Music Jack White says music industry is sexist

[flyingsnail]

I don't know if I completely buy that definition of heavy. Heavy metal is about catharsis, a place where strong feelings are expressed in a forceful style. It's a sort of sanctuary where you're allowed to be angry, scream and yell, and be aggressive, since you can't really do all those things in your day to day life. I wouldn't call that behavior masculine or feminine, just human.

Your description of heavy metal is, I think, just a fancy way of saying "alpha male behavior" or "aggressive displays of male status". In any case, I think you have to analyze music genres in their respective subculture.

Oh yay. Lets reduce everything that people do to the very questionable "behavioural ecology."

I'm not sure what is questionable about behavioral ecology, its just a field of science, and people only seem to take issue when you apply such fields to humans rather than the usual non-human animals. Talk about the mating strategies of birds and people listen....talk about the mating strategies of humans and people make jokes and ridicule. After all....humans are obviously such a dignified species.

I always am very selective while looking for a date. Usually I like an alpha male so I make sure he has at least 60%....

As before this is just an attempt to deride a position rather than seriously address matters.

 

[Dedalus]

My claim is based on behavioral ecology and the situation I described is pretty typical for primates. Human mating strategies can be analyzed just like any other animal.....even though humans think they are beyond their nature. I can give you source if you're truly interested.

The appreciation for music in humans, like other animals, likely evolved for mating purposes in the first place so the fact that music today involves a good deal of sexuality shouldn't be surprising.

If you can convincingly thread a woman's desire to create music with a primative 'display of dominance' then have at it. It sounds like 1 part speculation and 2 parts broad-sweeping generalization.

Right and that applies to both men and women, so why is it sexist when a woman's success in pop music relies on factors unrelated to her musical talent?

Because the unrelated factors for women will always be x and x plus her sex, whereas for men those factors may just be x and x.

 

[Clueless Git]

Because the unrelated factors for women will always be x and x plus her sex, whereas for men those factors may just be x and x.

I actualy agree with this, but to the degree that it is a problem for women it is largely a problem fueled by women.

Women, largely but not entirely, spend a lot of time and money on bizarrely impractical clothing, shoes, hair, make up, etc, that have no practical purpose other than to emphasise their femininity, their sexuality.

Somewhat on topic ..

The series 'The Apprentice' is back on TV as of this week and the first installment was a boys-v-girls sales competition.

Girls team strategy #1; "High heels, short skirts, nice make up."

These was women who had already proven successfull track records in the male dominated business arena, not a bunch of whingeing air-head bimbos though.

Struck me as 'strange' (by which I mean not all strange) that the very thing that unsuccessful women see as their hold-back was the very first thing these women grabbed as a female advantage to be fully exploited.

It may be x and plus sex for the ladies but if the 'plus sex' factor is advantage or disadvantage seems to be largely a matter of attitude.

The x and x plus their sex team soundly trounced the x and x plus no tits to flash around team, btw.

 

[AeryFairy]

I actualy agree with this, but to the degree that it is a problem for women it is largely a problem fueled by women.

Women, largely but not entirely, spend a lot of time and money on bizarrely impractical clothing, shoes, hair, make up, etc, that have no practical purpose other than to emphasise their femininity, their sexuality.

Because women are taught from an early age that, no matter what they choose to do in life, their looks are the most important thing, and they will always be judged on their appearance, even when it bears no relevance whatsoever to what they are pursuing. I don't think the blame can be placed entirely on women who present themselves in the way that society expects, whether they dress that way because they want to or because it makes life slightly easier for them.

Of course, you can't really win - take too much care over your clothes, hair, and make-up, and there's an equally sizeable portion of the population who will label you a shallow, vapid bimbo.

Somewhat on topic ..

The series 'The Apprentice' is back on TV as of this week and the first installment was a boys-v-girls sales competition.

Girls team strategy #1; "High heels, short skirts, nice make up."

These was women who had already proven successfull track records in the male dominated business arena, not a bunch of whingeing air-head bimbos though.

Struck me as 'strange' (by which I mean not all strange) that the very thing that unsuccessful women see as their hold-back was the very first thing these women grabbed as a female advantage to be fully exploited.

It may be x and plus sex for the ladies but if the 'plus sex' factor is advantage or disadvantage seems to be largely a matter of attitude.

Actually, it was one woman's strategy, that was largely opposed by her female teammates, and the women on the 'You're Fired' panel, and most of the women watching at home (if my social media feeds were anything to judge by).

 

[ledboots]

My claim is based on behavioral ecology and the situation I described is pretty typical for primates. Human mating strategies can be analyzed just like any other animal.....even though humans think they are beyond their nature. I can give you source if you're truly interested.

The appreciation for music in humans, like other animals, likely evolved for mating purposes in the first place so the fact that music today involves a good deal of sexuality shouldn't be surprising.


Right and that applies to both men and women, so why is it sexist when a woman's success in pop music relies on factors unrelated to her musical talent?

Because the vast majority of music executives, producers, and sound engineers are male. The decision makers, the hirers, the bosses, the ones with the power to make a recording and promote it.

 

[flyingsnail]

Because the vast majority of music executives, producers, and sound engineers are male. The decision makers, the hirers, the bosses, the ones with the power to make a recording and promote it.

I don't get why this would make it sexist, ultimately the factors that determine success are based on society and our evolutionary history not some executives. The executives, or rather their marketing departments, are just going to exploit the existing situation. But they do this for both male and female musicians, in both cases there are many factors unrelated to musical talent that promote success.

 

[Clueless Git]

I don't think the blame can be placed entirely on women who present themselves in the way that society expects, whether they dress that way because they want to or because it makes life slightly easier for them.

I don't think the blame can be placed entirely on women either, Aery.

What I am curious about is why so many people want the blame to be put entirely on men.

 

[Clueless Git]

Actually, it was one woman's strategy, that was largely opposed by her female teammates, and the women on the 'You're Fired' panel, and most of the women watching at home (if my social media feeds were anything to judge by).

Which kind of points towards females resenting femininity being part of a package that can bring females success in a mans world?