I would argue that there is a men's way and a women's way of being political. It's not that there is an intriscially female way of being political and a male one or that you can't move between the two---I've been involved in both and I've worked with men and women in both---but that mainstream society views one as political and not the other. Institutional bias i would say.
This institutional bias carries itself out into how one's defines oneself often though. Many people will define what they are doing as political or not based on how society will view it.
The blogs Canada E Group focuses on what i would call the mainstream view of politics. Political parties and the debates and the latest scandals in politics. I wouldn't say this is because of Jim or anyone else in particular in the group--- Jim having gone looking for women for the group in the past shows an interest in balance that isn't that common. But since most of the group members were men and because of some of the format of the group it tended to stay that way.
Drop in on a course in politics that is being studied from a women's studies perspective in university and you will view a totally different environment and different definitions of politics. My school's women's studies program was interdisciplinary and there were credits that were both political science and women studies credits---but how the courses worked ended up being quite different.
We had men in the courses that were both women's studies and political science courses. But there were many more women in them. Also we tended to get men who were interested in a different view of politics and more open to a different situation.
We had political arguments in both types of courses. Even if you get a majority of women who are feminist in a course you will find that there are many different views of politics and feminism and how the two should go forward. But we seldom had loud arguments or yelling fights---something i saw in my political science courses and which got louder as the years went up. At my university the Political Science field was more and more "male dominated" in the upper years. Before third year there was no visible difference between the sexes, but it grew and became a lot stronger by the fourth year.
Being involved in environmental groups, anti racist groups, groups trying to decrease sexism, poverty, ableism are all political and involve both men and women. They do tend to have a more equal amount of men and women involved though. And my experience is that more of the women involved in them tend to view them as political. I tend to view these groups as activist (a term i think a lot of others use). I'm a member of the NDP in my area, but unless there is a nomination or an election i usually spend my time in activist areas. So you won't see me at nearly as many party events. I don't think I'm the only one and that this is why you may see more men generally in "politics". My politics are dual activism and NDP. But there are many who stay in just one or the other. Also being an activist doesn't mean being NDP even if you do have a political orientation. Activist issue often don't have as clear a party to be with. Sometimes just getting parties to recognize them can be difficult. And generally they are not what the public views as politics. But grassroots politics can often effect political change.