Is music taste gendered?: BBC6, RYM, High Fidelity

Of course music taste is not exempt from a culture in which almost everything has the potential to be described in terms of the gender binary. With a predominance of male musicians being discussed in music journalism, which is mostly written by men, the consensus that has been developed is that intellectual music taste is associated with masculinity, and that women do not experience music on the same level. When attempts were made to balance out the predominantly male audience of BBC 6 Music, former BBC chief of popular music Lesley Douglas cited the changes as a recognition of women’s ’emotional reaction’ as opposed to men’s ‘intellectual’ attachment to music. But because critical acclaim is just the opinion of mostly males, it’s just as easy to see the association with males and “intellecutal” music as just the link between men and music that other men like. There is nothing intrinsically complex about critically-acclaimed rock music, nothing confoundingly intellectual – perhaps there is more of a link in discussion of contemporary classical music, but not in rock criticism. It seems that that which is critically acclaimed is conflated with that which is challenging and cerebral, even though we’d also think of classical music and opera as more intellectual than rock music.

So simply to contradict Douglas’ use of the word “intellectual”, I’ll cite a 1995 study which found that amongst UK secondary school students, ‘girls expressed liking for a wider range of styles than did boys, especially “serious” ones’.1 In this study, Hargreaves, Comber, and Colley found that the girls in their study had more positive reactions to a wider variation of music; the only statistically significant genres preferred by males were rock and heavy metal – which is dismissed by the researchers as being due to ‘the stereotype of masculinity that has frequently been associated with these styles of music’. (I’ll cover stereotypes later). Interestingly the study deals only with adolescents, who are described as generally lacking the ‘open-earedness’ that they had up to the age of 8 and would redevelop in early adulthood (only to become more close-minded in old age). The study is flawed (it doesn’t mention gender of singers in the music) and narrow, but essentially, this suggests that females, at least at this age, have a more intellectual, open-minded approach to music.

In other studies, girls have been proven to have a more positive and active approach to music at all ages between 12-18 (1982),2 although a recent study of university students suggests that men have a broader taste in genres, with no significant results suggesting they like more “sophisticated” music3 (I might suggest that the study is biased; I believe that much of the music in it would be performed by men, if not, all of the genres were certainly popularised in mainstream media by men; also, that the way these studies are conducted might not be the most representative way of gauging musical open-mindedness; I might have thought the samples were really bad examples of the genre!) An extensive list of gender and music-related sociological studies can be found in Ann Colley’s article ‘Young People’s Musical Taste: Relationship With Gender and Gender-Related Traits’,4 which suggests that women are more likely to take up instrument tuition and approach music creatively. I’ve not had much luck searching for studies relating to older participants – which is a shame because some of the stuff I’ll go on to talk about is more about middle-aged Wire readers than identity-forming teenagers.

So in spite of this contrary evidence, we still have this cultural consensus (for which I’ll provide more evidence later) that men are more intellectual in their approach to music, presumably because most music journalists and personalities are men – and because apparently, in patriarchal society, “intellectual” is synonymous with “masculine”.

To be fair though, Douglas is referring to a type of intellectualism familiar to the male BBC 6 listener, not so much that which is complex, but as a tendency to focus on, in her words, ‘the tracks, where albums have been made, that sort of thing’. This is a bit vague but it encompasses equipment, production techniques, personnel, trivia, as well as (I would argue) music journalism/criticism. In the internet age, the link between this obsessive approach to music and “intellectual” appreciation of music is stronger, because of the impersonal nature of interaction over the internet and its usefulness in honing out one’s music taste. We are likely to encounter more by a quick text description of label, production, personnel etc., as well as things like genre/style or even mood and themes (eg. the AllMusic Guide info – note the left hand column for a reduction of such a wildly emotional album to an alphabetical handful of adjectives). The effect is that music isn’t presented as emotionally, and therefore emotion can get dissociated with music. This could be one of the reasons why women’s music taste is so often disparaged – because when discussion and description of music is reduced to text, it doesn’t align with the way women more often experience music.

