Jump to content

Why so few all female metal bands?


Strawberry
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Arguably metal. It's like metal for people who hate metal. Whatever this is, it's insufferable. Wish I hadn't looked them up. I have no way to unhear this now.

LOVEBITES - Rising

 

These assholes are on Nuclear Blast? ugh...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sheol said:

These assholes are on Nuclear Blast? ugh...

Of course they are, what other label would they be on? NB are the kings of garbage bombastic symphonic and power metal among other crap. Obviously there's a market for this stuff or there wouldn't be so much of it out there, but fortunately I've been able to avoid those corners of the internet for the most part. If they sign a good band (a band I'd want to buy) call me, that would be noteworthy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/11/2022 at 4:28 AM, SurgicalBrute said:

Oh, I don't doubt they're some out there, particularly with Japan's obsession with all-girl pop bands. Seems like exactly the kind of situation that would cause some "anti-diva" pushback from the right kind of ladies. I was more curious about the "Japan leads the way" aspect of that comment. A bit of google searching took me to a few different lists, but of the ones I checked out, most sounded like pop-punk or radio rock bands...Nothing wrong with that, but I was wondering what kind of bands we were really talking about here.

Haven't listened to Kovent since their demo. I remember liking it okay, just didn't grab me super hard

Konvent albums I've enjoyed are call down the sun and puritan masochism on recent listens. When they play it live the singer reminds me bit how obituary singer walks round on stage with all the hair in front of them but there alot prettier ☺️. Those albums are Worth a listen if you like death/doom music. The singer is tiny bit different to bloke doing same vocals but I say👍another band asagraum who are a Netherlands all female black metal band I think are very impressive. Worth a listen. 

Once human have a good metal singer. Saw them support fear factory number of years ago. Can't remember her name. She was good enough to convince Logan mader(ex machine head) to come out of retirement 

From my experience most metal fans and musicians are blokes. So no surprising that there are not that many all female metal bands. How do you see it. Have you got any female metal bands you rate well?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/11/2022 at 5:19 AM, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Arguably metal. It's like metal for people who hate metal. Whatever this is, it's insufferable. Wish I hadn't looked them up. I have no way to unhear this now.

LOVEBITES - Rising

 

There's some things we agree on and that's letting others listen to this music.😉  What is genre. Is it Powermetal/ nightwishy/ pop music. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/12/2022 at 6:40 PM, blaaacdoommmmfan said:

Konvent albums I've enjoyed are call down the sun and puritan masochism on recent listens. When they play it live the singer reminds me bit how obituary singer walks round on stage with all the hair in front of them but there alot prettier ☺️. Those albums are Worth a listen if you like death/doom music. The singer is tiny bit different to bloke doing same vocals but I say👍another band asagraum who are a Netherlands all female black metal band I think are very impressive. Worth a listen. 

Once human have a good metal singer. Saw them support fear factory number of years ago. Can't remember her name. She was good enough to convince Logan mader(ex machine head) to come out of retirement 

From my experience most metal fans and musicians are blokes. So no surprising that there are not that many all female metal bands. How do you see it. Have you got any female metal bands you rate well?

 

Sorry for the late response...not a whole lot of all female metal bands out there, but I've found more than a few over the years with at least one female member, that I've enjoyed. On one side, traditional stuff like Savage Master, Sign of the Jackal and Mystik are all really good and on the more extreme side of things bands like Bestial Holocaust, Adorior, and Savage Necromancy have all been topnotch. I agree that there aren't a lot of ladies playing metal, but I disagree with about 90% of the posters on here on the idea that there aren't a lot of girls who listen to metal. It's by no means an even 50/50 split, but over the years I've seen it get to about a 1-in-3 ratio...it really depends on the type of metal. My own anecdotal experience has been that women seem to be drawn more strongly to either stoner doom or black metal...I think it's as much about the aesthetic of those styles as it is the music 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you broaden it out to female fronted bands you've got plenty of witchy stoner doom posty and even crusty bands like Sub Rosa, Acid King, Royal Thunder, Witch Mountain, Windhand, Agrimonia, Eight Bells also comes to mind.  Last year, we had albums from Vouna, King Woman, Succumb, Pupil Slicer, Big/Brave. I think it's fair to say relatively few raw female fronted bands or female extreme vox bands, but the ladies can bring it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have heard a few guys say that metal music is considered more of an "aggressive" genre, and thus usually appeals more to guys since guys are believed to have a more aggressive nature than girls.

