As I've said countless times before, we need more women in technology. (Wait! Don’t go!) We need more female entrepreneurs, we need more women working at start-ups and companies for many, many reasons.
However, as it’s unhealthy to blindly support anyone from your “tribe” or “party” for the sake of it, I think women should disagree with each other more, which is something Caitlin Moran elegantly discussed in How To Be A Woman. Whether we’re CEOs or simply part of the supposed “sisterhood”, we need to disagree, question, and challenge each other. And this is precisely why we need to talk about Luluvise.
The Women-Only Social Network
Luluvise is described as a “space for young women to discuss what really matters, with the girls who matter most” - it’s a social network for women to talk to their gal pals and create a “private network of girlfriends they actually care about.”
This girly network was created after entrepreneur Alexandra Chong became frustrated that after a particularly horrific successful date on Valentine’s Day 2009, she had to send and make “three telephone calls, a slew of BBM messages, a few text messages, and two Skype calls” just to tell to her friends about it.
“Why can’t I tell this story to all of my friends at once?” was the question she asked her friend and co-founder Alison Schwartz after this traumatic multi-platform communication debacle. Alison’s reply must have been something along the lines of, “Gosh, I don’t know, but why don’t we raise one million dollars so that in two years time, you can have an entire social network to tell all of your friends at once!” As that's precisely what happened two years on, and why we now have Luluvise.
Perhaps Alison could have (lulu)advised Alexandra to just send a group email, private Facebook message, Twitter DM, group SMS, private blog post, conference call, or to ask her friends over for a cup of coffee next time - but why point that out? I’m convinced that the unnamed but “prestigious US and UK investors” that gave Alexandra the $1 million to start Luluvise immediately asked that exact question the minute she walked into their office. Obviously she had a dazzling and logical answer because they gave her one million dollars in the middle of a global financial crisis to start it up, despite there being a landslide of other social networks and online communities that herald a plethora of privacy features and messaging services.
But, who am I to argue as women finally have an entire network to engage in the pinnacles of all female friendships, which Luluvise list as being: “chatting, sharing, gossiping, shopping, supporting each other, and giving advice (even if it hasn't been asked for!)”
Ladies do love unsolicited advise. I am so glad we finally have another place on the Internet where other women can tell us what we’re doing wrong without even having to ask first.
Yay! Scoop! BFF!
I signed up to Luluvise to check it out and because I, too, want to discuss shopping and to find out how I can better support my girlfriends online despite already being connected to them on at least four other networks and platforms.
Surprisingly, I found the site a bit confusing.
Luluvise have a bunch of statistics in their press release about how women “generate more than 70% of the messaging activity on Facebook”, and when you go to Luluvise.com, you’re met with a familiar blue box (unfortunately not the TARDIS) and a message stating, “We only use Facebook to make registration easier.”
Here's a question for you - if you’re creating a network to rival the world’s largest social network (that has an Oscar-nominated film based on it), why do you keep reminding us about it? Yes, I’ll sign in via Facebook. Yes, you’re right, my friends and I do use Facebook messaging a lot...gee, why don’t I just continue to use Facebook!?
Luluvise also claim that their target audience is 18-35 despite using the vocabulary of your average 16-year-old or twee lifestyle blogger, and a lipstick kiss favicon that looks as though it belongs on 14-year-old’s Tumblr blog. Their Twitter background looks like a teenager's notebook that's covered in silly phrases and even the word “Obsess” inside a heart.
I was half-expecting to find the word 'Belieber' in their terms and conditions.
Women in their late twenties and thirties have other things to talk about than shopping and gossiping, and we certainly don’t need an “in-depth analysis of which New Year’s Eve party will have the cutest guys”. Or quotes like “No man is safe”. (What does that even mean? Are we talking about sexual harassment or that we're going to harass them? Is this about rape? I'm confused.) Also, women don't actually talk like that. We want Nigella covered in salted caramel not a reminder of what it was like to be in high school.
