The Afflicting Intersections of Gender and Music Production
Divine Affliction: Perception Through A Feminine Lens Part 2
Divine Affliction: Perception Through a Feminine Lens Blog Series presents an expansive view behind the music production of album Divine Affliction. An expression of the feminine aesthetics in music. A sonic portrayal of the duality of divinity and affliction, a journey through the female experience. The album is a shorter album consisting of seven songs and would be defined as experimental electronica with raw, introspective, brooding, emotive music. This album presents an aural representation of the female processes and application to music production. The musical compositions are inspired by my own experience of the intersectionality of gender and music production along with the preliminary research uncovered in the following theoretical blogs.
Affliction: “Something that makes you suffer” (Cambridge, N.d).
Divine: “Extremely good or pleasing” (Cambridge, N.d).
These two terms, divine and affliction describe my experience with the intersectionality of gender and music production. Divine is how I feel when I’m writing music and in my creative realm. Divinity is the state of things that are believed to come from God or a creator (Wikipedia. N.d.). I attribute being a creator to being a music producer, and through creating this project I am establishing my feminine subjectivity within my creative practice, reaching my true state of divinity. French feminist author, Irigaray believes “as long as woman lacks a divine made in her image she cannot establish her subjectivity or achieve a goal of her own. She lacks an ideal that would be her goal or path in becoming” (Irigaray, 1984, p. 63). (Adams & Duncan, Ed Clark, 2003, p. 197–198). By creating my own image of the divine through the sonic notions in the music I will establish my feminine subjectivity. Producing the album Divine Affliction is my goal and ideal of becoming. Throughout this project, the term divine is attributed to the feminine aesthetics of music production. These feminine aesthetics include; feminine performativity in music production, female modalities of music production, and feminist DIY cultural production. I feel afflictions with my femininity and the masculine culture of music production. Throughout this project, the term affliction defines the representation of women in music production, and the barriers to accessing the field this produces, along with the alterity issues this brings for women.
Introduction
“Despite the Universal Declaration of Human Right’s that states ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression’, the freedom for women and sexual minorities to represent themselves through the arts as a form of cultural self-expression remains contentious” (Whitely, 2013, p. 83).
No one has an explanation of why men dominate in the music industry other than traditional gender factors; therefore, gender is an important aspect to consider in future music research, Paula Wolfe reports of recent research in Sweden (Wolfe, 2016). By critically analyzing and deconstructing; the effect of the historic barring and censoring of females from music and the lack of representations for women in the field of music production, this exploration exposes and illustrates the afflicting intersectionality of gender and music production. The lack of representation highlights; the gendered barriers of accessing music production discourse and technology, and alterity issues these bring for females. Thus providing insights into how these afflicting intersections nurture the male domination over the music industry. This study focuses on both studio/producers and artists/producers/DJs to gain perspective on current industry practice on both popular (pop) and electronic (EDM) music industries.
Representation and Access to Music Production and Technology
“Beats aren’t gendered, so why do women represent less than 5% of music producers and engineers?” (Saxelby, 2014). Women face structural limitations with respect to gaining access to the necessary technologies and discourse required to participate equally in music production, describes Stephanie Kale. Evidence of this is indicated in the greater proportion of men that produce and perform music. Kale “attributes these limitations to the persistence of gendered stereotypes that are evident in women’s historical roles in subculture, and also in women’s relationships with technology” (Kale, 2006, p. 53–4). She revealed these limitations by considering the historical male gendering of music technology, discourse, and culture along with the social stereotyping of genders (Kale, 2006, p. 53–4). Kale explains these structural limitations are due to:
“The unequal opportunities that girls experience in accessing the same technical competencies as boys, an inequality based on differing attitudes towards the sexes in the social institutions of school…as well as on the persistence of gendered stereotypes that portray women as irrational and therefore technologically incapable” (Kale, 2006, p. 53–4).
The solitary activities of learning music technology appeal more to the male gender as “through their early development, boys are more honed and encouraged in areas of technology than girls are” (Kale, 2006, p. 78). The historical weight of these idealized and demeaning concepts of gender leads to men portrayed as rational and thus more technologically inclined. This gendered representation plays an active role in encouraging a larger proportion of men than women in fields of technical knowledge and expertise (Kale, 2006, p. 53–4). Victoria Armstrong finds evidence of barriers to accessing music production discourse for females at an entry point to music production in education due to a lack of representation, which results in a lack of confidence with music technology (Armstrong, 2011, p. 48). These gender stereotypes are reinforced throughout popular culture, and those with an interest in music production are subjected to the fact that experimenting with music technology is a male domain.
The role of the music producer within the popular music industry has been recognized as a profession strongly associated with notions of power and control. Historical evidence of this is evident. In 1978 Angela McRobbie identified the music industry as being male-run, observing that popular musicians, writers, creators, technicians, engineers, and producers, are mostly men (McRobbie, 1978). Rebekah Farrugia describes that Meintjes experience of a producer was by “allowing outsiders access to this male-centred technological environment would demystify the production process” (Farrugia, 2012, p. 122–3). Farrugia comments that the intricate and nuanced ways of male-centricity music culture hosts; historical, discursive, material and social practices; that have contributed to the barriers to access music production and marginalization of women from this culture (Farrugia, 2012, p. 7). Females are notoriously expected to inhabit the environment of a performer or singer, viewed as unskilled in comparison to recording technology or music production. In contrast, music producers inhabit expert environments of songwriting, engineering, and production strongly associated with male genius (Whitely, 2000). The representation of and masculine gendering of music production discourse and associated technologies creates a barrier for females to access this culture. Vicotria Armstrong, argues men’s production of technological masculinity is having control of the technology and being the arbiter of technological knowledge, therefore having the power to decide with whom to share that knowledge (Armstrong, 2011, p. 58). Dr Fabian Cannizzo and Dr Catherine Strong have found females that do make it in the industry have to put up with discrimination. “Female screen music composers described feeling excluded because of their gender in relation to their treatment in workplaces, with concerns of self-presentation, access to professional networks and studio culture or the boys club” (Cannizzo & Strong, 2017). Sheila Whitely describes Kate Bush’s critics viewed her control of the studio as a somewhat absurd intrusion into a male domain (Whitely, 2003, p. 72).
