Sign In: or Sign Up! (forgotten password?)
Drowned in Sound

The organisers speak

With Ladyfest London 2002 kicking off this week (click here for our preview, and check out the official site), it seems many still have misconceptions about the festival and its aims. I asked Ladyfest London organsiers Irene and Richard to clear up a few things for our readers' benefit:

DiS: First of all can you tell us a little about the origins of Ladyfest - how long has it been going for, who started it and how did it come about?

Irene: Olympia, Washington USA, was the first Ladyfest in 2000, organised mostly by women involved in the local scene such as Sleater-Kinney. It attracted many great performers such as Cat Power and Neko Case. In a broader historical context, we feel very much rooted in the ethics and legacy of early 80's punk and new wave musicians such as The Slits and Kleenex, among whom there were many women.

DiS: Roughly speaking what are its aims?

Richard: Partly to cast some sort of spotlight on sadly-ignored female artistic talent, and partly to encourage more women/girls to get involved in arts and music, whether by actually meeting people and networking at Ladyfest itself, or by reading about it and thus realising that this is something they can do for themselves.

Irene: For people to come and have fun, participate, and take away with them a sense that anyone can get their hands messy with art and get active however they feel they want to!!

DiS: How much work do you feel needs to be done in raising awareness of womens contribution to the music scene, and of DIY culture in general? With bands like Le Tigre selling out the Astoria recently it seems like progress is being made - how successful do you think Ladyfest has been in the past?

Richard: I think there's a huge amount that needs to be done. I think the very fact that Le Tigre selling out the Astoria is seen as some sort of victory just goes to show how atypical it is. That's not to say I don't think progress is being made: I can think of lots of indie bands who have 1 or 2 female members, and whereas 10 years ago that would have been "shock! horror! there's a girl playing bass/drums/whatever", it's nice to see that, say, the drummer from Seafood isn't seen as some sort of gimmick but as just another musician. But I hardly think that's the end of the road - if I count the female artists playing at Reading Festival, for example, well, it's not exactly a large percentage, is it?

DiS: Many seem to have the mistaken impression that Ladyfest is a women only event or that men are not welcome - in particular many men I've spoken to seem reluctant to attend some of the Ladyfest gigs despite being really into the bands playing because of the "vibe" given out by the event in some circles. Do you think more could be done by the organisers to avoid this rather unfortunate effect?

Richard: Well, I'm male, and at no point has anyone ever told me not to turn up to meetings, or made me feel unwelcome. I suppose some men might feel intimidated by mixing in a predominantly female audience, but if that really is the case then surely it would be even worse for women who want to go to (male-dominated) gigs normally. In which case isn't that a much more serious problem for us all to worry about than any fear men might have about turning up to Ladyfest?

Irene: Hearing that men feel deterred is really the saddest thing for us - we were precisely clear from that start that it would be an event for everyone with the involvement of everyone - you only need to look at the number of male peformers, or the fact that several of the key organisers are guys. Personally, of my friends coming, I think the majority are male - most of whom are veterans of previous Ladyfests! And crucially, sexism and patriarchy affect 100% of the population, men as much as women - so we want them to come along and have just as much fun!

DiS: While celebrating women in music, Ladyfest seems to concentrate on DIY/Punk/Indie areas of expression - to what extend is an effort being made to include women into other types of music and the cultures surrounding them in the festival this year?

Richard: Well it is certainly the case that in the past feminism in music has been associated particularly with the indie-punk genre that is "riot grrl". Now, there's a limited amount we can do about that - given that lots of the people who will turn up to Ladyfest want to hear that sort of music, and that many of the bands who want to play are into that sort of music, we can't just turn around and say "No, we're only having drum and bass this year, and it's for your own good", as that would be more than a little patronising. But on the other hand, there is some great "non-punk" music made by women, and we've tried to show that as well, hence the line-up on the Sunday night. I mean, it'd be terrible if there were women out there who were interested in music but felt that because they were women they weren't "allowed" to be into, say, electronica, and while we can't magically create loads of female electronica bands to encourage them, we can certainly show off the ones that we know about!