I have noticed a few signs of that on various occasions, like for example of two guys get into an argument then there is often this feeling that they could get into a physical fight at any moment (and sometimes do), whereas if girls get into an argument then it is a lot more verbal.
I have also noticed that my female friends and I will often spend a lot of time on having intimate discussions about our romantic relationships or on how we feel and things like that, where guys seem to be more closed about that and focusing their attention more outward and being more rough with each other (in a playful way, but still).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/19/2022 at 12:50 AM, Miss_Teala said:

I have heard a few guys say that metal music is considered more of an "aggressive" genre, and thus usually appeals more to guys since guys are believed to have a more aggressive nature than girls.

I have noticed a few signs of that on various occasions, like for example of two guys get into an argument then there is often this feeling that they could get into a physical fight at any moment (and sometimes do), whereas if girls get into an argument then it is a lot more verbal.
I have also noticed that my female friends and I will often spend a lot of time on having intimate discussions about our romantic relationships or on how we feel and things like that, where guys seem to be more closed about that and focusing their attention more outward and being more rough with each other (in a playful way, but still).

I think that's just playing into the tired old cliches of what constitutes a "Man" and a "Woman". Both genders are to a large part conditioned to behave a certain way or cultivate certain mindsets, conflict resolutions, and emotional responses, or else they are seen as a-typical of their gender. If it's not "adjusted" before kindergarten/school it's usually done by classmates through bullying and social expectations.

Men can absolutely talk about feelings, and they 100% would be better off if they did. But the societal patriarchal norm is that if they do they're a pussy and should man up (the fact that female genitalia is seen as something negative and male as something positive, is a whole another discussion). But to talk, or hell even recognize and name your emotions, is something you learn to do, it's not innate. That's why women are supposedly "better" at it. They're taught that that is how you resolve conflicts, process and problem solve, and encourage group cohesion. Men are taught that the most accepted way of enabling group cohesion is to perform activities together, and problem solve by actions/force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Johan my old friend, I'm not disputing the societal conditioning aspects that you speak of, for I believe that is mostly acurate. But even you must see that a lot of these stereotypical gender traits do come naturally even without any conditioning. They have a basis in reality, we're not just pulling this shit out of thin air. You seem to suggest that you think most of it is learned behavior but I disagree. I do believe some of it is learned or mimicked but a lot more of it does come natural to many and is then positively reinforced by society. Boys will be boys and all that. So just like we now all mostly belive that homosexuality is not a choice it's inherent (which was not commonly accepted 50 years ago) then it also must follow that being masculine to some extent is inherent and comes naturally to many men, (not all) it's not all learned behavior.

Yes, clearly it is seen as a negative by many if a man shows too much emotion. (men are expected to suffer in silence) But being a pussy as you say is only a negative for a man, not for a woman. Women are desired/expected/encouraged to be and act femininely by men. And this includes hyper-emotionality, even though men will often outwardly complain about this female trait to other men. Same way women will claim that they want men to feel they can express their emotions, but then will turn around and call them a pussy, think them weak, devalue and disrespect them if they actually do. Society enforces these boundaries subconsciously.

Men & women are under no obligation to be traditionally masculine or feminine, and more and more members of both sexes are choosing not to be. But yet these traditional gender stereotypes remain the traits men and women want most from their heterosexual partners whether consciously or unconsciously, whether expressed or not.

So in a sense it's like natural selection in action. Less masculine men are not desired by women to the same degree that masculine men are. Women will sometimes settle for less masculine provider types if they themselves are less attractive/desirable, or they're single moms, or after they have reached a certain age and have become less attractive/desirable and have not as of yet been able to secure the more masculine male of their fantasies. But yet they remain resentful of having been forced to settle so they'll still usually be keeping an eye out for any opportunities to trade up. This keeps the divorce rates high in first world countries.

But regardless of marriage & divorce rates, bottom line the most masculine men among us will still always have plenty of opportunities to spread their seed, even if they won't necessarily commit to 'settle down' and start a traditional family with the women they impregnate.

While the least masculine men in society might not ever get a chance to breed. 90% of women are competing for 20% of men. Seems women all want and feel they deserve their prince charming. Some of them will inevitably have to end up settling for the next 40 or 50%, but most of the bottom 30 or 40% of men will likely never be able to breed and pass down their genes. Yes I'm making up the numbers here but surely you see what I mean. The 'incel' 40 year old virgin is an actual trend these days, not just a myth anymore. No woman will ever die a virgin unless it was her choice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sheol said:

I think that's just playing into the tired old cliches of what constitutes a "Man" and a "Woman". Both genders are to a large part conditioned to behave a certain way or cultivate certain mindsets, conflict resolutions, and emotional responses, or else they are seen as a-typical of their gender. If it's not "adjusted" before kindergarten/school it's usually done by classmates through bullying and social expectations.

