Having it all?? An article by Jennifer O’Connell

Published: Monday, May 23, 2011

In 1898, British journalist Arnold Bennett - who would go on to become a celebrated novelist - published a guide for women journalists.

The second chapter of his pamphlet, which is still available to download free online, is entitled 'Imperfections of the existing Woman-Journalist'.

''Is there any sexual reason why a woman should be a less accomplished journalist than a man?" he wondered. ''I can find none." And yet he suffered from no such shortage of evidence for the thesis that they were - quite spectacularly - less accomplished. ''Women-journalists are unreliable as a class . . . the influences of domesticity are too strong to be lightly thrown off," he lamented.

They suffered, he argued. from ''slipshod style . . . an undue insistence, a shrillness . . . a garrulous, gesticulating, inefficacy''; they were ''inaccurate and careless''; they overused metaphors and similes ''with glee''; were too prone to writing ''fanciful essays''; ''too fond of corresponding with editors''; and so forgetful that they were liable not to include their own names in their correspondence. But take heart, aspiring female journalists: Bennett concluded that you were not entirely without hope.

With the sound advice of his guide, they could hope to make a decent career writing about ''nature notes; household affairs; country occupations; parochial management; home handiwork; village sketches'' - and even ''fashion, cookery and domestic economy, furniture, the toilet, and (less exclusively) weddings''.

Over a century later, the outlook for women hoping to pursue a career in the media is a little less bleak.

Click here to read full article.