Irene: To make it clear, Ladyfest is all about independent and DIY alternatives - we have no interest in aping Lilith fair! I believe that punk is everything to do with attitude, and enthusiasm, and very little to do with musical style. We tried extremely hard to have bands that we feel represent that attitude in 2002 - thus the inclusion of many more electronic musicians such as People Like Us or Printed Circuit. We want to inspire new and exciting forms of expression rather than some retro aesthetic.

For those interested in attending, the evening line-up features many DiS faves, including Chicks On Speed, Electrelane, Katastrophy Wife, Angelica, Kaito, Lolita Storm, Mika Bomb and Bangs. For more detailed line-up and ticket info visit ladyfestlondon.org.



  • fuck that shit

    if men are so welcome why are so many of the workshops female only? i thought the whole point of ladyfest and feminism in general was to make all people equal, not just to discriminate again men

    bloody hypocrites, i for one won't be attending
    • Re: fuck that shit

      grow some tits.
    • Re: fuck that shit

      no, no. you don't understand. it's ok for women to do it. as long as they can bitch about men doing it, at the same time. equality is doing it back. maturity will always reign supreme in the modern world. it might be a good thing though, the whole pointed segregation thing. i'm not sure how but they'll explain sometime. probably.
    • Re: fuck that shit

      When readdressing inequality, excluding the group that oppresses you is, in some instances, necessary. Your argument is essentially equivalent to saying that blacks shouldn't feel the need to form all-black pressure groups (the black panthers?) to fight for equality because this is racist against the white majority, or that gay pride marches should have an equal number of straights in attendance. Reactionary nonsense. The fact is, those workshops you mention are women-only to ensure that a male presence doens't cause unease in the group. Why should it cause unease? Because the majority of men, when faced with something as confrontational as a feminist talk or workshop, snigger and fall back on the kind of defensive twaddle you just spouted. Grow up.
      • ALL discrimination is oppression

        Your argument is shot full of holes. Just because I believe Equality means seeing all people as equal and not excluding people on a criteria such as the shape of their genitals I need to "grow up"? If anything, I'm not the one who needs to grow up.

        Can you imagine the stink if "Blokefest" was even proposed? Let alone if they proposed male-only workshops?

        Women are not oppressed by men. If anything, all people are oppressed by far far larger things than their sex and sexuality : sex and sexuality are small arbitrary factors for discrimination that people are encouraged to discriminate on by the media.

        We, that is Men and Women, are oppressed by other things. The very basis of this event is by its intrinsic nature sexist and discriminatory - the very thing it seeks to eliminate. The oppressed becomes the oppressed.

        Stop being ashamed of being male, and look beyond it.
        • Re: ALL discrimination is oppression

          Adolescent posturing might get you far in common room debates, but you're going to have to come up with a bit more than crypto-Right-Wing hectoring to convince me. The fact is, women doing exactly the same job as men are paid, on average, only 2 thirds of what their male colleagues receive. If that's not oppression by any other name, god knows what is.

          Power structures remain, largely, male dominated - look at the higher eschelons of the judiciary, the police force, the sexist bias inherent in much modern advertising, the notoriously male centred Houses of Parliament, and, perhaps most importantly, your average corporate boardroom.

          That's not to say that other forms of discrimination aren't important. I'd argue that the way we organise our economy results in whole swathes of the population suffering a gross disadvantage. But it's not a coincidence that, in statistical terms, far more women live in poverty than men.

          The point is, "Blokefest" simply isn't required - the music industry, like all the others i mentioned above, is overwhelmingly dominated by men. The point of an event like Ladyfest is to raise the profile of women in music, who find themselves in a minority, often expected to conform to restrictive feminine stereotypes to succeed. Is it so unreasonable that women should want to get together and give each other a little support?

