Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[a pack of wolves]

I remember it seemed like every negative review of The Donnas would bring up the aspect of their gender being used as a marketing tool. They never seemed to just say "this is not very good pop-punk, listen to something on Crackle! instead", their gender was always made an issue. Then again, we were seeing reactions in very different places since you're in the US (I think) and I'm in the UK, and I was reading about them in punk and hardcore zines which might not have been your experience.

[DoubleAW]

If it means anything, I <3 The Hush Sound to death.

[De_El]

A younger slant, perhaps: Basically until high school there wasn't any music I particularly liked that had any sort of female vocalist. Pissed if I could say exactly why, but in the late 90s (for example) all of the mainstream "rebellious" music was totally male dominated, and the most visible top 40 radio pop was dominated by annoying female vocalists. Of course, given the opportunity to listen to better music, I gradually abandoned my prejudice. I was essentially ignorant of the possibility of a phenomenal female vocalist.

More at the original issue, I think more guys tend to want to join bands in high school because it's just what people are used to.  It's a familiar cultural reality, and most people don't try very hard not to be boxed into gender roles.

Edit: In the gap between what's happening in my mind, and what I'm actually typing, I have a tendency to leave out words that change the meaning of a whole sentence.

[Jackie Blue]

True story!  Some 18-20 year old friends of mine have an all-girl punk band here called GUTLOCKER who are crowd favorites, particularly for their deep, poetic tune "Get That Dick Out of My Ass".

[Nodaisho]

I... actually don't really listen to any bands with female vocalists regularly. I do really like some of the female backing vocals that I hear sometimes. Thinking specifically of Tara Vanflower's vocals off of the track "Halloween in Heaven" off of Dead Again by TON, the females in How Like a Winter, and the female vocalist in the "She Painted Fire Across the Skyline" trilogy on Pale Folklore (Apparently John Haughm's ex, she did opera so he convinced her to sing). I liked the vocals from The Bastard Fairies, and the female vocalist in Winterpills, but I don't listen to those often.

And who said that the girl from Be Your Own Pet is a good vocalist? Her voice grates on my ears and ruins otherwise decent, if unoriginal, music.

[Cire27]

True story!  Some 18-20 year old friends of mine have an all-girl punk band here called GUTLOCKER who are crowd favorites, particularly for their deep, poetic tune "Get That Dick Out of My Ass".

I'd go to there show.

[Patrick]

Why the hell would I want to have a band member who is a member of the gender that I happen to write most of my music about? That would be painfully awkward. I just feel a bit safer opening up about that shit around other dudes. It's hard to relate to everything about somebody's difficulties when the other person is different down to the letter of their chromosomes.

[imapiratearg]

It's really not all that difficult.  Of course, it might also have to do with what gender you usually associate yourself with.  See, all the girls I know are fucking awesome, and a majority of the dudes I know are pretty okay.  So I tend to hang out with my female friends more.

I was going to start a band comprised two girls and three dudes including myself.  When that didn't work out due to everyone else being busy, etc., I decided to try and start one with a female guitarist I am close friends with.

[Caspian]

Why the hell would I want to have a band member who is a member of the gender that I happen to write most of my music about? That would be painfully awkward. I just feel a bit safer opening up about that shit around other dudes. It's hard to relate to everything about somebody's difficulties when the other person is different down to the letter of their chromosomes.

This is a good point, and indeed there have been a lot of good points throughout this whole thread (except for maybe the idiots dropping the 'waa misogyny' line). To be honest, I can't really see tis being a huge issue unless if the lyrics you're doing are either talking about getting your ex and going all Cannibal Corpse on her, but I guess in some situations is would be quite awkward.

Anyway, good answers people.

I wonder if any musicologist has done a gender census on bands from a given timeframe. I mean, do any of us really *know* that there are fewer females in bands? And if so, what are the proportions (insert joke about boobs and hips here)? Unfortunately all we have to go on so far is anecdotal evidence, which while interesting can't actually prove anything.

