dezb1 wrote: Don't forget Stevie Ray's ass... even he couldn't stop looking at it:
Annie Clark of St Vincent designs her own sig guitar
Moderated By: mods
This all reminds me of some interview I'd read with a sketch show writer about the difficulty of including female characters at any level within a sketch. Put simply, an audience (largely men) see men as "the default" state of a joke. Any time a woman is introduced for no other reason than they're good at the job, have good timing or delivery, where it's nothing to do with them being a woman, people automatically expect their womanliness is part of the punch line, and that the sketch somehow has to hinge on it somewhere, and a lot of the time the cut and thrust of the piece gets lost or obfuscated by people assuming this extra layer of a joke that doesn't exist. The woman comes before the comedienne, whereas men are simply comedians.
A lot of the attitudes here emulate that exact same thing. There's this kind of vibe going on that Annie Clark is a woman under the (your) male gaze before she is acknowledged or accepted as a guitarist/artist/musician, where her image and femininity is front and center for your approval. It becomes this extra layer of analysis that could be worthy of discussion in some sense, but it's handled really clumsily and makes a lot of you sound basic as fuck, where opinions on her music or art or image is passed through the woman filter and through your gaze, and you can't just let her "be", as it were.
A lot of the attitudes here emulate that exact same thing. There's this kind of vibe going on that Annie Clark is a woman under the (your) male gaze before she is acknowledged or accepted as a guitarist/artist/musician, where her image and femininity is front and center for your approval. It becomes this extra layer of analysis that could be worthy of discussion in some sense, but it's handled really clumsily and makes a lot of you sound basic as fuck, where opinions on her music or art or image is passed through the woman filter and through your gaze, and you can't just let her "be", as it were.
And FWIW I don't think those accused of being sexist are genuine irredeemable sexists, it's just a lack of exposure to these kinds of ideas and opinions. This is a fairly arty forum of arty people in arty music scenes where these ideas and views are shared collectively. Maybe one half could dial down the accusations and the other take a pause to reflect on what a few of us have said and try to take it on board?
Corsair,
I would have never guessed from that post you were trying to link her sexuality to the aesthetic of the guitar design. The two thoughts were sentences apart and seemed unrelated. That said, I don't see it but lets look at what some experts have to say:
You said: "So her signature guitar is shaped like a boxxy girl dress, complementing their boobs and bottoms and it feels more comfortable for women to play. "
Ernie Ball said: " .. the unique electric guitar was crafted to perfectly fit her form, playing technique and personal style."
Annie Clark herself said: "I was always finding when I was playing onstage and wearing various stage outfits the guitar would cut across one of the best features of the female body, which is your waist. I carry my guitar pretty high so I had to make all of these costumes based on the fact that you wouldn’t be able to see if I had a waist or not. I wanted to make something that looked good and not just on a woman, but any person."
So there it is. One of the above statements is patronizing and sexist. By the way it isn't that you even said the guitar looked good on her (or "compliments her boobs and bottom" if you want to put it that way), it was that you assumed it was why the artist herself designed it.
You don't need to keep digging the thread back up to explain or defend your post. I get that you weren't trying to be sexist. It was casual sexism; the condescending/stereotyping/mansplaining sort which tends to slip out accidentally if your social circle is also made up of people who say things like this. I don't think you hate women or are that ignorant. Just try to learn from the experience and move on.
I would have never guessed from that post you were trying to link her sexuality to the aesthetic of the guitar design. The two thoughts were sentences apart and seemed unrelated. That said, I don't see it but lets look at what some experts have to say:
You said: "So her signature guitar is shaped like a boxxy girl dress, complementing their boobs and bottoms and it feels more comfortable for women to play. "
Ernie Ball said: " .. the unique electric guitar was crafted to perfectly fit her form, playing technique and personal style."
Annie Clark herself said: "I was always finding when I was playing onstage and wearing various stage outfits the guitar would cut across one of the best features of the female body, which is your waist. I carry my guitar pretty high so I had to make all of these costumes based on the fact that you wouldn’t be able to see if I had a waist or not. I wanted to make something that looked good and not just on a woman, but any person."
So there it is. One of the above statements is patronizing and sexist. By the way it isn't that you even said the guitar looked good on her (or "compliments her boobs and bottom" if you want to put it that way), it was that you assumed it was why the artist herself designed it.
You don't need to keep digging the thread back up to explain or defend your post. I get that you weren't trying to be sexist. It was casual sexism; the condescending/stereotyping/mansplaining sort which tends to slip out accidentally if your social circle is also made up of people who say things like this. I don't think you hate women or are that ignorant. Just try to learn from the experience and move on.
Last edited by Nick on Fri Mar 10, 2017 1:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
GAK have got the Sterling version of St Vincent's guitar up on their website now. Price is £700 but it doesn't look like they actually have them in stock atm.
LANK
LANK
Fran wrote:I love how this place is basic as fuck.
ekwatts wrote:I'm just going to smash it in with a hammer and hope it works. Tone is all in the fingers anyway.
-
BoringPostcards
- .
- Posts: 1439
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:08 pm
- Location: Newfoundland
-
plopswagon
- cutesy tag
- Posts: 18906
- Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:32 pm
- Location: 3rd Fret
- Contact:
-
Darth Stang
- .
- Posts: 163
- Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:33 am
Arty you been reading the same forum as me?George wrote:And FWIW I don't think those accused of being sexist are genuine irredeemable sexists, it's just a lack of exposure to these kinds of ideas and opinions. This is a fairly arty forum of arty people in arty music scenes where these ideas and views are shared collectively.
benecol wrote:Or maybe we could challenge tired bullshit tropes when they're wheeled out?
Got to agree with this George
XY
This. I agree entirely with Tim that the old fashioned attitudes/tropes need to be challenged, but its the way that is done.George wrote:I think it's the ferocity of the challenge, not the challenge itself (which was warranted).
Approach a situation with metaphorical fists swinging, and you'll get someone putting up their defences, a more measured approach gets better results, at least from a reasonable person.
And if you aren't dealing with a reasonable person, you aren't going to change their mind, so what does it matter, beyond making a point?
Which brings me to
Indeed it wasn't, it probably meant Corsair got a harder time than was warranted too.Nick wrote:I don't think Speedfish's ferocity was warranted at all.
It isn't the first time Speetfish's attitudes and opinions have been...off base either