Women and Men
May. 27th, 2006 08:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vovatI'm pretty much caught up on my friends list now, so it's time for me to go back and reply to all those old comments that I saved up.
I was listening to the Magnetic Fields song "Desert Island, and my player then switched to the demo version of They Might Be Giants' "You'll Miss Me." Since I'd already heard that one today, I skipped it, and guess what came up next? XTC's "Desert Island." I found it amusing. {g} It's always kind of weird when artists I like have unrelated songs with the same titles. I understand that Frank Black's upcoming album has one called "Seven Days," which, based on the lyrics, seems to have nothing to do with either the Cracker or Fastbacks songs of the same title. Frank and Liz Phair both have cool songs called "Headache." But those are all fairly mundane titles that different artists could easily come up with individually. What's weirder is when there's a situation like Cracker and Sloan both having songs called "I Hate My Generation." I mean, that CAN'T just be a coincidence, can it?
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
revme wrote an essay on gender in pop music. I commented on it here, and brought up TMBG, who seem to have no problem singing from the point of view of murderers, stalkers, disembodied heads, and grocery bags, yet apparently draw the line at females. When they covered "Maybe I Know," they changed all the gender-specific pronouns. The thing is, I can think of several covers that someone does from the perspective of the opposite gender, but they're all women singing songs written by men. I don't think Neko Case ever changes the genders when she covers male-penned songs. Kim Deal doesn't do it on the Pixies' version of Neil Young's "I've Been Waiting For You," either. And in the liner notes for the Fastbacks' Truth, Corrosion, and Sour Bisquits, Lulu Gargiulo writes, "As always with covers, Kim and I are singing about girls. It just never seemed right to change the words." I think I would probably have to agree.
Stephin Merritt also came up in the discussion, and he seems to be someone who does more weird stuff with genders than is typical for a man. Since he's gay, it's not weird to hear him sing love songs to men. On the other hand, he'll also do things like "Papa Was A Rodeo," where the female vocalist in the last chorus is apparently singing the part of the "Mike" from the first verse. He also did a cover of the Human League's "Don't You Want Me" with Future Bible Heroes, where the male and female parts were switched. And "The Night You Can't Remember" has him singing as a straight woman who had a fling with a male army officer.
I do think the public wouldn't take too kindly to a man who tried to sing a song about a serious and/or traumatic female experience. While I'm sure it would also work the other way 'round, how many uniquely male experiences are the subject of serious songs?
Speaking of genders,travspence linked to this article, which is really pretty offensive. It always pisses me off when people see women as baby factories, and it's not at all uncommon. This is hardly the worst instance of something like that happening, but it brought the issue to my mind. Some people just can't it through their heads that: 1) not everybody wants to have kids, and 2) the idea is basically a vicious circle. Let's say a woman has daughters, so then those daughters are also treated like factories who will produce even MORE daughters. Where does it end? And it's not just women. While it's nowhere near as bad for men, there's still societal pressure on them to reproduce. I'm all for making conditions better for the future population, but dehumanizing the PRESENT population to do so just strikes me as ridiculous.
I was listening to the Magnetic Fields song "Desert Island, and my player then switched to the demo version of They Might Be Giants' "You'll Miss Me." Since I'd already heard that one today, I skipped it, and guess what came up next? XTC's "Desert Island." I found it amusing. {g} It's always kind of weird when artists I like have unrelated songs with the same titles. I understand that Frank Black's upcoming album has one called "Seven Days," which, based on the lyrics, seems to have nothing to do with either the Cracker or Fastbacks songs of the same title. Frank and Liz Phair both have cool songs called "Headache." But those are all fairly mundane titles that different artists could easily come up with individually. What's weirder is when there's a situation like Cracker and Sloan both having songs called "I Hate My Generation." I mean, that CAN'T just be a coincidence, can it?
revme wrote an essay on gender in pop music. I commented on it here, and brought up TMBG, who seem to have no problem singing from the point of view of murderers, stalkers, disembodied heads, and grocery bags, yet apparently draw the line at females. When they covered "Maybe I Know," they changed all the gender-specific pronouns. The thing is, I can think of several covers that someone does from the perspective of the opposite gender, but they're all women singing songs written by men. I don't think Neko Case ever changes the genders when she covers male-penned songs. Kim Deal doesn't do it on the Pixies' version of Neil Young's "I've Been Waiting For You," either. And in the liner notes for the Fastbacks' Truth, Corrosion, and Sour Bisquits, Lulu Gargiulo writes, "As always with covers, Kim and I are singing about girls. It just never seemed right to change the words." I think I would probably have to agree.Stephin Merritt also came up in the discussion, and he seems to be someone who does more weird stuff with genders than is typical for a man. Since he's gay, it's not weird to hear him sing love songs to men. On the other hand, he'll also do things like "Papa Was A Rodeo," where the female vocalist in the last chorus is apparently singing the part of the "Mike" from the first verse. He also did a cover of the Human League's "Don't You Want Me" with Future Bible Heroes, where the male and female parts were switched. And "The Night You Can't Remember" has him singing as a straight woman who had a fling with a male army officer.