Well, if you look at an earlier post of mine, I did it with the top 100 last fm bands. I didn't count all teh dudes but I'd estimate that it was about 250 of them, and only 13 women. So we're basically looking at somewhere around 5% or so.

[a pack of wolves]

That census is very small though. I'd be interested to see something done on a large scale.

Personally it's never bothered me singing songs about women along with other women, that never even occurred to me as a problem so I didn't consider it as something that would put people off playing in a band with women. I suppose I don't really think of people in that way, with their gender being such a big deal. Interesting thought that it could be a factor for a lot of people and is for some.

[GenericName]

If you look at last week's top 10 for me on last.fm, 5 of them are female, 3 of them are male, and two of them have no vocals. I am too lazy to tabulate any larger numbers than that though.

Maybe I am not normal, or maybe Caspian has been disproven. As we all know, one anecdote is enough for a disproof.

[sean]

I've actually been wondering about this recently myself, its kinda been bothering me.

I think there is some legitimacy to the argument that girls play more "orchestral" instruments. For example, the cellist of Laura is a chick, and Sophie Trudeau, formerly of Godspeed and now in Silver Mt. Zion, plays violin.

And for all you dissing female vocalists: I will not tolerate this. The chick from Unexpect has an beautiful angelic voice. It is awesome!

[Caspian]

If you look at last week's top 10 for me on last.fm, 5 of them are female, 3 of them are male, and two of them have no vocals. I am too lazy to tabulate any larger numbers than that though.

Maybe I am not normal, or maybe Caspian has been disproven. As we all know, one anecdote is enough for a disproof.

I'm not referring solely to singers, though.

Also: Object inside Clouds, you were doing so well, but then you had to bring up Unexpect. Why shame yourself infront of all of us?

[DMart]

A few people I know refuse to be in a band with female members, allegedly because they always lead to the band breaking up - something about people having to take sides or something... please don't ask me to further explain this because I really don't know any more than that, but perhaps there are a lot more people out there of the same opinion/generalisation?

[sean]

Man fuck that noise I enjoy Unexpect.

Seriously I think they are a good band.

Also Dimmukane would probably like to have a word with you.

[a pack of wolves]

I think there is some legitimacy to the argument that girls play more "orchestral" instruments. For example, the cellist of Laura is a chick, and Sophie Trudeau, formerly of Godspeed and now in Silver Mt. Zion, plays violin.

The Institute of Education in the UK recently published some research on gender bias in instrument choice: http://ioewebserver.ioe.ac.uk/ioe/cms/get.asp?cid=1397&1397_1=19037

[RedLion]

Shit, has no one mentioned Sonic Youth?

[DoubleAW]

Well, it's kind of a given, Red.

[Nodaisho]

Why the hell would I want to have a band member who is a member of the gender that I happen to write most of my music about? That would be painfully awkward. I just feel a bit safer opening up about that shit around other dudes. It's hard to relate to everything about somebody's difficulties when the other person is different down to the letter of their chromosomes.

It is hard to relate to everything about somebody's difficulties period. I have four really close friends, three of them are females. I would say I am more open with the male friend, but I don't think that is due to gender. I couldn't pin down what it is, because the relationships are very different.

[jimbunny]

Well I guess the short answer really is just:

I'm just gonna say patriarchy to avoid reading all the posts.

Also, touring? Since there are already more guys than girls in bands, and I'd imagine it'd be rough sailing (not to mention sexual tension) for anyone, really, to endure the rigors of touring being the only other-gendered person in the group. Again, not a barrier, but probably a contributing cause.

I would like to add, though, that - at least in my experience - female singer-songwriters as a whole wipe the floor with their male counterparts.