Joanna Newsom is subject to misogynistic comments depressingly often - there's a great feminist meta-commentary on critical appreciation of Newsom, among other Newsom analysis, at All The Birds.

This link has been drawn before, in this article about androcentrism in The Wire magazine by Aiofe Barry. Unfortunately the article to which Barry refers is no longer available but her views are nonetheless important. She criticises the clinical, detached presentation of the music described in the magazine, drawing parallels between its approach and the androcentric focus of artists it promotes, contrasting it with Plan B (which is now defunct, but you can download dated issues from 2004-9 on their website). The Wire covers in question do at least portray women in exactly the same way, without exception, as the men – the problem is solely balance rather than image and context of women, the main offence in pretty much any mainstream music publication, as Barry points out; the masculine bias here is part of why fewer women than men pursue the role of “intellectual” tastemaker, professional or otherwise. Women are not presented any more sexually than the men on the Wire covers, and any of the artists could have been replaced by someone of another gender without anyone batting an eyelid (and it’s also worth noting that there have been at least two transgendered people portrayed on Wire covers in the past four years). But it is mostly written by men, in an analytical style which bolsters the link between intellectual and masculine; to use Jacques Derrida’s terms, it’s the same phallogocentric logic that is fundamental to patriarchy.

But the same logic pervades in non-professional and community-based music websites too; I found some particularly striking results on the music database/library/communal reviewing & rating website, which (to clarify) I refer to several times a week, Rate Your Music. The concept of RYM is brilliant, and I believe the way in which they present their website is admirably non-biased, however, it’s let down by a rather questionable community. OK, it’s a community of tens of thousands, but still, I can’t help but feel that this isn’t a very good representation of music fandom. For a start, have a look at the main album chart (which is determined by an algorithm taking into account not just mean rating, but number of ratings cast). As of 23/8/11, the highest-ranked female artist is Joni Mitchell (with Blue) at #141. There are just 12 mixed-gendered bands in the 140 albums preceding Mitchell, the highest being the Pixies at #20, and all 12 of those are predominantly male. In terms of personnel for the other 128, the odd female session musician popping up during my Google double-checks (Carol Kaye on Forever Changes, for instance), but it’s a staggeringly male pile of albums. I’d like to say, “imagine the outcry if a professional publication were to release a list as androcentric as this” – but as Aiofe Barry found, magazines like Total Guitar are all too open about the practise of featuring “token” females, and I might add that no female artist has ever received a 10.0 from Pitchfork. We are being tricked into thinking that women cannot be geniuses, and it’s reflected in this user-created RYM chart.

In Brett Millar’s study of 18-25-year-olds, it is (unsurprisingly) revealed that men are more likely to identify male artists as their favourites than women, and more likely to believe male artists are more critically-acclaimed, although the ratio of males to females is balanced heavily towards males in both genders.5 Like me, Millar blames the media representation of women in music for the discrepancy, as well as more deeply-ingrained social aversions to women. He cites studies that find more positive reactions to male than female voices, pro-male bias in music teachers, and children’s (to some extent adults’) tendency to dissociate themselves from the opposite gender, in men more than women. So this suggests that RYM users are mostly male – internet communities are thought of as masculine, so the users are expressing masculinity through music taste.

...it's the norm for people like the Quietus to naturally represent themselves (Twitter & other promo) using pictures of men.