Women suffer social implications with gender as a barrier to access their careers in music production. Natasha Patel comments, “Women’s success is hindered by broader social norms which prescribe particular gender roles and influence the kinds of opportunities afforded to men and women at each stage of their musical and career development” (Patel, 2016). For female producers, these circumstances include; lengthy time to establish a career, find it harder to gain positions, treated differently because of their gender, and believed they had to gain more qualifications than men to be hired for the same jobs, distinguished Cannizzo and Strong (Strong & Cannizzo, 2017). Keith Negus contends the skill and knowledge of music production and associated technology have been developed and accessed in the professional recording studio, an environment historically gendered as a male space, resulting in the gendering of music production discourse (Negus, 1992), and a barrier of access to this discourse for females’. As evidence to the male gendering of discourse, Victoria Armstrong quotes Cooper with the comment “some technology discourse is written in a way that assumes a particular (male) audience” (Armstrong, 2011, p. 73), showing discourse is written for men by men. With the idea that technology and masculinity go together, the gendering of music technology remains pernicious (Armstrong, 2011, p. 103).
Rebekah Farrugia and Magdalena Olszanowski interrogate the misogyny in electronic dance music culture that shows no signs of slowing down, stating that the access to discourse “is tied together with its insistence of a lack of women involved” (Farrugia, & Olszanowski, 2017, p. 1). They comment that there are more women than people expect using electronic music technologies but they’re left out of the historical discourse, with a male washing of women from electronic music production discourse, in reference to Tara Rodgers. Also commenting that Rodgers notes the whitewashing of electronic music cultures, both due to the majority of music critics and musicologists being white men (Farrugia, & Olszanowski, 2017, p. 2). There are many references to the DJ as he, this works discursively to maintain maleness as essential to pursuing DJing and in turn precludes the idea that women can’t be DJs (Farrugia, 2012, p. 28). Production and music magazines are featured in the men’s interest section at bookstores and news agencies, along with advertisements in music and electronic music magazines regularly feature representations of men in ads for drum machines and music production software. The perpetuation of discourses and practices that situate women on the margins of technology produces a culture in which they have limited exposure and opportunities to contribute to the technology-centred element of music (Farrugia, 2012, p. 129), namely music production. Abbey Phillips explains even as musicians’ women have been denied access to discourse. “Rock is a potent means of expressing the active emotions–anger, aggression, lust, the joy of physical exertion–that feed all freedom movements, and it is no accident that women musicians have been denied access to this powerful musical language” (Phillips, 2011).
In the electronic music sector, the barriers begin at the first access point of DJing and production, with the gendering of record collecting discourse. This presents material barriers to accessing music production discourse for females’ explains Tami Gadir (Gadir, 2017). The history of women’s lack of obsession in the pursuit of recorded music is noted across all genres, with record collecting a marker of masculinity as a male pastime and mode of expertise. Men invest a greater amount of economic and social capital on record purchases and at clubs networking with music producers and DJs. “As such, a more refined and personal understanding of music…is considered the interest of men” (Farrugia, 2004, p. 239). Record collectors are the carriers of the information whose arrangement and interpretation are part of the broader discourse on popular music (Farrugia, 2004, p. 239). Farrugia comments to be successful, DJ’s need the access to discourse and access to the material, “DJs must have access to not only the technical and musical knowledge central to DJ and electronic dance music culture but also to the key players in these scenes such as promoters, club management, and other DJs” (Farrugia, 2012, p. 69). Farrugia states that occupying such a secondary position can be detrimental to female DJs, as interactions with collectors and record store clerks are of prime importance and a gatekeeping role, confirming the social barrier to access for females. “The record store and discourse around collecting function as the hub of the shared knowledge and social networks that develop between producers and DJs” (Farrugia, 2004, p. 239), creating a “sense of camaraderie and homosociality among record collectors is maintained in the interest of both male DJs and record shops. Confirming the distinct masculinity of DJ culture” (Farrugia, 2004, p. 239). Gadir also identifies social barriers to access music production due to sub-cultural capital, that is the rules that govern a particular subculture and describe the processes by which it is objectiated and embodied (Farrugia, 2012, p. 28). The masculine bias of subcultural capital excludes women due to a process of male homosociality, “realms of socialisation where men are the sole bearers and sharers of their nerdish obsessions” (Gadir, 2017, p. 59). With rare records and niche genre-focused communities, the barriers are intensified, “women are denied access” (Gadir, 2017, p. 59), due to their lack of representation in this space.
For some producers, DJing is a stage to communicate your music to an audience, for others they start as a DJ, which leads to music production. Farrugia explains there is a reciprocally between DJing and producing as DJing contains the same processes as production, “combining what seems at times complementary and at times disparate tracks to create a seamless mix in which tracks are sped up, slowed down, subjected to equalizing effects and otherwise altered” (Farrugia, 2012, p. 119). Most male DJs believe that the progression from playing records to producing them is a small one; they see the move from DJ booth to the recording studio as a natural progression, though others see the leap from DJ to producer as quite challenging, especially women (Farrugia, 2012, p. 119). Compared to DJing, production is a “much less intuitive process; analog music production gear and high-end digital software offer few immediate cues as to how they work” (Farrugia, 2012, p. 130). Learning to produce involves acquiring the vernacular and jargon of the industry along with the technology, and many women perceive the learning curve of the language and gear very steep (Farrugia, 2012, p. 130). Farrugia explains that “many men are unwilling to share the powerful role of controlling sound, limiting opportunities for women to receive hands-on training” (Farrugia, 2012, p. 131). For some women, the change from the social nature of DJing to the solitary practice of producing is reason enough to resist the progression to production, despite understandings of its potential career benefits. Others resist due to the element of self-promotion in music production, or with the marginalization of women from the politicized spaces of the record industry and recording studios (Farrugia, 2012, p. 120). Historical evidence illustrates the studio environment has been constructed as a male space, known as a boys club, with this camaraderie generally not available to or totally exudes women. Farrugia found the census of recent research in the United Kingdom concluded that 5–15% of working DJs are women, while female sound engineers and producers only comprise 2–5% of this profession, mostly concentrated in live sound engineering (Farrugia, 2012, p. 122). Thus highlighting the masculine representation and stronghold over music production, which creates the social, discursive, historical and material barriers to access music production for females.
Ange McCormack from Triple J’s Hack, reports on the material barriers to access music production for females resides with the male dominion over the gatekeeping roles at the entry point to the industry, including; artist managers’, promoters, festival directors, label owners, A&R representatives, and board members of peak music organizations (McCormack, 2017). These industry-specific components with their deeply ingrained set of customs and habits have forged circumstances for the gender inequalities for females in music production and nurtured the barriers to access music production discourse for females. A prime example of the male dominion over the gate-keeping roles is found with Bluesfest, a popular music festival held in Byron Bay Australia. In 2018 Bluesfest was critiqued via social media for the lack of gender diversity, along with whitewashing on their festival line-up, considering the genre of Blues was formed due to the Trans-Atlantic slave trade of African American migration to America. The criticism by Listen representative also provided a Bluesfest slogan promoting their diversity. An example of this social media post is figure 2 below.
