The Pitchfork People's List - top albums 1996-2012

That's exactly the kind of thing I mean, though obv (as your comment alludes) it's a more bald-faced example and usually these processes are much more insidious/subtle ("insidious" probably has unnecessarily negative implications but you get what I mean).

Great post Tim

tim otm. if there's a problem here, it's less what individuals do or don't like and more the way canon-building & conversation-driving entities emphasize certain voices over others. of course, that's a pretty big and complex subject too.

Also - why we listen to music and what qualities we enjoy. There are people who genuinely prefer music that is raw, macho, visceral, antagonistic and so may be drawn to certain elements of heavy metal or hiphop, whereas others listen out for sounds that are mellow, groovy, chilled out, cool and therefore are more naturally inclined towards r'n'b or house. For a lot of people it's the reason they listen to music at all - not because they want a varied musical diet with a panoply of emotions. Some people go through life not giving a hoot about music until one day they come across, say, a Minor Threat track that hits them over the head and after that they're hooked on hardcore with little need to sway or diversify from that sound because it quells a certain appetite that they have a strong craving for - a craving that simply won't be satiated by, say, disco or whatever. That person might like to diversify a little. Maybe they hear the same kind of thrill in listening to hardcore as they do in metal, gabba, gangsta rap, but maybe it's specifically hardcore that works for them and the buck stops there. For someone like this, listening to any other music is either a waste of time or bordering on painful.

This is where comparisons between things like race and class (people who are othered because we are separated from them by culture) and things like gender and sexuality (people who are othered even though they inhabit the same culture) just completely break down.

This is what I just find so frustrating: when someone who can get obsessed with music made by a man completely outside of their experience from the other side of the world, musically will, at the same time, just not even consider the idea of listening to or, in this case "canonising" (listifying?) a woman on their musical block.

again, though, i think that's incredibly reliant on how much of a given 'musical block' is even populated by women. in some cases you'd have to look really hard to find even one.

xpost but who does this WCC? I don't believe anybody who's got an interest in a style of music from the other side of the world would prefer a male/female artists merely based on the grounds of basic sexism. If I were interested in, say Nyabinghi-style roots reggae, the experience of actively seeking out this kind of music (probably via a compilation most likely) would make "oh no i don't want to listen to that because it's sung by a woman" sound very strange indeed...

People having a problem with women's singing voices is a deep and storied history

again, though, i think that's incredibly reliant on how much of a given 'musical block' is even populated by women. in some cases you'd have to look really hard to find even one.

Why? That is a question that needs asking, too.

1) is this really an actual genre without any women at all, or have the women in that genre been routinely discounted or ignored?

2) there are some genres where it feels like (to me) the lack-of-women is a feature, not a bug. What does it say about someone if they are really drawn to that genre? Is it the music they like, or the girl-free lifestyle?

(And I say that as a woman who has many, many times, been attracted to and tried to participate in certain genres that code as male, and been told flat out "women don't like this" or harassed until I leave. Women-free spaces very rarely happen by accident these days.)

And again - there is music out there that clicks certain buttons for people; music that would be considered macho, aggressive, visceral etc that is almost inarguably masculine, and therefore male-dominated by nature. There are some tremendous female death metal vocalists for example, but they tend to be the exception rather than the rule. It would take some extreme denial not to be stunned by the presence of someone like Angela Gossow (Arch Enemy), who can cookie-monster growl better than a lot of male metal singers.

But equally, there's plenty of music out there for people who prefer a more traditionally feminine touch. R'n'B is a genre where females appear to be canonised if not equally then more than their male counterparts. But R'n'B isn't really a very aggressive or hard-hitting genre. It's not going to click everyone's buttons, but it is one of the most popular styles of music in the Western world, so it's not as if it's being ignored.

1) is this really an actual genre without any women at all, or have the women in that genre been routinely discounted or ignored?

yeah of course there aren't, but i think there are still plenty of situations where the participation level is like 95% or 99% male

what genres are these? i guess metal is one, judging from what people say.

lol no

chicks dig metal. plenty do. it's more about what one seeks out in music though, innit? the values you're drawn to. most people have categories of emotions/feelings/sounds that they enjoy hearing and others they don't. metal could be seen as having a particularly masculine sound, but then if you take a band like Cradle Of Filth, they have a huge huge female fanbase.

so way more than 1 in 20 metal musicians is female? i have no idea really but i wouldn't have guessed. (xpost)

There's def more women in popular, working metal bands than ones with salable rap careers in 2012

I think if you were a Pitchfork reading indie fan taking the path of least resistance in 2012 you'd have been pointed in the direction of a lot of female voices from your "own block". Taking Pitchfork's Best New Music selections 2012 alone would give you Jessie Ware, Purity Ring, Dirty Projectors, Fiona Apple, Beach House, Chromatics, Julia Holter, Grimes and Frankie Rose, which isn't 50% but it's not far off especially when you remove the rappers and Frank Ocean.

