Visual representations of female techno/house producers

yes!

people may well know what the artist looks like, but the idea of the "cover" being important or indicative of anything is haywire, not least since actual dance music is still driven by singles, either digital or vinyl, and mixes (mostly digital) and i'm not sure many artists are slapping their faces on 12-inch sleeves or attaching jpgs to mixes.

http://www.residentadvisor.net/images/reviews/2011/ostgutcd17.jpg

compare and contrast with this cover, though, gender differences ahoy:
http://ostgut.de/media/image/resize/L/Record-9-8e177a3718b63b192d282c119bb39026.jpg

note that it may actually be a better indicator of the real panoramabar if prosumer was stretched out naked, according to my limited knowledge

If I could make any of the men on this thread saying this stuff doesn't matter feel any of the alienation I grew up with as a female dance music listener reading e.g. Mixmag, seeing that for men in dance music it is cool to be just some balding guy in jeans and a t-shirt who wants to talk about hi-hat patterns, but the only women in the magazine are the hott semi-naked teenage model pouting on the front cover and the skinny young things on the street fashion page. I seriously got the message that I would not be welcome in a club since I didn't and couldn't look like those women - a feeling not dispelled by trying it out a few times.

So I thought I'd post this and get clowned for not belonging on a dance music thread on the internet instead. Have at it.

mixmag's actual title was "tits and e, guvnor", you have to remember that

not sure who was saying "this doesn't matter" or words to that effect, with the exception of Ronan's last post; I think these things 'matter' a lot but bits of what Tuomas was saying struck me as kind of unrepresentative and/or outdated

But, caustic joking aside, the mixmag/"club" scene always seemed (from my regional, secluded, not actually able to go to events of the time) perspective as the club-led, commercialized, overground image of electronic dance music as it became in the late 90s. I have no doubt that this included good clubs and some people with a genuine love of the music, but it also has all the image-led baggage connected to that, including misogyny, entry/denial based on looks (both to venues and to making music), and the need for a saleable image.

I don't think that's the case for the music scene at large, but it definitely exists and a lot of musicians have to cross back and forth between friendlier spaces and a more commercial world.

I think Tuomas's point is very valid, but to the extent that women are marginalized and more likely to feel pressure to look attractive in a stereotypical way, or "fun," or strike sort of sexy pose or dress stylishly compared to the army of men in trim t-shirts staring straight-faced at the camera

actually I just started looking at the artist pics for a bunch of people on the resident advisor dj page and nearly every one, regardless of gender, is just kind of smilelessly staring at the camera

yikes

(many xps, to mh) Oh, sure, it was, but Jockey Slut got round the whole thing by never having any women in at all (plus, uh, the title), and DJ/Muzik/7 would go maybe 3 mean+moody woman-free issues and then have a Mixmag-style bikini special, so the shelves of my provincial backwater newsagent were not bursting with more positive alternatives

(one less xp, to DJM) yeah, I think it has changed a bit, and I totally concede my own views are outdated, but as a general rule "female producer looks attractive on album cover, male producer either does not appear on album cover or is shown side-on scowling into decks and drum machines with face half-obscured by headphones" still seems... somewhat true

I do take the point that dance music is not "about" albums, but if they exist, and feature visual statements about that specific release/artist in particular in a way that 12"s or downloaded mix mp3s tend not to, then it seems fair to consider them

On a related note, I checked out the covers of all the Panoramabar releases. The Cassy one is obviously a huge offender of the "women are photographed differently" rule, but of all the mixes so far only Nick Höppner's does not feature his picture on the cover. Here is his image on Resident Advisor:
http://www.residentadvisor.net/images/profiles/nickhoppner.jpg

I was actively put off by commercial mixes, especially those that would stuff commercial record stores in the late 90s (hello cheesy mixes with "mood" or "ultra" or "lounge" in the name, or ministry of sound) and didn't think live dance stuff would really be my scene because of what I did see -- that and images from events in magazine and the growing coverage on the web. In reality, I wasn't any nerdier or less attractive than anyone else into the music, but the way it was being pitched was pretty fucked up.