Peter Noble, Bluesfest director responded at the Listen group with accusations of a “poorly researched attack” reported by Tom Cliff (Cliff, 2018). Another woman commented on “Bluesfest being a sausage fest” (Cliff, 2018). Noble responded in a vicious tirade of abuse on Facebook in the comments section of the post, reported by Cliff as following:
“Attacking events without doing any research on them and starting a media campaign based on your own isms and schisms is the sort of thing that worked well in Nazi Germany. Find someone to attack because you have a screw loose. Bet you are an under or underemployed white privileged nobody with too much time on your hands. Going nowhere fast into a life of depression and loneliness due to you having nothing meaningful to justify why you continue to breathe” (Cliff, 2018).
Dance music cultures are following the framework set out by male-dominated popular music industry gatekeepers, with their perpetuation of male-dominated festival line-ups. In 2016 at Musikkfest in Norway, there were forty-seven DJs on the line up with only four females. A local DJ published an objection to this imbalance, with her editorial provoking booking agents to defend their position on the grounds that they prioritize skill and talent when booking DJs, and by implication, that they do not prioritize equality. The booking agents’ responses highlight the gatekeeper’s male-domination with the perpetuation of a status quo in dance music cultures, where men disproportionately dominate the role of DJing. Gadir comments “The Musikkfest case ultimately shows that gender politics in dance music cultures do not necessarily correspond to dance music’s historical associations with egalitarianism” (Gadir, 2017, p. 50).
The ideologies of the patriarchal archetypes residing in these gatekeeping positions provide a material barrier for females to access audiences and economic capital earned through performing, showing political implications to this male domination over music production and further afflictions for females. The music industry is big business, in Australia alone, Music Australia’s reports show; “Music Australia estimates music contributes $4 to $6 billion to the Australian economy” (Music Australia, 2017). Andrew Taylor in the Sydney Morning Heralds reports, “We are the sixth-largest music market in the world in revenue terms ahead of much more populous nations like Canada, South Korea, and Brazil, according to the Australian Independent Music Market Report” (Taylor, 2017). Poppy Reid’s research has found the Australian music industry is a major contributor to the Australian economy. “Australia’s copyright industries generate more value to the Australian economy than manufacturing and health care, recorded music is one of the biggest contributors” (Reid, 2016). The Music reported that ARIA publicised a 5.5% growth in the Australian Music Industry revenue from 2015 to 2016, generating $352.2 million (The Music, 2016). These barriers also marginalizes over half of the population, showing a massive under-representation of females producing and creating media and artifacts, let alone indigenous and other minorities, paints the culture as predominantly white and male. With the gatekeeping roles being a prominent male dominion, deciding who gets the job, who gets the award and who makes the money (McCormack, 2016). Farrugia and Olszanowski provide an example of this political impact represented in the electronic dance music industry. In 2016, the International Music Summit reported that electronic dance music was the largest growing music genre, with the global industry worth $7.1 billion. Though only 3.2% to 28.9% of the artists on festival line-ups are women. Reflecting on the gender imbalances effect on economic capital of this growing scene is filling men’s pockets, evident with Forbes top 12 highest paid EDM artist list from 2016 or prior containing total male domination (Farrugia, & Olszanowski, 2017, p. 1).
Farrugia states, the intricacies of women’s positionality within EDM culture is based on the increasing fragmentation of the music into sub-genres, which creates the need for increased protection over territory and music by this partitioning (Farrugia, 2004, p. 245). “As such, there are a limited number of gates through which one can enter and be an accepted member of the scene” (Farrugia, 2004, p. 245). The female producers interviewed by Farrugia recognize the inequalities in this culture with comments of an all-boys club (Farrugia, 2004, p. 244). Containing them to the dance floor or to non-music related service work such as bartending, and public relations or promotion, relating to afflictions with alienation for female producers in the field. Record labels honour the traditional, socially constructed gender roles in music, with most label managers, owners, executives, and artists and repertoire representatives being men, “while women continue to be ghettoised as PR personnel” (Farrugia, 2012, p. 123). Women who deviate from the expected feminised roles of dancers in clubs, taking up the more active and conventionally masculine role of DJ or producer are often excluded from valuable social networks. Farrugia states, that this lack of access and alienation, acts as punishment for these women by making their pursuits generally more difficult than the male gender (Farrugia, 2004, p. 241). Showing further social barriers to access music production for females. Another of Farrugia interviews finds female producers feel that certain geographical locations and formal education in music production can provide a source of access for females. Though this does not help in their acceptance into sub-genre communities as “the lack of a penis, by which maleness and hence acceptance is defined” (Farrugia, 2004, p. 247).
Herstory of Women Barred and Censored from Music
Through the ages, musical creativity has been historically associated with masculinity. Women were regarded as incapable of creating their own musical works as composers or interpreting musical pieces of famous composers. Psychological causes and social or domestic consequences were scrutinized. Eva Fenn explains, in comparison male music always claimed the idea of autonomous music, unbound to these external psychological, social, and domestic factors unrelated to music. Women were excluded from musical educational institutions for a long time preventing women from a professional carrier in music. Women were censored from music conservatories until the end of the nineteenth century, then accepted in performance classes although still not permitted in theory and composition classes. Fenn describes Helen Clark’s remarks of German Teachers’ refusal to teach women the science of harmony because they believed no woman could understand it. ‘Mulier in ecclesia taceat’ translates to ‘Let women keep silence in church’. Which was the earliest official censorship silencing women, as part of general measures to organize and standardize musical practices in church during the fourth century, with all musical sections of church services entrusted to choirs of men and boys. During the middle ages, the only female compositions that have survived history are the sacred music of Hildegard of Bingen, 1098–1179. In the twelfth and early thirteenth century, surprisingly women became musically active as troubaritz, as males were absent due to the crusades leaving women to govern their husbands’ land. However, in Catholic and some Anglican churches, the censorship of women singing remained until the nineteenth century. In sixteenth-century Italy, women established themselves as professional mainstream singers, though the Catholic Church still preferred castrati. In 1686 the Papal States banned women from appearing on stage, with the women’s parts of opera sang by castrati. At the beginning of the eighteenth century, this ban was on the grounds that it was impossible for women performing on stage to keep their chastity. Female singers were confronted with their public appearance on stage depicted as a public flaunting of their body and marketing themselves as prostitutes. With the decline of castrati at the end of the eighteenth-century women finally regained their positions in the opera (Fenn, N.d, p. 4–5).
