Men make Better Conductors

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Beef Oven!
    Ex-member
    • Sep 2013
    • 18147

    Originally posted by Richard Barrett View Post
    Exactly. Men arguing about what's wrong with positive gender discrimination is an unedifying sight.
    Luckily, the men have gods who come down from Mount Olympus from time to time and point out their errors, so they can begin edifying themselves.

    Comment

    • Richard Barrett

      Originally posted by Beef Oven! View Post
      Luckily, the men have gods who come down from Mount Olympus from time to time and point out their errors, so they can begin edifying themselves.
      Or they could maybe listen to what women have to say.

      Comment

      • Flosshilde
        Full Member
        • Nov 2010
        • 7988

        I thought that was what BO meant?

        Comment

        • Beef Oven!
          Ex-member
          • Sep 2013
          • 18147

          Originally posted by Richard Barrett View Post
          Or they could maybe listen to what women have to say.
          They must, and they do.

          Comment

          • MrGongGong
            Full Member
            • Nov 2010
            • 18357

            I think Jude has a good point.
            Sadly the world is much more 'gendered' for people in their 20's now than it was when I was that age even though we do now have more women in significant roles in the arts (Jude Kelly being a case in point).
            BUT
            It's always seen as remarkable that a woman is conducting an orchestra? WHY on earth should that STILL be the case?

            If Orchestral music was a meritocracy then the arguments against encouraging these organisations to encourage more women conductors would have some credence.
            But it's not.
            It's not a conspiracy.
            But the idea that somehow 'talent' rises to the top and only the 'best' end up waving their arms about in front of an orchestra is a bit of a myth. (ask Hornspeiler?)

            Comment

            • ahinton
              Full Member
              • Nov 2010
              • 16122

              Originally posted by Beef Oven! View Post
              Have you no shame? You've cut out the next bit that says that "But it [positive discrimination] was/is [necessary] because when it applied only to men (the Temirkanov observation) it took decades to get to the point of redress.."

              This means that positive discrimination is necessary, the very thing you believe is odious. If you then reply 'precisely', you have contradicted yourself. Maybe you didn't mean 'precisely' and by trying to be a clever-clogs, using French, you have merely inadvertantly contradicted yourself.
              I fear tht your logic - or what may pass for it - is beyond my comprehension; What in any case would be "clever-clogs" about using a single word in French?

              Comment

              • Beef Oven!
                Ex-member
                • Sep 2013
                • 18147

                Originally posted by ahinton View Post
                I fear tht your logic - or what may pass for it - is beyond my comprehension; What in any case would be "clever-clogs" about using a single word in French?
                If you had kept it in simple English (the Normans have had their day) you may have noticed that you were contradicting yourself. But this isn't about France. It's about you believing that positive discrimination is 'odious', then changing your mind and stubbornly refusing to acknowledge that you now know you were wrong.

                And it wasn't 'a single word in French', it was three - you're a very slippery man.


                We need to stop this now, I don't want another visit from the mountain.

                Comment

                Working...
                X