[Jimmy the Squid]

The lead guitarist in the metal band I sing in flat out refuses to play in a band with a chick. This is nothing to do with sexual tension or anything like that but rather because he does not believe that women can play any musical instrument as well as a guy can. He even went so far as to say that if it came down to choosing between a guy and a girl he would always choose the guy no matter how good the girl is. This was a few years ago and I can only assume that he has changed his terrible opinions on this since he didn't have a problem when I posted an ad looking for a new guitarist that featured the line "Gender is NOT an issue." Funnily enough though, he did express concerns about whether I was being too harsh with the line "No NSBM fuckwits."

At any rate I think it's too complex a problem to label simply as patriarchy or musical skill because it encompasses all these issues. Guys will tend to have bigger hands than girls and so it might be easier for them to play certain instruments (for the record my hands are fucking tiny, most women would have bigger hands than me), some guys may not be comfortable singing about certain issues with women around (which is dumb because if you play a gig you're probably going to be playing the songs to a bunch of women anyway), and socialisation of musical instruments is a reliable factor. I went to a performing arts primary school and most of the girls played piano, violin, flute or sung. Most of the guys played drums, guitar, trumpet, saxophone, bass etc... I also think that the children of our generation will be more likely to have a wider range of instruments to play. Consider that for most of us, our parents probably helped to shape our musical inclinations, I would not be surprised if girls were to be pushed less towards the "feminine" instruments and more towards what they actually want to play, regardless of which gender should or shouldn't play a certain thing.

[Nodaisho]

That parental pushing issue was mentioned in the article someone linked further up, the suggested remedy was to make all-male and all-female groups, so that males and females would be represented across all of them. One of the people studying it says that while some people would say not to worry about the instruments chosen, "I think the world would be a poorer place if James Galway had been discouraged from playing the flute and Evelyn Glennie had been told that girls shouldn’t become percussionists."

She of course forgets that with her suggestion in place, people would be pushed to play instruments that are needed, rather than what they actually want to play, so what we should really be doing is getting parents to stop pushing their children into playing instruments, and encourage people who beat up bullies (because bullies will taunt people that play the wrong instrument). But then... what if an excellent musician didn't want to play their instrument originally, but their parents pushed them to continue?

I still advocate beatings.

[Alex C]

Never underestimate the power of familiarity-- Patriarchy and its effect on social norms are indeed a definite factor, even if it's just via trickle down. I mean, I hate to say it, but the hypothetical "Girls aren't good at music because they spend all their time cooking and having babies," Rynne scorns had a fair bit of truth to it not so long ago, and it's naive to act like such things don't have  lasting impact on our culture. Western women were often shunted off into a secondary domestic role or else they were allowed into a more public role society was careful to pressure them into selecting something "respectable." I mean, seriously, who do you think is more likely to get branded as brazen and morally suspect in 1910? A woman who plays a nice, traditional instrument like the cello for family at home or a woman with the temerity to perform on the bar circuit, working in the company of men? There was a lot more incentive for men to take these risks and become the pioneers of today's popular music than there were incentives for females, which has led to there being (generally) more famous male role models in music than females, which thanks to the magic of familiarity and gender roles leads to more young men picking up a guitar and passing on the violin than women. I mean, seriously, you know what June Cleaver and Elvis have in common? They were both famous in 1957.

I really think we're getting closer to parity every day, and there's definitely wondefully talented females out there. But we've still got a ways to go to before we have a culture that uncovers and nurtures all of them.

[casull]

I have always wondered about this- I know many, many great female musicians, but with only a couple of exceptions, they play music that is within defined structures- either  they sing, or they play a string instrument in formal classical style. On the other hand, the male musicians that I know play a much wider variety of instruments, play a much wider variety of music, and generally seem to engage in... more creatively demanding/improvisational/open-ended music as a whole. This is just my personal experience, but it's a trend I've noticed for years. I've seen many VERY talented female musicians cower in fear at the idea of sounding something out without music in front of them or improvising. At the same time, I've seen much less talented male players take on the same task without a second thought.

