Print

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

[Jackie Blue]

I just think that misogyny is an extremely loaded term, as much of one as calling someone a racist.

Like Caspian (I think) said, why not just talk about the points instead of one-offing a response like your original one that used the M word?  Seriously, can you not see how that response was not helpful to the thread and was inflammatory?

Mostly everyone has been going with anecdotal evidence, so I don't think too many people are making over-arching statements about gender in any grand scheme.  Anecdotally, I know a fuckton of female musicians and they do have small hands and they do find it hard to play guitar because of it.  I see absolutely no reason other than rampant PC bullshit to refute this.

Like someone mentioned about the tennis thing.  I always wondered why there is "women's tennis" and "men's tennis".  It seems to me that the only reason to split them up is so that men don't win the vast majority of times.  If you want a level playing field, then level it.  Have women compete against men in every sport.  Maybe in a few hundred years, or through the use of steroids and testosterone treatments, we will have female linebackers.  I would be fine with that.

But to dismiss or play down the very real genetic differences between the genders is at best ignorant and at worst living in Magical Unicorn Land.

[rynne]

I said at the top of the page that there are obvious genetic differences in men and women.  And I also said that I think making music isn't one of the places where they make an ounce of difference.  Yes, there's "men's tennis" and "women's tennis" but there's not "men's poetry" and "women's poetry" or "men's painting" and "women's painting."  You never see orchestras with "first male violin" and "first female violin."  Music and art aren't adversarial physical contests where men's bodies are more suited to win than women's. 

Yeah, women are different than men.  But that doesn't mean that those differences extend over every aspect of their lives.


*edit* You know what?  I keep seeing this "small hands" argument as to why women aren't in bands as much as men.  What I think I'd like to see is some sort of evidence that men who are smaller than average are also underrepresented in bands.  Because if it really is a matter of size, then it's not a matter of sex: similarly sized men and women should be at similar disadvantages.

[diablo_man]

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.

i would like to note that most of my anecdotal knowledge and conclusions are regarding highly technical music, specifically metal like that.
anecdotally, i dont have ridiculously large hands(about 9inches from pinky to thumb, i can do two white keys above an octave on piano) but i havent met more than one or two girls with hands even as large as mine.
even with my larger hands, i find the increased stretch when playing bass to be very inconvenient. i am sure with more practise i wouldn't notice it so much, but still it is something that could put off a beginner, especially someone with smaller hands than mine, (from my experience nearly all girls would fall into that category, along with a lot of guys too)

and someone said something about my statement(guys being better at electric guitar than girls) being completely false? maybe i should rephrase that.
the currently existing electric guitar players that are girls, are not at the same level as the currently existing guy guitarists. i have no reason to doubt that with the same amount of practise girls could reach the same level, but as of yet they haven't.
to clarify THIS is the type of guitar playing i am refering to.
as a point of my general knowledge, which is anecdotal, i have never seen a female lead guitarist in a metal band, or any that approach that level of skill. prove me wrong if you like, or say that you dont like that style of fast playing, but that doesn't change my point. 

[casull]

I think someone should start a new thread where we assume that the difference is nurture, not nature, and we talk about it. This thread had potential, but the really interesting bits, the cultural stuff, got overrun by the general gender skirmish.

[Jackie Blue]

Yes, there's "men's tennis" and "women's tennis" but there's not "men's poetry" and "women's poetry"

Basically every American University would disagree with you on that point.  People take classes in "women's literature" (or "african-american literature", etc.) all the time.  And it is generally the feminists who want there to be that distinction, which only confuses me more.

*edit* You know what?  I keep seeing this "small hands" argument as to why women aren't in bands as much as men.

No you don't.  I said it twice.  I also said it as an idle speculation as to why some women might not choose to play guitar.  If your reading comprehension did not allow you to see that I was just engaging in a possible idle speculation, I apologise.

What I think I'd like to see is some sort of evidence that men who are smaller than average are also underrepresented in bands.

Well, I think they are.  Most drummers I know are a little beefy and most guitarists I know are lanky with large, skinny fingers.  Again, anecdotal, but think about it.  How many 5'4" guys do you see in bands?

