Blog Secrets... Plus a Giveaway!

Image: Ace Covers

So as the blog-clock ticks down on our final weeks at Cranky Fitness, I find myself wanting to indulge in a few more "behind the scenes" posts. (Like last week's peek at weird google searches.)

It's just that this silly little blog has been a huge part of my life over the last few years. Yet when you try to talk about blogging to friends who do not read or write blogs themselves? Their eyes glaze over and they get these cute little frozen smiles on their faces and pretty soon they seem to have a sudden need to freshen their drinks or visit the restroom or call their grandmothers.

Since I have no more "real life" friends left to chase away with blogging tales, you lucky patient folks get to read these behind-the-scenes, Top Secret Crabby McSlacker True Blog Confessions! Wait... where are you all going? Well, at least I've got a bit of a bribe today: 5 copies of the new SparkPeople Workout DVD to give away over on the product page. If you've got a U.S. mailing address, be sure to check it out!

So anyway, for those of you who haven't fled yet, let me share a few shocking, lurid blog "secrets."

1. For a shy person, I'm quite the attention-seeking narcissist. Unexpected links, mentions, and page-view spikes get me WAY more psyched than any normal person should be. And I used to joke about being obsessed by my blog statistics? Well... um... it was never a joke. Even now, I still check every day.

2. Some PR folks are professional, friendly, and awesome, but others are total idiots and/or buttheads. And 95% of the pitches we fitness bloggers get on behalf of major corporations are (1) clueless about what we do and (2) offensive in their one-sided approach to working with us. We are supposed be honored and flattered to write about their products and link to their sites! While they promise to do nothing in return but send us more information about their products. Yippee, sign me up!

The reviews and giveaways can be fun (SparkPeople got a thumbs-up for friendly professionalism, which is why we're doing another one). But a few giveaways we've done have been a nightmare because of extreme sponsor idiocy or flakiness.

3. Blogging makes me feel guilty. All The Time. I don't know how some bloggers do it--writing great posts, replying to comments, emailing, tweeting, updating their blogrolls, visiting all the other great blogs out there and leaving comments, finding and linking to other sites. I used to do more of all that stuff. True to form, I'm a slacker--but, alas, not a carefree slacker. It bothers me that I'm not being nearly as supportive to all the great folks who link and visit and comment here as they have been to me.

4. Bloggers get catty behind the scenes. I've made some great online friendships through the blog, and we bloggers trade emails. You'd be surprised at some of the tacky things we say about PR folks, fitness celebrities, and even sometimes other famous bloggers or clueless random googlers who leave ridiculous or offensive comments on our sites.

5. Reading blog comments is way more fun than writing posts. OK, so this isn't exactly a secret, but I have to mention this again. The quality of discussion on this blog, and the warmth an humor of the commentators, has made reading comments the best thing about blogging. Writing posts, on the other hand... Of course I love having finished them, but the writing process is slow and sometimes hard going. You'd think with my sloppy attitude towards research, composition, and proof-reading, that I'd whip these things right out. But I don't. It's gotten harder as I've said most of what I had to say about health and fitness, which is why it's not a bad time to take an extended Crabbatical.

6. I've never been sure how to handle the gay thing. Regular readers have been so mellow and accepting that this has almost been a non-issue. But it's still weird to try to write a post in which, if I were straight, I'd naturally mention my husband. But I don't have a husband, I have a wife, and this could be confusing to some folks. I know that lots of readers are not regulars here but drop in from google. If I just said "wife" they'd assume I was a dude, and then they'd get all confused when I mentioned sports bras or pap smears. But leaving the Lobster out felt all wrong and closety, so I tried not to do that either.

It's funny that I haven't run into more gay or lesbian health/fitness/weight loss bloggers--or maybe I have and just didn't realize it. Anyway, I appreciate that the folks here have never been anything but supportive. You guys rock.

7. Jillian Michaels mentioned Cranky Fitness on her radio show... but I'm pretty sure she never read the blog. I was totally thrilled to hear that she recommended us, until I actually listened to the program. All the quotes came from the article that Women's Health did on us; some assistant probably just passed the info on. Sigh. Despite her sometimes brutal training style, and the ickiness of her hawking weight-loss pills, I still admire her. Would've been cool if she really had discovered the blog and liked it.

8. There was almost a Cranky Fitness book. This was a bit of a heart-breaker: I got contacted by a publishing company about doing a Cranky Fitness book, and at their request, sent them a proposal. It was enthusiastically recommended by a couple of underlings and sent up the chain for further review, but they ultimately decided against it. Dang! But I guess the upside of not having managed to finagle a book deal? I don't have to write a book!

