For the moment I've just glanced at the list and it seems pretty much inarguable, though of course one can always tweak the details to fit personal preferences. Right off the bat, I can't believe the Roches album isn't higher than 150. At first glance the top 10 seems to include mostly the right albums w/out reference to the order but imho Car Wheels on A Gravel Road has to be in there and Exile in Guyville probably should be in there (and has gotta be higher than #31).

I saw that Rumours was on the list but did not stop to read what I presume is the explanation of why that's an album made by women.

But What. The. Fuck. The 150 greatest albums by women can only be voted on by women???? That kind of thing just drives me crazy. I don't see why the empowerment of and due respect for women requires us to go backwards as a culture. Shouldn't we be moving to equality & inclusion and not towards separate but equal? The world is way too fucking complicated for me.

beantownbubba wrote:For the moment I've just glanced at the list and it seems pretty much inarguable, though of course one can always tweak the details to fit personal preferences. Right off the bat, I can't believe the Roches album isn't higher than 150. At first glance the top 10 seems to include mostly the right albums w/out reference to the order but imho Car Wheels on A Gravel Road has to be in there and Exile in Guyville probably should be in there (and has gotta be higher than #31).

I saw that Rumours was on the list but did not stop to read what I presume is the explanation of why that's an album made by women.

But What. The. Fuck. The 150 greatest albums by women can only be voted on by women???? That kind of thing just drives me crazy. I don't see why the empowerment of and due respect for women requires us to go backwards as a culture. Shouldn't we be moving to equality & inclusion and not towards separate but equal? The world is way too fucking complicated for me.

There's an unsettling trend among some on the left to push all equal rights movements into this post-modernist power struggle, which views equality as impossible. Rather than equality, they want to see groups in power toppled and replaced, or more power for their group.

Ive always scoffed at the right's assertion that there's any kind of actual discrimination against straight white males at a systemic level, but there are definitely groups comprised of typically marginalized people who conduct themselves in a very discriminatory fashion towards the traditionally advantaged.

Well, men pretty much regularly sexualize women and so maybe they wanted to avoid that influence in voting as well as just better engage women in the process, who otherwise would likely be overrun by men in voting numbers.

Overall, I try not to critique women making decisions about women, just like I try not to critique black people making decisions about black people, etc. Not my call to make. My kind has enough of the world without needing to have our say included in everything.

lotusamerica wrote:Well, men pretty much regularly sexualize women and so maybe they wanted to avoid that influence in voting as well as just better engage women in the process, who otherwise would likely be overrun by men in voting numbers.

Overall, I try not to critique women making decisions about women, just like I try not to critique black people making decisions about black people, etc. Not my call to make. My kind has enough of the world without needing to have our say included in everything.

I understand the national human impulse to group together whenever you've been under attack historically, but eventually this idea that only people of Group X are allowed to have an opinion about it has to go away. The continued group fragmenting is a huge barrier to unity and equality.

Iowan wrote:

lotusamerica wrote:Well, men pretty much regularly sexualize women and so maybe they wanted to avoid that influence in voting as well as just better engage women in the process, who otherwise would likely be overrun by men in voting numbers.

Overall, I try not to critique women making decisions about women, just like I try not to critique black people making decisions about black people, etc. Not my call to make. My kind has enough of the world without needing to have our say included in everything.

I understand the national human impulse to group together whenever you've been under attack historically, but eventually this idea that only people of Group X are allowed to have an opinion about it has to go away. The continued group fragmenting is a huge barrier to unity and equality.

Well, maybe if we strongly emphasize the word "eventually."

I think equality will happen when people have equal roles in society. That can happen somewhat through natural progression, but it also requires that underprivileged groups be granted stronger privileges in areas of importance to them than overprivileged groups until the time that things are truly equal.

Men don't get to dictate abortion policies or laws unless they support women controlling their own bodies.
White people shouldn't even comment on black NFL players kneeling during the anthem unless to support people of color expressing their right to protest racism.
Straight people don't have a place in setting integration policies for gay, lesbian or transgender people unless they want to lend support to sexual/gender minorities developing their own policies for inclusion.
And so on...

As white men, we have to give up the power on things that are not primarily about us. Equality won't happen by privileged white men telling underprivileged women, people of color, and sexual minorities to just everyone join in a big group together and eventually they will somehow become equal. White men have to be willing to become a minority, not just in numbers, but in power, before equality will happen. You can't simultaneously maintain a power position and bring about equality, so the only hope for unity happening is us willingly putting ourselves underneath these other groups on issues of importance to them.

At the moment, you can't really swing a dead cat (almost) anywhere in the media without hitting something about the Weinstien scandal and other similar, horrible harassment and assault grossness. I wish any of these revelations were surprising to me.

The fact that this is the only thread on 3DD addressing gender dynamics right now says a lot about the prevailing mindset here on this subject.

Having lived on this planet as a female for 49 years, my experiences would indicate that Lotus makes all valid points. The fact that a significant percentage of the population will find these points abstract and threatening and thus choose to disregard them, is discouraging but not surprising.