I can see the shitty misogynist flip side to this, though -- the idea of privilege, that I'm being sold a bill of goods, and that if I go out to a club or dance event then I should see girls in bikinis and if I buy an album by a female artist why wouldn't she want to show herself to me on the cover and..

* vomits all over keyboard *

not sure who was saying "this doesn't matter" or words to that effect, with the exception of Ronan's last post

actually my point was that cd or album covers are an archaic and fairly irrelevant part of (dance) music.

that's not the equivalent of saying "this doesn't matter".

i agree it's fair to consider covers, in an abstract way, but it is worth bearing in mind how many people actually see these visual representations or place stock in them - very few.

most of the time artists in dance music don't have to provide any visual representation of themselves.

i don't think i'd recognise photos of the vast majority of djs, male or female, apart from a few long-serving exceptions.

djs that tour and play commercial $$ venues are definitely recognizable to their fans, but I think that's only a limited crossover to ilx-world

Album & single covers make more of an impact that the 500 or so physical copies something might actually sell, they're displayed in itunes, on MP3 players, shown with online reviews, etc. I probably see a cover image more now on my iphone than I did when I used CD wallets.

Pretty sure house & techno lads are familiar with how Nina Kraviz looks. And plenty of other female techno / house artists. Went to Hot Creations / Paradise closing at DC10 the other week and was saddened to see writhing female podium dancers everywhere..

― mmmm, Monday, October 8, 2012 11:54 AM Bookmark

Yeah, I went to the Fade to Mind party they had in Seattle and there were female gogo dancers (pretty sure this was the promoter's doing, I've heard reports of similar at his other events) and I was just like, "Really tho?" They looked really bored.

I saw Nina Kraviz play last week to a largely gay audience and whenever I looked over at the booth she was shimmying and shaking and whatnot between mixing. My straight friend was quite appreciative. I insisted she stole all those moves from me.

Album & single covers make more of an impact that the 500 or so physical copies something might actually sell, they're displayed in itunes, on MP3 players, shown with online reviews, etc. I probably see a cover image more now on my iphone than I did when I used CD wallets.

Yeah, I was gonna say, I don't think it's true what Ronan says that these images are totally insignificant to techno and house listeners, except for maybe those who only go to clubs and never listen to this music elsewhere. Even those online-only DJ mixes and other web releases there's usually an accompanying image tagged to the file, which you'll see on your MP3 player, the "album art" window of your computer audio player, etc.

But regardless of how many people see or don't see these images, I think it's still important to discuss the aesthetic and social tendencies that inform them.

i don't think i'd recognise photos of the vast majority of djs, male or female, apart from a few long-serving exceptions.

otm

http://i.imgur.com/Jj0NE.jpg

http://www.xlr8r.com/files/news/benklock_09132012.jpg

Album & single covers make more of an impact that the 500 or so physical copies something might actually sell, they're displayed in itunes, on MP3 players, shown with online reviews, etc. I probably see a cover image more now on my iphone than I did when I used CD wallets.

yeah but the single covers (digital or vinyl) almost never involve an artist's face, i don't think i've ever seen an mp3 that has an artist's face as the attached image.

Even those online-only DJ mixes and other web releases there's usually an accompanying image tagged to the file, which you'll see on your MP3 player, the "album art" window of your computer audio player, etc.

i listen to more unofficial mixes than i do to anything else, and this is totally untrue ime, my iphone is full of these mixes and few if any have photos, and in rare cases that they do it's not a person, more likely to be the logo of the podcast or club.