Indeed, some users seem to have clocked on to how male-dominated RYM is. In this thread, there is more citation of the stereotypes of men as intellectual, statistics-oriented (the latter might hold a grain of truth), and that the internet is a masculine area, but essentially, heavy RYM use is a sort of territorial, identity-forming practice, a characteristic I’ll explore later in my analysis of High Fidelity. And I suppose, like any online community, women can feel threatened by the choice dickheads who use their internet-anonimity as an excuse to fill with lechery the inboxes of any women who dare admit that they are female. But the prevalent masculinity of RYM prompts ordinarily-erudite scholar “slipknotmaggot666” to opine “I am not the sexist type, but I just think men enjoy music more than women”. Perhaps it is the internet age’s preoccupation with the reduction of arts to statistics and information (last.fm, Hypemachine, and Metacritic do the same) that doesn’t appeal to women, if indeed they cannot have this perhaps more “masculine” experience of music.

Even the reviews themselves display gendered attitudes to music taste. Here’s an oft-cited compendium of reviews, which to be honest is mostly hilarious, but #3 displays some gender trouble. This review of Bring Me The Horizon offends not just cause Oli Sykes is my cousin’s cousin (srsly!) but is mostly just a bitter attack of androgyny; it’s not so much transphobia as an assertion of masculinity, using the idea of “feminine” as an insult, verbally abusing effeminate men.

But I’m fascinated by #5, which creates an extended metaphor in which ( ) by Sigur Rós, one of my favourite records of all time, is described as an idealised woman. I feel totally compelled by the review, but its complete reliance on gender stereotyping is a bit off-putting. It implies that ( ) is a feminine album in its aetherial nature, free from any sort of restriction or real outside influence, even language itself. There are no hard edges or any real tropes of “masculine” rock music, so in spite of being made by four men, ( ) can be characterised as “feminine”. But the review (and I know I’m taking this too seriously, but still) swings a bit close to the baffling stereotype of “crazy bitch”, a dramatic reaction to the minor-key shift of the record’s second half. So why is the review gendered? I suppose because ( )  is this passive thing of beauty that is so often adored by people in utter awe of it; it doesn’t conform to patriarchal expectations and it’s amazing and mystifying.

Both of these reviews are popular because they fit into a community of reviewers who are assertively masculine, and their peers are automatically assumed to be heterosexual male; reviews like this perpetuate the stereotype. These are the people who are deterring women from assuming the role of tastemaker, and they are who define “intellectual” music.

RYM allows you to subtitle your 5-star ratings, and the results are often demonstrably heterosexual male - it really didn't take me long to find these.

There’s also the issue of aggressive or heavy music as being a masculine endeavour, and that women are not able to emulate, enjoy, or understand that which is aggressive. The same could apply to anything really – sports, action films, spicy food – and music too reinforces images of masculinity not just with the whole “phallic guitar” thing, but standards of machismo feeding in to many different genres. This can apply not just to the fashion or “scene” associated with a style of music, but a link between masculinity and technical complexity. This image pretty much inspired this post, because it implies that the ability to enjoy something “extreme” and “technical” is necessarily masculine, as well as that women are more concerned with “scenes” than objective artistic value. Or just simply that only men can appreciate art. And refer back to the Total Guitar covers that reinforce the idea that only men can rock out. It’s even been used in reference to indie-rock, which wasn’t ever the most macho genre, but check out this Jim Farber article in which he chastises “girly men” in indie-rock. Not only does he flaunt the common misogynist trick of using “feminine” as an insult, but in focusing on men he completely denies the capacity for women to inhabit the same space as critically-adored, hipster-approved, progressive men in music; not to mention the fact that he misses the point completely.

Another much-cited stereotype links technological aptitude and masculinity, and nowhere is this as obvious as in music criticism. Check out the androcentrism of these lists for top albums of 2010 by electronic music magazines Mixmag and Resident Advisor: in the former, the first female is at #15 (half of Crystal Castles), and the latter only features one female, Christabelle, as a collaborator with Lindstrom, who twiddled knobs on the record. Although to be fair, Resident Advisor’s other lists are mostly more gender balanced than other like-minded publications (DJ Sprinkles and Fever Ray got albums 1 & 2 of the year for ’09; but that is to say, still overwhelmingly focused on men). Most other electronica critics will yield similar results; magazine covers too are worringly male-oriented. Mixmag covers tend to sexualise women and present men as neutral, while OHM covers demonstrate a general androcentrism that isn’t going to encourage women to make electronic music. Production and music technology is male-dominated, and publications like these are at least partly to blame.

