I have to ask this question again about women in history

[longhornfan1234]

Margaret Thatcher.

[LJJ]

Well, the music situation is a bit misrepresented in the OP.

It's true that girls in priviledged families would ofter receive a musical education. Thus, there were also a lot of adult female musicians throughout classical music history as well. So why did none of them go on to become household names like Mozart or Beethoven?

In short it's actually as the conventional narrative goes: because they weren't allowed to.
It wasn't because of a lack of talent, there would always be outliers. Not all the great, famous composers were actually that talented either. And we know of plenty of females who did display musical talent. In fact, both Mozart's and Mendelssohn's older sisters were noted child prodigies rivalling at least in some aspects the talents of their younger brothers (which is a huge deal, as Mozart and Mendelssohn are the two most accomplished child prodigies in music history). We know for a fact both of their musical careers were strongly opposed and cut short by their families.
A women's, even with prodigious musical ability, only acceptable choice of life would be to become the head of a household. They could continue to perform music as a hobby, locally. And a lot of great compositions have actually been written with the intention of the local female virtuosi performing it. They could teach music, locally. And actually a lot of the great musical figures had female teachers.
But women could never travel as a musician, they could never publish music and they could never hold an official position. All of these things were essential for become a famous, well respected composer or performer.

So it's actually true that the reason there is no female Mozart or Liszst is because of patriarchy.

That said, it's much harder to answer why there have been so few great female musicians in modernity. Even when females are widely renowned for their musical genius (Argerich, Fitzgerald, etc), it's almost always as a performer and not as a content creator.

[ILLsmak]

I got u boy.

While not exactly a feminist celebration, my counter argument to "where are the great women in history" is this:

Women have accounted for a large portion of art made by men, as inspirations.

Women console great men in a way no one else could, telling them they are great, likely before they were. Men don't support each other like that.

Plenty of women also twisted great leaders around their fingers and changed history in that way.

also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin

-Smak

[gigantes]

some cool, interesting posts in this thread. nice reading.

nick young, if that is your real name, it is time for you to come along and declare them all bullshit.

[iamgine]

Well, the music situation is a bit misrepresented in the OP.

It's true that girls in priviledged families would ofter receive a musical education. Thus, there were also a lot of adult female musicians throughout classical music history as well. So why did none of them go on to become household names like Mozart or Beethoven?

In short it's actually as the conventional narrative goes: because they weren't allowed to.
It wasn't because of a lack of talent, there would always be outliers. Not all the great, famous composers were actually that talented either. And we know of plenty of females who did display musical talent. In fact, both Mozart's and Mendelssohn's older sisters were noted child prodigies rivalling at least in some aspects the talents of their younger brothers (which is a huge deal, as Mozart and Mendelssohn are the two most accomplished child prodigies in music history). We know for a fact both of their musical careers were strongly opposed and cut short by their families.
A women's, even with prodigious musical ability, only acceptable choice of life would be to become the head of a household. They could continue to perform music as a hobby, locally. And a lot of great compositions have actually been written with the intention of the local female virtuosi performing it. They could teach music, locally. And actually a lot of the great musical figures had female teachers.
But women could never travel as a musician, they could never publish music and they could never hold an official position. All of these things were essential for become a famous, well respected composer or performer.

So it's actually true that the reason there is no female Mozart or Liszst is because of patriarchy.

That said, it's much harder to answer why there have been so few great female musicians in modernity. Even when females are widely renowned for their musical genius (Argerich, Fitzgerald, etc), it's almost always as a performer and not as a content creator.

Makes sense.

But what would you consider modernity? Who are the great male content creators in this modernity?

[LJJ]

Makes sense.

But what would you consider modernity? Who are the great male content creators in this modernity?

For classical music starts in the early 1900s until now. So that would be Prokofiev, Sch

[iamgine]

[QUOTE=LJJ]For classical music starts in the early 1900s until now. So that would be Prokofiev, Sch

[MavsSuperFan]

I got u boy.

While not exactly a feminist celebration, my counter argument to "where are the great women in history" is this:

Women have accounted for a large portion of art made by men, as inspirations.

Women console great men in a way no one else could, telling them they are great, likely before they were. Men don't support each other like that.

Plenty of women also twisted great leaders around their fingers and changed history in that way.

also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin

-Smak

You arguement is extremely anti women.

basically you are arguing that women are independently incapable of greatness.

I think we are all overlooking the fact that despite usually being a slight majority of the population (women have longer lifespans on average, and only through radical social policies has the male population exceeded the female population) women have always been in real terms an oppressed population.

Women werent allowed to get educations until relatively recently in the west and in lots of parts of the world they are still killed for seeking an education.