I do think the public wouldn't take too kindly to a man who tried to sing a song about a serious and/or traumatic female experience. While I'm sure it would also work the other way 'round, how many uniquely male experiences are the subject of serious songs?
Speaking of genders,
travspence linked to this article, which is really pretty offensive. It always pisses me off when people see women as baby factories, and it's not at all uncommon. This is hardly the worst instance of something like that happening, but it brought the issue to my mind. Some people just can't it through their heads that: 1) not everybody wants to have kids, and 2) the idea is basically a vicious circle. Let's say a woman has daughters, so then those daughters are also treated like factories who will produce even MORE daughters. Where does it end? And it's not just women. While it's nowhere near as bad for men, there's still societal pressure on them to reproduce. I'm all for making conditions better for the future population, but dehumanizing the PRESENT population to do so just strikes me as ridiculous.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-05-28 02:23 am (UTC)LMAO
I love how you put that, even if it is true. Hah.
Rufus Wainwright sings "The Art teacher" from the point of view of a schoolgirl who has a crush on her Art Teacher, and then later, the woman who still says she never loved any man since. It's bittersweet. Apparently he did have a crush on his art teacher, and had him listen to the song, but the teacher didn't get it. I don't know why he chose to sing it from a female perspective, however.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-28 04:50 am (UTC)Just sayin'.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-28 02:07 pm (UTC)You make an interesting point
Date: 2006-05-29 12:14 am (UTC)I noticed the lack of female perspective and it made me snicker as well. So, yeah, the borders of your self are permeable enough and your imaginations broad enough to imagine being inanimate objects or all sorts of animals or whatever, so long at they are non-female. As if femaleness were a foreign forbidden zone that no one would dream of breaching. As if the universe were neatly divided down the middle, male on the one side, female on the other. Hee hee! As if gender weren't a spectrum.
Although ...I have to credit Mr. Flansburgh with more cross-genderal lyrics than Mr. Linnell, do you agree? F's cover of "Look What You''ve Done," could be sung by a woman, and since I was unfamiliar with the Hedvig movie, I thought he was singing a female part, and found it interesting and moving. It is very emotional, the way it was rendered, and he often sings about romance in a paranoid and agenderal way. "Narrow Your Eyes" is agenderal, for instance.
There is also a tendency to cast women in stuff Mr. F sings (in the past anyway) as large, powerful, scary objects of lust, as lovers in a "male" role, as if what the proper male role might be was something he was juggling around with. Not exactly singing as female, but there is a gender ambiguity and confusion about how power balance fits into romantic relations. Which makes sense, if I may be forgiven for playing pop psychologist here (pls forgive me, Mr. F) that if one is dynamic and dominant like John F., getting a woman able to withstand his personality and not crumple must have been a herculean task. You would have to get someone of similar dominance, energy and self-confidence, qualities that get squashed out of alot of women.
It's fascinating, and while there is lots of protestations (esp from Mr. Linnell, I notice) that "our narrators are not us!" I say, "Bull." Nothing gets into a narrator's perspective that was not first imagined by the lyricist! If female perspective is missing, that absence tells me the lyricist cannot imagine himself as female. Or, if the narrators of one writer tend to have issues with how much power the woman can have and not "be the man" they come out in the lyrics.
Re: You make an interesting point
Date: 2006-05-29 07:33 pm (UTC)I haven't really thought much about it, but maybe. I've noticed that neither of them use very many proper names, but that's a different subject entirely.
I've never seen Hedwig, but wasn't it about a transexual who'd had a botched operation? I don't what character originally sang "Look What You've Done," though.
"Narrow Your Eyes" is agenderal, for instance.
"I don't want to shake your father's hand, and walk in the sand, and ACT LIKE A MAN" (emphasis mine). Of course, if a woman were to sing that, it could lead to an interest new meaning, couldn't it?
There is also a tendency to cast women in stuff Mr. F sings (in the past anyway) as large, powerful, scary objects of lust, as lovers in a "male" role
Yeah, definitely. I can think offhand of "She's Actual Size," "Ondine," "Out Of Jail," and "Hotel Detective" (well, the video more than the song itself, for that last one). I wonder if these are the result of any particular experiences with women, or just a general fear. There once was a guy on the newsgroup who tried to interpret TMBG's entire catalog as misogynistic, but I'd say that's going too far (and really, any attempt to find a common theme in someone's entire body of work strikes me as incredibly limiting).
