Gender Neutral Best artist awards are dominated by men

[alhoon]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...minations-men/

The gist: Organizers of Artist of the Year Brit Awards made the awards gender neutral. All the nominees are men. The album of the year category is also dominated by men with just one female. There have been people supporting the change and people opposing the change. Some feminists were concerned beforehand that this would happen.


I will spare you my first, joyful reaction when I saw the progressive plot backfire.
And I will say that... I am not 100% against the change. Sure this year happened to be all men. But I don't think that's because women are treated badly. Honestly, sports have to do with gender. Performing... not so much.
If anything, I would be concerned male singers will be doing worse than female singers (but not significantly). I think that because I am sure even women (behind closed doors) agree that women are prettier than men. I have not checked any studies but most of my female friends and relatives, agree that women are prettier although the feminists put it to a rotten society that pushes women to try to be pretty. Regardless, I think women actually have the physical advantage here. And I do think beauty plays a part but it is not insurmountable.
Good artists would do well whether they are attractive or not.

So, my stance is: I would have agreed with the change if it happened before the 1990s. Now, it is clear it happened to push progressive agendas and the notion of more than two genders and that we shouldn't tell boys and girls that they are boys and girls. I would have agreed if it happened because gender is mostly irrelevant in best artist competitions.
So... I agree with the change but not with the reasons behind the change.

So, the question is: Do you agree with the Brit Awards that changed it? What is your opinion on men dominating it?

[antaeus]

Two things...

Firstly, lets look at this from the reverse direction... If you had an artist, who didn't announce their gender and who released the best album of the year, where would you have previously nominated them? It isn't unprecedented.

Secondly, I agree, gender as a metric when comparing something subjective like music is stupid. However, music is primarily a business, and prone to the same kinds of shadiness that impacts gender in all big businesses - as illustrated by the Harvey Weinstein (etc) case... there is still likely issues within the entertainment industry where gender based abusive practices - primarily, but not solely, towards women - still occur. I don't know if separate awards for men and women is the solution to this. I'm open to workshopping what is.

[mishkin]

What is your opinion on men dominating it?

what is your opinion?

Doing nothing more than talking about genres, it is clear that you have not understood the idea. Let's hope that by the tenth time that gender-blind awards are held, people will start to stop taking gender into account.

[Kyriakos]

Eh, this is a music award? I suppose most bands still are male, and (possibly?) most solo singers/composers are also male? So no surprise there.
Tbh I don't see the point in "best female musician"/"best male musician", so this seems to be a positive development, even if currently the nominations are almost all male.
But this can't happen with acting, because lack of awards seems to be followed by lack of high pay, so I expect acting awards to remain binary.

[Pontifex Maximus]

Who cares.

[alhoon]

what is your opinion?

Doing nothing more than talking about genres, it is clear that you have not understood the idea. Let's hope that by the tenth time that gender-blind awards are held, people will start to stop taking gender into account.

Of course, the progressive articles linked are angry about men dominating the awards, also missing the point. Because most progressive article authors are actually hypocritical as you aptly demonstrated.

[Muizer]

Of course, the progressive articles linked are angry about men dominating the awards, also missing the point.

Which articles?

Because most progressive article authors are actually hypocritical as you aptly demonstrated.

Care to explain?

[conon394]

Oddly enough I would agree with PM on this one (quite possibly not for the same reasons).

In my case I find this kind award event pretty pointless. One need look no farther than say the Oscars their best choices are often bad at the time and have aged even more poorly in many cases.

https://screencrush.com/worst-oscar-...cture-winners/

For example

and of course Citizen Kane lost to some move nobody ever watches now and certainty is never a analyzed in film in school... Alfred Hitchcock best director sorry nope, Kubrick nah (and really Dr. Strangelove lost to my fair lady please), Spike Lee, nada. In 1952 the greatest show on earth won best picture - singing in the rain perhaps the best Hollywood musical ever produced did not even get nominated. Again nobody stops to watch the greatest show on earth now. And it beat High Noon for f-sake. Double indemnity the Searchers yep snubbed, Cary Grant are you kidding me tossed under the bus. Award shows are silly

Its close to the same problem I have with judged sports where say Simone Biles is penalized for being too good - it makes no sense.

I will say I find the red carpet event to these more interesting in that its fun to see famous/expert designers dress people who are not 16 year old walking hangers but a range of body types who can't just ordered about to see who they dress well.

[alhoon]

Which articles?



Care to explain?

Mishkin said the point to having genderblind awards was so that we wouldn't care of whether the persons that won were men or women, saying that by mentioning "most winners are men" I miss the point.

I explained that the article in the OP mentions several progressives that go "OMG! The men dominated the gender-blind award and that is a BAD thing!"
Thus, those same progressives mentioned in the article (including the author of that article) also "missed the point" since they immediately turned the gender-blind awards about gender.

This exposes the hypocrisy of those people because with their reactions, they make clear that "gender-neutral" awards in their opinion should be used to "fight the Patriarchy" and the gender-binary etc etc.