Dick, Rob, and Barry in Championship Vinyl (from the 2000 film adaptation).

Nick Hornby engages with the debate in his novel High Fidelity,6 and explores this idea of a “masculine” approach to music, taking the stereotype to an extreme with his character Dick, who works at narrator Rob Fleming’s record store. Dick is so obsessive about music that his entire personality is based around it, however, he approaches music as something to be collected rather than enjoyed. Our introduction to Dick suggests his autism, his incapacity for emotional response:

[Rob:] ‘Good weekend?’ […] [Dick:] ‘All right, yeah, OK. I found the first Liquorice Comfits album in Camden. The one on Testament of Youth. It was never released here. Japanese import only.’ (p.31)

Rob neglects to tell Dick about his recent breakup, explaining that ‘if I were ever to confess anything of a remotely personal nature – that I had a mother and father, say, or that I’d been to school when I was younger – I reckon he’d just blush, and stammer, and ask if I’d heard the new Lemonheads album’ (p.32).

The other co-worker at Rob’s shop is Barry, an intimidating figure who terrorises Dick but exhibits a similarly obsessive personality, similar methods of categorisation. If Dick compulsively collects and listens to as much as possible, Barry compulsively lists that which he has experienced: ‘if he has seen a good film, he will not describe the plot, or how it made him feel, but where it ranks in his best-of-year list, his best-of-all-time list, his best-of-decade list – he thinks and talks in tens and fives, and as a consequence Dick and I do too’ (p.34). He takes his own lists as dogma, refusing to accept that subjectivity allows for disagreements with him; he is defensive when others disagree with his tastes, saying ‘if it’s the wrong preference, it’s bollocks’ (p.36), exhibiting the defensive competitiveness that characterises patriarchal motives, but over something as subjective as musical taste.

Rob has similar qualities to both of his co-workers, frequently pausing in his narrative to catalogue a ‘Top 5 List’, his first sentence introducing his ‘desert-island, all-time, top five most memorable split-ups, in chronological order’ (p.1), as well as sharing lists like his ‘Top 5 films’, both American and ‘subtitled’ (p.21), ‘Top 5 Episodes Of Cheers’ (p.110), and ‘Top Five Bands Or Musicians Who Will Have To Be Shot Come The Musical Revolution’ (p.124 – Simple Minds, Michael Bolton, U2, Bryan Adams, and Genesis, in case you were wondering. This was pre-Coldplay). These lists are made with his peers in mind, for example, when prompted by Barry to choose his ‘top five Elvis Costello songs’ (p.76), Rob reveals: ‘I go for “Alison”, “Little Triggers”, “Man Out Of Time”, “King Horse” and a Merseybeat-style version of “Everyday I Write The Book” I’ve got on a bootleg tape somewhere, the obscurity of the last cleverly counteracting the obviousness of the first, I thought, and thus pre-empting scorn from Barry’ (p.76).

While to some, it might seem odd that Rob is being a bit dishonest with a subjective list, constructing it according to opinion of his peers rather than instinct, (aside from any scepticism about the formation of any music list), this behaviour accords with the results of a 2000 study by North, Hargreaves and O’Neall, who found that (in adolescents) ‘females seemed to report that music could be used as a means of mood regulation whereas males reported that music could be a means of creating an impression with others’.7 The fallacy of this idea is pointed out, as the study also finds that music is a largely solitary experience: ‘if they listen to music in isolation, they must make a point of informing others of the activity in order to create this impression’.8 The implication is that females have a more “honest” appreciation of music, that their enjoyment of music is more personal. The subjectivity of music is appreciated, whereas males apparently strive to fit their music taste to their social identity, subscribing to the myth that music taste is objective, like a form of competition. It’s patriarchal logic, manifested in something as seemingly unrelated as music taste.