During the Renaissance period, this censorship on women had lifted slightly, with women barred from playing certain instruments. Percussion, wind and string instruments could only be played by the male sex, as the female sex was physically too weak to play these instruments. Plucking and keyboard instruments could be played by women, though with exceptions. These exceptions were; women could not play strong or loud tones as these are not suited for the fairer sex; kettledrums, trumpets, and horns likewise were male instruments associated with the military and hunting; and certain physical demeanours deemed indecorous for women, provoking obscene sexual fantasies within the male audience, with the cello as the worst example. It requires a straddled posture of legs, impossible for women due to their legs having to be covered to the ankle and kept closed. According to this theoretical basis, Fenn explains the harpsichord and the piano were seen as appropriate for women (Fenn, N.d, p. 6- 7). Phillips’s found in the eighteenth century, female keyboard players and violinists gained recognition as concert artists, but orchestras remained all-male affairs. Phillips comments on female composer Fanny Hensel Mendelssohn, who primarily published her music under her brother’s title, Felix Mendelssohn due to the gender inequalities and devaluation of female compositions (Phillips, 2011). Strong states women were considered incapable of producing serious music, due to the assumptions surrounding what comprises serious music and credibility. As these are constructed by a patriarchal music press, that systematically excludes women (Strong, 2011, p. 402). It was not until the second half of the nineteenth century that women could widen their choice of instrument significantly. Currently, women in professional orchestras are still under-represented and find fewer acceptances among their male colleagues. During a press conference in Peking in 1979, the chief conductor of the Berlin Philharmonic Orchestra’s answer to the question to why there were no women in his orchestra, was that women “belong in the kitchen and not in the orchestra” (Fenn, N.d, p. 8). This remark gives a brutal yet real perspective of male dominance and representation in music, and the barring of women from music practice.
Until the nineteenth century, the role of composer and performer were intertwined. Women’s works were unable to reach the same validation as the works of men, due to women’s’ restriction to professional opportunities. For example, the prestigious positions like maestri di Capella at courts and churches, or the heads of opera companies and orchestras. Even twentieth-century women are often dismissed at musical training posts, with hopes of becoming professional instrumentalists (Fenn, N.d, p. 9). It is also difficult for female musicians to get gigs compared to their male colleagues. Fenn discusses percussionist Paula Hampton accounts that; “the union out there is run by men, so naturally, when gigs came up, men got the gigs” (Fenn, N.d, p. 10). This is another example of male dominion over the gatekeeping roles in the industry. Until recently, female jazz musicians got paid less than their male counterparts, and female rock musicians often complain about being perceived only as sex objects, with their musical talents taking a back seat (Fenn, N.d, p. 10). The stereotype of Rock’s masculinity, as Norma Coates states, is still very much at play discursively and psychically, in which any trace of the feminine is expunged, incorporated or appropriated. This is noted with the discursive and stylistic segregation of rock and pop. Rock is branded authentic while pop branded as artifice, authentic becomes masculine while artificial becomes feminine. Rock, therefore is discursively masculine and pop is feminine, set in a binary relation to each other with the masculine, of course on top (Whitely. Ed. Coates, 1997, p. 52). Stylistically Pop music is allegedly prefabricated, used for dancing or mooning over teen idols, and other feminine recreations (Whitely. Ed. Coates, 1997, p. 53). Catherine Strong’s observes that women involved in punk and grunge have already been for the most part omitted from the history, due to the overall position women hold in popular music (Strong, 2011, p. 401). These examples illustrate women’s barring and censoring from Rock music.
Susan McLary compares music to literature, with the second narrative either a female character or understood on a fundamental cultural level as a feminine character, as similar to chromaticism, which enriches tonal music, taking on the cultural cast of the feminine, but must finally be resolved to the triad (male) for the sake of closure. “The feminine never gets the last word within this context, in the world of traditional narrative, there are no feminine endings” (McLary, 2002, p. 16–17). Philip Stoltzfus explains that “musical expression can provide orientation for the entirety of the inner life”, including the characteristics of gender, heard in the metaphors of the masculine and feminine in the major and minor keys (Stoltzfus, 2006, p. 81). These metaphors come from different theories on sonata form, with the first theme denoting the masculine, written in a major key. The second theme portraying a feminine character is written in a minor key. Sally Macarthur describes Karl Marx’s concept on sonatas as one that depicts the first theme as masculine, “constructed decisively and completely with energy and vigor” in contrast to the second theme: “tender feminine themes, dependent and determined by the preceding masculine theme” (Macarthur, 2002, p. 90). These codes marking gender difference in music are informed by the prevalent attitudes of the time and participate in the social formation, as individuals, we learn how to be gendered beings through our interactions with cultural discourses such as music. Moreover, music serves as a public forum within which various models of gender organization, along with many other aspects of social life are; asserted, adopted, contested, and negotiated (Macarthur, quotes McLary, 2002, p. 11 ). Most take for granted these aspects of musical practice as simple elements that structure his or her musical and social world, though McLary states:
“They are perhaps the most powerful aspects of musical discourses, for they operate below the level of deliberate signification and are thus usually reproduced and transmitted without conscious intervention, for it is through these deeply engrained habits that gender and sexuality are most effectively and most problematically organised in music” (McLary, 2002, p. 16–17).
What are the reasons for the male censorship and barring of women in music? McLary explains music’s subjectivity and association with the body in dance has led to its being relegated in many historical periods to be understood as a feminine realm. Male musicians have retaliated in a number of ways; by defining music as the most ideal and least physical of the arts; insisting emphatically on its rational dimension, representing masculine virtues of objectivity, universality, and transcendence; and by prohibiting actual female participation altogether (McLary, 2002, p. 17). Strong comments “Women are generally written out of historical accounts of music in order to reinscribe the creative dominance of men in this field” (Strong, 2011, p. 398). There have been many obstacles in musical production preventing women from participating throughout history. McLary describes most of these have been institutional with women denied the necessary training and professional connections, assumed to be incapable of sustained creative activity. The music that has been composed by women has often been received in terms of the essentialist stereotypes ascribed to women by masculine culture, undervalued and explained as pretty yet trivial or aggressive and unbefitting a woman (McLary, 2002, p. 18–19). Since gender and music studies recently became of interest, the history of women composers and musicians is being excavated. The long-forgotten music of extraordinary figures such as Hildegard von Bingen, Barbara Strozzi, Clara Schumann, Ethel Smyth, Ruth Crawford Seeger, and others is being made widely available for the first time, as well as the history of the conditions that consistently have served to exclude or marginalize female participation in music production. “As a result of this research, our understanding of music institutions and of specific people engaged in musical activities have been substantially altered” (McLary, 2002, p. 5).
