Privileging of traditionally masculine qualities in music

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

This is a pretty huge topic, and I don't expect to be the one to say the most intelligent things about it. It just seems very noticeable to me that a lot of forms of music, especially underground ones, tend to privilege traits that are traditionally thought of as masculine. Some examples that seem pretty solid to me: punk (though that one is so broad that I expect argument), hardcore punk in particular, industrial, hardcore &/or gangsta rap, techno (but house?--I wouldn't think). I'm mostly mentioning things that I have had some interest in myself. Indie rock--no, but maybe yes in its earlier incarnations (the U.S. ones anyway).

Feminist liberation in terms of masculinist music perspective: women get to be as loud, obnoxious, belligerent, vulgar as men? (But why would men want to be anything other than loud, obnoxious, belligerent, and vulgar?)

(Ganster rap was originally kind of an underground thing--at the very least, I don't think it got much if any commercial radio play--but after it became more mainstream, or at least became a thread in mainstream hiphip, undie took on more "pussyass" qualities.)

When people bash salsa romantica they often mention the fact that it was directed at a female audience, silly love songs for girls, etc. Salsa dura (HARD salsa) much more associated with masculinist qualities than I'd originally suspected.

Is rhythm more masculine than melody?

(Actually, yeah, I guess this does get discussed here a lot in the context of music and dancing, and 80s synthpop type stuff.)

Is this an overall trend in music, or am I overgeneralizing insanely? (I probably am. There's too much I don't know about entire continents.)

I'm just cataloging examples and throwing out ideas, not attempting to make a completely coherent argument, because I haven't got one to make.

Is this more of a 70's on sort of thing, at least in underground/alternative culture? 60s something else again with guys growing their hair long and wearing floral patterns?

Most of the time I don't even like to think about this stuff too much, because it makes me feel like the epiphenomenon of a bunch of social forces.

(I am not anti-male or down on every trait that could be considered masculine, so don't go there.)

― Rockist Scientist, Wednesday, 14 January 2004 22:45 (twenty-two years ago)

These are the questions that I wish I could answer in some fashion but I admit I can't pretend to even think how I could. Everything I could think of would sound ill-informed.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 15 January 2004 02:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Have you read Simon Reynolds' "The Sex Revolts"? That book addresses some aspects of your question. Not his best book, however (I thought Generation Ecstasy was really great and this annoyed me a bit, as I'm not convinced he avoids stumbling into essentialisim rather clumsily) but an interesting read nonetheless.

― plebian plebs (plebian), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Haven't. I'm not a big Reynolds fan, and I tend not to particularly like most of the music he cares about the most, but I'd be willing to take a look at it.

― Rockist Scientist (rockistscientist), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:24 (twenty-two years ago)

How many female drummers are there?
How many female singers are there?

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:26 (twenty-two years ago)

"Rockist Scientist" is a perfect name for this guy.

― Johnny Badlees (crispssssss), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Johnny Badless, why is that? I don't think my tastes actually following a rockist line all that consistently. (The name is mostly a joke. Of course, you could still find it appropriate.)

― Rockist Scientist (rockistscientist), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:31 (twenty-two years ago)

there's certainly a lot to what yr saying, RS, and i'm wondering if you would go so far as to genderfy certain genres of music (much of the sex revolts, which i have considerable problems with, does this) along these lines? it certainly isn't a coincidence that the genres you mention are very much male dominated, though i suppose the question becomes "are they male dominated because of these traits, or do the genre's traditionally masculine qualities attract men?" i would say a combination of both would be the obvious choice. i would not consider rhythm to be a masculine quality at all, but i think the way it's used/inflected can be. i don't really wanna go into specifics cuz that gets into defining what is masculine and feminine about music and creating false dichotomies and distinctions (the sex revolts again) that are based primarily on generalized stereotypes. certainly reynolds argues (and this is the strongest part of the book) that the '60s' rootless wild man persona certainly fostered these cock-as-rock fantasies (jim morrison to thread), and the existence of that as a real thing (as much as it ever was) seems almost quaint today, in our u-r-what-u-own kulchur (hello palahniuk). or i should say it seems quaint in rock and pop -- the image still thrives in hip-hop and country (classism?).

― Yanc3y (ystrickler), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:39 (twenty-two years ago)

I think the "scientist" part is what I was referring to.

Its just music. Qualities in music are controlled by the INDIVIDUALS who make them - you're dissecting music like its got a mind of its own. And it doesn't. I like music too, but not enough to write a thesis on a song or style I DON'T like.

― Johnny Badlees (crispssssss), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:45 (twenty-two years ago)

I still feel that music can't really be much more interactive that dancing with someone (although you're still getting two completely different feelings) or telling someone "hey check out this riff" or "doesn't this remind you of....".

I'm not trying to be mean (sorry if I come off that way), but I've just always kinda thought overthinking the listening experience ruins music. It either gives you that feeling or it doesn't.

― Johnny Badlees (crispssssss), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Look, I was bored at work, and this is what we do here, at least some of the time. ("This is how we do it. . .")

Music is made by individuals, but individuals don't exist apart from a social context.

Other people here are much more proficient at discussing this sort of thing though. I haven't written a thesis at all.

― Rockist Scientist (rockistscientist), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:52 (twenty-two years ago)

ILM is too abstract tonight anyway. I have no idea what half of these threads are about or the true identity of any given poster.

