Gramsci wrote:......novelty.....all-women group.....

Since when is gender a novelty?
You defend yourself as a non-sexist by being sexist.


I read everything, and you did clearly call a group of women a novelty. Maybe you should re-think your own point?

I think that all-female bands are unquestionably a 'novelty' in the sense that was used by Gramsci.

nov·el·ty P Pronunciation Key (nvl-t)
n. pl. nov·el·ties

1. The quality of being novel; newness.

2. Something new and unusual; an innovation.

3. A small mass-produced article, such as a toy or trinket.

Clearly all-female bands are extremely unusual (for whatever reason) and thus there is a certain novelty to them.

That statement in no sense detracts from any potential artistic worth of the band, but merely remarks on the unusual gender make-up of the band. It's surely counterproductive to wilfully deny that the gender make-up of a band is a factor in their success or marketing for an (in my opinion) mis-judged insistence on political correctness?

Gramsci wrote:I said this wasn't about gender. Read all of my points, don’t just pick the controversial bit and run with it!

I see what you're saying & what you've said. The thing is, as with any band with what appears to be an obvious marketing schtick, if you don't like their music, you'll blame their success on their schtick. Another person who likes their music will disregard the schtick & say that their success is due to their music.

Clearly your dislike of Electrelane is based on your dislike of their music, and not on their gender. That is totally acceptable and beyond dispute.

But you made the claim that other people like them based on their gender, and not on their music. That's where you're veering into disputable territory, for many reasons including 1. people might like them based on their music, and 2. people might like them less because of their gender.

Isn't the point of any discussion to "veer into disputable territory"? Jeez. Who cares.

rachael wrote:

Gramsci wrote:......novelty.....all-women group.....

Since when is gender a novelty?
You defend yourself as a non-sexist by being sexist.


I read everything, and you did clearly call a group of women a novelty. Maybe you should re-think your own point?

Oh please! Read the whole point I was trying to make. Trust me on this, I am the most liberal person in any room, so yelling "sexist" isn't going to cut it.

My simple point is: would Electrolane be as well regarded if it were four white guys from Jersey etc. Why can't you see that I am attacking the sexism of the music business not women... If you don't think that some people still regard the idea of an "all-girl" group a marketing point that punches above it's artistic merit you're living in fairy-land. To be clear, I'm not saying this is always true, or even right, I'm merely saying that in the case of Electrolane it is.

I think their music is mediocre at best and if it was four guys from... wherever... they still be in the garage somewhere. As I said this is a criticism of the sexism of the "culture industry" not women playing music. If it was four women playing fantastic, original music I'd buy the record, Electrolane aren't.

Some people just don't get it!

spoot wrote:Clearly your dislike of Electrelane is based on your dislike of their music, and not on their gender. That is totally acceptable and beyond dispute.

But you made the claim that other people like them based on their gender, and not on their music. That's where you're veering into disputable territory, for many reasons including 1. people might like them based on their music, and 2. people might like them less because of their gender.

You are one of the most polite people I've ever debated with

I agree, that "that other people like them based on their gender, and not on their music." I would be in very shifty territory. But that's not what I mean, its a more subtle point... It's not so much that people will "like" it, in this case I think it gives the band more of an "aura" -for lack of a better word- than, I think, they deserve.

But again this does come down to taste, if I loved them we wouldn't be having this conversation

So, the fucked up, sexist industry may look at more than one woman in the same place at the same time playing music as a novelty, but that doesn't mean you have to.

The only reason anyone pays attention is because they are all women. Ask a simple question: if it was all guys would most people that like them, still like them?

rachael wrote:So, the fucked up, sexist industry may look at more than one woman in the same place at the same time playing music as a novelty, but that doesn't mean you have to.

The only reason anyone pays attention is because they are all women. Ask a simple question: if it was all guys would most people that like them, still like them?

It looks like you're determined to pick a fight regardless. If you can't see that in the music biz "all-girl" is a marketing pitch, you obivous know nothing about the industry. Try looking at every press release and review, I'll bet money that every single one makes issue with the gender of the group...

But somehow I'm sure you'll find room to point this back at me.

Gramsci wrote:would Electrolane be as well regarded if it were four white guys from Jersey etc.

Yeah, damn, you're totally right. Sorry for blabbing. When I saw them I wasn't into it at first, but stuck around because the guitarist was hot. After a while I dug the music as well. Had they been skinny guys, I may well have gone home early, even though extended listening may have paid off.

So I do think the music stands on its own merit, but other merits have unquestionably helped in their success.

that's how i got into the donna's! i think it's the bass player that's chunky and not very pretty but the rest of the band is hot. i saw them live and their looks definitely had something to do with me paying more attention to them. i downloaded the record the next day after i saw them and think it's ok.