First, I want to clarify that most sexism these days is mostly NOT conscious or intentional. Sexism exists as a structure within society. History put women in a position of inferiority, and those structures have not been dismantled. If you’re not sure what this means how how it is manifest, I recommend:

So, I’m not “claiming sexism is rampant.” I’m demonstrating that the program of the conference meets the definition of sexism. This has nothing to do with my personal opinion or my perspective. It’s math. And what words mean.

I also recommend you look into Implicit Associations, and the way unconscious bias influences, for example, hiring decisions.

Second, I know that the imbalance of men and women in high-level conducting positions is not the choice of women because of all the many, many, many women I know who would like access to those kinds of positions. You can read the representative responses to this post in the Women Choral Conductor’s FB group:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/53330406471/permalink/10154221670916472/

It’s not just sexism. Similar prejudices and structural impediments exist for people of color — they end up conducting the multicultural choir b/c hey, can black people conduct Bach? (Yes they can. But they don’t get to as often as white people.)

I know it’s real because I know sexism is real… If you’re asking how I know sexism is real…. I’m not sure how to answer. It’s not that sexism is only rampant in ACDA. Sexism is rampant everywhere.

Sorry about the condescending tone of this one, but it is accurate and effective:

So, yeah. Sexism is a large scale problem that results in a sexist program at ACDA conferences. But ACDA can make choices that minimize its impact. They just haven’t done it yet.