[Joseph]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_Kiss ?

[Jackie Blue]

Psh, they don't even play their own instruments.

[Patrick]

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.

Bullseye. Sorry for the poor wording on my part, Roo!

[Jackie Blue]

One of my bands had a stripper as a singer.  She couldn't sing or write lyrics (she had me write them) but she had a practice space and lots of coke!

It took her about three months to realise I was not writing, not trying to write, heavy metal songs, just loud Sonic Youth rip-offs.

NB: I realise not all strippers are stupid.  I have known several who were very intelligent.  I dated one who wrote poetry and listened to The Cure!

[rynne]

Yes, there's "men's tennis" and "women's tennis" but there's not "men's poetry" and "women's poetry"

Basically every American University would disagree with you on that point.  People take classes in "women's literature" (or "african-american literature", etc.) all the time.  And it is generally the feminists who want there to be that distinction, which only confuses me more.

Ah, touche.  Though, I wouldn't necessarily argue that's because women or minorities are worse at it than white men, but that their contributions might've been overlooked due to cultural bias.

*edit* You know what?  I keep seeing this "small hands" argument as to why women aren't in bands as much as men.

No you don't.  I said it twice.  I also said it as an idle speculation as to why some women might not choose to play guitar.  If your reading comprehension did not allow you to see that I was just engaging in a possible idle speculation, I apologise.

Well, we can be together in our lack of reading comprehension, then, as you seem to have missed the numerous other references in the thread by people who are not you. 

What I think I'd like to see is some sort of evidence that men who are smaller than average are also underrepresented in bands.

Well, I think they are.  Most drummers I know are a little beefy and most guitarists I know are lanky with large, skinny fingers.  Again, anecdotal, but think about it.  How many 5'4" guys do you see in bands?

I don't know.  I don't trust anecdotal evidence too much in the first place, since people's memories tend to recall anecdotes that support their own conclusions while overlooking ones that don't.  In fact, that pretty much screws everyone in this thread, since no one so far has given any concrete percentages about the amount of women in bands that aren't biased by personal musical preferences (i.e., "looking though my music collection, I see ...")

[Jackie Blue]

But my music collection is so big I think it could stand up as a statistical analysis of the height/weight issue of people in bands.

Seriously, my music collection is huge.

Most women can't even handle my music collection.

OK, I'll stop now.   

[pilsner]

I'm having difficulty imagining that physical differences between the genders are a major factor in the lack of female instrumentalists.  Among the most virtuosic young performers of classical instruments -- the performers whose performances must meet the highest levels of technical proficiency -- women have taken a prominent role in instruments including cello, violin and piano.  Martha Argerich, Anne-Sophie Mutter and Mitsuko Uchida are performers who can be compared reasonably against the most talented male performers in the world.  Not to mention pop performers like Janet Weiss, Kathy Foster and Kelley Deal.

I also think that there's something at work here, in addition to simple gender discrimination.  What gets omitted in these discussions is the legacy problem:  think of how many more role models young male guitarists, drummers and bassists have to look to than up-and-coming female instrumentalists.  Think of how male guitar teachers will typically favor male students, hence the novelty of programs like Girls Rock Camp.  Think of how (primarily male) music critics and marketers tend to ghettoize all girl acts from the early '90s like Sleater-Kinney as "Riot Grrrl".  Like in many other areas, the lack of female rock and metal instrumentalists is self-perpetuating.

Ultimately the biggest difference is that if you take a bunch of 14 year old American boys and 14 year old American girls and ask each group what they want to be when they grow up, you're going to get a lot more boys than girls say "guitarist" or "drummer".  I think, though, that you're going to see the numbers slip closer to 50/50 as time goes on, and as each generation of female instrumentalists provide aspirational models for the next generation.

[Nodaisho]

Yes, there's "men's tennis" and "women's tennis" but there's not "men's poetry" and "women's poetry"

Basically every American University would disagree with you on that point.  People take classes in "women's literature" (or "african-american literature", etc.) all the time.  And it is generally the feminists who want there to be that distinction, which only confuses me more.