And just to clarify, nobody is saying that guys aren't allowed to have opinions on the 150 greatest albums made by women. They are just saying that participation in this particular on-line poll is restricted to women. Personally I find this poll so utterly uncompelling that I can't even be bothered to click on the link.

I like metaphors. I think they're fun and often funny. In trying to think of a good metaphor for this situation, I came up with a riddle. It goes as follows.

What's the best way to persuade someone to eat a shit sandwich? Say, "Hey white guy! This shit sandwich is not for you." That's my one and only postmodern joke.

The parallels to the current discussion in the politics thread are obvious and I won't pursue it further here.

But, sheesh. I'm sorry, I am not willing to accept that my opinion on music made by women is any more or less valid than a woman's opinion on the same subject. We might have the same opinions, we might have different opinions and the differing opinions might be rooted in our different gender-based experiences, but we're talking about music, not the right to vote or to have an abortion. Extending "identity group politics" into this non-political sphere just makes me despair (yeah, yeah, I've been to known to argue that much of music making is inherently political but let's not get overly cute here).

Lotus, you do make a fair point of the "mansplaining" variety, i.e. it would be willfully ignorant to not acknowledge the potential for male voices to overwhelm the female in this context and it seems fair and reasonable to me to insure a significant voice for women's opinions on this subject (btw, I would argue exactly the same thing for a poll on the 150 greatest albums made by men). I don't care whether one defines "significant" as 20%, 50%, 51% or 80%, but I do object to defining it as 100%.

lotusamerica wrote:

Iowan wrote:

lotusamerica wrote:Well, men pretty much regularly sexualize women and so maybe they wanted to avoid that influence in voting as well as just better engage women in the process, who otherwise would likely be overrun by men in voting numbers.

Overall, I try not to critique women making decisions about women, just like I try not to critique black people making decisions about black people, etc. Not my call to make. My kind has enough of the world without needing to have our say included in everything.

I understand the national human impulse to group together whenever you've been under attack historically, but eventually this idea that only people of Group X are allowed to have an opinion about it has to go away. The continued group fragmenting is a huge barrier to unity and equality.

Well, maybe if we strongly emphasize the word "eventually."

I think equality will happen when people have equal roles in society. That can happen somewhat through natural progression, but it also requires that underprivileged groups be granted stronger privileges in areas of importance to them than overprivileged groups until the time that things are truly equal.

Men don't get to dictate abortion policies or laws unless they support women controlling their own bodies.
White people shouldn't even comment on black NFL players kneeling during the anthem unless to support people of color expressing their right to protest racism.
Straight people don't have a place in setting integration policies for gay, lesbian or transgender people unless they want to lend support to sexual/gender minorities developing their own policies for inclusion.
And so on...

As white men, we have to give up the power on things that are not primarily about us. Equality won't happen by privileged white men telling underprivileged women, people of color, and sexual minorities to just everyone join in a big group together and eventually they will somehow become equal. White men have to be willing to become a minority, not just in numbers, but in power, before equality will happen. You can't simultaneously maintain a power position and bring about equality, so the only hope for unity happening is us willingly putting ourselves underneath these other groups on issues of importance to them.

so much this.

this tweet from a few weeks ago summarizes it nicely.

Isn't the goal of equality that no group is under another?

White men need to cede power. All of lotus's examples are great examples of how to do that.

That's different than "willingly putting ourselves beneath others". That kind of self-flagelating rhetoric is just fuel to the White supremacist crowd. There's a very palpable under current from some that current white men should be punished for the sins of the past. How is that equality? It's just revenge.

To me, equality means there are no de jure or de facto blockades to participation and representation in our government. No laws or government practices that hold back specific groups. Bust the gerrymandering. Convict cops who kill without justification. End the drug war. Create sensible immigration policies that don't weed out people with different skin tones.

I'm sure being a white male makes it easy for me to look at the bigger picture, but maybe that's the duty of those with privilege? Those of us who don't have to struggle about our inherent identity should focus our energy into the eventual ideal.

i remember looking at this list when it first came out and thinking two things.


how the fuck did Neko Case not land in the top 150?

and how does one define records from bands such as Sonic Youth, X, Portishead, Fleetwood Mac and Cocteau Twins as being 'made by women'? i do not denigrate the contributions of Exene, Kim, Liz, et al but it's kinda like when Rolling Stone rolls out their umpteenth 'best records of X' and toss in a random jazz record or two amidst the giant majority of white guy, blues-based rock records.

lotusamerica wrote:Well, maybe if we strongly emphasize the word "eventually."

I think equality will happen when people have equal roles in society. That can happen somewhat through natural progression, but it also requires that underprivileged groups be granted stronger privileges in areas of importance to them than overprivileged groups until the time that things are truly equal.

Men don't get to dictate abortion policies or laws unless they support women controlling their own bodies.
White people shouldn't even comment on black NFL players kneeling during the anthem unless to support people of color expressing their right to protest racism.
Straight people don't have a place in setting integration policies for gay, lesbian or transgender people unless they want to lend support to sexual/gender minorities developing their own policies for inclusion.
And so on...