9. I have quite a few names; many of you do too. I am Crabby McSlacker; I am Jamie Graham... and I also have two other names: the full name that appears on my birth certificate and driver's license, and the shortened version that I'm called by most "in real life" folks. (I'm not actually crazy about it, but retraining IRL folks would be a losing battle). The whole alias thing started because when I still had psychotherapy clients, I didn't want them thinking they were models for characters in my fiction. But I liked my pen name better than my real name, and also liked having a whole additional layer of anonymity when doing Webthings in the scary Webworld.

So I thought this multiple-identity thing was all very bizarre of me until I started doing more giveaway contests... then I discovered I am not the only one. I see folks with a cute name they blog under, who also have an easy-to-discover "real" name which appears under their profile, or is associated with their email address. Which then turns out NOT to be the name their postal delivery person will recognize. It was a relief to find out I'm not the only many-named weirdo on the web!

10. I almost blogged about my bowel habits for 10 days. I once got paid to take a "challenge" which involved eating a lot of products containing bran and other fiber additives and reporting on how I "felt." Fortunately, for both myself and for blog readers, the sponsor backed out, but let us bran bloggers keep the money. Later on, I got another even more generous offer to take a laxative for an extended period of time and blog about it. This time, I was not even tempted. Perhaps the "Cranky" in "Cranky Fitness" makes sponsors think I need a laxative? For the record: nope, I get plenty o' fiber from all those fruits, veggies, grains, and other whole foods. I may complain about 'em, but I eat 'em.

Do any other bloggers or blog visitors have silly internet secrets or confessions? Do spill!

How Did I Get Here?

(Image: 姒儿喵喵)

In case you were thinking the title of this post was some deep philosophical or theological question... Um, nope.

This is Cranky Fitness after all. Depending upon our personal proclivities, we're more likely to be ruminating on scantily clad Italian soccer players,



or buffed female Olympic swimmers,


or cupcakes.


We're not all that big on philosophical or theological exploration.

So the title "How Did I Get Here?" just refers to the perplexed reaction some people must have upon arriving at Cranky Fitness, given the curious and sometimes amusing google searches that led them to click on our link.

And yes, almost every other blogger on the planet has done this post already, but I haven't yet, and always wanted to and time is running out! Looking at the stats and finding out who's visiting and how they found you--it's one of those secret fun things about having a blog, even if it's really hard to explain to normal people at cocktail parties.

Anyway, the weird thing is not just that some of these recent searches are quirky; it's that they led someone here, to our little cranky home. Did the person who came here looking for "Big poo in ladies public toilet" find what they were looking for in the Cranky Fitness archives?

I kind of hope not.

Some searches are totally on target, and I always love seeing a question we can help with. If you're trying to discover "is 1 simple rule a scam" or hunting down "kuru shoe review"? No problem, we're here for you! But many searchers are not so lucky.

Of course one category of Cranky mis-googling is entirely my fault: those coming from Falsely Salacious Keywords. I once wrote a post on sports bras and liberally sprinkled around terms like "Great Big Bouncy Breasts," and even though that was years ago, "big bouncy breasts" still generates a fairly respectable number of hits every day. It boggles the mind how anyone could get here with that query, since the post, being old and irrelevant, must be on page 248,321 of the breast-related google search results. Big breast seekers are apparently a very determined bunch.

So here, arranged by category, are a few random searches from the last few weeks that brought folks to this blog:

Sorry, wish we could help!
Some offbeat queries make me wish Cranky Fitness actually did have some useful information on the topic in question:

Free sex romance movies
magical weight loss
elliptical machine bubble butt
80’s aerobic porn
exercise videos for lazy people
Kirstie goes beserk
Sex and the country lady
evil blender poems
Brad pitt’s butt
Doctoral degrees that earn big bucks
Cranky yoga pants
Aerobic oops
Drill sergeant love

Not So Sorry!
But others just make me think: eww, go away:

2 girls chased in gym porn
embarrassing pictures of girls
Afv Pull underwear down video
Absolutely free bouncing breast
Dyke gym teacher showers
Adult drinking breast milk
Housesitting coworker cheating sex
Don’t wash I’m coming home
fitness teen sex
bit tits, white girls
crossfit porn
fat ass pussy girls model
women penis size
Breast milk is gross

The Apparent Death of Introspection:
And then there's the category of: Is google really the best place to ask this question? It makes you wonder what people think google is, exactly.

Am I naked?
can I get rid of all my belongings and start over?
can I put carrots on my salad?
can I quit the gym?
Why do i look so young naked?
What can I change about myself to make next year better?
What motivates me?

And, Um, Why do you Ask?
Then there are the searches that seem to suggest a curious, disturbing, or intriguing back-story behind the question:

“chia" seeds "stolen"
Can a dog overdose on splenda?
fat acceptance salad
can your earlobes die
earlobe serial killers
furman eat to live gas
unusual vaginas
braces boyfriend circumcised
burn notice flavor of yogurt
turkey weight loss training
Big breasts with fish oil
fall of bellydancing is hard to handle
chin hairs Czech women
can you sit by the window and not get rickets
calling in sick at sears
when your cat thinks its in charge
fish oil on booty

And I'd be curious to hear what other bloggers find brings folks to their own sites. Do you get interesting search terms?