Individually, yes, a lot of women do like a combination of these things. We gossip with friends, we want to chat to them about our bad dates and our bad days, but lumping all of these things together and creating a social network based on our need to do these things and only these things is so boring and insulting and so rage-inducing it makes me want to take a shot of tequila and howl at the moon.
Female Entrepreneurship at its Best?
The worst part about Luluvise is not that it’s such a horrendous concept, or that people thought it was such a good idea they invested $1 million dollars in it, but rather that it’s being treated as a positive example of female entrepreneurship.
The press release closes with this "inspiring" line that's apparently meant to make us want to throw pair of fuck-me pumps at a VC. Or something.
“Luluvise is proof that in a male-dominated industry, female entrepreneurs can kick ass and do it in a great pair of shoes. As Alexandra’s elevator pitch always concludes, "Think Sex and the City meets Facebook.”
Really? Women kicking ass in a great pair of shoes? Thanks, no one ever knew that was possible before! We were all trying to not kick ass whilst wearing the ugliest shoes we could find. Now we see where we were going wrong.
Looking through Luluvise’s Facebook, Twitter, and “Scoops”, the branding and copy not only feel dated, but incredibly out-of-touch with those of us who they say “spend 35% more time on social networks than men”. In fact, it’s so bad, it appears to have been created by a group of Republican men living in Arkansas who thought they’d get rich from setting up a site for little ladies to gossip and “talk shoes and periods” on.
And speaking of men, Luluvise seem to think that they’re all women think and/or care about, despite its big "female friendships" hook.
Check out the first scoop that met me on the site:
The Scoop reads: "Seriously ladies, what do you think is the worst quality in a man?"
Let’s all just stop and think if this were a male social network, with no women allowed, and the first “Scoop” (or, “Punch” or “Jab” as this is a man’s site) asks what men really hate about women. We would all shit a brick and then blog the holy hell out of it, ripping it in to tiny, teeny pieces of sexism dust.
Did I also mention that you can review men? Yeah. Review them. Like a mobile phone or last night's Chicken Jalfrezi.
“We take the score from your review and average it with the scores from other Luluvisers who have already reviewed the gentleman in question. Your score contributes to Luluvise’s ever-growing database of dudes.”
Database of Dudes? I'm just going to let that one marinate for a while...
But despite the blatant sexism and double-standard-athon, when your strictly female blog’s tag cloud has DAVID CAMERON as being one of the most predominant, you know something's up.
Speaking of good ol’ DC, Luluvise’s founder is said to have “met with UK Prime Minster David Cameron during his Tech City tour in support of startups and innovation in London”, which makes me worried. Is David Cameron now going to think this is what women want or that the future of women in business looks like Luluvise? Was the “Sex and the City meets Facebook” elevator pitch presented over a cup of tea?
If this were just another bad idea, I could leave it, and stick it in the same mental pile I keep all of my Kim Kardashian knowledge. However, this isn’t just a fleeting bad idea. It’s an idea with millions of dollars behind it and that's been given access to the highest political figure in the country. It’s an idea that people are paying attention to, and other women in business and all of the big start-up blogs are talking about.
A website that is women-only, reviews men, and promotes acting like a catty teenager (and is proud of it) is not what we need. We do not need to praise the entrepreneurs who came up with this and miraculously got funding for it. They're not positive examples of what women in business and female entrepreneurs can do, fabulous shoes be damned.
If you'd like to be reminded of some positive examples, please cleanse your mind with the FT's "Power with Grace" feature - read it and be reminded that we don't need to pander to stereotypes to be successful, or to put down and exclude men to feel powerful.
We don't need a special, quarrienteind place online to talk to our friends, and we most certainly do not need a website or business like Luluvise lurking around the Internet.
There. How is that for some advice that you didn't even have to ask for?
UPDATE: It's been brought to my attention via Twitter that I misread one word on the press release - Alexandra's date on Valentine's Day 2009 was successful, not horrendous, so I have changed about three words in my piece above to reflect this.