It was just a little safer to do it that way rather than to throw it out into the world and get the bites back. I think just as we saw in this past election, there were a range of perspectives on Hillary, and you guys were able to surface both the excitement of having a serious female candidate and the disappointment that that serious female candidate was the complicated wife of a complicated former president.It allowed the section to not have a party line of any kind, which I think is maybe more of a problem on today’s internet than on the internet of 2008, which was a little bit more of an exploratory place. Bazelon: I remember myself feeling uncertain about how much I could …I remember being hungry for conversation among women, and, Meghan, I remember worrying a little bit about how since we were all responding to each other constantly, I wasn’t even sure how readable how it would be. That was to me the really exciting thing about it—that it was a place, as you’re saying, of conversation, collaboration, and being able to talk in a different mode or register, which was one of thinking out loud and combatively sometimes thinking out loud, but thinking out loud.Now, we’re so used to that from social media, but this was really pre-Twitter. Hanna Rosin: I definitely remember we didn’t know how to write.
In a moment, when matters of gender are vital to our coverage of news, politics, culture, and technology and when there’s a hunger for family and lifestyle coverage for and by readers of all genders, we’ve decided to pull up stakes on an idea of the editorial section that carves out womanhood as a particular focus.It’s not that we didn’t know what to write or what we thought about things, but we didn’t know what tone to strike. ” Am I supposed to say, “Well, Dahlia, I disagree because blah, blah, blah, blah.” Are we supposed to be very skeptical, or is it supposed to have a sisterhood feel? O’Rourke: But it kind of quickly found, I think, a freewheeling energy.There was like a hesitant, “Am I allowed to mention the children? ” Because Slate has an established tone, we’re like, “Well, are we supposed to be like here? I remember the delight of just getting into it and being able to think alongside all of you and what a pleasure and surprise that was to me, because I had been writing for a long time, and I thought of myself as a very comfortable writer.Rosin: I totally get that feeling you’re describing, and the safety was in the collective.I have it a little bit now because I’m working in radio, so you work collectively on things.It was designed as a space for everyone—men included—to read, but where the voices were primarily women’s, with a focus on issues that might be of particular concern to women but really were of concern to everybody.That was what was really exciting about it in those early, early days to me.Now we’re changing all that—saying goodbye to Double X, distributing its coverage across the magazine, and launching an exciting new lifestyle section, Human Interest (more on that here).But we didn’t want to make this change without marking the essential contribution Double X has made to Slate, and to the broader conversation around gender, over the years.We’ll continue to cover matters pertaining to gender in our new section and across the magazine, and we’ll feature parenting and lifestyle issues in a new section called Human Interest intended for readers of any gender.The Double X podcast, which Hanna still hosts, will continue as an audio outpost of smart and lively conversation among women that you three helped cultivate nearly a decade ago.