Tag: show

Thinking Class: Session 2

To read PART I click here.

I was on Facebook last night and I really think it’s the craziest scene ever and I’ve been on Facebook since 2007. (That was a time when most users were in high school or college and many scoffed at the idea that the web was changing to a social paradigm.)

People scoffed about Facebook the way you might scoff about jumping to earth from space. Of course, that happened too (see video).

Things have changed. Great grandparents muck about everyday on Facebook like it’s totally normal. Nevertheless, right now–on the social media platform used by billions–actual knowledge of facts is super low but the zest and vitriol seems sky-high.

It reminds me that most of us were not taught to think for ourselves critically. We were taught to believe what we are told. This happened in church, school, by government, law enforcement, and in social and political circles.

I want to introduce a quick look at what critical thinking actually looks like. These posters are meant to show that opinions are not the same as arguments. Arguments are not the same as opposing views or fights. A good argument in a contention based in sound thinking and a logical foundation. Yes, sound arguments are rare and tend to be demonized. But knowing what makes a sound argument helps us separate fact from opinion.

(click to enlarge)

Pass along this to others for better thinking all around! :)

thinkingclass2

(another poster is coming….visit again soon)

EXTRA CREDIT: Mill around on television, radio, or the internet until you spot a logical fallacy and then link to it on here and tell us which sort it is. (A+ for anyone who does!)

 

5 Questions you have to answer before you can be a success.

it's loud
Cory Brown via Compfight

It’s crazy!

4 times this week I’ve been approached for my brain!

I’ve heard things like, “You’ve done a great job strategizing and promoting so-in-so, and I don’t know what I’m doing. I’d like to ________ (be a published author, sell my ebook, get speaking gigs, create a following, etc.)”

So I thought maybe instead of giving the info out time and again I could create a post with strategy tips to get you started if you fall into that category, too.

If you’re a musician, expert, artist, writer, speaker or whatever…it’s harder than ever to get noticed and build a following of those who will want what you have to offer.

It’s the problem of TOO MANY OPTIONS. (It’s paralyzing) 

Most publishers, for instance, won’t even look at your stuff without an agent. They have cut their staffs and gone with sure-bets, like celebrities who hire ghostwriters. (I’m contractually obligated to avoid specifics on that bit.) But, you know what ? Agents want sure-bets too. You’re stuck researching and writing endless proposals to prove you are a good bet that just get rejected after all the hard work most of the time.

It’s even worse if you don’t know your way around a blog, promotion, social media, or ways to integrate what you are doing with the right people. You get stalled!

In the end, making something great is only half the battle.

You have to execute. As Seth Godin says, “You have to ship.”

I’ve found that great “crafts-people” (think good at a certain field: experts, academics, talented artists, experts, artisan, inventors, writers, signers, etc) often lack in the area of marketing themselves well and creating connections that pay off. They do something great, but don’t have the lateral thinking prowess outside their niche to know how to get it sold or stake their claim in their field.

As one person put it, “I’m an academic. I stay in my study and write and hope someone magically wants to read it.”

Well, that won’t work, of course. Others have to know about you to realize that you are amazing.

It’s hard to be good at both craft and marketing / connecting, but those are the people who really make it. Or the people who make it know how to delegate properly for what they aren’t expert in. That’s a KEY point. (Keep that nugget. it’s free.) :) You just can’t do it all.

Here’s the hopeful part!

Even if your aren’t a celebrity or infamous or have someone huge to vouch for you to land a deal, there is a lot you can do to generate buzz, especial if you can mobilize your fans/audience that already trust you. It the wilderness route, but with a little bit of $ and lots of hard work (a.k.a. “bootstrapping”) it can make a dent.

Through bootstrapping and almost no money I get 100,000 visitors. That’s nice and all, but it’s not as fun as helping others realize their goals and dreams.

So, I want to help. This below is some of what I’ve been telling other people as they get started.

