For rock music to survive it will have to cut back on testosterone

[Wombat]

Oh yesterday was immigration, today it’s gender identity politics.

Anybody thought about discussing audio , ya know just for a change.

OK. Most women don't give a shit about 'audio'.

Also, why do/did some ASR members(pun intended) assume female avatars?

There seemingly isn't much left in audio to talk about except equipment test results, and regarding the level of performance of most tested gear most discussion is vacuous.

 

[maverickronin]

Also, why do/did some ASR members(pun intended) assume female avatars?

My avatar's a girl too...

 

[maverickronin]

Also, why do/did some ASR members(pun intended) assume female avatars?

More seriously, I would assume they are using their avatar pictures to showcase something they like rather that what they are IRL.

 

[RayDunzl]

Also, why do/did some ASR members(pun intended) assume female avatars?

I didn't.

 

[Wombat]

More seriously, I would assume they are using their avatar pictures to showcase something they like rather that what they are IRL.

I wonder at times.

 

[maverickronin]

I wonder at times.

I'm a terrible shot and I don't have a talking motorcycle.

 

[Cosmik]

I "know" what my gender is (and it corresponds to my sex btw).

I think this is a fascinating statement. Can you give me an example of how your gender corresponds to your sex?

 

[andreasmaaan]

I think this is a fascinating statement. Can you give me an example of how your gender corresponds to your sex?

Well my point wasn’t to discuss my own gender and it’s relationship to my sex.

My point was that I identify as a man and believe myself to be a man, and this for me is an adequate basis on which to accept that others also “know” what their gender is - regardless whether or not they have a Y chromosome (or whatever biological indicator you happen to apply to the question of sex).

Why fascinating?

 

[Cosmik]

Why fascinating?

The absence of a real answer shows why it is fascinating!

If you identify as a 'man' (which is just a word), you first need to define what a 'man' is. What is the definition of 'man' you are using?

 

[andreasmaaan]

The absence of a real answer shows why it is fascinating!

If you identify as a 'man' (which is just a word), you first need to define what a 'man' is. What is the definition of 'man' you are using?

I don't have the luxury of defining what a "man" is - the culture does that for me.

Regardless, though, I'm more comfortable when identified as a man by others than by any other gender. This is how I "know" I'm a man.

 

[Cosmik]

I don't have the luxury of defining what a "man" is - the culture does that for me.

And how does the culture define it?

 

[andreasmaaan]

And how does the culture define it?

Well we come from similar enough cultural backgrounds that I doubt there will be much difference in how we understand that. Can you not answer the question yourself?

But I'll humour you:

• masculine appearance (body, facial hair, vocal pitch, etc)
• responding as a matter of course when referred to as "he"
• ticking "Mr" on forms
• wearing men's clothing most of the time
• etc.

 

[Cosmik]

Well we come from similar enough cultural backgrounds that I doubt there will be much difference in how we understand that. Can you not answer the question yourself?

But I'll humour you:

• masculine appearance (body, facial hair, vocal pitch, etc)
• responding as a matter of course when referred to as "he"
• ticking "Mr" on forms
• wearing men's clothing most of the time
• etc.

How could you be meaningfully "uncomfortable" with that stuff? (surely the facial hair, body stuff is biological sex and not gender..?).

I don't buy it that anyone walks around obsessed with personal pronouns at an abstract level, or fumes every time they see the word "Mr." for no other reason than it comprises an 'M' followed by an 'r'.

Genuinely if you had asked me whether I felt like a man I would have said to you "I don't know. First define 'man'". As far as I am aware, I just 'am'.

I am biologically male - which is just an objective fact and not an answer to the question. I observe that I seem to have some similar traits to typical males but plenty of dissimilarities. I wear male clothes because they fit me, and the people I know expect me to wear them. I answer to "he" and tick "Mr." because that is what I am used to, and I was given this designation at birth like my national insurance number. For me to feel "uncomfortable" with my gender would be like feeling uncomfortable with my national insurance number.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Genuinely if you had asked me whether I felt like a man I would have said to you "I don't know. First define 'man'". As far as I am aware, I just 'am'...

For me to feel "uncomfortable" with my gender would be like feeling uncomfortable with my national insurance number.

This is hardly surprising, given your own internal image of your gender (whether or not at the forefront of your mind most of the time) has always coincided with the image imposed upon you from the outside.

People like you and me, who don't experience any dissonance in this regard, have little reason to be particularly aware of their own gender most of the time (I'm rarely consciously aware of it either).

What if you woke up tomorrow and found that everyone, from your family members to your colleagues, were referring to you as "she", expressing surprise, amusement or disapproval (not necessarily overtly or deliberately) at your choice to cross-dress in men's clothing, etc. (and there are many more etceteras).

Would you feel equally as comfortable in those circumstances?

Would you be no more aware of your gender than you are now?

And anyway, putting all that to one side, does the question of how society should deal with transgender people really turn in your mind on how you or I should happen to feel about ourselves?

 

[Thomas savage]

How could you be meaningfully "uncomfortable" with that stuff? (surely the facial hair, body stuff is biological sex and not gender..?).

I don't buy it that anyone walks around obsessed with personal pronouns at an abstract level, or fumes every time they see the word "Mr." for no other reason than it comprises an 'M' followed by an 'r'.

Genuinely if you had asked me whether I felt like a man I would have said to you "I don't know. First define 'man'". As far as I am aware, I just 'am'.