Or, if you don't have a blog, you can still play a voyeuristic google games. The Bloggess tipped me off to one: type in the beginnings of a search into google, then see what the auto-complete suggestions are for finishing your question. These are presumably the most popular inquiries, and yet... hmm. Innocuous beginnings like "why are..." or "is my..." may lead in unpredictable directions. You can also throw in a celebrity's name: "Does Oprah..." "Is Sarah Palin ..." and see what issues people are wondering about. (And if you figure out whether Oprah really has 6 toes per foot or not, let me know okay?))

And does anyone remember how they got here to Cranky Fitness in the first place?

Gender, Lifestyle, Money, and Weird Web Statistics

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

I found a new statistical resource recently--and longtime readers know I've always been easily distracted by shiny statistical toys. This new thingy not only purports to measure the number of visitors to a website, but also tries to tell you who those visitors are. (Plus it's public, allowing readers to snoop around and see most of the stats without passwords or permissions or anything).

It's called Quantcast and it gives you demographic information for many popular websites. Last I looked, it said, for example that: nfl.com skews male (surprise!) and that npr.org skews well-educated (what a shock!). But it also says that bargain-hunting sites like Nextag.com and Overstock.com attract an affluent readership (really)? And according to their numbers, HuffingtonPost.com gets more men visiting than women, while Netflix gets more women than men. (If I were to guess, I might have reversed those two).

Note: I have no idea how Quantcast gets this information. Nor do I know how accurate it is. Be especially careful when look at a site that hasn't been directly measured or "Quantified," because their guesses on readership can be way off.

Of course I don't really care much about all those other sites--the most interesting statistics to me are all about Cranky Fitness readers! And while you're mostly who I thought you were... there were some surprises.

So, Who The Heck Are You People?

According to the Cranky Fitness quantcast profile, last time I checked you folks reading this were mostly:

Female;
Over 35 years old;
Caucasian;
Childless;
Middle income;
and Incredibly, Ridiculously Well-Educated.

Seriously, the education stats were off the scale compared to the average website. (And no, I have no idea whether the folks who end up here googling "big bouncy breasts" or "big fat ass" are included. If so, then these statistics are even more impressive).

You Are People, Not Numbers

A quick glance at the comments section of our posts or the profiles of our friendly "followers" reveals that there are plenty of you that don't fit this description at all. We get men, and parents, and people just starting off in college, and folks of many colors. Incomes range from Almost Nothing to Very Well Off. So these are just averages. The numbers are also based in large part on lurkers and googlers and folks you never get to meet down in the comments section.

But Two Statistics Surprised Me

The first surprise: I thought a lot more of you had kids! Are moms just more sociable and more likely to comment on posts? Because last I looked at the Quantcast numbers, only about a quarter of you were parents. I would have thought it was way higher.

The other thing that struck me as odd: the income numbers. Given that Cranky Fitness readers are older (than average websites), childless, and extremely well educated... one might predict higher income. Instead, readers are slightly underrepresented among the higher income ranges, not overrepresented.

Generally, it's my impression that over-35, well-educated childless folks often have slightly higher incomes than less educated, younger, child-full folks.

So what's the deal?

Well... the education/affluence link is a generalization from average populations. You folks aren't "average"--you're mostly women! And I can't help but wonder if there's a connection.

Why the Income/Education Disparity?

Maybe it's not a sexist conspiracy that on average, you're making less money than similarly well-educated readers of Macho Meaty-Man Fitness.Com. There could be plenty of innocent explanations for this that have nothing to do with gender discrimination.

Among the possibilities:

1. Quantcast has its pointy head up it's ass and the statistics are just plain wrong;

2. My assumptions about more education leading to higher income are fundamentally screwed up; or

3. People willing to read posts by an author named "Crabby McSlacker" may be less career-oriented than the general web surfing population.

Gender Wage Gap, or Healthy Balanced Lifestyle?

Unfortunately, there is still a stubborn wage gap between men and women. And women, when they do have kids, are more likely to cut back on working hours and stay home with them, whereas men tend to keep on earning.

But I'm kinda hoping it's something else.

I read the comments here, and I read many of your blogs, and I have at least an illusion that I have a sense of who some of you are. Here's my optimistic hypothesis:

It seems to me that many of you strive for a balanced approach between work and life; between time and material possessions; between human values and financial ones. I sense a tendency to choose careers that involve helping people or creating things versus more lucrative pursuits. You folks also seem more likely to take time off to take care of a family member, or work for the Peace Corps, or go back to school to pursue a whole new endeavor.

