« Travel plans | Main | Strange Horizons updates »

Author initials

| 2 Comments

Nick M. notes that only women submit to Clarkesworld using initials (in place of a first name). Which I found especially interesting because at SH, at least a third of the submitters who use two-initials-and-a-last-name for a byline are female, but at least 43% are male, and I don't know about the other 23%. Which led me to wonder why the men who submit to us using initials aren't submitting to Clarkesworld, at least not using their initials. Nick notes that he takes horror and we don't, but that doesn't explain why those men aren't submitting to him. One possibility is just that they don't know about Clarkesworld; I've been meaning to post for months saying "Y'all writers should be submitting to Clarkesworld Magazine! They pay 10¢ a word--twice SH's rate--for up to 4000 words of fiction!" But I've also been meaning to point y'all to various other newish markets, and so I was holding off 'til I could mention all of them at once. So much for that plan.

Sudden new paragraph!

Anyway, the above reminded me of something I've been meaning to mention for a while: it turns out that there's one pair of initials that's been used in the byline of seven female authors who've submitted to us, but no male authors. And another pair of initials that five male authors have had in their byline, but no female authors. I suspect that this is yet another case of sample space being too small to be statistically useful (only about 530 authors have submitted to us using initialed bylines, and there are a bunch of sets of initials used by both at least one male author and at least one female author), but I still thought it was interesting, and I'll be curious to see whether we ever see submissions using those particular initials from the other gender.

I bet you're curious what the initials are. Unfortunately, I don't feel like I can say publicly, 'cause some of them might not want their gender publicly known. But in both cases, they're not sets of initials that I think of as traditionally gendered--I don't look at them and immediately say "Oh, that must be a woman/man."

Okay, now that I've talked your ear off (written your eye off?) with completely pointless statistics, I'll move on to some more-relevant stuff about SH; see next entry.

2 Comments

>But in both cases, they’re not sets of initials that I think of as traditionally gendered—I don’t look at them and immediately say “Oh, that must be a woman/man.”

I was wondering if it had something to do with the middle name...I've met far, far more women (of, admittedly, about my age) with middle names of Rose, Lynn, and Marie than I've met men with middle names in common.


*looks innocent*


Post a comment