Lack of Female Representation
The gendering of music technology along with the notions of power and control nurturing such gendering have resulted in patriarchal assumptions through the representation that only males practice music. Mavis Bayton explains “The problem is partly one of a lack of female role models” (Whitely. Ed. Bayton, 1997, p. 45). Niall Richardson analyses Stuart Hall’s Philosophy on representational theories and explains that he believed there are two important agendas in the study of representation in popular culture, representation is always re-presentation no matter how realistic it is not a true reflection of something, representations are not innocent. They are constructed in accordance with a specific set of politics and ideas. In debating the politics of representation we can attempt to blame; the producer of the image/media text, the influence of the genre, or we can consider the socio-cultural dynamics at play in shaping the imagery. The second agenda of representation studies is as a representative of something. This is the idea of an image being representative of a specific group or set of ideas/politics (Richardson, 2010, p. 3). Media representations are how we represent and interpret the world around us through culture or media artifacts. Kirstin Lieb defines Butler’s argument that these representations are also the schema of how all gender is socially constructed, by and through the impressions of femininity and masculinity in our everyday lives. Those with the power of shaping our views on gender are the creators of media texts distributed for public consumption, or popular culture (Lieb, 2013, p. 141).
In the music industry, as previously discussed, males hold dominion over access to the production of cultural artifacts, therefore they are the producers of the media texts. They are also the representatives of this industry constructing the politics and ideas that lock in place the types of careers possible for female producers and artists (Lieb, 2013, p. 162). Hegemonic gender formations or the cultural and political implications that lie behind popular music and gender not only represent to us how things are but also help to constructs the very categories of identity through which we experience them (Whitely, 2013, p. 81). It is understood that the systems of capitalism and patriarchy have a complex relationship that constructs the spaces for women’s participation and representation as musical artists and producers, explains Emma Mayhew (Mayhew, 1999, p. 64). Evidence of this is noted with British Q magazine’s headline suggesting that women need men to produce their songs, ‘Behind Every Great Woman, There’s a Male Co-songwriter: Horny-handed, Platonic Tunesman Wearing at Least One Leg of the Musical Trousers’. “What is missing from this representation is the acknowledgment that many male performers rely equally on musicians, songwriters, producers, and publicists to create their sound and image,” states Mayhew (Mayhew, 1999, p. 70). The record producer signals power and control over the end musical product, traits traditionally associated with masculinity. Mayhew shows an example of this in the following two reviews of Bjork’s album:
“Bjork has an intriguing and wild vocal style and Iceland has a certain otherworldly charm that renders its few international exports exotic, but how much of Debut’s impact was down to the magic fingers of her producer and co-writer Nellee Hooper” (Mayhew, 1999, p. 70–71).
“There’s no mistaking Bjork’s voice, but the dynamics and atmosphere of Bjork records don’t appear to owe much else to Bjork at all. Nellee Hooper, Tricky, Howie B, 808 State’s Graham Massey and Mark Bell: surely a Bjork record is only as good as its producers” (Mayhew, 1999, p. 70–71).
Even when women are represented as genius musical voices, this can be devalued when their talent is positioned below roles such as composer or producer. Thus the marginalization of women in these media representations has had its consequences (Mayhew, 1999, p. 72), giving little recognition to the female singer as having any creative input into the musical text on any sophisticated level, which put the composer and producer into the prime creative roles (Mayhew, 1999, p. 77). Mary Celeste Kearney agrees, “We can witness such attempts at containment in the mainstream media’s representation of women (and girls) entering traditionally male-dominated practices” (Whitely. Ed. Kearney, 1997, p. 211). Mark Savage reports, “Performing Arts say only 6% of the students enrolled in its sound technology course are female. That figure hasn’t changed for three years” (Savage, 2012). A representative of Women in Sound Women on Sound noted by Linda O Keeffe found that the gender imbalance is caused by the lack of female representations in key music industry roles:
“Girls move away from technology in high school. The outcome is, the creative field becomes dominated by male practitioners, male lecturers, and male authors, meaning girls don’t have role models or people they see representing them. Seeing women teaching you about any area of technology won’t be a rare event, it might even become part of the norm in education” (O Keeffe, 2017).
These perceptions and perspectives are imprinted as a reality in education and as audiences. Richardson explains with popular cultural representation and our postmodernist era, a representation may very well be the dominant reality, and media images are often more real for the spectator than tangible objects (Richardson, 2010, p. 206). Richardson believes when something becomes hegemonic or dominant in media representations the spectator or audience is left with two major options: to accept and conform to the hegemonic ideology expelled, or resist the dominant ideology denoted by the media representation (Richardson, 2010, p. 40). Coates agrees, she proclaims that the construction of gender is also affected by its deconstruction (Whitely. Ed. Coates, 1997, p. 53). Lieb comments on how important media representations of ‘female’ are to be interpreted as a reality for the audience.
“Historically, women have been underrepresented in the music industry and in society (e.g., women only got the right to vote in 1920 — less than 100 years ago). This makes the few representations of women that we see all the more important from a social influence standpoint” (Lieb. 2013, p 163).
Media representations have been the structure of power and control in the culture industry, representing reality bound by generalization, stereotyping and augmentation, aiding in dominant discourses distribution of essentialism and ethnocentric perspectives of the male-dominated position as a producer. Providing the dominant ideology and identity of a music producer as a male leads to issues in regards to identity for female producers in the industry, who are the alter gender in this space and creates barriers for those wanting to access the industry.
“You can’t be what you can’t see” (Mariane Wright Edelman, Spellman College, 1959).
Alter Gender in Music
Females are always identified in music in association with their gender, signalled out as the alter-gender to the norm and made aware of their otherness. This identification echo’s in mainstream press reports on female’s attempts to get a break into the music industry. By reducing the woman in question to her gender either through concentrating on her physical attributes or through comparisons with other female artists, as though sharing the same gender is enough to make all female artists the same in a way that male artists are not (Strong, 2011, p. 402). Paula Hearsum states “female musicians are perceived and discursively placed within the framework of their gender and in relation to men who are set as the norm” (Jennings, & Gardner. Ed. Hearsum, 2012, p. 110). Armstrong explains that masculinity is characterized by a confident rational approach to composition while femininity is characterized by a lack of confidence and an emotive approach based on self- expression (Armstrong, 2011, p. 91). This lack of confidence is not an innate aspect of feminine identity but becomes part of a musical feminine identity, constructed by teachers’ gendered discourses of what constitutes a gifted composer, who is invariably male, and which then reflects back negatively onto young female composers (Armstrong, 2011, p. 102).