It's fascinating, and while there is lots of protestations (esp from Mr. Linnell, I notice) that "our narrators are not us!"
Flans has admitted that a few of his songs have really personal lyrics. I think "See The Constellation" might have been one of them. And "(Another) First Kiss" is specifically a love song to Robin. I can't recall Linnell ever saying anything comparable. I seem to recall someone saying that he used to look uncomfortable singing "I've Got A Match," but even if this is true, it doesn't necessarily mean anything. But it COULD, I suppose. I think it's likely that a lot of songs have personal aspects, because, really, how can you avoid those? But a lot of them are either really general or really surreal, making it harder to find any direct aspects of the Johns' own lives in them.
I say, "Bull." Nothing gets into a narrator's perspective that was not first imagined by the lyricist!
Well, yes, but I'm not sure that they mean there's NOTHING of themselves in their unreliable narrators. I think they've made the comparison to writing fiction. Obviously the characters in fiction aren't real people, but they might have aspects of real people. After all, we can only base what we write on our own experiences, right?
Re: You make an interesting point
Date: 2006-05-30 12:06 am (UTC)Point conceded. But it does go toward my contention that he wrote a number of songs where lurking in the background is the question, "What is my proper role as a man in modern society? Am I in charge?"
no subject
Date: 2006-05-29 07:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-30 12:03 am (UTC)Gay men are men, and usually fail in appreciating the feminine viewpoint, in my experience. In some ways, gay male culture is how culture looks when you don't have to take women's needs and thoughts into account at all. You, my friend, have to have some understanding of the feminine in order to live with a woman. Homosexual men don't. It took me a long time to figure this one out, and I was shocked by it, but it explains so much.
no subject
Date: 2006-06-01 06:11 pm (UTC)I love how you put that, even if it is true. Hah.
Ditto.
As for the baby thing, rar, I'm not even going to get into ranting about that, other than to say that the fact that half of pregnancies are unplanned blows my mind and reminds me how happy I am that I'm an officer next year for Smith's reproductive rights club.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-28 02:35 am (UTC)Anyway, I expect my gynocologist to be concerned about my reproductive health, but (in general) doctors shouldn't be putting conception above the overall health and concerns of their female patients. But, if they *are* going to treat most female patients as "pre-pregnant", then they need to treat male patients the same way. After all, a healthy man is important to conception too.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-28 03:43 am (UTC)You'd think that doctors should be more concerned with the woman's health for HERSELF (i.e., advising her not to smoke) rather than for the health of potential babies years down the line, if at all.
"Gotta keep those baby factories runnin' clean, just in case some man wants to start 'em up!"
no subject
Date: 2006-05-29 07:35 pm (UTC)It does seem like there's a double standard at work there. Have there been any occasions where men HAVE been treated that way? There's definitely societal pressure for men to have kids, just as there is for women, but it often seems like men are given a lot more choice in such matters.
valuing possible people over the real one in front of you
Date: 2006-05-30 07:37 pm (UTC)I think women ought to be able to decide if they want the medicines, and not rely on doctors to decide they are too stupid to avoid pregnancy. Because that *is* what we are talking about. I cannot tell you how furious I was to have male doctor after male doctor deny me a type of medicine I needed because I "might" get pregnant. Of all the fucking nerve. I have had sex thousands of times, and I understand that intromission causes pregnancy, and can do so even with good birth control. I have very regular periods, so I could never be more than a few weeks pregnant before I knew it.
Finally, I got a female doctor my own age who, after we discussed the realities and dangers of pregnancy, trusted me enough to give me a script.
Re: valuing possible people over the real one in front of you
Date: 2006-05-30 08:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-28 04:47 am (UTC)I'm really off topic now. hehe.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-29 07:37 pm (UTC)Yeah, definitely. I didn't necessarily object to the ideas put forth in the article, just to the basic assumption behind them. It's all too common for people to think that nothing bad can possibly happen to them. I mean, that's a large part of why people still smoke at all, regardless of whether they think they'll have kids.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-28 05:39 pm (UTC)But I'm with
Anyway, there was nothing in the article about women being baby factories, just about women's health in general, and reproductive health is important whether you want to have babies or not. It's still taking care of your body.
And babies and children are not another species-- I get the feeling a lot of people think that way sometimes. They're human beings, and someday, they will be adults: doctors, politicians, educators, people who affect the world. The fact that they're dependant upon the older human beings gives us older ones even more responsibility to doing everything we can do to make sure that they grow up right, because eventually THEY will be running the world, and if they've got serious health problems because their parents did, then it's going to be harder for them to run the world properly.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-29 07:48 pm (UTC)Personally, I'm worried about the amount of seafood I have eaten during my reproductive years so far. My mom fed us lots of seafood because seafood is good for you. But we ate the seafood that comes from a fish population with high mercury levels, and I have no idea how much mercury has been building up in my system.
