Copyblogger Author Practicing What She Preaches about Compelling Post Titles: "Why James Chartrand Wears Women’s Underpants"

The author known as James Chartrand of Copyblogger explains why it’s still not a “post-feminist” world.

You know me as James Chartrand of Men with Pens, a regular Copyblogger contributor for just shy of two years.

And yet, I’m a woman.

This is not a joke or an angle or an analogy — I’m literally a woman.

This is my story.

Read the quote in context here.

James was out of work, with two young children, out of savings, out of luck. She began doing freelance copywriting and struggled her ass off. Then something happened.

One day, I tossed out a pen name, because I didn’t want to be associated with my current business, the one that was still struggling to grow. I picked a name that sounded to me like it might convey a good business image. Like it might command respect.
My life changed that day

Instantly, jobs became easier to get.

There was no haggling. There were compliments, there was respect. Clients hired me quickly, and when they received their work, they liked it just as quickly. There were fewer requests for revisions — often none at all.

Customer satisfaction shot through the roof. So did my pay rate.

And I was thankful. I finally stopped worrying about how I would feed my girls. We were warm. Well-fed. Safe. No one at school would ever tease my kids about being poor.

I was still bringing in work with the other business, the one I ran under my real name. I was still marketing it. I was still applying for jobs — sometimes for the same jobs that I applied for using my pen name.

I landed clients and got work under both names. But it was much easier to do when I used my pen name.

Understand, I hadn’t advertised more effectively or used social media — I hadn’t figured that part out yet. I was applying in the same places. I was using the same methods. Even the work was the same.

In fact, everything was the same.

Except for the name.

The blog she started as James, Men with Pens, is a well-respected resource for professional bloggers.

Pretty wild when you think about it. Discouraging too.

She doesn’t mention it but my peripheral experience in the publishing world makes me pretty confident the new work wasn’t all coming in from men who preferred to hire (what they believed to be) male writers.

This isn’t the only time we’ve seen this sort of discrimination based on name only. It’s a fairly common academic and investigative-journalist exercise to pair individuals who are evenly matched except for, say, age, sex, or race, and send them out to apply for work. I’m pretty sure there’s even a study demonstrating that academics are likely to rank submitted papers more favorably when everything else is identical except for a single letter change in the purported author’s first name — e.g. a submission will get a higher rating just by substituting the single letter “a” for “h” in the name “Joan Smith” to make it “John Smith.”

But that’s all fairly academic. James Chartrand’s story is real as houses.

Something to think about next time you imagine there’s nothing left to be done because everything’s already just hunky-dory.

[See also Blue Gal’s take on assumptions about gender and pen names. —fl]

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

 

Wow, that’s scary. Mostly in the invisibility of it—the way it would be so easy for a woman to say “well, I guess my writing isn’t good enough” rather than even think it was because of her gender.

 

whut a load of horsesh*t.

i have been forced to interview repeatedly with 20-something females with a paucity of life experience ( as senior hr personnel have all been whacked ) since i was laid off and guess whut ???

yeah still unemployed. and as a matter of fact, the male age group 25-54 in the mighty mighty usa has an unemployment rate of 20.9%.

so boo hoo hoo for the woman who struggled getting work with a female name / persona.

[Hey, Anon, I’m in a similar boat to yours — older men looking for work are pretty low on the perception list, even sight unseen. (A lot of the time if they’d just see us we’d have a better chance.) But what she’s saying is that whereas in some fields times are hard for men (you’re point) they’re obviously even harder for women. Because, after all, the only thing she changed was her name online, right? So it’s not like she suddenly became 10 times better at writing because she typed “James” instead of her real name, right? Right. —fl]

 

Your story is true, and hers is true, and “boo hoo hoo” for you both, because life is more complicated than that. But unemployed men don’t justify discriminating against women nor vice versa.

Although may I suggest that seething resentment for your interviewers (20-something women gotta work too, I’m not “taking a man’s spot” by having a job) can’t be doing you any favors.

[Yup. One thing’s for sure (based on conversations with myself, my also-underemployed brother, and other men my age is that… nobody wants to hire cranky people. Hell, back when I was an employer and not a wannabe employee I didn’t want to hire angry or resentful people either — women or men. Because they have to be part of my team, and the team has to work, not just the people in it. Thanks, Holly. —fl]

 

What a load of horseshit, indeed, Mr. Anonymous. Your situation and that of the subject’s is not the same at all. You are apparently being selected for interviews based on some criteria (your resume/application, I assume, with your apparently masculine name) and are then evaluated in person. The subject was being evaluated on a perception based on gender. Also, you are looking for “a job” whereas the subject was looking for “clients.” The distinction being that the job seeker has to be impressive enough to be hired only once, the freelance service provider must be impressive enough to be hired over and over and by many different employers.

Holly is also correct about the clear resentment in your post and I’d add the poor communication style. As I used to tell my students in my old HR days, I can’t discriminate against race, religion, creed, sex, or national origin, but I can discriminate against poor spellers, bad attitudes, and rotten vibes all I want to.

 

Ahhh, most assuredly the business world does and will continue to give discounted prices for products and services to the women clients/customers who receive lower pay than their male counterparts….right?

After alll, it’s all about protect America!

 

Given this proof of continued ingrained sexism, it seems kind of ironic that in television and, to a lessor extent, radio, the current trend is to favor attractive women (appearance and/or voice) over more experienced men for reporters. How else to explain Soledad O’Brien or Erin Burnette, for example?

Of course, it could be that the newscorps can pay them less….

 

A fascinating article! I’ve seen writers change ‘genders’ when they adopt pen names for a variety of reasons. Historical novelist Robyn Young is actually called something else, but her agent said she wouldn’t be taken seriously unless she picked a more masculine name (Robyn is neatly androgynous.)

However, I’d like to play devil’s advocate and suggest that gender wasn’t the problem. The pen name this writer chose, James Chartrand, is just BRIMMING with subtle cues that have NOTHING to do with gender.

James – more formal than ‘Jim’ or ‘John’ and implies a more conservative upbringing than something more modern, like ‘Jared’. It’s also typically WASPy which suggests a more affluent and conservative background and presumably a better eduction.
Chartrand – French, of course, implying a European heritage which again, automatically suggests more sophistication that ‘Doyle’ or ‘Jenkins’ or ‘Leibowitz.’

I think if this author had been a man trying to sell writing under the name ‘Ken Schwartz’ or ‘Tony Jenkins’ or ‘Barry Sirowitz’ the effect would have been exactly – EXACTLY – the same.

Shakespeare wrote ‘what’s in a name’ but the fact is that a name carries a lot more weight than people realize.

I think gender might play a part here, but not NEARLY as much of one as you’re arguing.

[Actually I think it’s what she’s arguing but I know what you mean — “Seymour Krelborn” wouldn’t have had the same cultural, upper-crusty overtones. But then she didn’t call it “WASPs with Pens.” :-) —fl]

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.