Why is that? I'm not sure, but I don't think it's because girls are somehow inherently less interested or able to perform interesting, creative stuff. I believe it's cultural- the expectation of, um, demure/humble/etc female behavior hasn't taken its leave of our society just yet, and so as we stand today it seems like there's somewhat of a gap between expected female behavior and the aggression/confidence/etc that playing music outside of a formal structure demands. It's a shame, because the couple of girls I know who are really good and know it are very much able to participate in music where the creative expectation is open-ended.

I'm speaking of instrumental players here, not vocalists. I think vocals are kind of a different matter for some reason, but I am having troubling putting into words why that is. 

[Patrick]

Another thing is that a lot of the girls I know (and this is purely anecdotal, take it as you will) just plain don't care about rocking out.

[KharBevNor]

(except for maybe the idiots dropping the 'waa misogyny' line).

Yes , because of course, statements that dismiss every single woman engaged in a certain occupation, and statements saying that women just can't do certain things as well as men because they are weak and feeble little angels, are not fucking misogynistic at all.

Fuck this thread.

[rynne]

(except for maybe the idiots dropping the 'waa misogyny' line)

I'm not dismissing the entire thread, and more people have made valid points than not.  But if I see posts saying that a mediocre male musician is always better than the best female musician, or that music-loving girls' primary aspirations are fucking musicians instead of being musicians, I'll call it as I see it.

[Caspian]

(except for maybe the idiots dropping the 'waa misogyny' line)

I'm not dismissing the entire thread, and more people have made valid points than not.  But if I see posts saying that a mediocre male musician is always better than the best female musician, or that music-loving girls' primary aspirations are fucking musicians instead of being musicians, I'll call it as I see it.

Eh, I guess that's fair enough. i just kind of view words like that as things that often kill any sort of rational debate; I liken it to labelling, say, an anti-immigrantion stance as 'racist' or whatever. instead of using that kinda wording, why not just refute it?

and statements saying that women just can't do certain things as well as men because they are weak and feeble little angels

It's comments like this that I find kind of strange. There are some things women can't do as well as men; there are some things men can't do as well as women. Seems logical, really.


EDIT: Typo. I didn't mean "anti-immigrant". I mean ANTI IMMIGRATION. There is a difference, obviously. [/facepalm]

[KharBevNor]

I guess in your world to be a racist you have to be a member of the KKK and to be a misogynist you have to rape a minimum of one woman a week.

Fucking hell people, fucking hell.

[rynne]

(except for maybe the idiots dropping the 'waa misogyny' line)

I'm not dismissing the entire thread, and more people have made valid points than not.  But if I see posts saying that a mediocre male musician is always better than the best female musician, or that music-loving girls' primary aspirations are fucking musicians instead of being musicians, I'll call it as I see it.

Eh, I guess that's fair enough. i just kind of view words like that as things that often kill any sort of rational debate; I liken it to labelling, say, an anti-immigrant stance as 'racist' or whatever. instead of using that kinda wording, why not just refute it?

If you can suggest another word that means "prejudice against females," I'll use it for the sake of the thread.  I apologize if I offended anyone by using that term.  But if zerodrone sees me as being unnecessarily hyperbolic for using "misogyny," to me it seems just as hyperbolic for zerodrone to call for the thread to be locked solely because I used "misogyny" in the proper context.  It's like the secret word on Pee-Wee's Playhouse: "You said 'misogyny'!  Aaaaaaaaaaaaah!"

My intent in the original post, by the way, was to point out that the thread seemed to be moving off-track already.  I didn't mean for my post to be the actual derailing point.

[a pack of wolves]

It's comments like this that I find kind of strange. There are some things women can't do as well as men; there are some things men can't do as well as women. Seems logical, really.

Hardly any, and even when something does come up that in general women are better suited for than men or vice versa it's very rare and there are always exceptions. It's also worth remembering that gender is not the clearly defined thing we tend to think of it as, it's really more of a social construction like race. I really think biological factors have nothing to do with this.