On the other hand, Barry, Dick, and Rob’s obsessive list-making and categorisation suggests an inability to engage emotionally with music, which is suggestive of traits of autism. Autism is more common in men, but the reasons for this are unclear: while most research is into genetic differences (a 2009 study inconclusively suggests that the answer lies in the XX/XY chromosomes) , there is a strong argument that ‘diagnostic issues and gender bias’9 are to blame for the perceived difference. Autistic tendencies are more socially acceptable in men, which is partially why autistic women are more frequently undiagnosed,10 and women with autism are often overlooked. If autism is more strongly connected to masculinity, it follows that a “masculine” music taste is less emotionally-engaged than a “feminine” taste.

I’m not familiar with Hornby’s other work, but from what I’ve learned, these autistic qualities are all quite typical of his characters, and indeed, you get the impression he bases them on his own traits. The cover of my copy proudly boasts a quote from Harry Enfield: ‘a very funny and concise explanation of why men are as we are’. Hornby is trying to capture some sort of essence of masculinity, acknowledging that the domain of the record shop is inhabited by ‘young men, always young men, with John Lennon specs and leather jackets and armfuls of square carrier bags’ (p.30). So it’s somewhat revelatory when Hornby finally reveals a female perspective of enjoyment of music, when Rob’s romantic interest Laura confesses that she prefers Art Garfunkel to Solomon Burke:

[Rob:] ‘Can you really not see the difference between “Bright Eyes” and “Got To Get You Off My Mind”?’

[Laura:] ‘Yes, of course. One’s about rabbits and the other has a brass band playing on it.’

‘A brass band! A brass band! It’s a horn section! Fucking hell.’

‘Whatever. I can see why you prefer Solomon to Art. I understand, really I do. And if I was asked to say which of the two was better, I’d go for Solomon every time. He’s authentic, and black, and legendary, and all that sort of thing. But I like “Bright Eyes”. I think it’s got a pretty tune, and beyond that, I don’t really care. There are so many other things to worry about. I know I sound like your mum, but they’re only pop records, and if one’s better than the other, well, who cares, really, apart from you and Barry and Dick? To me, it’s like arguing the difference between McDonalds and Burger King. I’m sure there must be one, but who can be bothered to find out what it is?’ (p.201)

Coming near the end of the novel, this passage somehow makes Laura look at once ignorant (‘brass band’) and the voice of reason (‘there are so many other things to worry about’). There’s a thread of bitter irony running through Hornby’s narrative in which you realise that his narrator’s convictions are conflicting; his obsession with music gets in the way of his compulsion to patch things up emotionally; this passage reveals much about the source of tension between Rob and Laura.

I find it problematic that Hornby portrays Laura so simplistically; her views are obviously contrary to Hornby’s own (he’s penned a collection of essays about pop songs titled 31 Songs) and here she may as well be representing all women – most men in the book share Rob’s obsessive qualities, whereas women largely deride him. In an early, inconsequential episode, Rob encounters a vengeful wife of an adulterer, who attempts to flog her husband’s extensive and rare record collection for just fifty pounds – he can’t bring himself to deprive the stranger, no matter how morally corrupt he is, of such an achievement of a collection. It is only country musician Marie LaSalle who is portrayed intellectually, and very differently to the men, because she is a part of the music industry. He perpetuates the myth of masculinity being aligned to intellectualism, even if the men in his novel are always hapless. Rob actually marginalises Laura’s intellectuality, continually disparaging her in an attempt to sidestep her superior social standing. At one point he refers to her as ‘Mzzzz Hot Shot City Lawyer’ (p.203), undermining her feminist inclinations, and deriding the idea of a women with a career. Hornby is hinting towards patriarchal rhetoric which leads towards women being denied of intellectualism, perhaps ironically, but I can’t help but feel that his tendency to centre on men as arbiters of taste in the novel is part of the problem.