I mean the Pitchfork universe has always struck me as pretty open to female voices within certain defined aesthetics. But when you go beyond that the selections are overwhelmingly male - a relatively unknown male R&B singer is likely to get more traction than a female one.

I mean the Pitchfork universe has always struck me as pretty open to female voices within certain defined aesthetics.

I'd agree if you replaced "always" with "recently"

I don't think that's true -- Frank Ocean's the big crossover figure this year but in another year it's equally as likely to be, say, Janelle Monae (xpost)

I have typed about 3 or 4 detailed responses on this thread, then just given up and hit the back button. I'm tempted to just link to previous posts of mine, or blog entries or whatever. This feels so circular at this point.

Did Pitchfork (I don't keep tabs on Pitchfork at all btw, so a lot of the backlash bemuses me somewhat) cover Solange Knowles? Do they cover Rihanna? Cassie? etc. Just curious here.

I'd agree if you replaced "always" with "recently"

Yeah okay I'd go with that.

This is one reason why it's much easier to get a handle on how a person relates to music as a whole (or, perhaps more accurately, self-relates as a fan and consumer of music) by finding out who/what they read on music (assuming they read anyone) than what they listen to.

^^ otm

I have typed about 3 or 4 detailed responses on this thread, then just given up and hit the back button. I'm tempted to just link to previous posts of mine, or blog entries or whatever. This feels so circular at this point.

― Shepton Mullet (White Chocolate Cheesecake), Monday, 20 August 2012 14:13 (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

What is even more frustrating and circular is the presence of posts like this every page or two. Really - REALLY - I'm not trying to flame here, but please try and have patience. You've obviously thought about your position on this subject a lot, but sighing and rolling your eyes and moaning about certain turns of discussion is as tedious as you're making it out to be at best; and condescending to those you're speaking with at worst. Not everyone can be expected to intuit your specific thoughts and feelings on this (obviously fairly touchy/hot topic).

Dog Latin, you are aware that a few days, you were arguing that Metal was *not* defined by certain emotions (anger, aggression, etc.) And now today, you are arguing that the reason "women don't like metal" is because it is dominated by certain emotions (anger, aggression) which are so ~masculine~ that women don't ever, ever feel them?

1) Which is it? Metal is or is not dominated by anger and aggression? Make up your mind, please.

2) As to visceral anger and aggression being "masculine." You are aware that women can and *do* feel emotions of anger and aggression. In fact, given the levels of frustration inspired in me by this thread, I can assure you, as a woman, that rage and anger are a big, big part of females' experience.

xp There was a moment about five years ago when I realized "holy crap I have no problem with Pitchfork vs. gays, Pitchfork vs. women" but I don't remember what brought it on.

Re: TimF's thing about "what they read", it's so true and it's changed my own thought process. In the early 00s I would've said "sounds like Kranky" and now it's "sounds like you read XXJFG"

rip labels

If you can't even remember your *own* arguments, Dog Latin, really, why should I spend my time and energy and emotional wherewithall making points over and again until they get through to you? Knowing full well that I'll be accused of clusterfucking and not being able to let go of an argument etc. if I do try to make those points yet again.

WCC - I may be putting words in dog latins mouth here but it's totally reasonable to argue that a genre shouldn't be defined by certain criteria while accepting that it is perceived to be defined that way by the majority of people.

Dog Latin, you are aware that a few days, you were arguing that Metal was *not* defined by certain emotions (anger, aggression, etc.) And now today, you are arguing that the reason "women don't like metal" is because it is dominated by certain emotions (anger, aggression) which are so ~masculine~ that women don't ever, ever feel them?

Don't think I said any of these things. Metal has its tropes. I would say it is a masculine sound. The latterday discussion was saying that boiling metal's emotional impact down to terms such as "anger" is simplistic, and not always true. Something like Napalm Death, yeah it's "angry" (among other things), whereas Rhapsody aren't angry at all. I also didn't say women don't like metal. There are bands like Cradle of Filth whose fanbase is largely female. But there's a reason you go to a CoF gig and see lots of women whereas if you were to go to a Napalm gig you might see fewer.