Women’s’ otherness in rock is indicated with being regarded as either a sex object or a tomboy. Norma Coates defines rock critic Lucy O’Brian’s take on this: a masculinist discursive tendency of rock criticism is to erase women as anything other than sex objects or as tomboys. Women’s’ space in rock is secondary and passive; in the bedroom as groupies swooning over rock gods, or as teenyboppers swooning over pin-ups, and on the dance floor, with both these spaces coded as feminine (Whitely. Ed. Coates, 1997, p. 51). Though women have aided the success of some male musicians with their swooning as Mavis Bayton explains, “Male guitarists typically have their career serviced by the hidden labor of girlfriends and wives” (Whitely. Ed. Bayton, 2011, p. 48). Charlotte Greig explains women who sing about love are explained as feeble-minded, though when the Beatles or the Stones cover these same songs it’s totally fine (Whitely. Ed. Grieg, 1997, p. 168). The female categorization of the other is an omnipresent feature in rock, identified as ‘women in rock’. Coates deconstructs the grammar of this description as the designator itself delineates hegemonic space. “Rock is separate from women. Women are only related to rock by being allowed ‘in’. The ‘in’ of ‘women in rock’ has a contingent feel about it that will never be complete or fully integrated with the whole” (Whitely. Ed. Coates, 1997, p. 61). Coates shows evidence of this deconstruction of grammar with a male reporter's question, ‘Are women still excluded from rock?’ Noting that he ultimately falls back upon discursive techniques that succeed in positioning women as other to the rock formation (Whitely. Ed. Coates, 1997, p. 55). Strong’s analyses on grunge music genre and the label of Riot Grrrl, which has increasingly been applied to any female performer, again serving to reduce women to their gender regardless of the differences between their performances, separating the women musicians from the men, leaving the label grunge to describe the latter (Strong, 2011, p. 408). There is music, the normal form, and there is women’s music, the altered form.
Motherhood has led to many afflictions for female musicians including sexism, made aware of their otherness in the industry. Janis Martin’s initial success as the female Elvis ended abruptly when she entered the role of motherhood and marriage to her first husband. These socio/domestic practices were considered incompatible to her music environment of studio’s and gigs describe David Sanjek. Her second husband also had this perspective with demands that she choose music or domesticity. Janis Martin chose her husband and motherhood and unfortunately has not recorded since (Whitely. Ed. Sanjek, 2011, p. 154). Bayton comments that musicians schedule their lives around music and mothers schedule their lives around children. Only highly successful female musicians able to resolve this contradiction, most have to choose either a music career or motherhood (Whitely. Ed. Bayton, 2011, p. 48). Greig states that motherhood is the one area that is specific to us as women, though this subject is absent from popular music narratives. “Even as I write those words like childbirth and so on I feel that somehow, they sound crass and out of context as regards popular music. Yet why should they?” (Whitely. Ed. Grieg, 2011, p. 169). Grieg traces a submerged tradition of female singer/songwriters in the 1970s who brought their experience or attitudes of childbearing and motherhood into their lyrical prose, with songs by artists; Joni Mitchell, Bonnie Raitt, and Mary Chapin Carpenter. During the 1980s and 90’s this trend has been noticed in mainstream pop with songs by artists; Madonna, Sinead O’Connor and Neneh Cherry (Whitely. Ed. Grieg, 2011, p. 169). Madonna broached the subject in the pop hit ‘Papa Don’t Preach’; Neneh Cherry also brought the issue to the fore with flaunting her pregnant belly on Top of the Pops and songs like ‘Inner-City Mama’ (Whitely. Ed. Grieg, 2011, p. 176). Sinead O’Connor’s motherhood as a musician is a prime example of the realities of sexism within the music industry for females, prevalent in the treatment and presentation of female artists. O’Connor became pregnant during the recording of her first album, with both her record label at the time and the labels doctor attempting to regulate her musical career and personal life, with persuasions to have her pregnancy terminated due to the record companies £120,000 investment on the album. O’Connor reports on American television that at the same time a male artist on the same label and his girlfriend were having a baby, nobody said to him that ‘he can’t have the baby as we’ve spent £120,000 on your album’ (Whitely. Ed. Negus, 2011, p. 182). The sexism, social constructs, motherhood, categorizing of work by gender, and devaluing of artistic work provide evidence of female’s alter otherness in music, forging the alter gender for females in music production.
Farrugia notes that many females feel they are the alter gender in electronic music production, “confronted with questions related to identity and representation, many of which are unique to their sex and gender and are therefore political in nature” (Farrugia, 2012, p. 37), with music critics commenting on female artists physical appearance as frequently as their music. Olszanowski interviewed female producers and notes it is common practice for women to send their demos to artist labels under names that would not reveal their gender. She comments this is a double-edged sword because, it supports the idea that fewer women are attempting electronic music production, reinforcing the milieu as male-dominated, while it assumes being male is the most effective way to get your music noticed (Olszanowski, 2011, p. 9). Gadir notes of females alter gender in electronic music production with female artists' physical appearance and ageism of the expiry date built into gender disciplining. Male high profile DJs, producers, and promoters are perceived as a glorified pioneer with age, “yet despite the presence of high- profile women in dance music in their forties and beyond making inroads in the industry, older women who DJ are still not the idealized norm” (Gadir, 2017, p. 59). Women are underrepresented in this culture and not afforded the same opportunities as men (Farrugia & Olszanowski, 2017, p. 1). They are perceived by others as embodying deviance, due to their interest in male-dominated spheres of technology, music, and the art of DJing (Farrugia, 2012, p. 62). Farrugia states, “the range of DJ identities available to women remains limited, shaped by external forces both within and beyond EDM culture” (Farrugia, 2012, p. 62). Such as popular music where women also suffer identity issues with representations of token identities; a diva, a dancer, a girl next door, a dainty songstress; all younger updates on previous models, with no room for new archetypes, such as women producers, as history tells us killer producers are men, explains Ruth Saxelby (Saxelby, 2014).
