Why so few female Psy-artists?

[travbrad1001]

No. We share 99.9% of our DNA. http://www.telegraph...c-the-same.html

 

Or define 'great genetic difference'.

 

And Chimpanzee's share 98% of human DNA. If a completely different species has only 2% difference in DNA, it seems that even the minutest changes in DNA can create big differences.

 

Obviously there are much bigger factors in which music you enjoy though (if genetics even has an effect). I guess this is a very hard thing to study though. There are so many other factors that are impossible to control in any sort of scientific way (especially since there is so much about our brains we don't yet know).

[karan129]

And Chimpanzee's share 98% of human DNA. If a completely different species has only 2% difference in DNA, it seems that even the minutest changes in DNA can create big differences. Obviously there are much bigger factors in which music you enjoy though (if genetics even has an effect). I guess this is a very hard thing to study though. There are so many other factors that are impossible to control in any sort of scientific way (especially since there is so much about our brains we don't yet know).

I actually responded that way because I felt what was said was getting too close to eugenics. If you get into this whole thing of different races are different because of different DNA then how far are you from eugenics?

 

I'd be interested in what you think these other factors are? Factors apart from your genes and how they are expressed I mean.

[GagaISM]

I actually responded that way because I felt what was said was getting too close to eugenics. If you get into this whole thing of different races are different because of different DNA then how far are you from eugenics?

 

I'd be interested in what you think these other factors are? Factors apart from your genes and how they are expressed I mean.

So what you're saying is that you'd rather accept a politically constructed reality than accepting the facts of science simply because you're against eugenics? That's a bit weird to me. I think it's rather obvious that there's a genetic difference between Asian and North European people etc. All you have to do is to look at them to tell.

[karan129]

 

So what you're saying is that you'd rather accept a politically constructed reality than accepting the facts of science simply because you're against eugenics? That's a bit weird to me. I think it's rather obvious that there's a genetic difference between Asian and North European people etc. All you have to do is to look at them to tell.

 

Obviously there's a genetic difference. I never said I didn't accept that. What you said was "Unesco's program to erase the idea of racial and genetic differences has been a great success (I can see why it was necessary). But Unesco is more than anything else a political/humanistic program, not a scientific one. Fact is that our genome decides far more than we'd like to think and that there is a great genetic difference between various human races. Not just the color of our skin." and that seemed to imply you feel there are significant differences between races that can be put down to genes. If that is not what you meant, then I'm sorry for the misinterpretation.

[Cynos]

And what about Invid Mind?

[IronSun]

I would like to add something on the whole genetics discussion. Don't you think that general upbringing in our society is radical different rather than our gene-pool? If you take into account the dominant stereotype of what a girl is "supposed" to like, and the way that influences her upbringing (it's another stereotype but I think about barbies, other dolls, whose sole purpose is to look "pretty"), isn't that a much better explanation? What I think, and what sounds a lot more logical to me, is that the way you sculpt something eventually has a much wider and bigger impact on what it becomes than the buildingblocks it is made of have. So in that sense, I would go looking for the reason why there are fewer female dj's and artists in the socio-cultural paradigm rather than in the eugenic paradigm. The reason why men are more "technical" is because that stereotype has been held intact for a very long time, not because our genes are more "technically" biased. Ofcourse I can't say for sure whether or not this has, in the long run, affected our gene-pool, but one shouldn't automatically assign every (and take this with a grain of salt, I don't literally mean EVERY) difference between men and women to the field of eugenics. It's more complicated than that and just brazenly ignores socio-cultural impact (mainly the environment we grow up in and the way we are raised) in the equation.

 

Some food for thought, I think.

[kathmandu]

WHY SO FEW FEMALE PSYNEWS FORUM USERS?

[needle ninja]

 

- Second influence: Men have more obsessions. 89% of all big collections in the world are collected by male beings... To make electronic music you need some obsessive behaviour... Sitting hours, days and days behind a pc... Dreaming about that stupid music program at night etc... (theory 2)

 

Those 2 together makes the main reason imo

 

89% of all percentages are made up on the spot.

I agree, however, that it is because of the propensity of males to become obsessive that they get into electronic music more then females. I think that electronic music is far more difficult to learn about and hear then pop music is so most women never get into it.

[Veracohr]

WHY SO FEW FEMALE PSYNEWS FORUM USERS?

 

There used to be more. I think they left when Psynews started becoming Psydrama.

[karan129]

I would like to add something on the whole genetics discussion. Don't you think that general upbringing in our society is radical different rather than our gene-pool? If you take into account the dominant stereotype of what a girl is "supposed" to like, and the way that influences her upbringing (it's another stereotype but I think about barbies, other dolls, whose sole purpose is to look "pretty"), isn't that a much better explanation? What I think, and what sounds a lot more logical to me, is that the way you sculpt something eventually has a much wider and bigger impact on what it becomes than the buildingblocks it is made of have. So in that sense, I would go looking for the reason why there are fewer female dj's and artists in the socio-cultural paradigm rather than in the eugenic paradigm. The reason why men are more "technical" is because that stereotype has been held intact for a very long time, not because our genes are more "technically" biased. Ofcourse I can't say for sure whether or not this has, in the long run, affected our gene-pool, but one shouldn't automatically assign every (and take this with a grain of salt, I don't literally mean EVERY) difference between men and women to the field of eugenics. It's more complicated than that and just brazenly ignores socio-cultural impact (mainly the environment we grow up in and the way we are raised) in the equation.

 

Some food for thought, I think.

 

I'm sure dolls signify a lot more to girls than looking 'pretty'. If you go down this route you could say boys play with action figures whose sole purpose is to look 'violent'. Also, ofcourse part it of it is as you said the environment but of it is your genes. In other words girls can be genetically programmed to play with dolls, and it mayn't just be a case of environment. I agree with you in that it comes down to a combination of genes + environment.