[rynne]

Yeah, I absolutely agree.  There are really very few cases in music where you can point to a physical, biological reason for men and women to differ.  And most of the anecdotal evidence given in this thread doesn’t have any clear biological basis to it.  The relative lack of female musicians would seem to be more due to societal pressures than anything genetically inherent.

[gardenhead_]

I completely agree with both posts above me, especially the fact that gender is a social construct, and females and males aren't inherently anything, really. It's kind of strange that a lot of people don't realise that, I think.

[Patrick]

Do I get to go crazy fanboy all over Carrie Brownstein yet? Because that lady has got some bitchin' guitar skills. And Janet Weiss is easily one of the world's greatest living drummers, regardless of gender.

[diablo_man]

It's comments like this that I find kind of strange. There are some things women can't do as well as men; there are some things men can't do as well as women. Seems logical, really.

Hardly any, and even when something does come up that in general women are better suited for than men or vice versa it's very rare and there are always exceptions. It's also worth remembering that gender is not the clearly defined thing we tend to think of it as, it's really more of a social construction like race. I really think biological factors have nothing to do with this.

heh, sometimes when i look at all the other guys, i wonder why women would want to be our equals.
yeah, there always exceptions to any rule. like my vice principle when i was in high school, short fat fingers and played guitar like a mofo. when i speak of general characteristics, there are always the exceptions. i just dont understand why guy and girls have to be the exact same (note i didnt say i had a problem with us being equal), caus frankly you would have to be an idiot not to realize that men and women are different. if i say that men seem to have the advantage on bass playing, its because as a whole we tend to have larger stronger hands.
any real musician will tell you that these are not things that make or break a musician, but merely hurdles. and it seems along with the sociological preconceptions, many girls have another hurdle to jump.

really, i think girls and guys are able to be just as musical as each other, but mostly on different instruments (again mostly due to preconceptions about what women should or shouldnt do)

musicainship is very important to me, and while i dont care who is playing the instrument in question, due to the simple fact that on electric guitar girls are leagues behind guys, i dont end up listening to them very much. with several exceptions, of  course.

[a pack of wolves]

It is not a simple fact that men are better than women on electric guitar. It's not a fact at all, it's a subjective opinion and I think you're completely wrong.

I don't think you really got what I was saying. I was saying that the supposed biological differences that create two clearly distinct genders are not what they are often supposed to be, the concept of male and female is largely something we've invented not something that exists without being constructed by society. Like sexuality it's more of a continuum than a binary opposition. So when you start saying women have more hurdles it doesn't make much sense, particularly with regard to what you're talking about which doesn't hold up even if you do accept the idea of there only being two very distinct genders. For example, I have great hands for bass playing (I still suck, but the hands are there). But most men do not have hands like mine. There really isn't a biological advantage there which accounts for the differences in the numbers of musicians, there is just the slight fact that women are a little more likely to have hands totally unsuited to playing the bass in some rare cases and men are a little more likely to have hands very suited to the task.

[Caspian]

Yeah, I absolutely agree.  There are really very few cases in music where you can point to a physical, biological reason for men and women to differ.  And most of the anecdotal evidence given in this thread doesn’t have any clear biological basis to it.  The relative lack of female musicians would seem to be more due to societal pressures than anything genetically inherent.

I was referring to things in general, not just music -where the only arguments you could make is that males typically have bigger hands, which while is perhaps a little bit advantageous doesn't really mean a great deal overall.

But yeah, overall, in all aspects of life there's certainly some differences! Two glaringly obvious ones: Men are better at sports. Women are less likely to commit violent crimes. I for one think that calling gender a 'social construct' is maybe a bit too PC. Some people have penises, some have vaginas. Some people have XX chromosomes and some have XY and as a result there are various inherent differences.  Perhaps it's just that I'm a simple, not particularly intelligent person, but it seems that it's pretty easy to seperate gender, and the middle ground, the grey area between men and women is pretty small. Let's not throw away a perfectly useful concept just because it's not entirely comprehensive and/or some people may feel a bit excluded, you know?