The structural limitations of the gendering of music production technology within the electronic music scene are conflicting as this culture proclaims itself to be democratically accessible. Though the vast majority of such music is produced and performed by men. Kale compares these stereotypes that emerge and take effect in cultures of technology such as rave and dance music cultures in contradiction to “existing discourses of post-identity in electronic dance music culture and Do-It-Yourself (DIY) ethics of production, where traditional identity demarcations do not limit an individual’s capacity for participation” (Kale, 2006, p. 78). The early days of electronic dance music were dominated by the queer communities to provide safe spaces to party, along with African American and Latino men, compared to the increased homogenization of today’s electronic scenes. “As its popularity grew it became more conservative, with white, heterosexual men becoming its key players. As the cultural environment changed, the scene’s structure came to more closely resemble that of the mainstream popular music industry” (Kale, 2006, p. 78). The music industry and recording studio politics continue to reproduce gendered power relations that marginalize women, limiting their ability to produce music (Kale, 2006, p. 78). “DJing or producing was an arduous process for women because they were equated with sexuality, the body, emotion, and nature in dance music, while men have been assigned to the realm of culture, technology, language” states Farrugia (Farrugia, 2012, p. 28). Music production discourse and technologies have been gendered as male throughout history, with patriarchal constructions leading to the development of the male-centric electronic dance music culture mirroring popular music genres and the mainstream music industry, creating the lack of female producers, engineers, and DJ’s. Kale noted of the lack of research into the historical continuity of these gendered stereotypes and their intersection with popular music production and technologies is needed (Kale, 2006, p. 56–7). Farrugia compares the gender divisions within the dance music industry to the popular music industry, observing both reproduced “the same sexual division of labor which existed not just in the music industry but in most other types of work and employment” (Farrugia, 2012, p. 28).
Conclusion
The analyses of the afflicting intersections of gender and music production provide singular perspectives of these afflictions, but combined paints an integral and defined reality, illustrating an elucidation to why men dominate the music industry. The explorations on the representation and access to music production found that females have social, material, discursive and historical barriers to access music production, discourse, education, and environment (the studio), due to patriarchal archetypes embedded in the culture which produces the masculine gendering of music production discourse and technology. Armstrong states with the idea that technology and masculinity go together, the gendering of music technology remains pernicious. (Armstrong, 2011, p. 103). The patriarchal stronghold over the gatekeeping roles provided further material barriers to accessing music production for females resulting in socio-political implications for females in regards to their creative economy within the music industry. With the historical censoring and barring of women from music, we gain further insights into the historical and social barriers for females to access music production; as females were barred from instruments and composition which are the main elements of music production. The censoring of women from music was due to fear of feminine sexuality and emotion, and it’s able to overpower men. Forged by the masculine institutions of the church and state “leading to the contagious modernizing of discourse penetrating maniat society” (Canakis, Kantsa, & Yannakopoulous, N.d, p. 208–209). This historical censoring has led to the marginalization women face in the music industry today. When the lack of representation of women intersects with the patriarchal censoring and barring of women from music, the result is a lack of media representations of females in music and music production, as males are the media creators. This creates barriers to access music production as it bears women as the other in this space, with the categorization of work by gender and devaluing of females’ artistic contributions. Social constructs including domesticity, sexism, and motherhood also cause afflictions for females, providing more proof of this otherness or alter gender in music production. Thus, this analysis on the afflicting intersectionality of gender and music production provides an elucidation to why men dominate in the music industry leading to the current lack of female producers. Macarthur suggests “that the habitus in the field of music collectively is to maintain and perpetuate this hegemony, leaving little or no room for women’s music to make its presence felt” (Macarthur, 2002, p. 6).
Stuart Hall states there are some practices, whose principal objective is to produce dominant ideological representations in media. Then there are different, meaningful, intelligible, practices whose principal objective is to produce other commodities, based on subordinate ideological perspectives. These media practices produce, reproduce and transform the field of ideological representation itself (Hall, 1985, p. 103–104). It is here that we as female producers can produce, reproduce and transform the dominant ideology of the model producer as a male to one of gender inclusivity. If culture is a system of symbols and meanings and culture and media permeates all of society, then culture and media serve as a catalyst to introduce new ideological perspectives, through critique and deconstruction of the dominant ideologies and discourses. By disregarding the values, ideas, and ways of thinking implicit or expected in culture, we can change the industry model and dominant ideology of a male producer, leading to diversity in media representations and a system of production built on values and ethics.
Bayton believes men have a fear of women and make them aware of their otherness, due to the mystifying qualities that are woman, “Women’s essential otherness is not something a man can understand so he stands apart, at best a witness to his remoteness” (Whitely. Ed. Bayton, 1997, p. 105). Our otherness could be our power as females, we should perhaps embrace it. Embracing the feminine otherness may be a tool for women to reduce these afflictions. By use of culture and its system of symbols and meanings to produce, reproduce and transform the dominant ideology of the model producer as a male to one of gender inclusivity, and provide a source of access for females wanting to access music production and associated technologies through these representations. Mayhew comments the contradiction in music between its possibilities for change and rebellion, and its conservative tendencies in regards to female participation are important to recognize in any analysis of the gendered nature of popular music. This recognition of the contradictions in popular music identifies the room to challenge female stereotypes, though further struggles with the hegemonic patriarchal discourses circulating through popular cultural sites and institutions are also a consideration (Mayhew, 1999, p. 77–78). Females need to become the creators to improve representation, providing access, and produce and distribute discourses circulating through popular cultural sites and institutions, challenging the patriarchal domination over music production and associated technologies. “The question needs to be asked whether mainstream recognition of women’s art is an important feminist goal. Certainly, the dominance of one model of understanding the production of popular music needs to be challenged” (Mayhew, 1999, p. 77–78).
Encore
This is my intention of this blog series as a media creator and music producer, to use this medium of culture to produce, reproduce, and transform the dominant ideology of the model producer as a male to one of gender inclusivity, and to reduce these afflictions in the future for females by providing a source of access for womxn to music production.
In the following Blog, I will further these discussions with a feminine interpretation of the divine intersections of gender and music production. This following blog is based on the feminine aesthetics of music production, including; feminine performativity and feminine modalities of music production, and feminist DIY cultural production. Along with reconstitution of music as a feminine space, with a historical analysis of music, voice, and instrument as gendered discourse. Stay Tuned!
Read the previous blog: https://medium.com/orthentix/introducing-the-divine-affliction-blog-series-e8dac2270083
Read the following blog: https://medium.com/orthentix/the-divine-intersections-of-gender-and-music-production-1b49a1d73a67
Reference List:
Adams, Teresa & Duncan, Andrea. (2003.). The feminine case: Jung, aesthetics and creative process. Karnac Books Ltd, London: UK. ISBN: 978 1855752849.
Armstrong, Victoria. (2011). Technology and the gendering of music education. Surrey, UK: Ashgate.
Canakis, Costas; Kantsa, Venetia; & Yannakopoulous, Kostas. (N.d). The gender of voice: Transgressing the boundaries of bodily sound [Article]. London, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing
Cannizzo, Dr. Fabian, & Strong, Dr. Catherine. (2017). Australian women screen composers: Career barriers and pathways [Research Report]. RMIT. Melbourne: Australia.