Get a piece of paper! (seriously)

If you have something you want to share and make a name for yourself, or you want to start getting compensated for your goods, services, or talents be prepared to answer these questions specifically:

(yes, on paper or in a digital document, right now)

1. Who is your audience and how many people would buy the book (or service or product) from you *right now*?

2. What is your budget for marketing and promotion? (This of course will determine how much can be done.) You shouldn’t go forward if you can’t spend $500 – 1,000 to get the ball rolling. If you don’t have the money, you should save and do a bunch of leg work first on your own. Again, with the bootstrapping.

(This means you have to put what you love to do on hold, or hire out help.)

3. What are you doing already to promote what you have, if anything (website? Facebook page or group? speaking? workshops? readings at the library? church groups? MOPS? social media accounts? gathering an email list of fans?) (Be able to show what, if anything is already being done so it can be can ramped it up, or started if it hasn’t been.)

And what could you do, if you started? (write it down)

4. What connections do you have or people do you know who would help you get the word out? colleagues?  teachers? librarians? leaders? church folks? groups, camps, and clubs? anyone famous or well connected (like to Focus on the Family, for example? ) People in tv, radio, bloggers, local newspapers, or journalists and writers to feature you?

5. What can you offer for free to build trust and gain a following?

That’s it!

…But, sometimes it’s overwhelming! If you’ve haven’t thought to ask these questions, you fall into the category of craft-person more that of “marketer” or “promotion and communications guru”…and that’s fine, but you’ll need help.

I can help. Contact me!

 

Names for Women (or how language is oppressing us)

barnyard

How do you spell oppression? …maybe E-I-E-I-O. Today it almost looks like we’re down on the farm!

Let’s look at some names, shall we?

HEIFER/COW – connotation towards female: “a fat woman”

(actual meaning: a female cow who has not borne a calf/female cow)

VIXEN – connotation toward females (according to the dictionary) “a spiteful and querrelsome women” (but a google search turns up very racy photos indeed)

(actual meaning: a female fox)

SOW -connotation toward females: “a female police officer, or a degrading name for a woman”

(actual meaning: a female pig)

NANNY– connotation toward females: “a female caretaker of children”

(actual meaning: a female goat)

HEN-connotation toward females: “a gossiping woman”

(actual meaning: a female fowl)

QUEEN – common connotation:  “a man behaving unmanly and defectively as a woman” (as in flamboyant homosexual male) Also used for a female monarch.

(actual meaning: a female cat)

TOM -common connotation toward females: “tomboy” a female who does not behave as expected.

(actual meaning: a male cat)

BITCH – connotation toward females: “an annoying or whining female, a disparaging name for a woman, or a person who is dominated”

(actual meaning: a female dog)

SIRE – a respectful and formal name for male royalty, such as a king.

(a male dog, or other male animal parent suitable for pure breeding)

COUGAR– connotation toward females “a sexually aggressive woman”

(actual meaning: a large wild feline)

NITTANY LION – a pedophile named Jerry Sandusky (okay that one is just a joke I heard)

MADAM: connotation toward female: “a woman in charge of prostituting women”

(actual meaning: a formal way to address a women in respect)

SIR: A polite way to refer to a man.

MISS: An unmarried woman

MISTRESS: connotation toward females: “A woman having an illicit sexual relationship”

(actual meaning: The prefix of a formal name referring to a married woman or the female head of a household. Abbreviated as Mrs.)

MISTER: A formal way of referring to a man, and sometimes used humorously. Abbreviated as Mr.

(And finally, my least favorite. Scientific studies show that this word is also typically the one men most dread being called. Seriously.)

Screen Shot 2013-06-18 at 11.25.43 PM

By now, you probably have noticed some commonalities. And maybe you can even think of further examples I left out.

What surprised you most?

To me, it doesn’t seem that language favors women. Not the English one anyway.

It also seems that if a man is degraded or thought of an less than, a woman serves as a reference point of that inferiority. This is male privilege in action–every. single. day.

