Oh I'm fully aware of the current woke-nomanclature, but it's highly insulting and not needed. A woman is someone who is born a female. A trans-woman is not born a female, but born a male; they are of a different sex class and should not erase a woman to be "inclusive". A non-binary person is someone who was born male or female (or yes intersex in very rare cases (which are also either male or female with DSDs) but has a non-binary identity. Sex is an objective truth; gender is a subjective feeling. All people mentioned are equally valid. Reality does not belittle anyone. Therefore, to be most accurrate, and to avoid the erasure of any of these individuals: just write this: women, trans-women and non-binary people. That way you don't cancel women out by writing womxn. Many women find this incredibly insulting and offensive, myself included. Anyway it's ultimately just a current-trendy hot take from certain chambers of loud online genderists, teenage anime accounts and many who desire to be on 'right side of history.com' resulting from their various "queer theories", etc, and after any scruitiny or consideration it amounts to virtual-signaling wankery. You really don't have to take part, and please, if you're considering it, don't put pronouns in your bio. But, as they say, you do you.
As for the other content of this article, I love seeing more and more women being represented in lists, I have no problem with lists in theory. I also know that there are many, many more men who perform jazz, and so none of this is shocking tbh. Jazz has always been a boys club for the large majority, but we are seeing it embrace more and more non traditional players, which is great, such as women, trans people, and non binary people. :-)
Thanks for your input on the article, Julia. Re the term "womxn", I hope that you will recognise the positive and inclusive intensions behind my decision to use this broader term. All the best.
I have some sympathy with the premise, especially the unwitting (or perhaps sometimes witting) bias caused by the hugely disproportionate number of male critics. What I'm less sure about however, is the idea that 'best' lists are no longer appropriate. I agree that "...we don’t all experience one thing the same way...", however, how else can one get across how much you REALLY want people to recognise how great an album/gig/piece of music is? In this very article you have posted an 'album of the week'. Is this not a microcosm of the same process involved in ranking albums of the year/decade/century, etc?
I admit I too fall foul of the impact of reviews, simply due to the overwhelming amount of music available and needing help to decide what to try out. I realise that's the key point you are making - under-representation of women especially women of colour is an unfortunate consequence for the reasons you've articulated, however I wouldn't confine that issue to 'best' lists, but to all commentary about releases/gigs. If a critic raves about an album, I'm more likely to check it out than if someone calls an album "weak/derivative/uninspiring", etc. I am inevitably being influenced by the critic (still better than a streaming service algorithm by far, however). Great debate though, thanks Tina.
Anyway - typo alert - you've said "deplore you.." to read the NPR article - you meant "implore you.."!
PS Totally as an aside, "Data Lords" and Laura Jurd's Dinosaur "To The Earth" were in my top three 2020 albums ( & the other isn't 'jazz'), but I'm just a music consumer, not a professional critic.
Thanks for contributing, John! I appreciate it and I totally hear the merit of your opinions.
I had thought about the validity of my argument in context to my own AOTW; the argument is about ranking albums across a year and who might loose out, as opposed to issues with the actual act of reviewing an album. I hope that AOWT helps to draw attention to a release that might not be recognised by mainstream music press.
It's a complex conversation and one I definitely don't have all the answers for. But I feel the opinion is worth putting out there to create some conversation, so thanks again for contributing (:
And also - thanks for pointing out the typo. I didn't mean to DE-plore people at all, hahaha.
Woman: there fixed it for you. Maybe not erasing them in your own stable as a start will help.
Hi Julia. “Womxn” is a term that is inclusive of all women, trans and non-binary.
Oh I'm fully aware of the current woke-nomanclature, but it's highly insulting and not needed. A woman is someone who is born a female. A trans-woman is not born a female, but born a male; they are of a different sex class and should not erase a woman to be "inclusive". A non-binary person is someone who was born male or female (or yes intersex in very rare cases (which are also either male or female with DSDs) but has a non-binary identity. Sex is an objective truth; gender is a subjective feeling. All people mentioned are equally valid. Reality does not belittle anyone. Therefore, to be most accurrate, and to avoid the erasure of any of these individuals: just write this: women, trans-women and non-binary people. That way you don't cancel women out by writing womxn. Many women find this incredibly insulting and offensive, myself included. Anyway it's ultimately just a current-trendy hot take from certain chambers of loud online genderists, teenage anime accounts and many who desire to be on 'right side of history.com' resulting from their various "queer theories", etc, and after any scruitiny or consideration it amounts to virtual-signaling wankery. You really don't have to take part, and please, if you're considering it, don't put pronouns in your bio. But, as they say, you do you.
As for the other content of this article, I love seeing more and more women being represented in lists, I have no problem with lists in theory. I also know that there are many, many more men who perform jazz, and so none of this is shocking tbh. Jazz has always been a boys club for the large majority, but we are seeing it embrace more and more non traditional players, which is great, such as women, trans people, and non binary people. :-)
Thanks for your input on the article, Julia. Re the term "womxn", I hope that you will recognise the positive and inclusive intensions behind my decision to use this broader term. All the best.
I have some sympathy with the premise, especially the unwitting (or perhaps sometimes witting) bias caused by the hugely disproportionate number of male critics. What I'm less sure about however, is the idea that 'best' lists are no longer appropriate. I agree that "...we don’t all experience one thing the same way...", however, how else can one get across how much you REALLY want people to recognise how great an album/gig/piece of music is? In this very article you have posted an 'album of the week'. Is this not a microcosm of the same process involved in ranking albums of the year/decade/century, etc?
I admit I too fall foul of the impact of reviews, simply due to the overwhelming amount of music available and needing help to decide what to try out. I realise that's the key point you are making - under-representation of women especially women of colour is an unfortunate consequence for the reasons you've articulated, however I wouldn't confine that issue to 'best' lists, but to all commentary about releases/gigs. If a critic raves about an album, I'm more likely to check it out than if someone calls an album "weak/derivative/uninspiring", etc. I am inevitably being influenced by the critic (still better than a streaming service algorithm by far, however). Great debate though, thanks Tina.
Anyway - typo alert - you've said "deplore you.." to read the NPR article - you meant "implore you.."!
PS Totally as an aside, "Data Lords" and Laura Jurd's Dinosaur "To The Earth" were in my top three 2020 albums ( & the other isn't 'jazz'), but I'm just a music consumer, not a professional critic.
Thanks for contributing, John! I appreciate it and I totally hear the merit of your opinions.
I had thought about the validity of my argument in context to my own AOTW; the argument is about ranking albums across a year and who might loose out, as opposed to issues with the actual act of reviewing an album. I hope that AOWT helps to draw attention to a release that might not be recognised by mainstream music press.
It's a complex conversation and one I definitely don't have all the answers for. But I feel the opinion is worth putting out there to create some conversation, so thanks again for contributing (:
And also - thanks for pointing out the typo. I didn't mean to DE-plore people at all, hahaha.