"Pretty good for a girl" : Navigating gendered spaces as a female electronic DJ and producer
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In 2018, Misstress Barbara, electronic music DJ and producer from Montreal (Quebec, Canada), posted on her Facebook page about how far she had come since her mid-90s debut and mentioned that she had frequently been told throughout her career: ‘You're pretty good, for a girl’. This sexist remark illustrates the challenges women still face in the predominately male-dominated electronic music industry. Data from international journals show that women continue to be drastically underrepresented in the music industry in general but there is little information in the literature about the underrepresentation of women in the electronic music industry specifically (Farrugia & Olszanowski, 2017; Gadir, 2017). \n \nFemale electronic music DJs and producers remain underrepresented at festivals and events worldwide (Abtan, 2016; Gadir, 2017; Hesmondhalgh & Baker, 2015) and less visible in the professional media and production networks, which tend to focus on men (see, for example, Butler, 2006; Holmes, 2012; Kirn, 2011). In Montreal, the practical importance of this issue is highlighted by the numerous groups working to address it in Montreal such as Montreal Women in Music, F*EM, Female Pressure, Amplify Digital Arts Initiative, Keychange, and She Said So Montreal. In Quebec, the overall participation of women in festival programming is around 10% (DIG, 2017). And the participation of women in electronic music festivals such as Île Soniq and Mutek were 23% and 30% respectively in 2019 (Female Pressure, 2020), whereas the average number of university graduates with music degrees was in the parity zone in 2015 (Statistics Institute of Quebec) and around 50% of singers and musicians in Canada are female (Nordicity, 2015, Hill Strategies Research, 2016). This underrepresentation is not unique to the Canadian electronic scene as just under 13% of the musicians scheduled in European electronic music nightclubs in 2019 were female (A8M, 2019). \nOur research aims to find explanations for this persistent under-representation and invisibilization despite a certain increase presence of women on the electronic scene since the 2000s (McRobbie, 1994). Recent work focusing on the contributions of female electronic music DJs and producers also testify to the intersectional (at the intersection of various identities such as ethnicity, gender, sexual identity, age, capacity, etc.) difficulties they face (Farrugia & Olszanowski, 2017). How do we explain this persistent underrepresentation of women in the electronic music world? What are the day-to-day consequences for female DJs and producers? What are the strategies they deploy on a daily basis to make a career in an overwhelmingly male environment? \n \nThis research aims to contribute to a better understanding the under-representation in this industry and, ultimately, to the improvement of the working conditions of these women who actively participate in the development of a flourishing economic field in Montreal, as evidenced by the popularity of festivals created here that have been exported, such as Piknic Electronique, Igloofest and Mutek. We will now explore the theoretical and practical implications of these questions for our research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».