          To be completely honest, reading someone like you blithely dismissing the effects of gender based discrimination makes my blood boil. Perhaps you'd like to espouse such a view to a woman denied a job simply because of her gender, or a woman ruined by sexual violence. (a phenomenon almost exclusively perpetrated by men.)

          If I'm ashamed to be male, it's because there are still men about who think what you think.
          • to contradict slightly...

            if you look at the structure of the corporation I work for, women *severely* outnumber men at all levels...

            in my team alone, there are 7 people at 3 different levels. 5 of those people are women. there are 5 people at the lowest level, both males are at this level. the two higher levels are women.

            then on a much larger scale, the two co-MDs are women, head of HR and most of the HR team, head of technology, head of production, various tiers below that, head of business, various tiers below that, head of marketing, various tiers below that.

            while there are a large number of situations where men behave outrageously towards women, and many companies do seem to have unwritten policies of paying women less than men, there are also situations where the gender bias is totally reversed and women have, to use a figure of speech, men by the balls.

            there is a legitimate need to end all forms of discrimination, but it has to be recognised that in this day and age, men are also on the sharp end of discrimination, not helped by us constantly being reminded about how crap we all are.

            I don't agree with the original post that it's discriminatory for men not to be invited to the workshops, but I do agree that there is a massive tide of anti-male sentiment that we can't fight because we'd be seen as being petty.
            • Re: to contradict slightly...

              My heart realy bleeds that you are outnumbered by women.

              And what about the lowest paid jobs where the vast majority of people on the minimum wage are women?

              You have got the wrong end of the stick, feminism is not anti-men it's about anti-descrimination
              • Re: to contradict slightly...

                I didn't say it was a bad thing that I was outnumbered by women. I was merely showing that the world isn't as male dominated as many would have us believe.

                the company is one of the largest corporate entities in the UK, and that it has women in most of its key posts is telling.

                and yes, I know what feminism is *supposed* to be about, thank you. my comment with regards to the reality of it in some cases... people using a good, positive movement as an excuse for a little tit for tat.
                • Re: to contradict slightly...

                  >>I was merely showing that the world isn't as male dominated as many would have us believe.

                  your workplace does not speak for the majority. if women have key posts in certain areas of the workplace, it is telling, that theyre suitable for the job, not that they are provided with the same oppertunites etc.

                  im also intreagued by your idea that there is a set unchanged, definition for feminism. surely as time progresses, so do the aims of the movement

          • The White Male Demon Complex

            I don't agree with women not being paid equally and fairly for the same works as men. To suggest that I support the discrimination of women simply because I can see that anti-male discrimation exists is absurd.

            I don't care about someone's gender - it's irrespective of whatever job they do. It is however unreasonable to exclude people on the basis on their gender - isn't that what they set out to destroy?

            If a man does it it's bad, if a woman does it its ok? That seems to be what you are saying here. Hypocrisy is the greatest luxury, and you're guilty of it. I reckon you might also sympathise with white people repatriating the descendents of slaves as well, which is impractical and unfair.

            If a woman has been denied a job due to her gender, it certainly is something I would never support.

            Before you talk about domestic violence perpetrated upon women, recent studies show that actually women tend to perpetrate around 60% of domestic violence. I'm not going to look for the link right now though, but my personal experience of knowing people in such relationships seems to indicate something similar.

            If you're ashamed to be male because I think that all discrimination is wrong, that gender is irrelevant, and that the stcuture of society is unfair and unequal, than I wonder what your beliefs really are.

          • the statistics of domestic violence

            Domestic violence is almost exclusively perpetrated by men? You obviously don't know your facts. 52% of domestic violence amongst pensioners and the elderly is perpetrated by women, for example. Try this...

            37% of women have perpetrated some form of domestic violence, compared to 22% of men. ( source: http://www.vix.com/men/battery/stats/briefs.html)

            or....