High Fidelity is just another example of a cultural hegemony in which privileges a masculine approach to art as the most intellectual. The “masculine” and “feminine” approaches to music which I have described are not by any means rigid, in fact I think one of the reasons we feel the need to gender music taste is because our society adheres so closely to the gender binary. To conclude in a sentence: men often assume that women have inferior music taste because the androcentric agenda of the patriarchal arbiters of what is “intellectual music” actively excludes women, and marginalises a “feminine” approach to music. In my research I’ve found so much ridiculous internet which genders music taste, but I’m going to leave you on this one that I found particularly absurd:

Girls with good taste in music DO EXIST!!

I’m studying to become a teacher, and I was talking to this girl in my class. She told me that she’s 18 years old (I’m 24) and we talked for a while about music and stuff. Then she showed me her iPod and I found that she had every Stevie Ray Vaughan album in there.. and then I saw that she had ALBERT KING, early Pink Floyd and Hendrix in there. Awsome! A similar situation happened when I was invited home to my ex girlfriend the first time. She showed me her record collection and I found that she had “WIRED” by Jeff Beck, Peter Green’s Fleetwood Mac “Live” and lots of Zeppelin albums. It’s so great to see that there are young girls with good taste in music nowdays!!

But wait! Surely not!

Hmm, interesting thread. Something did just occur to me. Perhaps the music on her iPod was given to her by her Dad, older Brother, Cousin etc. Did she say that she was really into a lot of that stuff? Ya never know, she could’ve gotten it as a gift, and whoever was the giver loaded it up for her with whatever they had on their drive. It could happen.

References: (print/journal references are footnotes, website references are simply linked in the body)

1 David J. Hargreaves, Chris Comber and Ann Colley, ‘Musical likes and dislikes: The effects of age, gender, and training in British secondary school pupils’, Journal of Research in Music Education, 43 (1995), 242–250. [link]
2 Robert D. Crowther and Kevin Durkin, ‘Sex- and age-related differences in the musical behaviour, interests and attitudes towards music of 232 secondary school students’, Educational Studies, 8 (1982), 131-140. [link]
3 Ann Colley, ‘Young People’s Musical Taste: Relationship With Gender and Gender-Related Traits’, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38 (2008), 2039-2055. [link]
4 Ibid., pp.2039-2042.
5 Brett Millar, ‘Selective hearing: gender bias in the music preferences of young adults’, Psychology of Music, 36 (2008), 429-445. [link]
6 Nick Hornby, High Fidelity (London: Penguin Books Ltd., 2000).
7 Adrian C. North, David J. Hargreaves and Susan A. O’Neill, ‘The importance of music to adolescents’, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70 (2000), 255-272. [link] (p.269)
8 Ibid.
9 Tessa Taylor Rivet and Johnny L. Matson, ‘Review of gender differences in core symptomatology in autism spectrum disorders’, Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 5 (2011), 957-976. [link] (p.967)
10 Ibid. (p.964)

Advertisements

About decemberembers

I've noticed that all of my music-obsessed friends have completely different approaches to music in the digital age, and I'm writing this blog as an attempt to raise questions about what you experience when listening to music. It's also partly a response to a majority of music journalism which, stylistically and ethically, I find problematic. I'm trying to avoid being prescriptive and will encourage open-mindedness. :)
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Is music taste gendered?: BBC6, RYM, High Fidelity

  1. Rob Harman says:

    In case you remember: I’m sure at a NURL meeting I made some poorly-received remark about gender and music, along the lines of – but worded clumsier – “the cataloguing mentality is male and that’s why we have more men”. I stand by the first part, but my analysis is shoddy. We don’t get many more men, and they don’t seem to be cataloguers [NB all cataloguers I know (including me to some extent) are male though]. Thought I ought to at least clear that.

