Klarinet Archive - Posting 000245.txt from 1999/02

From: Roger Shilcock <roger.shilcock@-----.uk>
Subj: Re: [kl] Women and orchestras
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 04:30:19 -0500

On a point of information - gender - or at least sex - has *nothing* to do
with DNA. "Sex" is dermined by whether you have 2 X chromosomes or an X
paired with a Y. "Gender" is a matter of grammar. Ask anyone learning
Spanish or Russian.
rjs

On Fri, 5 Feb 1999 DHmorgan@-----.com wrote:

> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 22:17:45 EST
> From: DHmorgan@-----.com
> Reply-To: klarinet@-----.org
> To: klarinet@-----.org
> Subject: Re: [kl] Women and orchestras
>
> In a message dated 2/5/99 6:33:47 PM Pacific Standard Time, pollyg@-----.com
> writes:
>
> << What blows me away in this discussion is what I read as the assumption
> that "race/gender" is what makes the difference in how someone plays. I
> think that the culture/instructor/exposure to etc would possibly make the
> difference...this is all my opinion. Do you think a child brought up in
> the culture(s) of a race different than the one they inherited would
> still play according to their genes??? Something fishy here.
> So, IMO, the audition judge is hearing the *culture* of the player in the
> double blind test, his/her instructor, his/her playlist of exposures and
> so on - not that individual's DNA.
> Paulet >>
>
> I'm not sure why you brought DNA into the discussion--Race has nothing to do
> with DNA. I know that sounds confusing--it's confusing to me--but I have
> geneticists assuring me that French and Scottish people are genetically more
> different than 'black' and 'white' people. Race has to do--largely--with
> appearance--which group society lumps you in based on which group you appear
> to belong to. Any differences we are talking about have to do with growing up
> among the influences of the sub-culture and social scripts you were popped
> into at birth. Gender has to do with DNA, but I'm not arguing that genetic
> differences in men and women affect musical performance--YIKES! But social
> scripts might, mightn't they, based on gender identification and such?
>
> Also, I never said race or gender IS what makes a difference in someone's
> playing, I only ever said that based upon the best available evidence, it
> MIGHT lead to differences that COULD trigger unconscious bias and it would
> make sense to keep that POSSIBILITY well in mind! An argument could be made
> that training has much, much, much, much more to do with how one plays than
> any other factor--or any number of other factors. But, for the purposes of
> that particular discussion, we were just talking about how race or gender
> might influence playing. Even if it is the least important factor in
> influencing a musician's playing style, if such differences COULD BE PROVEN,
> MORE OFTEN THAN NOT to trigger bias in the audition process, even in a double-
> blind scenario, then that would be really unfortunate for the people being
> systematically excluded, wouldn't it? When ever we are dealing with a
> scenario where all the 'objective' tests prove that a 'certain group' just
> 'doesn't cut it' in a given field of endeavor, we must pause, reflect, look
> into the 'objectivity' of those test in the interests of fairness and human
> progress.
>
> Ahem.
>
> Truly,
> Don
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
> Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
> Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
> Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org