As white men, we have to give up the power on things that are not primarily about us. Equality won't happen by privileged white men telling underprivileged women, people of color, and sexual minorities to just everyone join in a big group together and eventually they will somehow become equal. White men have to be willing to become a minority, not just in numbers, but in power, before equality will happen. You can't simultaneously maintain a power position and bring about equality, so the only hope for unity happening is us willingly putting ourselves underneath these other groups on issues of importance to them.

100% agree. The idea there would be any pushback whatsoever about asking women to make a list about music MADE BY WOMEN is just staggering to me. This is, in essence, a list about cultural (in this case music) contributions by women so why would you want male bias involved in that? I do, however, agree with Tinnitus that the presence of records by Fleetwood Mac and Sonic Youth on this list is puzzling. I wonder if the selectors felt that these records were successful due to the contributions of women, if not necessarily by women alone?

Tequila Cowboy wrote:The idea there would be any pushback whatsoever about asking women to make a list about music MADE BY WOMEN is just staggering to me. This is, in essence, a list about cultural (in this case music) contributions by women so why would you want male bias involved in that?

The idea that you could be staggered by that pushback and ask the question that you do is equally staggering to me. A short answer to your question is that the idea is not to seek "male bias" it is to seek male opinions (as one perspective among many) because, ummm, you know, men are part of the culture too. The idea that only women can contribute meaningfully to a discussion about women's contributions to the culture doesn't merely stagger me, it fills me with despair.

Lotus, I hope you don't mind that I'm going to copy your post to the politics thread. It's relevance there is obvious and to the extent that I may respond to it (not clear in my own mind yet), I'd rather do so in that context.

beantownbubba wrote:

Tequila Cowboy wrote:The idea there would be any pushback whatsoever about asking women to make a list about music MADE BY WOMEN is just staggering to me. This is, in essence, a list about cultural (in this case music) contributions by women so why would you want male bias involved in that?

The idea that you could be staggered by that pushback and ask the question that you do is equally staggering to me. A short answer to your question is that the idea is not to seek "male bias" it is to seek male opinions (as one perspective among many) because, ummm, you know, men are part of the culture too. The idea that only women can contribute meaningfully to a discussion about women's contributions to the culture doesn't merely stagger me, it fills me with despair.

Lotus, I hope you don't mind that I'm going to copy your post to the politics thread. It's relevance there is obvious and to the extent that I may respond to it (not clear in my own mind yet), I'd rather do so in that context.

To be clear I'm not saying you can never have a discussion, list or what have you about the cultural achievements of women (or minorities, etc) without limiting the discussion inclusively to that group. You can, I just can't understand why your instinct wouldn't be to ask that group their opinion first. I would never think to question it.

Tequila Cowboy wrote:To be clear I'm not saying you can never have a discussion, list or what have you about the cultural achievements of women (or minorities, etc) without limiting the discussion inclusively to that group. You can, I just can't understand why your instinct wouldn't be to ask that group their opinion first. I would never think to question it.

I understand that.

And in turn I'm not saying that you can never have a discussion, list or what have you about the 150 albums [by women or by anyone] that speak most directly to women, or for women or that women are most proud of. If you do have that discussion, there's no reason men should be included, nor would it occur to me to include men in that type of discussion.

This comment moved to Political shit thread out of respect for the Swamp man...

Ponygirl, that’s good. Thanks for sharing that and glad I’m not too far off the mark to you it seems...

Seriously! (from the title to the comments)

Swamp wrote:Seriously! (from the title to the comments)

Sorry! Moved my comments over to political shit thread...

lotusamerica wrote:

Swamp wrote:Seriously! (from the title to the comments)

Sorry! Moved my comments over to political shit thread...

I actually liked your comments. It's the whole 150 best womens albums by women concept that I can't take seriuosly.

A dude weighs in...

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/magaz ... canon.html

lotusamerica wrote:A dude weighs in...

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/magaz ... canon.html

He makes a very good case that music by women is undervalued in rock or maybe pop culture (or maybe not w/ respect to the latter, he seems to be unsure). I didn't see, or maybe wasn't convinced by, his case for a list intended to establish a "canon" being single gender sourced. But I read it quickly.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=8331&p=329579&hilit ... st#p329579

all time feminist albums thread.

beantownbubba wrote:

lotusamerica wrote:A dude weighs in...

http://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/magaz ... canon.html

He makes a very good case that music by women is undervalued in rock or maybe pop culture (or maybe not w/ respect to the latter, he seems to be unsure). I didn't see, or maybe wasn't convinced by, his case for a list intended to establish a "canon" being single gender sourced. But I read it quickly.

I think he pretty much said yeah, the ladies picked a nice 150 albums, but here are 72 more they missed. Just like a man

Wasn't sure what thread to put this in; this one will do.

Here's WXPN's recent list of the 885 greatest songs by women. Seems kinda heavy on the oldies to me (by my count only 4 songs from the 2000's in the top 50).

https://xpn.org/countdown/885-greatest-songs-by-women/