Well, I think they are.  Most drummers I know are a little beefy and most guitarists I know are lanky with large, skinny fingers.  Again, anecdotal, but think about it.  How many 5'4" guys do you see in bands?

I find it odd too, how it is the feminists that want to keep the distinction, but could you imagine if a male wanted "men's literature"? There would be outrage, and not just because people would think it was about porn. Same if people started men's colleges. Now, this doesn't go for all feminists, my mother is one of the good feminists, the kind that just wants equality, not special treatment, so I know not all feminists are the misandrist pots calling snow black.

And for short guys in bands? Angus Young, Ronnie James Dio, Udo Dirkschnieder, just off the top of my head. I forget his name, but I think the guitarist in Nightwish is 5'5", so not quite.

I do fit the guitarist image you have, though, and my father fits the drummer one.

I would disagree with whoever said that some kinds of metal would take strength, I don't think that the really fast picking takes strength so much as it takes practice to get your hand to go back and forth that fast, maybe some strength in the fingers if you are going to do rapid tapping sections, but I don't think that a female would have trouble getting that much finger strength.

In the sports side of things, I would say that if females played against males, they would be as good as them, the average female would need to work more to get muscled for football (american), but if you have seen the female weightlifters, they have plenty of muscle. The average female might play differently than the average male, but that would be more down to body type than gender.

This is anectodal, but I know a girl that has played soccer for most of her life, she has really big leg muscles now, from soccer, mountain biking, and rock-climbing. She plays at least as well as the males I have seen her play against for fun, including ones that also play soccer, and she doesn't need to strain herself to do it.

If something requires brute strength, the males would have an innate advantage, but working at it can overcome that, and I can't really think of anything else that would give a male an advantage, except for average height.

[Jackie Blue]

Ah, touche.  Though, I wouldn't necessarily argue that's because women or minorities are worse at it than white men

Have you read Sylvia Plath or Ayn Rand?

*ducks and runs*

[a pack of wolves]

I find it odd too, how it is the feminists that want to keep the distinction, but could you imagine if a male wanted "men's literature"? There would be outrage, and not just because people would think it was about porn. Same if people started men's colleges. Now, this doesn't go for all feminists, my mother is one of the good feminists, the kind that just wants equality, not special treatment, so I know not all feminists are the misandrist pots calling snow black.

They do have courses in that and there isn't any outrage, or at least they do at the university I study at. My flatmate is currently doing one titled something like 'men and masculinity in American culture'.

Think of how (primarily male) music critics and marketers tend to ghettoize all girl acts from the early '90s like Sleater-Kinney as "Riot Grrrl".

I know what you're saying, but Sleater-Kinney were tagged with that because they did come out of the riot grrl scene. Corin Tucker's previous band Heavens To Betsy were one of the most important bands in it, and their early records sound very riot grrl. The term did get applied to a lot of artists who didn't deserve it, but S-K wasn't one of them.

[pilsner]

I know, but by The Woods, a lot of critics were still labelling them Riot-Grrrl or Grrrl Rock.  Why?  By that point they were just rock. 

[Nodaisho]

Ah, touche.  Though, I wouldn't necessarily argue that's because women or minorities are worse at it than white men

Have you read Sylvia Plath or Ayn Rand?

*ducks and runs*

What is your problem with Ayn Rand? The 60+ page author filibusters or the horrible philosophy behind it?

I have been reading more male writers recently, but that is because Tamora Pierce isn't out with anything new yet, and I keep forgetting to put a hold on the new Diane Duane book.

aPoW, really? I had never heard of that class before, that is interesting.

[jimbunny]

re "women's writing" as it is supposedly distinguished from "men's writing"

Don't make the mistake of making statements about "the" feminists. There is an enormous variety of opinions within the "feminist" and "gender studies" movements (as far as they can really be distinguished). The idea that women's writing is essentially different than men's is a pretty divisive issue. Interestingly enough, the theory of women's writing is not a sex-based one - men are entirely capable of writing like a woman.

