Re: Chix and Technology

[John Tidwell <wedgehed@yahoo.com>]

Laurie,

Thanks for cutting thru all the P.C. gender babble &
confessing to being a woman who loops, rather than a
woman-loopist. I was beginning to think I had 
stumbled into the Alan Alda chat room.

Now, go make me some biscuits! :) :) :)

John



--- Laurie Hatch <lahatch@dnai.com> wrote:
> > From: Javier Miranda V.
> [mailto:gnominus@earthling.net]
> > Sent: Saturday, October 30, 1999 1:03 PM
> >
> > I think this relates to what Jim Poppen said today
> about male masturbatory
> > tendencies.  Women tend to seek mutual
> satisfaction rather than their own,
> > i.e., "You don't share your feelings," "But honey,
> we don't talk," etc.  I
> > would predict that women will get into looping
> only in the context of a
> > group, where their looping interacts somehow with
> others.
> 
> Javier, this is a very interesting theory.  While it
> may arguably prove to
> have validity in a more generalized population, I
> must say that as a
> techno-nerd-chick, I'm as much (if not more)
> "satisfied" just looping with
> myself!  %^)  That's especially true if the other
> musicians are male-types,
> cuz they tend to jack off musically more than chicks
> do!!  Just kidding,
> xy's, just KIDDING.  No
> in-defense-of-musical-ego-masturbation flame wars,
> puhleeeeeease...
> 
> As a bassist, using techno and looping toys has in
> fact allowed me to
> finally, uh, play with myself solo, and do so in a
> manner that (hopefully)
> engages the listener.   Before looping, I invariably
> saw myself as being
> (for the most part) restricted to ensemble
> performance, at least to be
> commercially viable as a bass player.  Now I have
> more options, and it's
> tremendously liberating.  Don't get me wrong: I do
> love ensemble playing --
> the intimate, interdependent co-creation and
> interplay is an extraordinary
> and unique communication.  A sum far greater than
> the parts.  But I know I
> don't require that interaction to be able to twirl
> those knobs and loop my
> ass off.  It simply has never occurred to me to
> think of it in terms of
> gender.
> 
> > From: Mark Sottilaro [mailto:mark@cdm.sfai.edu]
> > Sent: Saturday, October 30, 1999 12:52 PM
> >
> > why do we
> > find so few women interested in working with new
> tools (such as loopers)
> > in Music?
> 
> At the risk of oversimplifying an extremely complex
> subject, I think the
> relative absence of women in tech/electronic music
> is a subset of the gender
> imbalance one sees in virtually all tech fields, at
> least here in the US.
> Although some fields are finally becoming
> gender-blind, I do believe it's
> gonna be a while before being a woman in most
> technical fields is not in
> _any_ way unusual.
> 
> Why and how those imbalances came to be is another
> topic, another list, but
> I would briefly hypothesize (and over-generalize):
> 
> From a very early age, girls (in some cultures) do
> not receive the same
> encouragement to go into technology as do boys.  In
> cultures where women do
> not, or historically have not had equal rights
> politically, economically,
> and sociologically, they typically were/are tracked
> into more traditional
> "feminine" roles.  Those who have chosen alternative
> paths have usually
> faced considerable impediments.  (Although sometimes
> that's made us better!)
> 
> I would like to mention a few examples from my own
> experience.  In my late
> 60's high school physics class of 25, only two were
> girls.  Same with
> advanced math.  On the other hand, the balance was
> about even in band and
> orchestra classes, although very few girls played
> more "masculine"
> instruments like bass, trombone, tuba, etc.  Even
> fewer played electronic
> instruments.  If you were a chick in a band it was
> automatically assumed you
> were the vocalist.  (I _still_ find that bias
> today.)
> 
> ~~Which brings up what was a strong undercurrent
> when I was growing up:
> being expected to fit into the "ladylike" category. 
> For instance, girls
> were not allowed to wear jeans in school because it
> was "unladylike"!!!  I'm
> still proud that a few disgusted jeans-clad high
> school chick friends and I
> were suspended for protesting that blatantly sexist
> rule.  We didn't change
> our jeans, and they did change the rule.
> 
> Even now many females don't receive the same
> encouragement to excel in the
> sciences and other technological fields in the same
> way that males do.  I
> was fortunate because my parents didn't program me
> to fit into typical
> gender roles of the time.  But even with that
> advantage there were a lot of
> societal biases and barriers to overcome. 
> Thankfully, however, it's been a
> while since I've heard "you play really good for a
> girl."
> 
> And finally:
> 
> > From: Mark Sottilaro [mailto:mark@cdm.sfai.edu]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 31, 1999 9:46 AM
> >
> > I'm pretty sure most of us know that woman, can,
> will, and do loop.
> > That wasn't the point.  The point is, I don't
> think that there is a
> > single woman on this list.  I find that
> bothersome.  It seems
> > unnatural.  There were females on this list at one
> time, why did they
> > leave?  Are we creating a hostile environment
> towards women?  Are we a
> > bunch of boring tech geeks?
> 
> Relax, be yerself, be a guy, talk tech geek looper
> talk.  It's all cool.
> That's why Tara and I, and everybody else --
> regardless of gender -- are
> here.  %^)
> 
> And thanks for asking~~
> 
> loopin' laurie
> (FYI, I've been on the list continuously for several
> years, but I don't post
> very often.  It remains my fave, for precisely the
> same reason that Claude
> Voit so perceptively expressed a few threads ago:
> 
> [snip]
> >this has never been an aggressive list but a deep
> and funny
> > crowd of individuals
> 
> right on!
> 
> 



=====
John Tidwell



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com