            "In 1977, Suzanne Steinmetz released results from several studies showing that the percentage of wives who have used physical violence is higher than the percentage of husbands, and that the wives' average violence score tended to be higher, although men were somewhat more likely to cause greater injury. She also found that women were as likely as men to initiate physical violence, and that they had similar motives for their violent acts (Steinmetz 1977-78).

            Steinmetz concluded that "the most unreported crime is not wife beating -- it's husband beating" (Langley & Levy 1977"

            http://www.vix.com/men/battery/battery.html and specifically...

            http://www.vix.com/men/battery/daveclass.html

            You don't have a clue about domestic violence.
            • Please, let us weep for the male crisis

              How did I know you'd begin quoting dubious American psuedo-psychologists? It'd be foolish to exclude the possibility of women-on-men violence, and I don't, but numerous studies (I'd refer you to the work of Delphy, Sue Sharpe, Juliet Mitchell's "Women's Estate" among others) have found a firm case for the belief that men are far more likely to batter women as an expression of masculine insecurity as much as anything else.

              I took a quick look round the website you referred me to, and it confirmed what I'd already expected. You are of a growing legion of men who, perhaps styling themselves on Tom Cruise's odious character in Magnolia, are convinced that masculinity is underthreat from women's liberation. This is simply not borne out by the facts, and it reveals a deeply conservative instinct, determined to "prove" men are now suffering at the hands of dangerously free women swinging their new found rights triumphantly round their newly-upright shoulders.

              It's pure fantasy Mark. Stop believing all that reactionary stuff you read in American sociological journals - next you'll be arguing that the poor "deserve" it and that the gay "lobby" is corrupting the institution of the family.

              You've yet to answer my central point, and one reiterated by others in this debate : women remain, on average, much more likely to be impoverished than men. Why?
              • Re: Please, let us weep for the male crisis

                Tom, to put it bluntly, you are full of **it.

                Lets put it simply:
                Violence exists. We can't deny that.People beat people.

                Men beat women. Men beat men.

                Women beat men. Women beat women.


                When someone beats someone of the opposite gender, it does not mean that the violence is an act of gender abuse.

                You completely misunderstand the point mark is tryign to make. As he has said, he is an equalist: men and women are equal. A woman (or a group of women, such as feminists) who are attempting to obtain a position of dominance over men, is as much an act of gender dominance and oppression as men are deemed to have over women. Not all women are virtious creatures, some are as evil and nasty as men are.Your gender does not define whether you are a better person or not, and if you think that, you are as entrenched in gender ignorance as you imagine mark to be.

                I was a battered husband too: i suffered violent spousal abuse from a woman who I lived with. It does not mean that all women are evil, just that that particular woman was violent. That is not sexism: justa recognition of that . that person was violent, and that person was a woman. It does not mean all women are violent.

                (From my knowledge of personal circumstances,Mark is fully aware that women are as capable and culpable of acts of domestic cruelty as men supposedly are)"

                The idea that mark is threatened by "hands of dangerously free women swinging their new found rights triumphantly round their newly-upright shoulders. " is ludicrous and laughable. Mark is seeking to redress the balance into neither Pro-male nor por-female, but pro-human, where all people are equal. Women, as much as men, can be not just physically, but mentally, financially and emotionally abusive in relationships. The shape of your genitals does NOT exonerate anyone from the moral culpability fot heir actions.






                "It's pure fantasy Mark."
                Is it pure fantasy to ask to redress the balance where male and female are equal, not necessarily one of "well, men oppressed women, now lets have women oppress men"? No.

                "You've yet to answer my central point, and one reiterated by others in this debate : women remain, on average, much more likely to be impoverished than men. Why?"

                Thats not the point he's making. the point he's making is that , quite simply the shape of your genitals does not mean that you are automatically a better person becuase of your gender. If you believe that, then you are as gender-biased as a misogynist who believes women should be chained up, locked and barefoot in the kitchen. Thats no advancement- thats swapping one form of oppression for another. IS that what feminism is about?

