Can't just blame the yoof

[stephbg]

I expect most people reading this will be aware of the fuss over the lack of female representation in the recent Triple JJJ Hottest 100 of All Time. One of the arguments was that the Yoof of Today (i.e. the JJJ demographic) had no respect for women etc etc.



I was bed-bound today and had the radio on Mix 94.5 for about 5 hours during the day. I'll grant that I was asleep on and off for much of that time, but I did pay attention to gender and noted only 4 tracks with female vocalists - and three of the four were different singles by Pink. The last was the GoGos "Our Lips Are Sealed" (aka "Alex The Seal"), which was announced as the first non-manufactured all female group who wrote their own songs and played their own instruments. Is that true?

I don't think today's playlist was taken from a specific listener poll, but the station makes a big thing of playing listener-requested music. Clearly the listeners are not asking for female artists, and I think it's fair to say that it's a very different demographic to JJJ.

Comments

[gemfyre.livejournal.com]

Maybe just all the popular/"good" songs are by male artists?

[girliejones.livejournal.com]

yeah that must be it. /sarcasm

[gemfyre.livejournal.com]

Well I mean, these stations asked people to vote for their favourite songs.

They did (assume the only voted for 1 song each). Once these songs were all compiled the ones with the most votes happened to all be by male singers (I say singers because there may well be females in the band and probably some involved in production).

It's not like people deliberately thought, "Hmmm, I'll vote for a guy so that all the songs are by males." People seem to be looking into it way too much. There's no agenda here, it's just the way it happened.

[girliejones.livejournal.com]

I'm not saying there was an agenda. But at the same time, I don't think it was free of bias either. I'm suggestion this is the insideous, subtle kind of sexism - the one where people don't really notice and thus don't really think there is or they need to take blame.

However, when you look more closely, like for example the fact that JJJ have a playlist that is 77% male, for this year, you have to wonder if in fact there was more at play.

500 000 votes were cast. There were 2 songs with female vocalists - who were guest singers for the all male band. There were like 3 other female members for bands across the 100 songs. There were 6 female acts in the top 200.

It seems to me, statistically kind of odd that the results should fall out that way. You know, unless it really is that people prefer male artists, cause they are better (again /sarcasm).

[stephbg.livejournal.com]

Maybe people prefer male vocalists because they are generally lower pitched than female voices, and are thus more soothing.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_bigjobbies_/]

first non-manufactured all female group who wrote their own songs and played their own instruments. Is that true?

No.

The original 1976 line up of the Slits was:

vocalist Ari Up (Ariana Foster), drummer Palmolive (Paloma Romera) guitarist Kate Korus and bassist Suzi Gutsy.

The GoGos weren't formed until 1978.

I'm sure there are many earlier examples, but I was reading an interview with Ari Up last night - so the Slits are the first act to spring to mind :)

[http://users.livejournal.com/_bigjobbies_/]

ETA: wiki entry for all female bands.
I think the Runaways would have a better claim to the crown

[girliejones.livejournal.com]

For me, the whole JJJ thing wasn't the shock that today's "youth" didn't appreciate female artists but that female artists were *still" invisible, even with young who supposedly have been raised in the least sexist environments we've ever had.

[transcendancing.livejournal.com]

For me the triple j thing was that it acted as a magnifying glass bringing into sharp focus a problem that already exists in such a way as you can't staticise it away. You can handwave to numbers 80/20 even etc, but not 98/2. I think that the experience reflects a systemic problem, one that would indicate to me an inherent lack of value in women.

It isn't just the 'yoof' last year I learned that both the people currently in power, and the senior advisors to those leaving power also don't value women, but I'd hoped for more value in the generation of people coming into power.

Still, this isn't as bad as how I felt when I realised that there was really no difference between what politicians expected of women in 1912 to 2004, despite the 96 years difference. It's the first time I've ever questioned wanting to be Australian, I felt that deeply betrayed by a country that professed itself to be working towards equality for all.

Hah!