It's very simple really. Outside of maybe a few specialist establishments in Soho, you don't often get big tough beardy dudes getting down to Britney on the whole. That's not sexism, that's just how taste works.

music that would be considered macho, aggressive, visceral etc that is almost inarguably masculine, and therefore male-dominated by nature.

male dominated by nature.

Let's just look at that again.

Male-dominated by nature. Because that's nature. Men are angry, women are...

Let me tell you, reading this rubbish, right now, it makes me so angry I wish I could reach you through the monitor and punch you.

It's not simple. And it is complete fucking sexism.

oh jesus. well, that's me out of here.

Tim and Owen are, respectfully, getting at some very interesting points.

And instead I'm letting myself get derailed by someone waving a red flag of "men are ~naturally~ like this, women are ~naturally~ like that" utter stupidity at me. I apologise to the thread and the board for letting myself get trolled by that. Please carry on, Tim and Owen.

Don't really see how being big tough and beardy would mean not liking Britney. That's not how taste works I don't think.

I reviewed the second Solange album for pitchfork but was the wrong choice for a "pitchfork" review given I was a bit down on the swirly electronic portions of the album.

On a grander scale, If you wish to analyze gender / race / sexuality breakdown in listening habits then you need to look at the balance of participation in certain genres, the societal boundaries to that participation and from there whether ones habits enforce, uphold or seek to redress those imbalances.

Outside of maybe a few specialist establishments in Soho, you don't often get big tough beardy dudes getting down to Britney on the whole. That's not sexism, that's just how taste works.

ajkldkjdfkjdkjsdiodidknc,lxknl;;;ls;spsp---

Tom Ewing has a massive beard, and he made Blackout his number one album on this thing. Huh.

have seen plenty angry tough bearded metal dudes getting down to britney fwiw

The better "simple" answer to " why is genre X dominated by a single sex" is "because most of the people participating in that genre want it to be dominated by a single sex". It isn't until you start asking "why?" that interesting conversations start happening.

i feel like generally speaking, lots of women make the music they want to make now, and lots of music fans of both genders listen to it. there's always going to be specific cases of marginalization or prejudice, among listeners and within music scenes, that are worth discussing and getting mad about, but i have no idea how we can even analyze this kind of thing on such a macro scale without uselessly second-guessing every fact and detail into total nonsense.

playing referee between WCC and Dog Latin again, I think it's totally reasonable to assert that there is societal pressure on women to downplay their own aggression.
I know plenty of aggressive & angry women, I don't think anyone here would argue against it being a natural state however it's not something that's accepted as a "natural" feminine trait within the gender binary so women are under immense pressure to identify more with Rihanna than Kathleen Hanna. Therefore it is "natural" within the society we live in that women are discouraged from taking part in aggressive genres of music far more than the pressure that already exists for them just to take part in musical creation at all.

The better "simple" answer to " why is genre X dominated by a single sex" is "because most of the people participating in that genre want it to be dominated by a single sex". It isn't until you start asking "why?" that interesting conversations start happening.

I have detailed, many times before, my experiences, as a woman, of "trying to get into genre X" and being told flat out "but women aren't interested in genre X" and then being ignored (in best case scenario) or harassed, bullied and worse, until I get disgusted and leave. So that men can continue to justify their masculinity by saying "I'm a man, and I'm into genre X, which is a masculine genre, because no women like it, because it is so tough and manly" while totally discounting, that actually, several women have turned up, liked it, and they have chased them away.

But no matter how many times I say this, the Dog Latins of the world will keep insisting that it never happened and it can't possibly be true, because they haven't seen it.

There's "being a woman, making music", and then there's "being a person, listening (or not listening) to music made by women" and there's "being a professional writer, paid to respond to music made by women" and I feel these three things are getting a tad conflated itt

Not quite the same but somewhat on par with having to constantly correct people who think I'm gay (at least in part) because my musical tastes are occasionally flaming.

WCC, Just out of interest (and because I don't have time to search for old threads) what genres did you have this experience with?

Let's all take a break and listen to planningtorock now I hear she does a fine grotesque parody of masculinity

if there's great records made by women that aren't getting a fair shake from critics and listeners, doesn't it kind of do a disservice to those records to simply frame an argument about that in terms of "hey you're not listening to enough women" instead of "hey these records are great and worthy of your attention"?

#1 wish is that people stop worrying about getting into genres and just get into tracks