    I could agree with you on loads of the patriarchy and misogyny’s wrong stuff, but it seems self-evident (preaching to the converted). Also, thank you for confirming what I’d assumed about Nick Hornby: he’s so dull. The only point of interest is Laura’s “authentic” – have you considered writing a piece on (faux-)authenticity in music? It’s one of the few things that affects everyone (I’m thinking kvlt, Mumford & Analog Africa).

    What I know of my non-NURL friends’ music listening tastes (despite my first analysis) suggests that women listen to their personal choice, and men to a communal one. (I’m assuming this because the crap men listen to is all the same, but women seem to have individually tailored crap.)

    I’d quite like to see that Newsom meta-commentary though: you seem to have missed off the link. [NB Ys is utterly superb, but only because of Van Dyke Parks & Steve Albini :P] Incidentally, what I most hate on these lines is the hypocrisy where female solo artists have everything but the voice credited to their usually male producers, but for male acts the producer is seen as a signifier of a genre rather than impacting the music (eg Stephen Street & Viva Brother)

    • ahh yeah, it’s at http://allthebirds.tumblr.com – WordPress doesn’t like me putting links in captions. I touched on a lot of the critical biases towards female artists in another post that I intend to re-blog here at some point, but the All The Birds tumblr seems to have covered pretty much everything!

      I also kind of touched on authenticity on the “honesty” post but I might cover genres etc at some point (I feel somewhat ashamed that my favourite Eastern European folk is A Hawk And A Hacksaw and Mali Music is one of the best African folk records I’ve ever heard…)

  2. Simon Hoare says:

    Men do have an emotional relationship with music but some men get caught up in intellectualising it. However, emotional responses vary from person to person.

    For example, I find Whitney Houston’s I Will Always Love You wholly lacking in emotion, bombastic and relying purely on vocal technique. Yet to some people that’s the most amazing song ever. I do however love Dionne Warwick’s Anyone Who Had A Heart and think it’s one of the most beautiful and tender songs I’ve ever heard. What does all that prove? Absolutely nothing.

    What men are often guilty of is not understanding is “different strokes for different folks”. It’s like all those anti-Justin Bieber comments you seen on Youtube. Totally harmless pretty boy targeting a market mostly comprising teenage girls. Not sure why so many of my gender pals feel so threatened by him.

  3. Jay Cavanaugh says:

    Wow this blog is fantastic. As a musician I’m always looking to understand what different genders find appealing and so on. I do agree that rock in particular is male dominated. But so much has to do with labeling. For instance, I grew up listening to Prog Rock in the early 70’s, I remember many, many women into Prog at the time. Some how over the years it’s been branded “Guy” music as if the only thing women find appealing is simple melodies in 4×4 timing they can dance to. Hum could have fooled me at the last Rush concert I attended when a group of middle aged women sat behind me and knew almost every word of every Rush song that night. I’m just sayin! Peace J.C.

    • Thanks Jay! That’s really interesting, I think it shows how much male-dominated music discourse affects these perceptions, it’s definitely to do with women being dumbed down in music crit :(

      • Well I’ve invited women to review my CD, even women who run online Rock Magazines based on Facebook. Nothing, you can hear crickets. I don’t think it’s because women have nothing to say, more that they’re overpowered in a very male dominated arena. I welcome women’s input and insights into my music. I’ve been researching this gender issue in music lately because of the stats I get from Facebook and Reverbnation on the gender and age demographics that like our music. So far we attract a mostly middle aged male audience with this strange little bubble between the ages of say 12 to 17. (That one completely throws me) Without women’s voices and opinions it’s hard to figure out how to adjust our music and make it a little more female friendly. It’s like, hey come on ladies step up to the plate! Being a critic invites a lot of hate mail, surely with all the Hollywood reporters out there there must be some strong opinionated women who welcome the sort of hate mail that say a Robert Christgau used to get for chastising someone’s favorite artist? LOL

