Visual representations of female techno/house producers

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.

(x-post)

if all you're doing is acting surprised that they exist, or denying agency, or saying things like "in many other genres the artist is always depicted on the cover" which is literally indefensible then i don't see how there's any real discussion at all

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

― lex pretend, Tuesday, October 9, 2012 6:21 AM (24 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Guy Mann Dude, Buddy Guy...

i was interested in spacecadet's thoughts about clubbing as exclusionary and the relationship between "sexiness" and sexistness tho

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

My point wasn't really that the covers are "completely unrepresentative", rather than that the ways of representation available to women seem to more limited than those available for men. But if you want an example, there's the Cassy mix someone posted above. If you look at the full cover, I fail to see how that represents the music inside.

(The images linked to are NSFW.)

where the artist is depicted in stereotypically feminine ways

i don't get what being depicted in a stereotypically feminine way is - are we talking 'dressed in a ra-ra skirt' or 'doing some needlepoint' or are we talking 'wearing makeup' or 'having a woman's haircut'?

the majority of album covers with the female producer on the front that i can think of are a headshot: you could argue that there's more effort made to make a female artist conventionally attractive in than headshot than there would be for a male artist, but that's true of all pictures of female artists/producers/human beings.

in that headshot

or saying things like "in many other genres the artist is always depicted on the cover" which is literally indefensible then i don't see how there's any real discussion at all

Okay, maybe that was an exaggeration, but you wouldn't probably disagree that in, say, pop music having the artist on the cover is much, much more common than in house/techno?

Yeah, that Cassy one supports your case in a way the Dinky one doesn't.

i don't think the Cassy cover supports anything tbh unless nudity is stereotypically feminine

that's true of all pictures of female artists/producers/human beings.

Is it really? Just look at the cover of the 2003 Dinky album I linked to in the first post, and compare it to Anemik: don't you think there's a big difference in degrees of conventional feminity there?

kiki being stereotypically feminine on the cover of his boogybytes mix?

http://theletter.co.uk/images/boobybytes1.jpg

i don't think the Cassy cover supports anything tbh unless nudity is stereotypically feminine

Can you name many albums by straight male artists that would have a cover like that?

Yeah, let me know when a male DJ appears nude in gatefold.

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?

this is what I feel, like, the nina kraviz one above, she just looks like "a woman". is she supposed to look more like a man or something? or less feminine? it's a photo of a woman, wearing fairly non-descript clothes, in low light.

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

it's focussed so far on covers. and videos, i mean dance music videos... how many of them have you even watched in the last five years? they aren't even a part of dance music.

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.

this is exactly right.

where the artist is depicted in stereotypically feminine ways

it's a picture, of a woman! what's stereotypical about it? and anyway, half of this debate is about album covers being done in stereotypical ways, big surprise when the person designing them is prob lower on the artistic food chain than someone drawing on school desk.

i don't think the Cassy cover supports anything tbh unless nudity is stereotypically feminine

well, it's widely believed that female nudity is more "sexy" and worth seeing than male nudity. (there was that awful piece in the graun Guide when that male stripper film came out that argued that male nudity was always funny and unsexy)

Tuomas you realise on the cover of that first Dinky album she looks like on of the models in Robert Palmer's "Addicted to Love" video, right?

Didn't realise slicked-back hair was such a challenge to hegemony tbh

that's the only time cassy has ever appeared on the cover of any of her releases. her follow-up commercial mix looked like:

http://s.discogss.com/image/R-2058046-1261421407.jpeg

i've been fighting the urge to post the orig Diamond Dogs cover

if you're arguing that this

http://images-jp.amazon.com/images/P/B000084TT7.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

is deglamourised or ungendered or makes no play with sexuality then lol x infinity

Tuomas you realise on the cover of that first Dinky album she looks like on of the models in Robert Palmer's "Addicted to Love" video, right?

She's also smoking a cigarette, and you know what they say about those kind of girls.

Tuomas I think the reason you're tying yourself in knots a bit here is because you're trying to tackle both "visual representation of women vs men in techno" and "why are women presenting themselves in this way in this supposedly faceless genre?" at the same time.

This is also overlooking people like Anja Schneider and Maya Jane Coles who have very recognisable images and aren't particularly sexualised. I mean even Ellen Allien's album covers post-Berlinette are about disguising or adorning her face in different ways, Bjork-style.

where the artist is depicted in stereotypically feminine ways

it's a picture, of a woman! what's stereotypical about it?

For example, the colours and lighting (seductive, soft, deep reds; as opposed to more stark colours often found in photos of male techno artists), her pose (leaning forwards, more passive than active, slightly sexual), the way her long hair (very much a feminine signifier) covers her eyes (denying the agency her stare could give her, further objectifying her)... Do you really think every photo of a woman is equally feminine, regardless of the staging/pose/colours/etc?

if you're arguing that this

http://images-jp.amazon.com/images/P/B000084TT7.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

is deglamourised or ungendered or makes no play with sexuality then lol x infinity

I wasn't arguing that, I was saying that the cover of Anemik clearly depicts her in a more stereotypically feminine way.