This is getting very off topic, but hey, I don't think I've ever had a debate on gender issues. It's quite strange/interesting.

Like sexuality it's more of a continuum than a binary opposition.

I would kind of agree with this, but it's more of an, i dunno, an inverted bell curve then any sort or linear continuum. I'd say most people would fit 'male' or 'female' gender roles quite well, and most of said gender roles would correspond with their physical sex.

[gardenhead_]

Genetic differences or predispositions aren't always related to gender though. Sometimes they are, yes, but for example the tendency for men to commit violent crimes rather than women is probably more of a social construct than anything inherent to a male. A male can be raised to not be violent and aggressive and a female can be raised to be aggressive. I don't really see anything to suggest that it's genetic or biological.

[rynne]

It's the sex vs. gender difference.  "Sex" is the biological distinction: penis vs. vagina.  It's a fairly cut-and-dry distinction, though there are intermediaries.  "Gender" is a cultural view of what how the different sexes behave: masculine vs. feminine.  That's a continuum, and it can shape how men and women develop psychologically, what roles they think are available for them to play in society. 

Personally, I can’t see any sex-based reason for there to be a difference in the ability of men and women to create music of any form with any instrument.  But I think gender roles do play a part in what males and females think they can do.  Which is to say if women are less represented in musical roles, that's not a deficiency in the talent of women as compared to men, that's a stifling of women's talents by cultural norms.  But there are certainly enough women who've said "screw the norms" to show that they lack nothing in terms of musicality (or plenty of other things, for that matter).


*edit* Ah, I see that gardenhead hit the semantic distinction before me. 

[Gemmwah]

Men are better at sports.

What?

I was going to participate but now I see that anything I write is going to be completely trite, and a complete waste of time because this thread is no longer a serious discussion.

[gardenhead_]

Yeah, with the whole "men are better at physical activities (ie sports)", society comes into it again. I'm sure if women were encouraged to play football and other contact sports with men, and not segregated or whatever, they probably could have developed their own techniques, strategies and roles within teams to be just as good as male players. The thing is, females are generally not encouraged to play contact sports because it's not feminine or whatever.

And if it's not a contact sport then all arguments are pretty much invalid it would seem. Tennis is a good example of females being as good as males at sport.

Sorry for getting so off topic, but I didn't really have anything to add to the discussion at hand that hadn't already been said more eloquently.

[Caspian]

Genetic differences or predispositions aren't always related to gender though. Sometimes they are, yes, but for example the tendency for men to commit violent crimes rather than women is probably more of a social construct than anything inherent to a male. A male can be raised to not be violent and aggressive and a female can be raised to be aggressive. I don't really see anything to suggest that it's genetic or biological.

The whole nature vs nurture argument! It seemed like eventually it would come down to this.

In both men and women, testosterone plays a key role in health and well-being as well as in sexual functioning. Examples include enhanced libido, increased energy, increased production of red blood cells and protection against osteoporosis. On average, an adult human male body produces about forty to sixty times more testosterone than an adult female body, but females are more sensitive to the hormone.

Yes yes, I know Wikipedia isn't the most reliable source (this quote was referenced, if that helps), but as we can see, the effects of testosterone are real on some sort of level, and men get a lot more of it then women do. And certainly there's other hormones that similarly affect the human body in various ways as well. To me, the argument isn't whether there's a genetic/biological difference, but exactly how much it affects the personality compared to upbringing.

[Caspian]

Yeah, with the whole "men are better at physical activities (ie sports)", society comes into it again. I'm sure if women were encouraged to play football and other contact sports with men, and not segregated or whatever, they probably could have developed their own techniques, strategies and roles within teams to be just as good as male players. The thing is, females are generally not encouraged to play contact sports because it's not feminine or whatever.

And if it's not a contact sport then all arguments are pretty much invalid it would seem. Tennis is a good example of females being as good as males at sport.