The standard of male as apex not only supports male dominance and heralds masculinity as the preferred societal and ontological ideal, but also works to continually degrade women as inferior. Since language is spoken everyday, every day we learn and re-learn the expectations and norms.

With many names women are highlighted as having defective qualities sexually, morally, physically and are routinely animalized (reduced to sub-man/sub-human) in a hugely disproportionate ways as compared with males. Yes?

Our language reinforces power structures and privilege, and sustains oppression. We should be honest about this. We should be aware.

People will refer to a women as a “girl” but rarely to a man as a “boy”. Plenty of other examples or preference exist.

So, now what can we do to make things better?

…how do we turn this around? I’m taking your suggestions.

Oh, and what’s with all the cat comparisons anyway, right?

# # #

Michael Hyatt says he features the “Best Leaders” (Men) Click http://wp.me/p1g2iA-3bK

Michael Hyatt says he features the “Best Leaders” (Men)

Note to Readers. As you read this keep in mind I’ve been reading Michael Hyatt’s blog since 2007 and I still really enjoy it. (UPDATE – I stopped reading MH’s blog regularly a few months after writing this) Please read all of this in the spirit of grace and mutual understanding all of it is meant to be wrapped in. I have to ask the questions, but I want amiable solutions.

UPDATE as of July 11, 2013

Michael Hyatt continues to change his blog for the better. More women leaders are visible now (which wasn’t true almost at all since 2007!) and the site has come a long way since I started prodding for a more appropriate and equitable Platform for the Michael Hyatt brand a few short weeks ago.

What I think will also happen is that you will never hear about me and this incident as something he took into consideration. You will never hear him say any of this happened. He will continue to look wise and fair.

He unfollowed me Twitter and to him, I’m probably not a good leader. But, I wasn’t looking for a permission slip to make sure the right thing could happen.

UPDATE as of JULY 2
I’m happy to report that I just checked and Michael Hyatt has adjusted his homepage. Now the videos featured in the sidebar do include some women. VICTORY!

UPDATE as of JUNE 26

Joy Groblebe (claiming the title of Michael Hyatt’s manager) has weighed in below in the comments section saying Hyatt is a poor example of bias. Yet, he still does not have women featured in his video leader interviews See what you think! Is she right?

UPDATE as of JUNE 25!

The post you are about to read was written last week, published in a limited sneak-peak form, and announced on Twitter and Facebook at that point. Though Michael Hyatt has too seldom featured women, yesterday Michael Hyatt did feature his longtime friend, Michele Cushatt (maybe he read the preview of the post you will read below…I’m not sure. But, great timing I must say.). You can read her article here. (It’s about females experiencing rejection. Irony.)

I found out about this surprise and rare post through this personal note from Hyatt on Twitter this morning:

FROM: @MichaelHyatt mentioned “@lisadelay The irony of this is that @MicheleCushatt was featured on my blog yesterday: http://t.co/c560ZMQiBJ”

JUNE 25

He didn’t see the irony… :)
The article is on REJECTION. Someting women leaders and speakers may be experiencing a lot with not just Hyatt (until recently), but also with publishers in general, as Michael explained in his Twitter posts. At this point, the vast majority of Hyatt’s blog guest posts are by men. Will it maintain the status quo of white male domination in leadership expertise? Time will tell if Intentional Leadership will evolve as a Brand that way. I have every hope it will grow more diverse and vital.

# # #

Background: This Spring (2013) I posted this (excerpt):

I’ve noticed something. Not too many male leaders list women authors, leaders, and thinkers in their blogrolls or refer to them in posts. You don’t see that women influence them. What about Christian male leaders? It seems twice as bad.

Michael Hyatt’s “Intentional Leadership” blog is a favorite of mine. I LOVE it. But have you noticed that not one video on his homepage sidebar features a female leader? Does he even realize the omission? Should he maybe be more intentional on this part….I think yes! Read the whole post here.

# # #

FINALLY- the post you’ve been reading this for.
POST WRITTEN JUNE 17.
What I didn’t get to do after that Spring post was follow up. I didn’t get to share Michael Hyatt’s direct correspondence with me that day. It’s far more interesting and surprising that I imagined it would be, and not for any of the reasons I expected.