 

Also, can we please not use the word 'eugenics'?

 

89% of all percentages are made up on the spot.

I agree, however, that it is because of the propensity of males to become obsessive that they get into electronic music more then females. I think that electronic music is far more difficult to learn about and hear then pop music is so most women never get into it.

 

Disagree. From experience, EDM parties have about 50/50 ratios so to say women are not into EDM would be incorrect imo. Women are as much into EDM as men are. I don't think how records you own is a good metric of how much you like EDM. I'd say it's how much you participate in the scene. And then comes the question of deciding how pop is more difficult than EDM, seeing that a lot of pop is made using synthesizers now-a-days anyway. Secondly, when you say women aren't into EDM because it's difficult, that implies that women are lacking and is sexist and incorrect. Have you considered that they maybe just interested in different things and that messing around with synths and DAWs just doesn't interest them? I also think there's a counter-argument that someone could say pop is harder to make than EDM and that's why men don't get into it (you get what I mean).

[Rotwang]

Good points by karan129 IMO. It's worth bearing in mind that the men/women ratio on psynews is not really representative of the men/women ratio among psytrance fans - it almost certainly has more to do with the men/women ratio on internet forums in general.

[needle ninja]

I'm sure dolls signify a lot more to girls than looking 'pretty'. If you go down this route you could say boys play with action figures whose sole purpose is to look 'violent'. Also, ofcourse part it of it is as you said the environment but of it is your genes. In other words girls can be genetically programmed to play with dolls, and it mayn't just be a case of environment. I agree with you in that it comes down to a combination of genes + environment.

 

Also, can we please not use the word 'eugenics'?

 

 

Disagree. From experience, EDM parties have about 50/50 ratios so to say women are not into EDM would be incorrect imo. Women are as much into EDM as men are. I don't think how records you own is a good metric of how much you like EDM. I'd say it's how much you participate in the scene. And then comes the question of deciding how pop is more difficult than EDM, seeing that a lot of pop is made using synthesizers now-a-days anyway. Secondly, when you say women aren't into EDM because it's difficult, that implies that women are lacking and is sexist and incorrect. Have you considered that they maybe just interested in different things and that messing around with synths and DAWs just doesn't interest them? I also think there's a counter-argument that someone could say pop is harder to make than EDM and that's why men don't get into it (you get what I mean).

 

The ratio at parties was not what I was talking about. I was thinking about the amount of people who buy EDM albums/singles, not the casual listener.

The topic was also about psytrance, so I don't think we should lump all EDM into the debate especially since it is hard to put boundries on what exactly encapsulates EDM.

Some people believe that Lady Gaga is EDM and I have seen her put into that genre in stores! I would strongly disagree that serious collectors of electronic music are split into the ratio of 1:1 male to female.

[karan129]

The ratio at parties was not what I was talking about. I was thinking about the amount of people who buy EDM albums/singles, not the casual listener.

The topic was also about psytrance, so I don't think we should lump all EDM into the debate especially since it is hard to put boundries on what exactly encapsulates EDM.

Some people believe that Lady Gaga is EDM and I have seen her put into that genre in stores! I would strongly disagree that serious collectors of electronic music are split into the ratio of 1:1 male to female.

 

Yeah I should've said psy. That's what I meant to say. I'm not doubting that "serious collectors of electronic music are split into the ratio of 1:1 male to female." but I thought you were using that to say women aren't into psy, and I don't agree with that part of it.

[draeke]

Let's speak of PsyNina

[Skilgannon]

WHY SO FEW FEMALE PSYNEWS FORUM USERS?

 

Dude, when there are very less female Psy-artists, how do you expect more female psynews forum users?

[DjProtaCay]

I am on the same mission as you... I my self am a female psy DJ!!! I never really thought about it to much untill just the other weekend when I was asked "Could you name any other psy dj's?" so far I have found only one and would wish to find more!!!

[Rotwang]

There was one who used to play regularly at the psytrance nights in Swansea back when I lived there. Can't remember her name for sure, may have been DJ Claire or something.

 

e: Nope, it was Clare.

[DjProtaCay]

Hmm. Does darkpsy have the highest concentration of women of any psytrance subgenre? That would contradict your earlier theory if so, since it's probably the most "extreme" form of psytrance, in the sense of having the least in common with conventional house music variants.

 

Personally I have more fun and it's easier with dark psy buuttt i have been having a blast lately with Full-on psy as well as forest too!

[Infra]

There is Dali from Israel, not that i´m a fan of her work but still...

 

http://www.discogs.com/artist/Dali+%282%29

[Imba]

She is more male imo

[Imba]

Btw i would like to add Nasti Moto:

http://www.nastimoto.com

[Tatsu]

In Switzerland I tend to see more and more femaile DJs. Not only psy but also in other electronical styles. Sure there are some who are there more for the looks (I'm talking more about house, don't know any Swiss psy djane who goes into that category) but there are some I really adore (because of their music but the few I know personaly also because they are just damn nice):

 

Xylophee (no soundcloud), Miss Ding (no Soundcloud); Auf Dauerwelle http://soundcloud.com/auf-d, Playlove http://soundcloud.com/playlove, Beryll Ryder (liveact) http://soundcloud.com/beryllryder, Jacqui http://soundcloud.com/jacqui, Cämix http://soundcloud.com/caemix, Jasmin conte http://soundcloud.com/jasmin-2

 

There are more that I have just seen on flyers (I don't go to psy parties that often anymore) or who are djing but are not that known. Sure, there are still way more guys doing the dj thing but compared to maybe 5 years ago I notice more and more djanes.