But regardless of how many people see or don't see these images, I think it's still important to discuss the aesthetic and social tendencies that inform them.

i don't disagree, but i was trying to make the point that given their increased irrelevance, perhaps it's not a surprise they're quite old fashioned, clichéd even? i mean, if designers for mixes/albums can't stop doing those lame dude in a vaguely industrial black and white setting photos then it doesn't surprise me the best idea for women is exploitative.

having said all of that, i think the nina kraviz image above is not particularly sexualised, i mean, isn't that just a picture of a woman? she's not scantily clad or anything, though i can see how you'd say her femininity is being used to sell the record. i think in techno as much as there is just overt sexism, there is also a thing where sometimes guys tend to automatically imbue a woman's music with qualities that may or may not be there, based on her gender.

if you've read people talking about cassy or steffi over the years then you'll know what i mean.

she's not scantily clad or anything

tbf she is wearing a see-through top, but her hotel room mirror probably wasn't lit by a camera flash

in the album cover? you can barely see her... her face is also covered. i don't think my mum would find that risqué.

oh I thought that was her in millmeister's pic

Also, even if the album cover doesn't sexualize her particularly strongly (though I do think there's some sexualization going on with the lighting, colours and her pose, at least compared to those "lame dude in a vaguely industrial black and white setting photos" of male artists), the video of "Ghetto Kraviz" I linked to most certainly does. And my point wasn't just that female techno/house producers are sexualized, but that their record covers tend to call attention to their gender in ways that covers of male artists typically don't.

(xx-post)

well videos is a whole other debate!

It's important to differentiate between the Mixmag-style bosh and bikinis strand of dance music (and Hot Creations is moving ever closer to that in terms of audience and attitudes) and the German-centric stuff Tuomas is talking about.

In the latter scene, my guess is that the latter audience fancies itself as significantly more liberal and its maybe more interesting to discuss this question in that context. ie it should be blindingly obvious that the former scene is inherently sexist but the way in which the attitudes filter through into less overtly sexist scenes is interesting.

I reckon artist albums are probably more important to non-indie leaning dance music than they were 10 or 12 years ago, certainly in terms of DJs and producers building their personal profile, but the artists under discussion here ARE probably more auteurish than most techno producers. The way in which the artist represents themselves or the label represents the artist extends to a lot more than just album covers.

(Xpost - the thread topic is "visual representations of female techno/house producers" not "women on dance music album covers" dude)

there is also a thing where sometimes guys tend to automatically imbue a woman's music with qualities that may or may not be there, based on her gender.

if you've read people talking about cassy or steffi over the years then you'll know what i mean

Hate this so much by the way.

ugh@hotcreations

feels like their time in the sun is beginning to fade at least

it's kind of weird to say "artist x presents themselves in a sexual way" based on a couple of photos where that's true, when most of the female artists mentioned here have presented themselves just as much in a non-sexual or asexual way over their careers.

there is also a thing where sometimes guys tend to automatically imbue a woman's music with qualities that may or may not be there, based on her gender.

if you've read people talking about cassy or steffi over the years then you'll know what i mean

Hate this so much by the way.

I've always kinda assumed most female producers would hate this phenomenon too, and that's why I'm a bit perplexed why so many of them choose to emphasize their gender, even though techno conventions would allow them for an easy way to hide it (besides the common lack of artist photos in record sleeves, most techno pseudonyms are non-gendered too). Besides the photo thing, many of them also have artist names who reveal their gender: they either use their real name, or some other female name, or have a gendered pseudonym like Sister Bliss or Miss Djax. In fact the only time I remember being surprised to learn that an artist I'd been digging was female was with Neotropic: her pseudonym is totally genderless, her albums have no photos of her, and even though the album credits give out her name (Riz Maslen), it's not one that I would immediately associate with either gender.

Though of course it's possible there are many female producers who use techno's anonymity in the way outlined above, it's just that I don't know they're female because they're successful at being anonymous.

it's kind of weird to say "artist x presents themselves in a sexual way" based on a couple of photos where that's true, when most of the female artists mentioned here have presented themselves just as much in a non-sexual or asexual way over their careers.