As to the existence of "women's literature" courses around, the reason could be as well the relative size of the female author community over time than any essential writing difference. Because there is such a narrow genealogy of women writers, the continuity of their works is much stronger than for men, which does lend itself to a good course curriculum. Also the thematic material more likely engaged by women writers because of their social position is different than mens'.

[Jinjo]

I think the thread has gotten a bit off topic, but it was to be expected. It's interesting to follow though.

[diablo_man]

And for short guys in bands? Angus Young, Ronnie James Dio, Udo Dirkschnieder, just off the top of my head. I forget his name, but I think the guitarist in Nightwish is 5'5", so not quite.

I do fit the guitarist image you have, though, and my father fits the drummer one.

I would disagree with whoever said that some kinds of metal would take strength, I don't think that the really fast picking takes strength so much as it takes practice to get your hand to go back and forth that fast, maybe some strength in the fingers if you are going to do rapid tapping sections, but I don't think that a female would have trouble getting that much finger strength.

In the sports side of things, I would say that if females played against males, they would be as good as them, the average female would need to work more to get muscled for football (american), but if you have seen the female weightlifters, they have plenty of muscle. The average female might play differently than the average male, but that would be more down to body type than gender.

well, to be fair Dio is a vocalist not a instrumentalist. dont think long fingers would be all that much help playing angus young's pentatonic rock stuff. but then im just nitpicking on your examples, i agree with what you are saying. there are plenty of exceptions to the rule.

'bout the metal strength, it takes quite a bit. guitar wise, the faster stuff, like constant riffing in 16th at 200bpm takes a lot of endurance, even if your technique is correct. if it were wrong then you would likely cramp up long before that. quite aside from being warmed up you need to be in shape to pull off a long metal show, but that comes with learning the instrument. i'd say the most physical one would be drumming. there doing say blast beats and double kick drumming at high tempos takes a lot out of you. a lot of pro metal drummers are beastly looking. like check this guy out from immortal. if you ever watch concerts, even just a normal rock band the drummer is almost always shirtless and sweaty after a song or two from the exertion.(not a bad reasong to have female drummers actually... )

as ive said before, anyone with enough time and the right attitude can become an exception to the rule. unfortunately, that has only just started with female rock musicians.

[KharBevNor]

Sweet nunfucking christ there is so much stupid in this fucking thread.

So much fucking stupid.

[De_El]

Next time, on QC Forums: someone embarrassingly reveals that they are a homophobe! Stay tuned to find out who!

[diablo_man]

Sweet nunfucking christ there is so much stupid in this fucking thread.

So much fucking stupid.

well, i looked back through the thread and all of your posts just say "fuck this thread" or blanketly describe all the posters as near rascists and woman haters.
much as i hate being the newbie dissing the older member, either state your own opinion on the matter or stop posting at all, if you hate the thread so much.

you may not like my opinion, but at least i have one and am trying to back it up and phrase it the best i can (which would be a lot easier if it weren't on the net)

i think its a pretty valid topic to discuss, given that whole genres of music are almost devoid of female prescence (such as metal) and the general music scene seems to be predominantly male(not my observation). 

[KharBevNor]

I don't like your opinions because they're fucking stupid, and it's not my job to have to educate people on why they are smug fucking pig-ignorant bigots.

So eat shit.

[diablo_man]

well, i dont see where you would have a problem with my last few posts, but okay.

[KharBevNor]

Holy fucking shit can you not use capital letters, what are you, 10?

[karl gambolputty...]

This thread is gay.

....oh shit.

[diablo_man]

Holy fucking shit can you not use capital letters, what are you, 10?

Yes, I can.

Edit: nevermind, this is getting a bit ridiculous. Its a fucking message board, not worth getting worked up over. Khar, i may have tripped off this thing by calling you down earlier, so sorry about that. Pretty sure this thread is over anyways.

[Nodaisho]

I had a nice post written up, and then the forums killed it.

