#2

SUMMER HOLIDAY BOYFRIENDS:

I am readily accepting your girth as displayed to the world circa v-fest 2008 as a natural part of the aging process, William; we'll all get fat one day and we'll all be better grandparents for it.
ps: how much is this beach the one where you imagine a number of your heroes 'killing an arab'?

DREAM BOAT PART ONE

stay tuned for more

an essay for school / general teachings / reasons i don't have a boyfriend

The status and quantity of women in music is a product of the patriarchal imperative of oppression and subsequent counter movements; paralleling the Western history of arts (literature, film, painting etc) and the linear progression of the past as we know it in general. ‘Rock’ music (as ostensibly distinguishable from rap/hip hop, explicitly pop, dance etc) and in particular the structure and composition of the ‘rock band’ appears to be still knee-deep in what should be outdated representations of women, and is suffering under the heavy hand of the rock-music-canon. This canon can be seen to be comprised of bands including but not limited to ‘the Rolling Stones’, ‘the Beatles’, ‘Led Zeppelin’, ‘Nirvana’; bands credited with the invention and progression of Western rock music, still highly influential and heavily publicised to this day. Although there exist a number of important women in this genre, Courtney Love, PJ Harvey, Patti Smith, to name a few, the fact that many are solo artists is as problematic as is the subordinate position many women fill in contemporary ‘rock’ bands.

Although the conception of a ‘rock band’ is often marketed as an organic, mystical occurrence, I would argue that many bands are founded on similar principals therefore are formulated in similar means and are an unconscious product of patriarchal lineage . In a cognisant generalisation, an idea of a ‘hypothetical stereotypical rock band’ can help to show the inherently problematic nature of this. The canon is crucial in the inception of the band, instilling amongst young boys of a musical inclination myriad role models who are afforded god-like status not only for musical achievements but also for private/public exploits such as promiscuity, drug taking, and general arrogance (read: ‘rock star' behaviour). The archetypal ‘rock star’ has been created and naturalized over time as an almost exclusively male role, necessarily leaving women to be posited as either wives or groupies, or as open to hypocritical debasement involving activities deemed ‘cool’ for men but not for women (sleeping around, speaking out).

When recruiting other fledgling musicians to make up the band, the question of who is playing the necessary instruments must be considered. According to ‘rock’ music history, the guitar (particularly electric), bass and drums have been fashioned as more masculine than feminine instruments. This sentiment has been institutionalised and is observable in the school-aged division between the academic and societal inclination to teach young boys the afore mentioned instruments versus those common to little girls- flutes, violins, pianos etc. Therefore, young women are often not taught the fundamentals of ‘rock’ music in the way young men are. To add to this, ‘rock’ imagery is very much bound up with advertising and media targeting a masculine audience; in the same way young girls are raised by popular culture to like dolls, makeup and ponies, ‘rock’ music falls into the opposing category of cars, robots and dinosaurs.

A common route of feminine integration into a ‘rock’ band is via ‘girlfriend’ or ‘sister’ status and playing either the bass guitar or keyboards – essentially ‘softer’ instruments, not traditionally foregrounded in ‘rock’ music composition. This coupling sees women firstly as last minute additions to the band, secondly as making less noise than their guitar or drum playing counterparts, thirdly, as not a significant part of the song-writing process, and, fourthly, the logical conclusion of point one two and three; as being in the lower end of the band hierarchy.

‘Rock’ history has located women for the most part as either in low-ranking positions in bands, as solo artists, or in ‘girl bands’ (a positive idea which is almost inherently weighed down by political stigma). Because of this, it can be said that patriarchy is not conducive to a notion like a female front woman of a male or mixed gender band, or to a band comprised of women as anything else but a novel event or a group with feminist/political agendas. An enormous problem, clearly, is simply the lack of women in this industry and the trickle-down effect this has on contemporary society. Women are not afforded the horde of musical role-models that men are, and role models in childhood and pubescence cannot be overestimated as powerful architects of the future. As well as this, the few women who do reach prominence in ‘rock’ music are subject to greater amounts of pressure than most men in similar positions; from fan adulation or demonization from those opposed. Another hugely detrimental aspect is the way in which male music has been interpreted and accepted into society – as universal. Maintaining that, yes, there surely are experiences and feelings common to most or all or a great amount of people of all genders and sexualities in the Western world, there seems to be a complete failure to listen to music written and performed by men as representative of a specifically male experience. As is demonstrated by other art forms, male experience is misappropriated as ‘human’ experience, essentially providing us with countless negative images of women in song lyrics; every second song being about some hussy who broke someone’s heart, and women being expected to sing in tune with this, for example, songs like ‘Evil Woman’ (and let’s not even get into ELO here) or ‘Under My Thumb’, devoid of any degree of equality in representations of men to discount these songs as simply about about failed relationships or regularly observed negativity or disappointment in the opposite gender or particular love interest. To continue, what we are commonly presented with is importantly, only one side of the story.

Clearly, ‘rock’ music is riddled with systematized discrimination and ingrained sexism, resulting from a patriarchal history. Of course, history cannot be changed, however, the way it is viewed and criticised can. The problem is not the music canon in it's particularities and the blame cannot be placed upon afore mentioned figures like Mick Jagger or Kurt Cobain (who are awesome); the problem is the way society has interpreted and revered specificities and identities in a gender specific manner. Awareness of gender superiority throughout historical structures is necessary when listening to and interpreting what you hear on the radio, when perusing ‘top 100’ lists of bands or albums, or watching music film clips, as well as appreciating up and coming women in ‘rock’ music and the importance they hold just by existing. Think about what it means to look through your CD collection and find it is crowded by ‘testosterone’. Or to list your top ten favourite bands/albums/songs and the lopsided amounts of men and women. It has nothing to do with quality, and everything to do with inequality.

cupid don't fuck wit me, are you tellin' me this is a sign?

the cd player in my car is maggoted and the only cds it will let me play are: legacy of brutality and houdini, and recently only the first three songs of each. pretty much if i can only listen to hooch and hybrid moments for the rest of my life i am a happy lady. life rules (sux) (rulez)