I am biologically male - which is just an objective fact and not an answer to the question. I observe that I seem to have some similar traits to typical males but plenty of dissimilarities. I wear male clothes because they fit me, and the people I know expect me to wear them. I answer to "he" and tick "Mr." because that is what I am used to, and I was given this designation at birth like my national insurance number. For me to feel "uncomfortable" with my gender would be like feeling uncomfortable with my national insurance number.

This sums up my experience of being me and being male but the lack of friction in that equation for us dose not tell any meaningful truth when it comes to other people’s experience of themselves and the potential friction in their equation.

 

[Cosmik]

This is hardly surprising, given your own internal image of your gender (whether or not at the forefront of your mind most of the time) has always coincided with the image imposed upon you from the outside.

People like you and me, who don't experience any dissonance in this regard, have little reason to be particularly aware of their own gender most of the time (I'm rarely consciously aware of it either).

What if you woke up tomorrow and found that everyone, from your family members to your colleagues, were referring to you as "she", expressing surprise, amusement or disapproval (not necessarily overtly or deliberately) at your choice to cross-dress in men's clothing, etc. (and there are many more etceteras).

If my clothes no longer fit me; my facial hair doesn't match my gender then that might happen. But then my gender would not match my biological sex. Gender being a purely artificial, cultural, 'administrative' label. Sure, if my gender doesn't match my biological sex - I have been mis-labelled - that is a problem for me.

Don't misunderstand me: I believe that we are lucky enough to live in the free world, and anyone should be allowed to do anything that doesn't harm anyone else. I want everyone to be happy - especially when it is as easy to achieve as changing a label ("a simple administrative procedure"). Swap gender? Do it. Decide on some brand new label (which, to me is just as logical), please be my guest.

What I object to is the idea that the rest of society is painted as somehow deficient for being the sex and gender they happen to be! John Harris says the rock scene is "depressingly male dominated" and starts to 'analyse' the statistics. People are not happy enough to be able to change their label at will, but have decided that I am in some way 'wrong' or 'oppressive' for being who *I* am.

 

[Cosmik]

This "rock is too male" thing is an example of wider society 'appropriating' someone else's culture.

Some cultural phenomenon is invented by geeks or people obsessed with guitars or computers etc. and it takes off, becoming a national or global phenomenon. It is at this point that 'the people' suddenly decide they 'own' that 'institution', and feel as though they can actually kick the originators of the phenomenon off their own invention.

Examples might be: "Computer gaming is too male". "Computer coding is too male". "James Bond is too male". "Doctor Who is too male". Etc. As has been pointed out, no one says "The prison population is too male" or "Sewage engineering is too male".

The statistics John Harris refers to will be taken by some people and used to justify policies that impinge on rock fans' and rock musicians' freedom. The mayor of London will decree that no rock festival in his city may feature more than 65% male artists. The BBC will cancel having The Arctic Monkeys on next week because it breaches their gender quota. The organisers of Glastonbury will decide against The Stones headlining because of the horrible masculinity they represent and will instead book the re-formed Spice Girls.

It is people who are not rock fans telling rock fans what to do in their own sub-culture - and probably ruining it in the process. Everyone is free to invent their own culture if they want. Why must people insist on poking their noses into other people's harmless freedoms?

 

[andreasmaaan]

People are not happy enough to be able to change their label at will, but have decided that I am in some way 'wrong' or 'oppressive' for being who *I* am.

Yes, but I don’t see the connection between these two issues (how society deals with transgender people vs whether rock music is sexist).

This "rock is too male" thing is an example of wider society 'appropriating' someone else's culture.

Some cultural phenomenon is invented by geeks or people obsessed with guitars or computers etc. and it takes off, becoming a national or global phenomenon. It is at this point that 'the people' suddenly decide they 'own' that 'institution', and feel as though they can actually kick the originators of the phenomenon off their own invention.

Your argument seems to be that some people don’t have a right to claim sexism in a particular field because they didn’t create the field. Is that right?

What would give someone standing to make this claim in your view?

 

[Cosmik]

Yes, but I don’t see the connection between these two issues (how society deals with transgender people vs whether rock music is sexist).

Well, as we have discussed, it is now no longer possible for a statistician to distinguish between gender and biological sex because a person's choice of gender even overwrites their previous birth certificate. It is literally impossible to make a charge of sexism based on statistics.

Raw gender balance statistics are regarded as a measure of sex-ism. It does not compute.

Your argument seems to be that some people don’t have a right to claim sexism in a particular field because they didn’t create the field. Is that right?

I think I go further than that: some people don't have the right to claim sexism at all, because they are just using guesswork, possibly based on their own internal feeling of "I know their type. 'Men'. Toxic."

What would give someone standing to make this claim in your view?

A body of work encompassing controlled experiments that, unfortunately, cannot and do not exist.

To anyone who feels that the idiots have taken over the asylum in the case of Brexit, I feel the same way about people who are claiming some sort of insight into how society works when they claim sexism in a particular field and want to change it based on their own warped judgements, biases and prejudice.

 

[maverickronin]

Raw gender balance statistics are regarded as a measure of sex-ism. It does not compute.

There aren't enough transgender people to meaningfully upset those statistics.

The real issue is using simple statistics in some attempt to infer prejudice. It doesn't take into account the fact that on average men and women have different interests. (...and some of the real crazies think this is proof of sexism...)

I frequently shop at crafts and fabric stores for various small scale DIY projects and I'm usually the only man in the store who's not being sulkily dragged along by his wife. Different strokes for different folks....