Yeah, I think this might be another case where, even if the long-term effects don't amount to anything, the short-term effects of eating a lot of mercury can be bad enough. It's sort of like how I feel about environmental issues. People will say that global warming is bogus, to which my response is essentially, "So what? Pollution is still harmful regardless, isn't it?"
And babies and children are not another species-- I get the feeling a lot of people think that way sometimes. They're human beings, and someday, they will be adults: doctors, politicians, educators, people who affect the world.
It seems like the annoying pressure that society puts on people to reproduce has resulted in an equally annoying counter-movement that thinks people who have kids are worse than Hitler (who presumably didn't have children, unless the rumors of clones in South America are true {g}), and, worse yet, takes it out on the kids themselves! Sheesh, it's not a kid's fault if their parents had them for a dumb reason, is it? This is actually something else I'd been wanting to rant about, but had never found a good jumping-off point.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-29 10:15 pm (UTC)I've said that same thing. I think a lot more would happen on a lot of issues if people took stands like this. Instead people end up arguing over details like "maybe it's not global warming" or whatnot... many issues like that... instead of just DOING something.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-28 06:04 pm (UTC)I don't know what I would do if I was covering a song. It might depend on the song. If it was just a rockin' song that I was singing for fun, the gender wouldn't matter, but if I was telling a STORY with the song, trying to express feeling, I'd probably change the pronouns to match up with my own sexual preferences, to bring more personal realism to it. But when I was taking private voice lessons in high school I had this book of classical soprano pieces, and over half of them were written from a man's point of view, and I really had to question that, like, why the heck would they write all these songs specifically for a SOPRANO, the highest possible human voice range, from the point of view of someone who couldn't even sing them? Unless he was a castrato. In which case he probably would not be giving much thought to romance in the first place. I did think that was a little weird.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-28 06:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-29 07:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-01 06:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-06-01 09:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-29 07:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-30 05:07 pm (UTC)I can't tell you how many confused stares I get from people when I tell them we don't plan to have children. They tend to fall into a couple of camps:
1) "You don't have children? What's wrong?" - These are the people who assume that if you are married and don't have kids, then obviously you have a medical/health problem preventing you from doing so. Also, they feel they have the right to question you about sensitive, possible medical problems.
2) "How do you not have kids? What do you do?" - These are the ones who can't conceive (pardon the pun) of a married couple using any form of birth control.
3) "You don't have kids? But...who's going to take care of you when you're old?" - These are my favorites: people who seem to believe that the most important reason to have children is so that you have someone to guilt into paying your bills and watching over you when you start having trouble taking care of yourself.
I've become a firm believer that people are stupid.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-30 08:29 pm (UTC)#3 strikes me as particularly dumb in an age when young people are having so much trouble finding gainful employment. Granted, this might change by the time today's children grow up, but there's no guarantee. Kids might well end up being a liability, rather than an asset, in old age.
I get the impression that some people view children as kind of an eighteen-year savings bond. You put time and money in, and then after a while, you stop and they pay off. Regardless of what the courts say, I think parents really have a responsibility for their kids as long they live.
what's that smell in the kitchen? you look under the sink cause I ain't gonna
Date: 2006-05-30 08:45 pm (UTC)I disagree about responsibility for their kids for a life-time. Helping them out of a jam is one thing, but by a certain age unless they are mentally ill or disabled, they ought to be supporting themselves.
Not because it is more convenient for Mum and Dad, but because it helps make adults of them, lets them experience the wonder of the roach-filled damp low-rent apartment. It's a wonderful motivator! Holy Jesus, I have to finish school! Holy Jesus, I have to stop working at the CD store and get a better paying job! or whatever. That first rental place knocked some green offa me, lemme tell you. Man, what a dump. XD
Re: what's that smell in the kitchen? you look under the sink cause I ain't gonna
Date: 2006-05-31 04:23 pm (UTC)Well, yes and no. I DO think adults should support themselves to the best of their ability, and I'm sure a good number of them want to. It sucks to have to rely on your parents once you're grown up. That said, I don't think it's all fair to put someone in the world, support them for a little while, and then just throw them out into the big, confusing world with no direction. Not that all or even most parents necessarily do this, but it seems to be what a significant part of our society THINKS they should do. And what's a "wonderful motivator" for some is a sure ticket to a nervous breakdown for others. I think people who are able to support themselves early on in life tend not to acknowledge the role that luck plays in this, and are often prejudiced against people who don't have such luck.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-31 02:20 pm (UTC)Then, for the number 3 people, I wonder what happens when they pour all their time and energy into their children with the sole hope that their kids will take care of them when they're old...only to have their children throw them into a home and forget about them. Simply having children is no guarantee that they will lift a finger to help you in your old age.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-31 04:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-31 04:54 pm (UTC)