Sure, with all those advanced degrees some of you could be pulling in bigger paychecks if you were working 80 hour weeks at law firms, or short-selling stock or performing liposuction on movie stars. And perhaps some of you are doing just that. But for most of you who are apparently not raking in big paychecks: I'm hoping you are choosing to use your education in ways that are more important to you than earning larger salaries.

But I'm just an over-educated under-earner named Crabby McSlacker, what the hell do I know?

Do These Statistics Mean Anything at All?

There's a good chance that these statistics were based on such a small sample that they don't mean bupkus. Maybe next week they'll be totally different. But it did make me realize that the question of who comes here is very intriguing! And I'm always curious about the whole "equal rights for women" issue that we were supposed to have solved decades ago--how is actually playing out in real life?

So if any of you feel liking checking in:

Do you fall within any of these "typical Cranky Fitness" demographics yourself?

Are you a highly-educated person who is not earning the Big Bucks, and if so, was that a choice?

If you're a gal, do you think your options or choices or paycheck would have been different had you been male? Or vice versa if you're a guy?

Do you care at all/believe in demographic statistics?

You're worried, but you're cheerful about it. Huh?

[By a disgruntled Merry]

image: chrkl

Yes, this is another post that questions research. Or, to be more accurate, it questions the way researchers question.

[Warning: this post contains dangerously high levels of statistics and percentages and such-like nasty math things. Proceed at your own risk.]

The Reuters/Zogby Index, which "measures the mood of the country," went up 4.4%. Apparently, "Americans remain worried about the U.S. economy and their personal finances, but their outlook brightened for the second consecutive month..."

So people are worried, but they're also feeling more cheerful about it. Huh?

It sounds like something Harry Potter would read in his tea leaves.


The pollster says the following statistics are cheering:

- The number of Americans who believe the country is on the right track rose to 25 percent from 23 percent
In other words, only 75% of the population thinks we're all doomed, not 78%.
- The number who are confident about their children's future climbed to 68 percent from 64 percent.
An increase of 4% in a poll of a thousand people is relevant?
- 45 percent of Americans said they plan to spend a little less or a lot less on gifts during the upcoming holiday season.
But Santa, I've been good this year!

How can that be cheerful?

The pollster, John Zogby, figured this meant "There are a lot of reasons to still have the jitters, but maybe people are learning to deal with them."

To me, this maketh not sense.

I realize that someone who appreciates sadistics um, I mean statistics more than I do (which isn't hard to imagine) might feel that this is a relevant number of people and that this whole telephone poll idea is a good thing. I understand polling a small number of people can produce accurate results if you take a sample that's representative of the populace.

What makes the poll so droll is twofold:
- This month's telephone poll surveyed 1,008 likely voters.
- They called people on their landline phones.

The number of people with landline phones is roughly equivalent with the number of people who remember when Farrah Fawcett was one of Charlie's Angels.


In other words, there's a section of the population who isn't being asked how they feel.

Yes, I'm exaggerating a bit about Ms. Fawcett

According to government statistics from 2007, it's actually closer to 13% of the population that doesn't have a landline.

To quote Scott Keeter, from the Pew Research Center, "If people who can only be reached by cell phone were just like those with landlines, their absence from surveys would not create a problem for polling. But cell-only adults are very different. The National Health Interview Survey found them to be much younger, more likely to be African American or Hispanic, less likely to be married, and less likely to be a homeowner than adults with landline telephones. These demographic characteristics are correlated with a wide range of social and political behaviors."

I concede that there would be a lot of complaints if people were called on their cell phones, thereby paying for someone to ask them questions. But it's unrealistic to assume that this doesn't skew the poll. It's like when a poll predicted Roosevelt would lose the 1936 election, when he won by a good margin. The responses were not representative of the whole voting population.

Yes, I'd love to see some positive news. Some could argue that it's positive to mention the fact that there are 40 more people out there who think their children have a good future. Me, I figure it's not unlikely that some of these people just had progeny since the last poll, and some of the others are feeling more cheerful because little Cyril is doing better at math and little Cindy has just broken up with her crack-using boyfriend. Given the land vs. cell issue, I think there might be too few people in the poll for an increase of that size to indicate a trend one way or another.

Studies we'd like to see

I'd love to see studies that went something like this:

[Reuters] A far-reaching Swiss study, covering 47 countries over 49 years, has conclusively proven that tiramasu causes humans to live longer and fit into skinny jeans easier than a steady diet of broccoli.

[API] A poll of 4,632 shopping mall employees discovered that 97% of them think their future will be greatly improved once they're able to vote.

[Cranky Fitness] Research conclusively proves that eating chocolate doubles your IQ and makes people sexier.

I mean, if the polls are going to be glib, they might as well be fun.