― Rockist Scientist (rockistscientist), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:58 (twenty-two years ago)

I sometimes have as much trouble understanding how male v female qualities shake out in music analysis as I do when they are cited in discussions of the appeal of politicians to say NASCAR dads or soccer moms, but I am curious...

Yea Johnny it's just music, but then why was riot grrl such a big deal, why are there more male rappers than women rappers, why do marketing folks calculate that certain genres sell more to one gender than the other???? I don't believe trying to understand the concepts identified is "overthinking", and I don't think the Scientist has suggested that any analysis is somehow blocking him from feeling the various tyoes of music he loves.

― Steve Kiviat (Steve K), Thursday, 15 January 2004 04:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, I figured I would just start a fight. I still think music is a personal experience. I'm no less "proficient" at discussing anything. I want to ask you one thing, do you ever create your own music or are you strictly a scientist?? I don't want to get into why I'm asking but it would clear something up for me. I just think we're on different sides here and well, its kinda like the difference between athletes and referees. I think I'm starting to figure some shit out here......

― Johnny Badlees (crispssssss), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:15 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm sorry I just realized this is the referees locker room.

― Johnny Badlees (crispssssss), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Have you read Simon Reynolds' "The Sex Revolts"?

Simon Reynolds and Joy Press' "The Sex Revolts," you mean.

― tokyo rosemary (rosemary), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:26 (twenty-two years ago)

I want to ask you one thing, do you ever create your own music or are you strictly a scientist??

You're getting better in your attempts to start a fight, but aren't quite there. (I need to go to bed soon anyway.) No, unfortunately I don't create any of my music. Neither am I a scientist. (Really, don't take the name so seriously. It's a joke at a couple different levels, that's all.) I'm not even an amateur music critic. While I like to think about this stuff up to a point, my enjoyment of music is pretty immediate, and for the most part I want something that moves me.

I don't want to get into why I'm asking but it would clear something up for me. I just think we're on different sides here and well, its kinda like the difference between athletes and referees. I think I'm starting to figure some shit out here......

What shit are you figuring out?

Incidentally, when I wrote: Other people here are much more proficient at discussing this sort of thing though, I was thinking than I am (not "than you are," which might be how you read it). That wasn't clear.

― Rockist Scientist (rockistscientist), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:28 (twenty-two years ago)

I apologize for taking that the wrong way. But you took my light-hearted "scientist" comment a bit serious too. And we'll stop now because we're not getting any closer to an understanding here.

As for What I'm "figuring out", when I first started posting here I thought it was a group of seriously knowledgable music "fans." Obviously I'm not trying to say anyone here is not a fan, but it seems like the some of the people here think they're here because theyre better than the rest of the world's music fans. I can remember a specific instance where I said SOD's "Speak English Or Die" was the best hardcore-metal album of all-time (perhaps I should have said it was simply "my favorite") and instead of getting responses like "yeah, but, I like this album better" or "I never could get into that one" I got shit like "haha, get a load of this idiot". Thats not what I want when I just want to have a conversation about music.

So trust me, you'll know when I'm trying to start a fight - remember I think Billy Milano seems like a sweetheart.

― Johnny Badlees (crispssssss), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:43 (twenty-two years ago)

for fucking christ sakes - my first post was "Rockist Scientist is a perfect name for this guy" Is that somehow cruel?? I'm sorry I'm trying to be less of asshole but its in my nature.

― Johnny Badlees (crispssssss), Thursday, 15 January 2004 05:54 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, Joy Press too. Seemed like such a masculine book is all...

(Joke - I knew he'd co-written it but didn't have time to look it up before leaving the house)

Back to the question, which seems perficktly reasonable to me, the idea that specific sounds can be gendered to the deepest level, or to the first instance, is kinda absurd. But it is pretty plausible that (for example) heavy power chords can have meanings attached to them over time so that they come to be understood as (for example) a very male-identified will to sexual power. This'll be a product of a particular meaning gaining more power in the culture than other possible meanings, even though at root there is no necessary connection between the meaning and the signifier (i.e. the power chord).

As a result, talented women who come in like (for example) Bikini Kill or L7 (especially BK because they were more consciously on a mission) can make completely thrilling music outta old formal material by upsetting an established relationship (not necessarily to invert it - L7 and Bk don't exactly replace the hyper-masculine with hyper-femininity or anything). Not completely sure where I'm going (it is late wharer I am).

― plebian plebs (plebian), Thursday, 15 January 2004 10:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Maybe I just mean that the fact that both bands I mention kick ass musically helps, where (it has been 3 years since I read the Sex Revolts so I could be mischaracterising it) some of the "feminine" the book seems to celebrate is, as someone said upthread, drawn too much in opposition to the straight male line, i.e. all fuzzy and shapeless, which is pretty hard to make great (or at least not boring) rock&roll out of (although some have done it, e.g Sonic Youth).

Of couse there is also the fact that gender and sex differ. Early 90s rapper Boss is a female with as armoured an ego as the Gangstas - she was way more masculine (at least in the songs I heard) than I am (or at least her persona was...)

Of course meanings will be inflected differently for different individual listeners (and likely intended differently by the artists), but some meanings are gendered according to powerful cultural narratives, which means they are more likely to be understood pretty clearly by a majority of people who are part of the culture that produces the meaning. So these questions are not entirely a matter of individual perception.

Feel kind of incoherent, so I'll go to bed now.

― plebian plebs (plebian), Thursday, 15 January 2004 10:33 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.