Recently in the america we have seen that female graduates outpace male graduates. It wont show up immediately but 3-4 decades down the line, females might make up a majority of the power positions in society if this trend continues.

The last few years the majority of new recruits to my office have been female. 20 years ago it was almost all males. As the move up the corporate ladder they will eventually enter the power positions.

[gigantes]

@LJJ,
again, i think it goes to the white / grey matter disparity in the brain. there are many quick reads online about this summarising the research.

but this would just be a quantifiable way of identifying what we should already be able to figure out given our knowledge of classic male and female roles the last six million years or so. we're tribal creatures and we're designed by evolution to do different things to best succeed in that format.

as we know, men tend to be the wanderers, procurers, risk-takers, problem-solvers (especially in the face of novel situations), protectors of life, physically powerful, hardy and combative, etc.

and women are life-bearers, life-nurturers, first influences, first teachers, emotional framework, invested in positions of safety, harmony-builders, workers upon small regular tasks, sensitive to social nuances around them, finders of clever work-arounds, etc.

if a clownfish asks other clownfish why an anemone is lousy at being a clownfish, the answer is likely to be........

[iamgine]

perhaps another reason is that most women had to go through childbearing and child raising at a pretty young age in the past century. It's pretty hard becoming great at something while raising kids at the same time since they took much of your time.

[MavsSuperFan]

perhaps another reason is that most women had to go through childbearing and child raising at a pretty young age in the past century. It's pretty hard becoming great at something while raising kids at the same time since they took much of your time.

This is another big factor.

The birth control pill and the financial freedom from men, allows them to choose when and if they want to bear children.

[Nick Young]

You arguement is extremely anti women.

basically you are arguing that women are independently incapable of greatness.

I think we are all overlooking the fact that despite usually being a slight majority of the population (women have longer lifespans on average, and only through radical social policies has the male population exceeded the female population) women have always been in real terms an oppressed population.

Women werent allowed to get educations until relatively recently in the west and in lots of parts of the world they are still killed for seeking an education.

Recently in the america we have seen that female graduates outpace male graduates. It wont show up immediately but 3-4 decades down the line, females might make up a majority of the power positions in society if this trend continues.

The last few years the majority of new recruits to my office have been female. 20 years ago it was almost all males. As the move up the corporate ladder they will eventually enter the power positions.

Learn real history. In the middle ages, women were more educated then men. Men left schools early at a young age to work the fields and help their fathers, women for the most part, were ENCOURAGED to stay in schools as long as possible. Of course I'm talking about the 99% normal population, not the 1% elite ruling class.


If you claim women have been oppressed you also have to claim that men have been oppressed. Throughout history men have been forced to fight in wars and give up their lives fighting as soldiers in wars they have nothing to do with.

In natural disasters, men always give up their lives to protect the women and children.

There was never a time in history when women were called to die on the front lines like men always have.

In WWII for example, women were allowed to stay home and work in factories, men had to go in to battle and give their lives. Is that equality?

Both genders were equally oppressed, just oppressed in different ways.


ALSO did you know that in the 70s universities changed their courses to ensure that it's easier for women to succeed, and harder for males?

ALSO Good grades do not equal greatness. They literally mean JACK SHIT. I know so many morons who get top marks in university and are going nowhere because all they know how to do is follow directions and do what they're told.

University for the most part trains people to be underlings and worker drones to work for people with ambition and creativity and drive.

[MavsSuperFan]

Learn real history. In the middle ages, women were more educated then men. Men left schools early at a young age to work the fields and help their fathers, women for the most part, were ENCOURAGED to stay in schools as long as possible. Of course I'm talking about the 99% normal population, not the 1% elite ruling class.


If you claim women have been oppressed you also have to claim that men have been oppressed. Throughout history men have been forced to fight in wars and give up their lives fighting as soldiers in wars they have nothing to do with.

In natural disasters, men always give up their lives to protect the women and children.

There was never a time in history when women were called to die on the front lines like men always have.

In WWII for example, women were allowed to stay home and work in factories, men had to go in to battle and give their lives. Is that equality?

Both genders were equally oppressed, just oppressed in different ways.


ALSO did you know that in the 70s universities changed their courses to ensure that it's easier for women to succeed, and harder for males?

ALSO Good grades do not equal greatness. They literally mean JACK SHIT. I know so many morons who get top marks in university and are going nowhere because all they know how to do is follow directions and do what they're told.

University for the most part trains people to be underlings and worker drones to work for people with ambition and creativity and drive.

Learn real history. In the middle ages, women were more educated then men. Men left schools early at a young age to work the fields and help their fathers, women for the most part, were ENCOURAGED to stay in schools as long as possible. Of course I'm talking about the 99% normal population, not the 1% elite ruling class.