Hey, it was just an example. I needed some sort of proof of difference and this was one that came to mind. I noticed that no one's complained about the violent crime one I mentioned. And do you honestly believe that, say, Venus Williams (or whoever's ranked no.1 in tennis, I don't follow it myself) would stand a chance against Roger Federer? On another example, compare, say, the record for the men's 100 metre record with the fastest time for a women. Or any swimming record. Or we could go on about cricket. Or squash. Or weightlifting.

I'm well aware that this thread is rapidly going down the toilet and that this post won't help, but come on, if you don't anything about sport then you shouldn't really comment on it.

[gardenhead_]

Or we could go on about cricket. Or squash. Or weightlifting.

I know for at least two of those (cricket and weightlifting, I have no idea about squash) they are "male" sports and females are generally not encouraged to play them. There is a female cricket league in Australia but it gets nowhere near the funding that the male league does, therefore creating an environment that isn't as supportive for growth etc.

(or whoever's ranked no.1 in tennis, I don't follow it myself)

if you don't anything about sport then you shouldn't really comment on it.

I don't want this to descend into a debate on semantics and nit-picking, but what?

[rynne]

Well, yeah, men tend to have larger muscles and be stronger than women on average.  Hence faster times, heavier loads in sporting events.  I don’t really see what that has to do with musical talent, though.

And to pre-empt anyone, there aren't many musical situations that require excesses of raw strength.  The closest thing I can thing of is that hard playing requires endurance, but that doesn't have as much to do with muscle mass as with repeated training, which is something that men or women could do.

[Caspian]

Just a bit of side tracking there, that's all.

Rynne: I would dare say that certain variants of very fast black metal and death metal would take a bit of raw strength and endurance; but overall that's probably pretty rare, and indeed with good technique it shouldn't be an issue at all.

[ruyi]

Why the hell would I want to have a band member who is a member of the gender that I happen to write most of my music about? That would be painfully awkward. I just feel a bit safer opening up about that shit around other dudes. It's hard to relate to everything about somebody's difficulties when the other person is different down to the letter of their chromosomes.

I am unable to comprehend this. I am not trying to be mean, I really cannot understand this kind of mindset. Can you or someone else explain?

[onewheelwizzard]

I think what Patrick is trying to say is that making music is generally something that he does with friends as opposed to romantic interests.  The act of writing a song is a very personal one, and so I imagine it's a lot easier to make a song about being attracted to a girl, or breaking up with a girl, or falling in love with a girl, or being cheated on by a girl, or anything that has to do with girls, if the people he's making the music WITH can relate to his position instead of being potential subject matter for the song.

Basically, if people make music as an outlet for their feelings about their personal life, which a LOT of people do, it's generally easier to do it if one's bandmates are not and furthermore would never be part of that personal life.  I can see where he's coming from ... if I were writing a song about a girl, but I had to collaborate with another girl to do so, it would be really hard to write the song I wanted to write from my own perspective.  My female bandmate's contribution simply wouldn't reflect what I was feeling.

When I personally make music I don't do it with a gender-specific mindset (mainly because I don't really write lyrics).  But I can see how someone would and how having a mixed-gender band composition might make it a bit difficult.

[Jackie Blue]

If you can suggest another word that means "prejudice against females," I'll use it for the sake of the thread.

misogynist

Main Entry: mi·sog·y·nist
Pronunciation: m-säj--nst
Function: noun
: a person who hates women

(emphasis mine)

[rynne]

Hey, I can cite dictionaries, too!  Let's check the Oxford English Dictionary:

misogyny, n.
Hatred or dislike of, or prejudice against women.

misogynist, n. and adj.
n.    A person who hates, dislikes, or is prejudiced against women.
adj.    That is a misogynist; characterized by hatred of or prejudice against women; misogynistic.

(emphasis mine)

But seriously, like I said, I'll gladly use any synonym you feel is more acceptable.  Arguing over words instead of ideas is kinda silly.