I think the main problem someone might have with your comments, Diablo, is the statement that men are better at guitar than women. I think what you meant was that the male guitarists you know are better than the female guitarists, and that is fine, as long as you aren't saying that being female makes you a worse guitarist. Of course, I am sure that the female guitarists you know aren't all worse than the male guitarists you know, just the best of the males are better than the best of the females.

[Caspian]

In the sports side of things, I would say that if females played against males, they would be as good as them, the average female would need to work more to get muscled for football (american), but if you have seen the female weightlifters, they have plenty of muscle. The average female might play differently than the average male, but that would be more down to body type than gender.

This is anectodal, but I know a girl that has played soccer for most of her life, she has really big leg muscles now, from soccer, mountain biking, and rock-climbing. She plays at least as well as the males I have seen her play against for fun, including ones that also play soccer, and she doesn't need to strain herself to do it.

If something requires brute strength, the males would have an innate advantage, but working at it can overcome that, and I can't really think of anything else that would give a male an advantage, except for average height.

Are you serious? Most sports have a large emphasis on brute strength. Sorry about this derailing, again, but if you seriously think that females could play sports as good as men, then you're kidding yourself and living in 'magical unicorn land', to paraphrase Zerodrone. It's just stupid to think that women will be anywhere near as good as men in pretty much ANY sport (short of marathon swimming, which women do well in) for a very long amount of time. Compare, again, ANY sport at the elite level (any sport) and men are a lot better then women, even if it's the more 'traditional' or 'acceptable' sports for women to compete, the men are better, with the possible exception of Gymnastics, where the smaller build of most women is an advantage.

Also: Khar, either post something useful or shut the fuck up.

[ruyi]

I don't like your opinions because they're fucking stupid, and it's not my job to have to educate people on why they are smug fucking pig-ignorant bigots.

So eat shit.

What's the point of being enlightened about gender/sex roles in society if you're not going to be patient with the people who need to hear it most?

[Caspian]

What's the point of being enlightened about gender/sex roles in society if you're not going to be patient with the people who need to hear it most?

Wow, do you honestly think you could be any MORE condescending with that remark?

[ruyi]

Sorry, I was trying to couch it in his terms. Khar implies that his hostility is because of how utterly ignorant he thinks certain opinions are. I am basically trying to say I don't think he's acting consistently given what he believes.

[jeph]

okay i think this has run its course

[diablo_man]

I had a nice post written up, and then the forums killed it.

I think the main problem someone might have with your comments, Diablo, is the statement that men are better at guitar than women. I think what you meant was that the male guitarists you know are better than the female guitarists, and that is fine, as long as you aren't saying that being female makes you a worse guitarist. Of course, I am sure that the female guitarists you know aren't all worse than the male guitarists you know, just the best of the males are better than the best of the females.

huh, i thought i had said that. no wonder it was all badly received, thanks for saying what i should have been saying.
pretty sure i made it a point to say that being female doesnt make you worse, just in my music outlook and anecdotal knowledge the best of the best are male.
thanks. still no clue what was wrong with my post about strength for certain metal playing, but w/e.

edit: ^ to jeph, sorry i didnt notice your post there. ill stop bumping this now.

[KharBevNor]

What's the point of being enlightened about gender/sex roles in society if you're not going to be patient with the people who need to hear it most?

The point is I (hopefully) do not unthinkingly denigrate women.

[Patrick]

Yeah, but saying somebody is stupid just because they do? Misguided and ill-informed, yes. Stupid? No.

[Der Golem]

Wow, do you honestly think you could BE any more condescending with that remark?

[ruyi]

aw matt don't look at me that way

[Patrick]

Tommy that's a good post but if you were a man you could've done it better.

[Caspian]

Yeah, take that you fucking girl.

Trying to post rationally and reasonably in this thread. How the fuck dare you? Who the fuck do you think you are?

Also - you may think you are okay at playing piano but you actually fucking suck and will never do it as well as a man.

To be honest I have absolutely no idea as to who or what Tommy here is criticizing, or if he even is criticizing anyone, or if he even has a point.

He was on a pretty good "excellent post" streak, too. I imagine it's just gone over my head, though.