[mishkin]

Mishkin said the point to having genderblind awards was so that we wouldn't care of whether the persons that won were men or women, saying that by mentioning "most winners are men" I miss the point.

I explained that the article in the OP mentions several progressives that go "OMG! The men dominated the gender-blind award and that is a BAD thing!"
Thus, those same progressives mentioned in the article (including the author of that article) also "missed the point" since they immediately turned the gender-blind awards about gender.

This exposes the hypocrisy of those people because with their reactions, they make clear that "gender-neutral" awards in their opinion should be used to "fight the Patriarchy" and the gender-binary etc etc.

so it's just an article, in which the varied opinions of artists are cited. Can you say here what opinions you find ridiculous or hypocritical and why? I did not find anything strange, no cry of "down with the patriarchy" or anything similar.


I ask you again to answer the question that you ask us

What is your opinion on men dominating it?

[alhoon]

so it's just an article, in which the varied opinions of artists are cited. Can you say here what opinions you find ridiculous or hypocritical and why? I did not find anything strange, no cry of "down with the patriarchy" or anything similar.


I ask you again to answer the question that you ask us

Both of those have already been answered.
The "which opinions you find hypocritical" is actually in the post you quoted.

My opinion on the men dominating is in the OP:

So, my stance is: I would have agreed with the change if it happened before the 1990s. Now, it is clear it happened to push progressive agendas and the notion of more than two genders and that we shouldn't tell boys and girls that they are boys and girls. I would have agreed if it happened because gender is mostly irrelevant in best artist competitions.
So... I agree with the change but not with the reasons behind the change.

[mishkin]

Nobody in the article that you quote is saying "OMG! The men dominated the gender-blind award and that is a BAD thing!" (your words), not anything like that, and you continue without answering the question that you yourself raised. You wanted to make a case of "progressives rage because their plan goes wrong" citing an article that in no way proves it.

most awards are a joke, they usually serve for the big companies (who only care about money, they would sell their daughters or sons, they dont care of the gender) to promote an artist or the gala itself in which the prizes are distributed, and that is everything (unless you want to contribute something else)

[alhoon]

Nobody in the article that you quote is saying "OMG! The men dominated the gender-blind award and that is a BAD thing!" (your words), not anything like tha

"At the time, critics warned that the move could be detrimental to women." <=== 5th line of the article.

And then:
"At the inaugural gender-neutral ceremony last year, Adele won artist of the year and said in her speech: “I understand why the name of this award has changed but I really love being a woman and being a female artist.”

And then:
"Critics of the change included Nadine Dorries, then Culture Secretary, who said [...]"

Etc.

Half the article is an "OMG, men dominated the gender-blind awards!"

you continue without answering the question that you yourself raised.

???? How many times should I repeat what I said in the OP?

So, my stance is: I would have agreed with the change if it happened before the 1990s. Now, it is clear it happened to push progressive agendas and the notion of more than two genders and that we shouldn't tell boys and girls that they are boys and girls. I would have agreed if it happened because gender is mostly irrelevant in best artist competitions.
So... I agree with the change but not with the reasons behind the change.

[mishkin]

"At the time, critics warned that the move could be detrimental to women." <=== 5th line of the article.

And then:
"At the inaugural gender-neutral ceremony last year, Adele won artist of the year and said in her speech: “I understand why the name of this award has changed but I really love being a woman and being a female artist.”

And then:
"Critics of the change included Nadine Dorries, then Culture Secretary, who said [...]"

Etc.

Half the article is an "OMG, men dominated the gender-blind awards!"

the most "progressives screaming hysterically / OMG! The men dominated the gender-blind award and that is a BAD thing!" you have is "critics warned that the move could be detrimental to women".

???? How many times should I repeat what I said in the OP?

that's not an answer to "What is your opinion on men dominating it?" that is your reasoning for rejecting the change ("it is a progressive agenda"). It is ok, I won't ask you again.

[alhoon]

the most "progressives screaming hysterically / OMG! The men dominated the gender-blind award and that is a BAD thing!" you have is "critics warned that the move could be detrimental to women".

The article mentioning how bad gender-neutral awards turned out to be for women half a dozen times = progressives screaming "OMG! The men dominated the gender-blind award and that is a BAD thing!"

that's not an answer to "What is your opinion on men dominating it?" that is your reasoning for rejecting the change ("it is a progressive agenda"). It is ok, I won't ask you again.

Let me be, again, absolutely clear.
- What is your opinion on men dominating it?
- I don't care that men dominated it, I am annoyed at progressives because they are hypocritical. <=== Those are in the OP as I have quoted several times. Now I wrote it more plainly so that there's HOPEFULLY no room for misunderstandings.

[mishkin]

- I don't care that men dominated it.

it was as simple as this, thank you. but now I wonder why you asked the question if you don't care.

[alhoon]

it was as simple as this, thank you. but now I wonder why you asked the question if you don't care.

Because I wanted to see what others thought about it.

[mishkin]

Because I wanted to see what others thought about it.

you were again looking for hysterical progressives comments. keep trying.