Education if it doesnt reach a certain threshold is meaningless. A fifth grade education isnt going to do anything for you.

If you claim women have been oppressed you also have to claim that men have been oppressed. Throughout history men have been forced to fight in wars and give up their lives fighting as soldiers in wars they have nothing to do with.

The vast majority of men have been oppressed. The key difference is men in the ruling class. No women at that time were educated to the same level those men were.

There was never a time in history when women were called to die on the front lines like men always have.

In WWII for example, women were allowed to stay home and work in factories, men had to go in to battle and give their lives. Is that equality?

These are not common occurrences and you are a fool if you think overall women had it better.

Both genders were equally oppressed, just oppressed in different ways.

In different ways, but clearly men overall always had the better end of the deal. You could argue recently in the west women have the better end of the deal.

ALSO Good grades do not equal greatness. They literally mean JACK SHIT. I know so many morons who get top marks in university and are going nowhere because all they know how to do is follow directions and do what they're told.

University for the most part trains people to be underlings and worker drones to work for people with ambition and creativity and drive.[

They do not mean jack shit. Its not for sure, nothing is for sure, but the more educated you are the higher your earning power. If you get a joke liberal arts degree of course nothing is going to come of it. But get a degree in a STEM subject or a business degree and you will typically do better than the average american.

Its anecdotal but at most of the accounting firms and other such corporate workplaces I am familiar with, females are being hired at increasing rates. We arent going to hire someone to a full time articling position without at least the clear indication that they are going to complete their bachelor's degree.

More and more the talent pool is becoming female.
EDIT: also a lot of the great men in history were scientists, and education was obviously very important to their success.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

To keep it simple testosterone is the magic hormone.

All creative genius has a good portion of sublimated energy coming from it.

With that said, very informative thread. A lot of misconceptions cleared up on both sides!


I think there was one polymath/polyglot woman in Greece named Hipposta or something along that ilne. Her resume was impressive.

I'd like a potential experiment done (consensually of course) where a girl at birth is injected with exogeneous test and trained to be the greatest at her field.

I've also heard that females can
a) see more colors than men
b) hear more sounds than men
c) smell fainter particles than men
d) actually have a few endurance athletes on par in swimming and running (will check my sources)
e) stronger white matter
f) more sensitive to environmental stimuli
g) a stronger link between IMAGINATIO nand reality, dream and day, logic, and emotion, holistic and compartmentalization (From a thicker corpos callasum).. interestingly enough dolphins don't have one and two Creative Geniuses (Einstein and Feynman did nto have AS HIGH of an IQ as others did but had EXCELLENT Right Brain-Left Brain Synchronicitiy) which begs the question.. what gives?

My oversimplified elementary probably-wrong but conceptually-solid hypothesis is that they simply don't have the latent energy especially in the most impressionable years (teens to 20s) and the hormonal craving for oxytocin (trust/relationships), ooestrogen (fertility), menses/ovulation, actually REDIRECTS mental focus from the cold formulaic dull process of mastering something into wanting to have fun, getting f*ked, obsessing about other people and security and all that.

I can attest that most of the people who want to CREATE CREATE CREATE BUILD BUILD BUILD something original that I meet in real life are about half and half. I can also attest that mos to fhte people who actually EXECUTE and ACT, are men.

Like LJJ said; in matters of writing, song performances; women be top notch. But creative genius and cr

[Nick Young]

Education if it doesnt reach a certain threshold is meaningless. A fifth grade education isnt going to do anything for you.


The vast majority of men have been oppressed. The key difference is men in the ruling class. No women at that time were educated to the same level those men were.

These are not common occurrences and you are a fool if you think overall women had it better.

In different ways, but clearly men overall always had the better end of the deal. You could argue recently in the west women have the better end of the deal.


They do not mean jack shit. Its not for sure, nothing is for sure, but the more educated you are the higher your earning power. If you get a joke liberal arts degree of course nothing is going to come of it. But get a degree in a STEM subject or a business degree and you will typically do better than the average american.

Its anecdotal but at most of the accounting firms and other such corporate workplaces I am familiar with, females are being hired at increasing rates. We arent going to hire someone to a full time articling position without at least the clear indication that they are going to complete their bachelor's degree.

More and more the talent pool is becoming female.
EDIT: also a lot of the great men in history were scientists, and education was obviously very important to their success.

Wars are not common occurrences? WTF? They are the one consistent thing through human history, fool.

Accounting firms are hiring women because women are more happy to follow directions and work as an underling then men are.

Jesus and Mohammad had little formal education are are two of the greatest people in history.

Buddha had education but gave it up.