Cliff, Tom. (August 4, 2018). Junkee music: Bluesfest director under fire for abusive tirade following criticism of male-dominated lineup [Media Press]. Retrieved from http://junkee.com/bluesfest-director-nazi/170408
Farrugia, Rebekah. (2004). Sisterdjs in the house: Electronic/dance music and women-centered spaces on the net [Article]. Women’s Studies in Communication, Vol 27, No 2, Pages 236–262, DOI: 10.1080/07491409.2004.10162474. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/07491409.2004.10162474
Farrugia, Rebekah. (2012). Beyond the dance floor: Female DJs, technology and electronic dance music culture [Article]. Intellect: Bristol, UK. ISBN 978–1–84150–566–4.
Farrugia, Rebekah, & Olszanowski, Magdalena. (2017). Introduction: Women and dance music culture [Publication]. Dancecult: Journal of electronic music dance music culture, Vol 9, No 1. ISSN 1947–5403. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.12801/1947-5403.2017.09.01.00
Fenn, Eva. (N.d). Women and music censorship: Past to present [Article]. Retrieved from https://freemuse.org/graphics/Publications/PDF/cnrship-in-fem-music.pdf
Gadir, Tami. (2017). Forty-seven DJs, four women: Meritocracy, talent and Postfeminist Politics [Article]. Dancecult: Journal of electronic music dance music culture, Vol 9, No 1. ISSN 1947–5403. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.12801/1947-5403.2017.09.01.03
Hall, Stuart. (June, 1985). Signification, representation, ideology: Althusser and the post-structualist debates [Article]. Critical Studies in Mass Communication: Vol 2, no 2.
Jennings, Ross; & Gardner, Abigail. (2012). Rock on women ageing and popular music. Surrey, UK: Ashgate.
Kale, Stephanie. (May, 2006). Beyond gender?: Women in the cultural economy of electronic music [Article]. Heritage Branch: Ottawa, CAN. ISBN: 978–0–494–16429–7
Lieb, Kirstin. (2013). Gender, branding and the modern music industry. NY, USA: Routledge.
Mayhew, Emma. (June, 1999). Women in popular music and the construction of authenticity [Article]. Journal of Interdisciplinary Gender Studies 4.1: University of Wollongong.
McLary, S. (1991) Feminine endings. London: University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 978–0- 8166–4189–5
McCormack, Ange. (March 8, 2018). ABC hack: By the numbers 2018: The gender gap in the Australian music industry [Research Article]. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/programs/hack/by-the-numbers-2018/9524084
McRobbie, Angela. (1980). Settling accounts with subcultures, A feminist critique. In Frith S. and Goodwin, A. eds. On Record, Rock, Pop and The Written Word. New York: Pantheon Books, pp.66–96.
Music Australia. (2017). A voice for all music: Australian contemporary music industry statistical snapshot [Research Report]. Retrieved from http://musicaustralia.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Australian-Contemporary-Music-a-billion-dollar-industry_2017.pdf
Negus, Keith. (1992). Producing pop: Culture and conflict in popular music. London: Hodder and Stoughton
Olszanowski, Magdalena. (2011). Dancecult: Journal of electronic dance music culture what to ask women composers: Feminist fieldwork in electronic dance music [Article]. Retrieved from http://dj.dancecult.net
O Keeffe, Linda. (October 4, 2017). The conversation: Women in sound: Addressing the music industry’s gender gap [Research Article]. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/women-in-sound-addressing-the-music-industrys-gender-gap-85132
Patel, Natasha. (October 2015). Music business journal: gender in the music industry [Article]. Retrieved from http://www.thembj.org/2015/10/gender-inequality-in-the-music-industry/
Phillips, Abbey. (September 1, 2011). Spacebomb: Truth lies somewhere in-between [Digital Press]. Retrieved from https://rvanews.com/features/spacebomb-truth-lies-somewhere-in-between/49992
Reid, Poppy. (April 6, 2016). Music Australia: music contributes $4 to $6 BN to AUS economy [Media Press]. Retrieved from https://themusicnetwork.com/news/music-australia-music-contributes-dollar4-to-dollar6-bn-to-aus-economy
Richardson, Niall. (2010). Transgressive bodies: Representations in film and popular culture. Surrey, UK: Ashgate.
Savage, Mark. (August 29, 2012). BBC News: Entertainment and arts: Why are female record producers so rare? [Media Press]. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-19284058
Saxelby, Ruth. (October 30, 2014). 13 Women on how to change male-dominated studio culture: Why aren’t more women becoming music producers? [Media Press]. Retrieved from https://www.thefader.com/2014/10/30/why-arent-more-women-becoming-music-producers
Stoltzfus, P. (2006) Theology as performance: Music, aesthetics, and god in western thought. New York: TT Clark.
Strong, Catherine. (2011). Grunge, riot grrrl and the forgetting of women in popular culture. The Journal of Popular Culture, Vol. 44, №2: Wiley Periodicals.
Taylor, Andrew. (September 26, 2017). The Sydney morning herald: Australian music industry the sixth largest in the world as indie sector thrives [Media Press]. Retrieved from https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/australian-music-industry-the-sixth-largest-in-the-world-as-indie-sector-thrives-20170925-gyol2v.html
The Music.com.au. (2016). News: Aria 2016 sales figures show revenue is up & streaming is booming [Media Press]. Retrieved from http://themusic.com.au/news/all/2017/03/29/aria-2016-sales-figures-show-revenue-is-up-and-streaming-is-booming/
Whitely, Sheila. (1997). Sexing the groove: popular music and gender [Book]. Routledge: NY, USA.
Whitely, Sheila. (2000). Women and popular music, sexual identity and subjectivity. London: Routledge
Whitely, Sheila. (2003). Too much too young: Popular music, age & gender. New York, USA: Routledge.
Whitely, Sheila. (2013). Popular music, gender and sexualities [Article]. IASPM: vol.3, no.2 Retrieved from www.iaspmjournal.net
Wikipedia. (N.d). Divinity definition [Website]. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinity
Wolfe, Paula. (2012). A studio of one’s own: Music production, technology and gender [Article]. Retrieved from http://www.arpjournal.com/asarpwp/a-studio-of-one%E2%80%99s-own-music-production-technology-and-gender/
Wright Edelman, Marian. (1959). Marian Wright Edelman quote [Website]. Retrieved from https://quotes.thefamouspeople.com/marian-wright-edelman-2254.php
List of Figures:
Figure 1. Lovely, Caroline. (August 17, 2018). Dudes be like I’m in the studio [Social Media Meme]. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10160937265950284&set=a.153143890283&type=3&theater
Figure 2. Cliff, Tom. (August 4, 2018). Bluesfest director under fire for abusive tirade following criticism of male-dominated lineup [Social Media Post]. Retrieved from http://junkee.com/bluesfest-director-nazi/170408