Men can absolutely talk about feelings, and they 100% would be better off if they did. But the societal patriarchal norm is that if they do they're a pussy and should man up (the fact that female genitalia is seen as something negative and male as something positive, is a whole another discussion). But to talk, or hell even recognize and name your emotions, is something you learn to do, it's not innate. That's why women are supposedly "better" at it. They're taught that that is how you resolve conflicts, process and problem solve, and encourage group cohesion. Men are taught that the most accepted way of enabling group cohesion is to perform activities together, and problem solve by actions/force.

I have noticed that a lot of things that are considered girly are seen as something negative if men do it.

If my girl-friends and I talk sweetly to each other and give each other endearing compliments, or cry easily or something like that, then this seems to be received much more positively than if guys do it.
And if I wear some pink glittery shirt or something like that on it then that is seen as "cute", whereas it seems to be viewed as negative if a man does that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, GoatmasterGeneral said:

Johan my old friend, I'm not disputing the societal conditioning aspects that you speak of, for I believe that is mostly acurate. But even you must see that a lot of these stereotypical gender traits do come naturally even without any conditioning. They have a basis in reality, we're not just pulling this shit out of thin air. You seem to suggest that you think most of it is learned behavior but I disagree. I do believe some of it is learned or mimicked but a lot more of it does come natural to many and is then positively reinforced by society.

I think where we disagree is the proportions of the nature/nurture. You say 70/30, and I lean more towards 30/70.

As for the attraction and preference thing, the problem with studies like that is that it's really hard to study adults who have not been exposed to traditional Western masculine/feminine stereotypes, since those ideals permeates large parts of the globe (not just the global north).

The way I see it is that some genetic predispositions and phenotypes are more dominant in one of the sexes or the other, like men typically being taller and having more dense musclefibers and women having higher percentage of bodyfat, but when it comes to hormonal distribution like testosterone and estrogen they are not as important as bro-science or Jordan Peterson would have us believe. They may have a significant effect on behaviour, if allowed so, but are by no means the single denominator.

11 hours ago, Miss_Teala said:

The thing that I have always wondered about is why men who have feminine mannerisms are sometimes considered "sissies".

Because feminine mannerisms in men are equated to being homosexual and homosexuality is apparently the worst thing imaginable in a patriarchal world. Since it doesn't just threaten the concept of what consitutues manhood, but it also represents someone who goes outside of the norm, and therefor is perceived as threatening to people who like to keep things in square little boxes. At least that's my theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sheol said:

I think where we disagree is the proportions of the nature/nurture. You say 70/30, and I lean more towards 30/70.

As for the attraction and preference thing, the problem with studies like that is that it's really hard to study adults who have not been exposed to traditional Western masculine/feminine stereotypes, since those ideals permeates large parts of the globe (not just the global north).

The way I see it is that some genetic predispositions and phenotypes are more dominant in one of the sexes or the other, like men typically being taller and having more dense musclefibers and women having higher percentage of bodyfat, but when it comes to hormonal distribution like testosterone and estrogen they are not as important as bro-science or Jordan Peterson would have us believe. They may have a significant effect on behaviour, if allowed so, but are by no means the single denominator.

Because feminine mannerisms in men are equated to being homosexual and homosexuality is apparently the worst thing imaginable in a patriarchal world. Since it doesn't just threaten the concept of what consitutues manhood, but it also represents someone who goes outside of the norm, and therefor is perceived as threatening to people who like to keep things in square little boxes. At least that's my theory.

You're reading too much into the word Johan. "Sissie" comes from "sister" which makes sense, feminine mannerisms equate with girls and girlish behavior. It's yet another way how society reinforces gender traits and expectations. Sissie doesn't necessarily have to mean homosexual. It just means girlie and emotional/weak. A kid can be called a sissie by other boys without being thought to be a homosexual. They have other words for that.

Now in Australia they'd call that boy a poofta, and as a Yank I don't actually know if that word carries more blatant homosexual connotations. But I suspect it might.

An actual dissection and deep discussion of homophobia is too much for me at 7:45 am when I have a 1,200 mile drive in front of me. It really seems to be quite a complex issue why homosexuality threatens so many of our manhoods. I will say that I think exposure has a lot to do with it. As a New Yorker gay people are no strangers to me so I'm not nearly as shocked or offended or upset by the flamboyantly gay as many from more sheltered rural environments might be. My attitude has generally been: who cares?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always like coming here for an education about Australia and Australian English.

Apart from in 80's kids, who in many cases didn't understand what they are saying or what it means, poofta has never been an Australia word. Poofter may well have been used, poof more likely, but poofta is what American TV thinks Aussies speak like. It's also a word that's been steadily slipping out of the Australian vocabulary since the 80's.