                Didn't think so. (and incidentally, I studied womens studies, 1992-1993, university of Teesside).
                • Re: Please, let us weep for the male crisis

                  I don't agree with you, but you make a point well. (Oh, except for the full of shit thing, which suggest you need less of the womens studies and more of the anger management and eloqution lessons.) To reiterate then : I'm not claiming that women aren't capable of violence. (in fact, recent studies into girl gangs provide disturbing evidence that, at least on a minority level, violence amongst women as a generalised phenomenon is increasing.)

                  You're absolutely right to say that the biological fact of gender makes little or no difference to behavioural outcomes. What you miss is the social effect of gender roles inflicted on us from an early age. While these roles have been somewhat subverted in recent times, familiar patterns of masculine domination are still emerging. (I'm loathe to repeat the evidence for this again, but you only need to consult any number of studies on the link between gender and economic status to understand this one.)

                  Your point is fully undermined by your, (and I hate to use this term again but unfortuanately it seems to be true in your case) regrettably reactionary equation of feminism with the dominance of women over men.

                  By taking proactive steps to increase their status, women are not trying to reverse the gender dominance of the past by a full 360 degrees. They are simply attempting to gain an equal footing with men, in both an economic and social sense. Your post suggests you have little problem with this aspiration, and so by rights you shouldn't have a problem with the initial point I was making, and with the concept of proactive feminism as a whole.

                  Talk of being 'pro-human' suggests that being 'feminist' is the same as being 'anti-man'. It is not, or at least it is not for the vast, vast majority of feminist activists. It's a claim that's been used by the Right to undermine feminism, and I was under the (presumably wrong) impression that it had slipped from the cultural radar quite some years ago. I'm saddened to see I was wrong.

                  (I study Social and Political Sciences at Cambridge University)
              • Re: Please, let us weep for the male crisis

                My masculinity or my gender is irrelevant. Whatever my masculinity might be, I don't define myself as a 'Male'. I define myself as a person who happens to be male. I don't feel under attack by someone's feminity. There's a hell of a lot more to me than the shape of my genitals. Look beyond the surface and recognise people, as people. Don't define them purely by their gender. To fail to do is sexist and degrading.

                Any event which purposely excludes a party is by its very nature discriminatory. To imply that I believe that the 'poor' deserve it or that 'gays are corrupting the family' simply because I take a stand against ALL discrimination, regardless of its perpetrators is not only inaccurate, but devalues any other good points you make.

                I don't know exactly why women are more impoverished than men: I suspect that it is for the same reason as anyone find themselves in a weaker position than others - the market and human nature exploits any possible factor it can find and use to gain power and leverage. And that's perpetrated by people of all colours, genders, ages, sizes, and backgrounds. Not just the Nasty White Male Demon.

                I quote : "men are now suffering at the hands of dangerously free women swinging their new found rights triumphantly round their newly-upright shoulders."

                What rot. Have you ever heard the famous saying 'the freedom to extend your arm stops when it comes into contact with my face'? Equal rights, not unequal rights, is my creed. And Anything which discriminates, ANYTHING is unequal.

                I have no problem with women using their rights. I'm all for it. What I do have a problem is where people oppress other people, be it women oppressing men, men oppressing women, straights oppressing gays (or vice versa), religious people oppressing atheists (ever seen your local high street full of Godbotherers on a Saurday Afternoon? I quite like the freedom to walk down the street without someone shouting "JESUS!" at me), or vice versa.

                If a man thinks a woman who wants to play a musical instrument is a figure of fun, then he is stupid, and sexist. If a woman wants to play an instrument, great. If a man does, great. Let's hope they're good at it though : that's what they should be judged upon.

                Any event which purposely excludes a party is by its very nature discriminatory. And isn't sexual discrimination, erm, 'sexist'?

