Ms. Orenstein said. ?It happens in every single session I do with women, and it?s never happened with men.? Women tend to back away from ?what we know and why we know it,? she said. Next she asked the participants why they thought it important to write op-ed articles. Women shouted: ?Change the world,? ?shape public debate,? ?offer a new perspective,? ?influence public policy.? ?You are all such do-gooders,? Ms. Orenstein said laughing, ?I love this.? She then proceeded to create another kind of list that included fame, money, offers of books, television series and jobs. The Rev. Dr. Katherine Hancock Ragsdale, an Episcopal priest and the executive director of Political Research Associates in Boston, frowned. ?It?s not why I do it,? she said. That, Ms. Orenstein declared, is a typically female response: ?I never had a man say, ?That?s not why I do it.? ? ?What I want to suggest to you,? she continued, is that the personal and the public interests are not at odds, and ?the belief that they are mutually exclusive has kept women out of power.? Don?t you want money, credibility, access to aid in your cause? she asked. Cristina Page, a spokeswoman for Birth Control Watch in Washington, leaned forward. ?I?ve never heard anyone say that before,? she said. ?What you?ve just said is so important. It?s liberating.?

Two thoughts. First, after describing the assignment to my Fletcher School students — who are generally perceived as a group of idealistic, altruistic overachievers — their immediate reaction to the prospect of publishing an op-ed was, “How much do we get paid for it?” I might add that this query transcended gender. Small sample issues aside, I’m very dubious about the notion that women don’t seek out the things that Orenstein says they don’t seek out. Second, think about that “Little Red Robin Hood” line in the excerpt, as well as this paragraph:

A bunch of women joined together on one side of the table to discuss an op-ed piece by Ms. Orenstein that appeared in June 2004 in The New York Times on the remake of the movie ?The Stepford Wives.?

Orenstein’s expertise raises a question about the ways in which women seek to get op-eds published. Is the problem that women write on topics similar to men but face a glass ceiling at the op-ed desk? Is it that women do not write about “hard news” issues that are generally discussed in op-ed pages (politics, economics, foreign policy, social policy, ec.)? Or is the problem that what is defined as appropriate for the op-ed essays overly gendered? I tend to think it’s the middle one (does Orenstein seriously think that op-eds about Little Red Riding Hood or the Stepford Wives will influence any White House?), but I’m open to suggestions from the readers.

Daniel W. Drezner is a professor of international politics at the Fletcher School at Tufts University and the author of The Ideas Industry. Twitter: @dandrezner

Read More On Politics

More from Foreign Policy

Children are hooked up to IV drips on the stairs at a children's hospital in Beijing.
Children are hooked up to IV drips on the stairs at a children's hospital in Beijing.

Chinese Hospitals Are Housing Another Deadly Outbreak

Authorities are covering up the spread of antibiotic-resistant pneumonia.

Henry Kissinger during an interview in Washington in August 1980.
Henry Kissinger during an interview in Washington in August 1980.

Henry Kissinger, Colossus on the World Stage

The late statesman was a master of realpolitik—whom some regarded as a war criminal.

A Ukrainian soldier in helmet and fatigues holds a cell phone and looks up at the night sky as an explosion lights up the horizon behind him.
A Ukrainian soldier in helmet and fatigues holds a cell phone and looks up at the night sky as an explosion lights up the horizon behind him.

The West’s False Choice in Ukraine

The crossroads is not between war and compromise, but between victory and defeat.

Illustrated portraits of Reps. MIke Gallagher, right, and Raja Krishnamoorthi
Illustrated portraits of Reps. MIke Gallagher, right, and Raja Krishnamoorthi

The Masterminds

Washington wants to get tough on China, and the leaders of the House China Committee are in the driver’s seat.