Oh dear, bless you too. I obviously entered into an ongoing discussion here, because (quite frankly) I'm surprised by the amount of venom from both sides. And ... the draft? Did I mention the draft? I take it that's part of the ongoing conversation. I wholeheartedly agree that everything about the draft (especially the fact that only males are targeted) is f-ed up. I don't believe anyone should be forced to kill or be killed. I also believe that women who so choose should be allowed in combat situations. I think we should do away with the draft as a future possibility in all but extremely dire circumstances (read, the US has been invaded, and we're losing.) If a draft were necessary, then I definitely agree that it's unfair that only males are called up. Yeah, and I'm a feminist. (aside to MerelyMortalMale: I officially complain about every single person in our cemeteries. While I'm a pacifist myself (and over the age of draft), I'd definitely support legislation including women in the draft. Hey, it'd probably make all those Republicans less likely to use it.)

Yes, classical conductors may make good money, but not compared to CEOs of large corporations. I think I've missed your point somewhere. So, are you saying that women don't get jobs as classical conductors because they are busy trying to be CEOs (where women are also under-represented)? I'm pretty sure the dichotomy is more on the lines of artist vs. business world. Believe me, there are plenty of females involved in the arts during the instruction stages. I disagree with you that feminism is causing women to flock to the business world. I think, rather, that the feminist movement has made it possible for women to enter the business world. Those women who are so inclined do so. This has not caused a drop in the number of women who enter the musical world because that number has always been pretty high. In fact, women have been involved in the musical world far longer than feminism has even been around as a concept. Longer than capitalism (and the glass ceiling) have even been around. Opera? Sopranos? Mezzo-Sopranos took over the positions of castrati (which, shudder it's not as though music has always been peaches and roses to men).

If any of the early composers made any money in their day, it was because they were subsidized by aristocrats. (What we now call Republicans.)

Close. It was usually the Church (something closer to republicans, actually). So, are you acknowledging that Republicans don't believe in a meritocratic society that works on free-trade? Because that's what those aristocrats were - titled and hereditary wealth that passed from one rich hand to another rich hand (male hands too, remember).

To this day, most classical music is subsidized by pretentious rich people who have no idea what they are listening to.

Wow. Sounds like you don't even like the culture or the music. I'm not rich, but I DO like classical music (and Baroque, since I mentioned Bach, and romantic, though I'm less into impressionist and modern). If you don't even like it, is it possible that you're having a knee-jerk reaction to a feminist discussion of a society you don't properly understand? I'm honestly asking, because it seems as though you're looking at an incredibly old tradition through post-modern glasses. Not that that's bad in any way! I just think it's important to remember that many in the "classical" music world don't even recognize jazz as "art music." Yet. It's changing, but slowly. Sort of like how this society changes in terms of racism, or, hey sexism.

I don't think you are anti-feminist. I think you are responding to a minority of feminists who are reactionary as opposed to constructive. Perhaps understandable: they get more press. From the response that Asehpe gave to your comment, I don't think that was reactionary. Once again, though, I am not privy to your ongoing conversation. But assuming that every discussion you have is with a woman who is more into femininism than feminism isn't constructive either.

That's neither here nor there. The point is that this is one place in which sexism (not the old "Don't give anything to the womens" sexism, but the fact that we are all unconsciously thin-slicing information in ways that include prejudice and some of those areas of prejudice are more likely than others) plays a part. I mentioned earlier that Marin Alsop has mentioned that her own (male and female) musicians respond differently when she performs actions that most male conductors do. These are people who support her in her career. These are people who want to do what she wants them to do. But in the moment, they interpret her differently because she's female. There is absolutely nothing wrong with discussing these issues. Actually, there's really no accusation directed at a specific person or persons.

Rather, we see a place where there is inequality. We discuss it. Somehow we talk about the draft. That's okay too, ie, here's a place of inequality. It's definitely a feminist issue. Let's discuss it. I find your theory about feminism keeping women out of top-flight musical positions to be incorrect. I outlined the reasons why I see it this way. I also call out wherever I see people (seemingly needlessly) getting personal. I apologize if I came across as needlessly sarcastic. I still don't get why you put the word feminism in quotes, but - whatever - Does this mean I can put "Iron John" in quotes? Well, it was a book....

Sure. The law is discriminatory. The point is: the law was not made by feminists. It was actually made by anti-feminists who thought women weren't fit for being soldiers, so they shouldn't be recruited or drafted. These anti-feminists are the guys (yes, guys) you should be trying to fight against--if you really believe in equality.

You rock. You seriously. just. rock.

Thanks.

You're welcome! :-) Your post was also quite enlightening and thoughtful.

Yes, it's an ongoing discussion, a never-ending story I'm afraid! Don't think it was meant at you personally; it wasn't. You can see the history of the discussion by clicking in the 'Read X's other letters' link at the end of messages. The idea is that there are a bunch of troll-like people here who seem to think feminism is all about enslaving men and giving women unfair advantages. Even though I do think there are some aspects of feminism that deserve criticism, what these people do is clearly too much. I've been trying to engage them for quite a while--first with nice posts, mentioning the fact that they had points worth discussing, if only they would do it without all the added bile and venom; but to no avail.

Lately I've been trying to refute their points with arguments, but I tend to get only more angry reactions, usually, however, without reactions to the points I raise. I think I'll be giving up shortly.

What is really sad is that I do really think some points deserve serious discussion. But they simply won't do it. They'll just throw a few more bombs, and then go on to the next letter threads. If, as I speculate, they really were hurt by some feminist earlier in life, this would explain this behavior, but it certainly does not help their cause, or anyone else's.