                • Re: Please, let us weep for the male crisis

                  I'd refer you to my answer to Graham's point which covered similar ground to yours, but I will say this : I'm absolutely with you as far as your ultimate aim is concerned. I believe passionately in equality, in an equal playing field. (and yes, I don't believe the market will ever achieve this either - I wouldn't echo your comments on human nature, but that's by the by.)

                  Where I think our fundamental disagreement lies is in our perception of the feminist movement. It seems to me that your perception is coloured largely by only the very extreme, anti-male vitriol only espoused by the most marginal of feminists. The vast majority want exactly what you want; a world where gender, sexual orientation, colour or creed do not influence your life chances and others judgement of your individual merit.

                  When fighting inequality, being 'pro-human' isn't good enough. It's a limp wristed, liberal compromise. When there exists such a genuine gulf between the economic and social chances of women in comparison with men, there must be a chance for the oppressed minority to group and, if necessary, exclude the oppressive majority in their attempts to regain an equal balance of power, at least temporarily. (You'll have to excuse my generalisations here ; I recognise that not all men are oppressive in their attitudes to women, and that not all women suffer day to day subjugation, but my point is targetted more at a general conception of capitalist-patriarchy.)

                  The Black Panthers formed during the ferment of the US civil rights movement as a direct, mirror reaction to the race hate politics of the Klan and others in mainstream American society. Their actions were sometimes seen as aggressively anti-White, but their anger at least had some justification in history and experience. Ultimately, they were vindicated despite their acrimonious disintegration, and I'd defend the right of any minority to actively oppose those that might oppress them.

                  I think it's easy in these discussions to lose sight of the original points that were being made, and I suspect, having reread your comments and my responses, that our politics are alot closer than perhaps we've let be known. I was talking to a female friend of mine today who went to one of the 2 all-women workshops and, when told about this debate and it's relentless elongation, she snorted derisively and said "it was just so the girls felt they could dance without prying male eyes". I, for one, am willing to surrender my right to dance for one afternoon.

                  Finally, perhaps we ought to agree to disagree. Somehow I don't see us reaching a point of agreement on this, and while I've enjoyed the debate immensely, I suspect many on DiS will be sick of political discussion and may be craving something a little more...musical. :-)

        • Re: ALL discrimination is oppression

          Surely, one of the reasons for having a Ladyfest is that there's plenty of "Blokefests" around already, they're just not called that.

          I, for one, attended Ladyfest and had a really great time. In my opinion, Ladyfest London had more great bands than this year's Reading Festival will have.
          • Re: ALL discrimination is oppression

            Absolutely. I went on the Saturday, and it was truly excellent - expect a review shortly. I think what this debate has proved above all else, is that the attitudes that Ladyfest is, in part, a reaction against are still around, even if they come wrapped in less offensive language. Over to you Mark.
            • Re: ALL discrimination is oppression

              Attitude? I'm not in any way supporting the oppression of anyone: men, women, black, white, or whatever. I believe in equality and despise any form of oppression, whomever it comes from. If that makes me in your eyes a right-wing intolerant fool, then more the fool you. x
      • ALL discrimination is oppression

        Your argument is shot full of holes. Just because I believe Equality means seeing all people as equal and not excluding people on a criteria such as the shape of their genitals I need to "grow up"? If anything, I'm not the one who needs to grow up.

        Can you imagine the stink if "Blokefest" was even proposed? Let alone if they proposed male-only workshops?

        Women are not oppressed by men. If anything, all people are oppressed by far far larger things than their sex and sexuality : sex and sexuality are small arbitrary factors for discrimination that people are encouraged to discriminate on by the media.

        We, that is Men and Women, are oppressed by other things. The very basis of this event is by its intrinsic nature sexist and discriminatory - the very thing it seeks to eliminate. The oppressed becomes the oppresser.