[Caspian]

ACK!

[Patrick]

God that's a fucking terrible comic, why did you have to remind me?

[Caspian]

I'm just a terrible person. When I'm not getting my misogyny/racism/homophobia on, I'm reminding people about really, really awful comics.

Also:



Actually perhaps that was a bit too far.

[Caspian]

Anyway, now that for the most part we're done with the 'nature' arguments, can I bring up something that I thought was an interesting point? I know that jeph said;

okay i think this has run its course

But here's what someone on another forum said, and I think I'll quote it ad verbatim. I agree with most of what's being said by this guy, although as this was posted on a metal forum, obviously there's  bit of a metal slant to it, but it can be applied to an extent with other music too. Anyway, I think it's great. Here you all go:

From a sociological viewpoint (ala my university class I took), men are more involved in risky behaviours. You see a similar, and most likely related ratio in other areas of (western civilization) humanity as well - men commit a far greater number of crimes, in all categories. In the top-25 ways people die, men lead all but *breast cancer* (and in most cases, lifestyle choices are a great contributer in most of the leading causes of death). Men are more likely to be smokers, drinkers and drug users. Men are more likely to be non-religious. And so on.

No-one, at this point, is really sure why all of these differences between the sexes crop up. It could be from the socialization process, in which we parents expects our boys to be little policemen, sports stars and politicians, colour their rooms blue and give them toy guns as a kid (and girls can be housewives, teachers or nurses, pink rooms and Barbies). One thing for sure is that girls are better in inter-personal/social situations (make friends easier, etc) than males are, and males are better in spatial stuff (hand-eye coordination and such).

Given that metal has, since Ozzy began singing about sorcerers, witches, magic, Satan, war/politics and such (and considering the musical roots of metal, in hard rock and blues [oh noes sattanik!!11]) and such - AND how rock'n'roll was for so long considered to be "Devil's music" even before the more extreme version of it (metal) came about, metal in it's own way is a high-risk activity.

It eschews a main-stream lifestyle (especially in it's earliest/earlier days, though now it seems to be more socially acceptable in certain ways) and way of thinking; "normality" is in many ways the antithesis of heavy metal. Heavy metal is closely associated with alcohol, loud noise, screams, charged-up lyrics which question our (western) society, and so on.

Thus, since women are far less likely to be involved in high-risk behaviour, and since metal is involved with a much more rebellious lifestyle, metal does appeal to a more masculine audience, no doubt about it. Mind you, most of my post was a sort of speculative association between what sociologists know about gender differences and the lifestyle of heavy metal, but one could say it wasn't a bad go at it, in any case

Here's another one that's probably a good deal more contentious, but has some good, albeit more controversial points:

A reason that there are overall less females in bands is that it's more like the traditional role of the male to seek recognition from the world at large and go out there and be a hero, whereas women tend to seek their recognition from their peer group - that's why (I think) many women are more concerned with careers and status and "fitting in" and doing the socially acceptable thing than men. Also, women may on average be more practical and realistic and tend less to follow rock star career dreams. Consider that women often want to build a safe "nest" in which to raise children; the music business doesn't provide that. That is the answer in terms of traditional role models, anyway, I think. I actually find it encouraging that the number of serious female musicians (i.e. excepting industry fabricated pop princesses) seems to have risen in the last 30 years or so.

Again, I didn't post these comments, so don't come yelling at me. I think that while the whole nature/genetic thing has been thoroughly killed in the previous pages this thread still has some interesting points to be argued in the nurture side of things. Sorry if this completely fails, but this thread has a bit more to offer, surely.

[a pack of wolves]

Given that metal has, since Ozzy began singing about sorcerers, witches, magic, Satan, war/politics and such (and considering the musical roots of metal, in hard rock and blues [oh noes sattanik!!11]) and such - AND how rock'n'roll was for so long considered to be "Devil's music" even before the more extreme version of it (metal) came about, metal in it's own way is a high-risk activity.