When it comes to scoring major idiot points, or for those blatantly making homosexual connotations, it's been replaced by  so many other words that these days you'd be lucky to hear it used in a pub with a bunch of drunk mates ribbing each other. Drag queens, gays, and the like began owning and using the word poofter in the 80's and it lost all it's power, these days it only gets used by naive people and TV.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly wish there were more all female metal bands. I came across "Crypta" from Napalm Records and they are awesome. I follow Solar guitars on Facebook and Crypta guitarist Taina Bergamaschi is now sponsored by them. Fucking rad!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2022 at 2:04 PM, GoatmasterGeneral said:

You're reading too much into the word Johan. "Sissie" comes from "sister" which makes sense, feminine mannerisms equate with girls and girlish behavior.

And I think you're taking me to literal. I wasn't thinking of the etymological roots of the word "sissie" in particular haha. Rather what the implication and connotations of the word were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • Join Metal Forum

    joinus-home.jpg

  • Our picks

    • Whichever tier of thrash metal you consigned Sacred Reich back in the 80's/90's they still had their moments.  "Ignorance" & "Surf Nicaragura" did a great job of establishing the band, whereas "The American Way" just got a little to comfortable and accessible (the title track grates nowadays) for my ears.  A couple more records better left forgotten about and then nothing for twenty three years.  2019 alone has now seen three releases from Phil Rind and co.  A live EP, a split EP with Iron Reagan and now a full length.

      Notable addition to the ranks for the current throng of releases is former Machine Head sticksman, Dave McClean.  Love or hate Machine Head, McClean is a more than capable drummer and his presence here is felt from the off with the opening and title track kicking things off with some real gusto.  'Divide & Conquer' and 'Salvation' muddle along nicely, never quite reaching any quality that would make my balls tingle but comfortable enough.  The looming build to 'Manifest Reality' delivers a real punch when the song starts proper.  Frenzied riffs and drums with shots of lead work to hold the interest.


      There's a problem already though (I know, I am such a fucking mood hoover).  I don't like Phil's vocals.  I never had if I am being honest.  The aggression to them seems a little forced even when they are at their best on tracks like 'Manifest Reality'.  When he tries to sing it just feels weak though ('Salvation') and tracks lose real punch.  Give him a riffy number such as 'Killing Machine' and he is fine with the Reich engine (probably a poor choice of phrase) up in sixth gear.  For every thrashy riff there's a fair share of rock edged, local bar act rhythm aplenty too.

      Let's not poo-poo proceedings though, because overall I actually enjoy "Awakening".  It is stacked full of catchy riffs that are sticky on the old ears.  Whilst not as raw as perhaps the - brilliant - artwork suggests with its black and white, tattoo flash sheet style design it is enjoyable enough.  Yes, 'Death Valley' & 'Something to Believe' have no place here, saved only by Arnett and Radziwill's lead work but 'Revolution' is a fucking 80's thrash heyday throwback to the extent that if you turn the TV on during it you might catch a new episode of Cheers!

      3/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 10 replies
    • I
      • Reputation Points

      • 1 reply
    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/52-vltimas-something-wicked-marches-in/
      • Reputation Points

      • 3 replies

    • https://www.metalforum.com/blogs/entry/48-candlemass-the-door-to-doom/
      • Reputation Points

      • 1 reply
    • Full length number 19 from overkill certainly makes a splash in the energy stakes, I mean there's some modern thrash bands that are a good two decades younger than Overkill who can only hope to achieve the levels of spunk that New Jersey's finest produce here.  That in itself is an achievement, for a band of Overkill's stature and reputation to be able to still sound relevant four decades into their career is no mean feat.  Even in the albums weaker moments it never gets redundant and the energy levels remain high.  There's a real sense of a band in a state of some renewed vigour, helped in no small part by the addition of Jason Bittner on drums.  The former Flotsam & Jetsam skinsman is nothing short of superb throughout "The Wings of War" and seems to have squeezed a little extra out of the rest of his peers.

      The album kicks of with a great build to opening track "Last Man Standing" and for the first 4 tracks of the album the Overkill crew stomp, bash and groove their way to a solid level of consistency.  The lead work is of particular note and Blitz sounds as sneery and scathing as ever.  The album is well produced and mixed too with all parts of the thrash machine audible as the five piece hammer away at your skull with the usual blend of chugging riffs and infectious anthems.  


      There are weak moments as mentioned but they are more a victim of how good the strong tracks are.  In it's own right "Distortion" is a solid enough - if not slightly varied a journey from the last offering - but it just doesn't stand up well against a "Bat Shit Crazy" or a "Head of a Pin".  As the album draws to a close you get the increasing impression that the last few tracks are rescued really by some great solos and stomping skin work which is a shame because trimming of a couple of tracks may have made this less obvious. 

      4/5
      • Reputation Points

      • 4 replies
×
×
  • Create New...