        Stop being ashamed of being male, and look beyond it.
      • hang on..

        the music workshops were one of the things i was most interested in, i play guitar and i would have loved to go to the recording and song writing workshops. i was just fucking pissed that i was not allowed to go cos i am a man.

        were they feminist workshops then?? was most of the time spent talking about women rather than learning about music? and more importantly would the sort of macho person who you were trying to exclude actually go to Ladyfest in the first place?
        • Re: hang on..

          Then why didn't you go to the workshops at One Live In Birmingham last year or One Live In Cardiff the year before that??
        • Re: hang on..

          To put it bluntly, stop whining. There are numerous music workshops you could attend, most of which you'll find dominated by men.
        • Re: hang on..

          from what i picked up on, the reason that the music, yes only the music, workshops were women only was to encourage women to step up and take part, while not feeling like they were being pushed aside. Tom raises a valid point when saying that most workshops are male dominated, so why whine because there happens to be only ONE that you cannot attend. surely you attending a workshop for people with no experience of playing an instrument would have defeated the object anyway?
    • Re: fuck that shit

      Ahhhhh didums angryboy.

      So because you can't go to 4 out of the 36 events you won't go........ and one of those 4 events has only enough space for 20 people.....
      • Re: fuck that shit

        sorry i just find the whole thing hypocritical, in the same way that the US death penalty teaches that killing is wrong by killing people

        i agree something positive must be done to redress the balance, but instead of women going to female only music classes why not go to your local one and prove to the guys there that you can be as good as them at guitar or whatever?

        sad thing is many people (myself included) still say WOW COOL when they see a band with a female drummer/guitarist/bassplayer, its still pretty much a novelty. girls should form more bands, simple as that!
        • Re: fuck that shit

          Maybe they feel intimidated from going to local workshops/classes because of the patronising comments and attitudes such as yours.

          I saw a lot of good bands and some not so good bands and not once did I think "wow cool what a novelty" or that they had proved it "to the guys"

          You see angryboy they have got where they are inspite of the system. Girls do form bands but the music industry isn't interested, the workshops were there to help redress this balance and inequality....

          If you felt so stongly about the subject why didn't you go along to the film making workshop and make a film about it?

          Why didn't you go along to the publishing workshop and make a zine/newsletter about it?

          Why didn't you go to the spoken word workshop and do talks on it?
    • weird...

      this entire discussion is totally dominated by men.
    • Re: fuck that shit

      to the best of my knowledge only the actionettes dancing workshop and lektrogirl's djing workshop were women only, and that was their choice as performers which we respect. this is obviously an extremely hot topic, which i feel has many valid arguments on both sides, but at the end of the day we greatly appreciate what both of the above people do, and if that is what they chose, that is the end of the story. there were so many different events going on simultaneously it was hadly as if there was nothing else to do.
  • Ladyfest London - The organisers speak

    "Your argument is essentially equivalent to saying that blacks shouldn't feel the need to form all-black pressure groups (the black panthers?) to fight for equality because this is racist against the white majority, or that gay pride marches should have an equal number of straights in attendance. Reactionary nonsense. "

    absolutley not. Its like holding a misogynist conference and saying that women can't attend. Reactionary? Not neccesarily. Discrimination on the grounds of gender is still discrimination, the kind of discrimination that the feminist movement has fought against. TO promote discrimination against a gender is still oppression. It just means now that its pro-woman, not pro-man. That is as bad as patriachal oppression anyday. Isn't it? eh? if not, WHY NOT?



    "The fact is, those workshops you mention are women-only to ensure that a male presence doens't cause unease in the group. Why should it cause unease? Because the majority of men, when faced with something as confrontational as a feminist talk or workshop, snigger and fall back on the kind of defensive twaddle you just spouted. Grow up. "

    Oppression is oppression: End of story. I'm not strictly a feminist, thought I studied it in university for a year. I think of myself as an EQUALIST: the whole point of feminism to be redress the balance of power relations which is currently masculine.
    In that context then, to have female-only workshops etc. is as sexually discriminatory as patriachial oppression of women. End of story. And as blatantly sexist too.