  4. Jaclyn Shaw says:

    If you (females/males) give my music a listen, you will hear that I use crazy time signatures, complex poetry, and intense chordal structures (intense, meaning they are not “popular” or as most optimistic listeners express: “unique”). When I have played with males in the past it would take them at LEAST 4 weeks (a month) to learn to play with my arrangements and chords for a single song. However, women who have collaborated with me, seem to pick up the complexities rather quickly. Again, this isn’t a statistic I am siting, just my experience…

    A lot of women don’t feel compelled to verbalize a defense about why they are NOT doing things on public forums. Maybe because they are busy… I don’t know. Currently, I am sick and have time to sit in front of the computer and respond to this, because I get my kicks out of expressing my voice, which I feel is EXTREMELY important to express (because I have high self esteem and I am important… lol) We (and I say we loosely because, “who am I but one voice?”) discuss it with each other, and heal each other from the verbal abuse that men often mindlessly (without intelligence) put us through. Public forums are for the ego, most women work on their issues without having to win a competition for show… that said….

    I read this article and laugh with irony! I don’t think that intelligence is neither the common denominator/predictor for why men are more common in the music industry nor for why men openly express their drive to learn more about performing various music. I believe that men may feel more comfortable competing for a crowds attention, particularly in this day and age when attention spans are short! Also, men are conditioned by conservative families and the media, to BE performers. Look at the role models glorified in rock? It’s a cock show…

    Personally, it’s hard to play complex music for people in bars, because it’s not known to them… Apparently, everyone (men and women) likes formulas. They like things that are common and known and simple. That is exactly what pop music is. It requires less thought to digest it, because people mostly don’t want to think… they are stressed out! Women, on average, are more stressed out then men. Why would they want to listen to something that they have to analyze? It’s just more work…

    As for the work, I enjoy it. Most women are not encouraged to work at music. Maybe that it why they don’t bother. I personally wasn’t encouraged to work on my CD, but I did it anyway.. because I’m not one to play by the unsaid rules. However, the unsaid rules, still affect me because even being as great as I am on guitar and having the voice that I have, people still look at me as a pretty face. They are stuck on my face… and that is just a reflection of how “unintelligent” society can be. They may have absolutely no idea what I am playing, but most people who actually hear my music/lyrics and connect to it, feel spiritually connected. I do it for them.

    • Uhh thanks for your comment, I think? I hope I sufficiently dismantled what is meant when men talk about what is “intellectual”, obviously I think it’s completely false that men are any more “intellectual” than women, I just think that discursively and socially, men are conditioned to think that their tastes are more “intellectual” than women’s, which has no basis.

      I guess you’re responding more to what makes people performers than what shapes people’s tastes. Which is obviously a related issue, and yeah, men are definitely more socially conditioned to have the privilege and confidence to become performers. I also believe that women performers have more of a struggle achieving critical acclaim, especially because as you said, hetero men are more likely to focus on appearance (and men are writing the most about music!)

      I wrote another article more recently which also touches upon how music criticism undermines the intellectual value of women’s music, link is here if yr interested.

  5. >>A lot of women don’t feel compelled to verbalize a defense about why they are NOT doing things on public forums. Maybe because they are busy… I don’t know. <<

    So let me get this straight: Women are too busy to venture into the world of taste making? After many years of talking shop with both Men and Women about music I know for a fact that women have opinions a plenty about everything. And I think the essence of this blog is more about the lack of those opinions in the public forum. It's shedding light on yet another area of inequality. Just like the growing lack of women Governors. My own experience with musicians has been 98% men, so I can't speak to who picks what up faster. I've mostly worked with female singers who didn't play an instrument. There was always some lag time in their ability to grasp some of the finer points. But honestly it was the same for Male non instrument playing singers. But since the music business is so splintered now days it's not really worth anyones time to become a music critic. People aren't even buying much in the way of merchandise so who cares what anyone really thinks?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s