It eschews a main-stream lifestyle (especially in it's earliest/earlier days, though now it seems to be more socially acceptable in certain ways) and way of thinking; "normality" is in many ways the antithesis of heavy metal. Heavy metal is closely associated with alcohol, loud noise, screams, charged-up lyrics which question our (western) society, and so on.

Thus, since women are far less likely to be involved in high-risk behaviour, and since metal is involved with a much more rebellious lifestyle, metal does appeal to a more masculine audience, no doubt about it. Mind you, most of my post was a sort of speculative association between what sociologists know about gender differences and the lifestyle of heavy metal, but one could say it wasn't a bad go at it, in any case

This is an interesting idea. However, it doesn't explain why women are far better represented in hardcore and punk than in metal. Or at least they seem to be, the male to female ratio isn't nearly as good as it could (and should) be, but it appears to be significantly better than metal. Hardcore is much more rejecting of a mainstream lifestyle and values, it's associated with non-mainstream appearance (tattoos, piercings etc) and the lyrics are far more directly questioning of society than those found generally in metal. So presumably hardcore and punk would have just as few women as metal if high risk was such a large factor but this isn't the case, after all punk led to riot grrl a sub-genre completely dominated by women.

Oh, and as a side note on the alcohol comment they made, in the UK it isn't true that men drink more than women.

A reason that there are overall less females in bands is that it's more like the traditional role of the male to seek recognition from the world at large and go out there and be a hero, whereas women tend to seek their recognition from their peer group - that's why (I think) many women are more concerned with careers and status and "fitting in" and doing the socially acceptable thing than men. Also, women may on average be more practical and realistic and tend less to follow rock star career dreams. Consider that women often want to build a safe "nest" in which to raise children; the music business doesn't provide that. That is the answer in terms of traditional role models, anyway, I think. I actually find it encouraging that the number of serious female musicians (i.e. excepting industry fabricated pop princesses) seems to have risen in the last 30 years or so.

I think this is getting closer to the reason. In western society the public sphere has been considered a masculine domain with the private, domestic sphere considered feminine, which would push women towards not becoming performers even if they have an interest in the music, which would begin to account for the discrepancy between the amount of women who listen to genres like metal and the amount that become musicians. I'm not so sure about the nest-building argument though, I think men crave as much stability as women.

[Nodaisho]

I think the better recognition in punk could likely come from there being more role models. I mean, really, when you think of the big people in metal, all of them are male, but in punk you have at least Joan Jett, I don't really know all that much about punk, but she gets airplay, and lots of it.

[a pack of wolves]

I think you're right, but why is it that more women have had a prominent role in punk than in metal to provide these role models? It might be related to the higher political content of punk, coupled with (at its inception) a closer relationship with fashion, whereas metal has never really been in fashion even when it's been very popular.

[diablo_man]

 Hardcore is much more rejecting of a mainstream lifestyle and values, it's associated with non-mainstream appearance (tattoos, piercings etc) and the lyrics are far more directly questioning of society than those found generally in metal.

i agree with the rest of your post, but that part stood out as false to me. far as i know, metal contains some of the most offensive lyrics out there, that totally go against mainstream values (death or black metal anyone?), not to mention the music itself being the direct opposite on mainstream stuff. sure the appearance stuff is probably right(i don't know either way) but liking hardcore and punk is much more acceptable in society these days. compared to the prejudice you face when you say you like metal ("isn't that the stuff about raping dead babies in a burning church? so do you praise satan now?), punk and hardcore seem almost mainstream.
i dont know, the society's view of punk/hardcore is sort of like "punk rocker, tattoos, rebel, dyed hair" while metal's is more "long hair, suicidal, homocidal, antichrist"
hell, the fact that people listened to metallica has been entered as evidence to prosecute them for murders, leading some to be on death row. (west memphis 3)

so i think that would be why more women are in punk and hardcore bands than metal bands, going with the whole "high risk behavior" theory.

[karl gambolputty...]

Are we not counting 80's hair-metal then?  From extensive research (ie: watching The Decline of Western Civilization Part II several times), it seems like there were plenty of women in the metal scene back then.