    IF we are seeking a redress of the balance of sexual / gender power structure, then pro-women is as bad as pro-male, becuase both are discriminatory. Only be ending discrimination FULL STOP - without exception - will feminism succeed. This sort of discrimination (against men) is as stupid and reactionary by damaging the feminist cause.

    • Re: Ladyfest London - The organisers speak

      Will you *please* stop drawing equivalence between the age-old, historical repression of women, and the laudable efforts of politically organised women to counter that repression. They're simply not the same. A male-only social club is far more offensive than a women-only workshop at a feminist conference. Why? Because women are reacting to male oppression and aggression. Men are acting based on historical and social roles expected of them. To put it childishly, men started it. The 2 acts of exclusion are based on entirely different motives. One aims to defend a gender-based monopoly of power. (that's the men Graham). The second, merely to counter that monopoly and attempt to level it's claims to superiority so that, in the long run, both sexes can live on equal terms. Can you not see the difference? Your view of the world, ruled as it is by a dogmatic, simplistic view of the struggle for equality, would never actually result in that equality being achieved.
      Somehow, I suspect Rosa Parks wouldn't have been quite so brave if she'd have had you whispering political theory in her ear...
  • parallels/reviews

    many years ago now (1999 to be precise) I ran a gig upstairs@the garage where all three bands were all female (Cheetara, Manatee, & Vyvyan). I didn't present it as a "girl" event or a novelty event for that matter. The night was successful with about a 50/50 sex split. It makes me question the need to brand something "ladyfest", or at least the live music aspect of it.

    On an entirely different note given that a lot of the commentators on this are DiS staff and that some of them went where are the reviews? I thought it was a pro-active event! I could review Thursday (the only night I went) but I really shouldn't review Angelica again.
    • Re: parallels/reviews

      I went Thursday afternoon but only saw bits of a few bands, who didn't inspire me to write a review. Wish I'd seen KaitO (singer introduced herself to me earlier and she may have been tipsy) but I've seen them sooo many times.
  • Mark...

    In all your rather overblown argument with Tom, you haven't really succeeded in explaining to me at least, what your problem actually is with positive discrimination. If a group is under represented or feels excluded for whatever reason (not necessarily the 'white male demon' or whatever) from some area of society, and something positive is done specifically for that group in order to help redress that balance, there shouldn't really be such a problem with it. You just seem to be going "ooh women's only events... ummm that's sexist", which rather misses the point. It would be sexist if women weren't already severely under-represented in bands and stuff, but they are...
    • Re: Matt

      Livened up the boards for a moment surely? Women are severly under-represented in bands, and I personally would love to see more equal voice for women in music, film, art, and print. Though there does seem to be a lot more equality in print than any other field.

      That said, a lot of women I know just aren't as interested in performing music than men. Don't know why that is. Personally I see a big problem in people being given an opportunity to do something because of some arbitrary factor such as skin colour, sex, etc.

      It just as unfair and as discriminatory as the 'old school tie'. That's my approach to the situation, and my interpretation of it. I'm not sure I can reason that view, especially at this late hour. Some people look at positive discrimination as a good thing, I see all discrimination as discriminatory. That's my point of view. I probably did an awful job of explaining that, erm, sorry!

      Mark
      • Re: Matt

        Mmm... ok. If your doctrine is all discrimination is bad, then fair enough, although I think practically speaking, although not always the most desirable option positive discrimination is often necessary to change things, and you have to judge each situation on its own merits rather than a blanket judgement on anything discriminatory as bad... by that logic separate mens and womens toilets are sexist, etc etc... discrimination is only bad if it actually disadvantages people or makes them feel inferior or marks them out as 'different' for no real reason.. or some other such significant evil which I dont think fits the ladyfest womens workshops can be guilty of...