Here’s that:

hyattbest1

So why don’t females pitch to him? Isn’t that the bigger and more important question? Should we look into that maybe?

Then I asked him if he felt he was hearing from a balance of leadership voices, and here’s his reply:

hyattbest2

I had presumed that Mr Hyatt would give my observation some thought. Maybe he would mention the need to assess he might have a blind spot.

Could there be an unconscious oversight? Were there ways to improve? But, he inadvertently offered up more than he may have realized. His comments only strengthened my contention that a gap, a regrettable gap, exists between men and women in leadership and visibility on his blog, website, but also across the board. This only gained momentum when he continued and mentioned the world of publishing. (see below. The older post is positioned on the bottom and is a continuation of his comment posted above.)

hyatt3

So by his admission the publishing industry  (his experience as the CEO of Thomas Nelson is a Christian outfit) has a massive blind spot.

This is not a surprise, but certainly a disappointment. What are leaders like Hyatt doing to turn the tide if the gap is this vast?

I soon realized the aforementioned blind spots would stay largely “in shadow” that day, but it wasn’t a total loss. Hyatt did show a desire for improvement. [UPDATE – in subsequent blog posts he wrote about Blind Spots -though never did he mention this incident-perhaps it was a blind spot too.]

choward

My exchange with Hyatt is long over and I wish him well. But, I have wonder: Has he for too long wasted his opportunity to his influence how we hear from leaders? Isn’t this the blindness that success and privilege creates?

I’ll let you decide.

APPENDIX:
Others weighed in during our Twitter conversation and things stayed interesting for most of the day, that Spring. Here are just two examples:

bias

howard

Yes, Hyatt has every right to feature only those he pleases, but mentioning that he doesn’t hear from women at the same time as mentioning that he only features “the best” seems deleterious.

Through his leadership we are left to wonder: Are “the Best” really predominantly male? or is Hyatt actually gleaning from a skewed pool?

Nah.

More importantly, does he realize it and will things change “on his watch”? I don’t think both his claims can be true unless he holds a disparaging  view of women in leadership.

And, mind you, I don’t believe he does. I think it’s a genuine blind spot from a well-intentioned male leader (with the current #1 blog on Leadership) who hasn’t quite comprehended or addressed the light-skinned, male privilege he is privy to.

Sometimes a cautionary tale gives us a great lesson. We should learn from this:

None of us are immune to blind spots of our particular privilege.

We must be diligent agents of progress and positive change. That’s my own hope and the reason I have decided to continue the conversation today. The more of us who ask the tough questions of the powerful and prod for the answers and the transformation needed, the better off we will all be. Won’t you join me? To help, Leave a comment or share this post.

SO! Who are the “BEST VOICES”?

In truth, we don’t hear from the “best voices” by doing a google search and poking around. They don’t get pitched to us by the establishment. The “best voices” may not turn up or asked to be heard. Sometimes because it’s too noisy and sometimes it’s because they assume they are not wanted. The stats do not favor minorities (women, the poor, the physically or mentally disabled, the marginalized, and people with darker skin tones), they favor the already powerful.

This means that if you indeed want to have “the best” you must make extra efforts to find and hear from those who don’t have an equal shot. You have to work much harder at it, plain and simple.

As leaders we should admit this. To continue the conversation online please use the hashtag #bestleaders and others can follow the digital footprint and continue onward in the pursuit of improvement

These hard-to-find voices have plenty to offer even if they don’t quite have the following as of yet. The stats don’t make the leader, the character and efficacy does. I think we can all agree there.

In the next post, I’ll talk about the subtle ways language reenforces privilege, especially in the poor opinions and myths perpetuated about women–often unintentionally. It’s sobering. However, I’m skewering the topic not with a pitchfork but a rubber chicken. The point, and my point, isn’t to make enemies, it’s to start the conversation and act as a change agent.