It's not just sexuality we're talking here rather than gender in general: why do female producers (seemingly) emphasize their gender more than male ones?

I'm a bit perplexed why so many of them choose to emphasize their gender, even though techno conventions would allow them for an easy way to hide it (besides the common lack of artist photos in record sleeves, most techno pseudonyms are non-gendered too)

but that's the thing - one's options are "emphasise" or "hide" one's female gender, there's no way one can just be female. The mere fact of being visibly female is an emphasis on one's femaleness.

Because the norm is male, a producer who is not identified as female is assumed to be male, not left as an anonymous genderless blank. Having other people assume you are male, when you're not, is having other people assume you're a different human being than you are. It's tantamount to lying. Why are you suggesting that it's weird that producers would not want to lie about themselves?

if you're making music and you're socialising with other people who make music, and you're a different gender from the norm, it's going to be apparent. It's not something you can do anything about. You might as well inhabit it and make it your own, of your own initiative: your other option is making it an even bigger deal by fighting to hide it.

It isn't female producers who emphasise their gender more than male ones, it's male producers who are able to exist as if their gender is unremarkable.

I mean yeah if you see a picture of a male DJ you're not thinking "hmmm why is he emphasising his maleness?" even if he has a hipster haircut and a tight t-shirt on.

or if he has a beard!

what cis said, "male" is seen as the default gender to such an extent that merely being a woman is seen as "emphasising" one's gender

i mean, you could equally talk about the male artists who use their actual male names or male honorifics...

techno conventions would allow them for an easy way to hide it

idk - you can do this but maintaining the whole thing a la Burial or Drexciya or whoever seems enough of a ballache as it is, let alone if they were women and inevitably had to deal with ppl coming to gender-based nonsense conclusions about their motives for annoymity

thanks cis for getting at what I thought was weird about a lot of this thread but wasn't able to articulate

and being anonymous or masking one's gender are JUST as much a statement on gender as just existing, just ask eg kevin blechdom

what cis said, "male" is seen as the default gender to such an extent that merely being a woman is seen as "emphasising" one's gender

That still doesn't explain away the original question in the thread: why use these polished photos where the artist is depicted in stereotypically feminine ways, when most male artist don't have any photos of themselves on the cover? If you're artist name is "Nina" or "Ellen", that should be enough to differentiate from the "every techno producer is male" assumption, so why are these photos needed?

your argument about what "most" covers look like is a blind alley without stats. your argument about genderising artists extends way beyond the field of House music.

Yeah, it does, but in many other genres the artist is always depicted on the cover, regardless of the gender. It's the disparity of depictions in techno/house that made think about this issue in the first place.

i don't think an argument based on incredibly loose generalisations is an argument worth having? patriarchy and heteronormativity exist, them sneaky buggers get everywhere, but people have agency and exist in complicated relationships to them, what's your point again?

I'm struggling too. Can you give an example of a cover which is completely unrepresentative of the music?

I don't have any specific "point", I just thought it would be an interesting subject to discuss. Pretty much any discussion like this can be summed up with "patriarchy and heteronormativity exist, them sneaky buggers get everywhere, but people have agency and exist in complicated relationships to them", but that doesn't mean they're not worth having.

exactly

frederik b is not reading any of these arguments particularly well

also it's not actually hard to talk about sexual attractiveness - eg what tim wrote! - so it's not the fault of nina kraviz, or women generally, if str8 men seem unable to do it without being creepy or confused. that problem is yours, not hers.

Well, I pretty much made Pat Finn's argument at the beginning of this discussion, so perhaps is you who don't read really well? But anyway, having problems reading arguments is a typical trait of the non-native english speaker, so no one has the right to look down on me for that.

I love bubble baths!

I mean this thread.I love this thread.

Nina Kraviz is hot, I wanna do her, ok?

sweet. i think we just have to be honest about these kinds of things.

that's not cool hurting

http://www.mixmag.net/words/features/seth-troxler-nina-kraviz-and-getting-naked