The people who were traditionally dressed in pink and called girls were boys. Pink was considered the traditional colour for boys and blue for girls in the 19th century. In 1927, there was a report about Princess Astrid of Belgium who had decorated her son’s room pink, only for her to give birth to a daughter. Part of the reason why blue may be seen as the traditional colour for girls is because the Virgin Mary is dressed in blue. Right until the mid-15th century, all children were referred to as girls, boys were called “knave girls” and girls were called “gay girls”. The word “boy” originally meant “servant”.
There are now loads of women touring in bands with female and male members and a fair few all-female bands currently touring. Over the last few years, the majority of the new records or downloads I have bought have been by female led bands, bands with female musicians in them or all female members.
Look not that it matters - but I think you need a reference to support that, otherwise surely it’s just unsubstantiated hearsay. I don’t have to look far to see early and mid 19th century news papers and other publications across Europe that refer frequently to blue is the male and pink as the female colour as the then norm - part of then gender colour association - eg
"THE IMPERIAL [LAYETTE]. As everything connected with the birth of the heir of the French throne… But as blue is the colour appropriated to male children, as rose or pink is to those of the opposite sex…
If you can share similar common documentary of the time (ie written text) that says the opposite then fair enough - (but I couldn’t find any)
Is it “blokey” or is it very male oriented? The two are slightly different. There is much great stuff here and much which has zilch to do with audio. Both good things I think. There will be male bias in some interests just as there is female in others but the question of why the forum is like this is really partly a question as to why music and audio are male oriented and partly a question about how inclusive we are.
This usually cues up lots of self-indulgent stuff about how of course the place is inclusive from people for whom the concept of inclusivity is generally alien and claims ofthat people are choosing to not identify themselves but that’s a cop out really. An assertion of inclusivity is not the same as actual inclusivity just as choosing to not fully identify yourself can be as much about discomfort as it might be about privacy. Are we seriously suggesting that our female numbers are here in droves but choose to not identify themselves. Why here and not elsewhere then?
My female friends probably slightly outnumber my male friends. All are huge music fans but if you want to know why forums such as this look like this then cast your net wider.
At the start of this century as a new father I simply could not take my new child with me if I wished to go shopping for music. Volumes in shops were, as they often still are, simply unacceptable and potentially damaging to young ears. If I needed to change a nappy then what chance in HMV? Same then as now. Nil. At a gig or a festival? Nota hope in hell.
Recent thread on the NW Audio Show quite instructive in this respect. The transport options from the station were not listed on the site but only visible at the venue. Changing facilities? Nil. That horrendous Pink Floyd rig outside on the grass appealed to every elderly bloke going but perhaps it was just me who noticed the kids crying when it went full blast?
There were a couple of female visitors I chatted to who tried to enter certain rooms and were greeted with “Are you looking for someone?/Are you lost?/Are you looking for the bar/food?”. They couldn’t possibly have been there to look at kit they were interested in. One of them the CEO of a well known GM company who would have quite happily spent 5 figures had she heard what she wanted but what she generally found that the attitude stank. She especially loved a certain room with lots of personal audio where it was assumed she’d have great interest because the kit was petite and personal and didn’t have all those nasty complex cables. Nothing heavy to carry. Could all fit in her handbag.
She apparently had great fun explaining that as a woman personal audio made her feel vulnerable and what she was in the market for was an upgrade to a £20k low power, efficient speaker based streaming system.
Social media reflects life. Ditto forums. When the audio industry recognises that £1 from a benefit claimant or a woman is the same as £1 from a middle aged white bloke who wants to bore the arse of the guy running a demo whilst others are trying to listen to the music then all music forums will look different.
It’s not a Naim issue. It’s a male and industry issue.
What? Literally thousands in bands. In Manchester at present you’ll find more all female bands than male if you’re paying attention. The issue is again about comfort. Why they don’t get signed etc.
Excellent can you share the references quoted in the QI! QED article? I would like to look them uo for my edification please? Or was it not a formal text and more of a subjective editorial perhaps - in which case it is unlikely to have references I suspect?
I don’t think music is in general (though certain genres, maybe). Just look at the proportion of girls attending some of the big pop gigs, fuelled by the growth in female ‘solo’ artists, of look ag the travelling public with earbuds on a train. Certainly young adult female members of my extended family seem never to be not listening to music, but always privately unless they are together and share earbuds. But never hifi. Maybe there’s an age effect?
In the 19th century, the use of blue for boys and pink for girls wasn’t as strictly observed as it later became.
[however reasons why it became more observed in the 19C were because]
Practicality: Blue was considered a practical color for clothing, as it was less likely to show dirt and stains compared to lighter colors. This made it a suitable choice for active boys who were more likely to get their clothes dirty.
Symbolic Associations:
Religious Symbolism: Blue has long been associated with the Virgin Mary in Christian iconography, symbolizing purity and virtue. While this association was more related to femininity, it also conferred a sense of respectability and tradition, which could be attractive qualities for boys’ clothing in certain contexts.
Calmness and Trust: Blue is often associated with calmness and trustworthiness, qualities that were desirable for children to embody.
Military Influence: Military uniforms in many Western countries often featured blue prominently. As boys’ clothing sometimes emulated adult fashion trends, including military styles, blue could have been adopted for its association with discipline and order.
Fashion Trends: Fashion trends in the 19th century were less rigidly gendered in terms of color than they later became. Children, especially young ones, were often dressed in white or neutral colors. When colors were used, the choice might have been influenced more by fashion trends, practicality, or family traditions than by strict gender norms.
Overall, while blue may have been popular for boys in some contexts during the 19th century, it was not due to a universally accepted rule or standard.
[So it did vary on cultures and countries more]
European References (which seem to vary from US references)
The Gendered Object" by Pat Kirkham “Dress and Gender: Making and Meaning in Cultural Contexts” by Ruth Barnes and Joanne B. Eicher “Pink and Blue: The Color of Gender” by Yvonne de Gaulle
To be fair with you, I believe it’s bollox. All research I’ve seen suggests the norm for boys and girls was white, and white ‘dresses’ at that to make toilet practices easier allegedly.
Colour only became a thing when it was cheaper to produce and thereafter colours followed fashion as opposed to gender identity. Even then it was for formal occasions for the same reason as now, kids grow out of stuff. That coupled with what I suspect were outfits originally painted quite red in a portrait but have seen colour fade and pollution over the years.
There is no doubt boys wore pink. But they also wore blue, yellow, purple and green too.
Edit: The above reply was to your pre-edited reply!
@Simon-in-Suffolk@Jamiewednesday Cheekily I will lightheartedly comment “I suspect most kids’ clothes were soon so dirty that the original colour was hard to discern in Victorian times. Unless of course, they were fortunate enough to be born into the aristocracy or the middle/merchant classes.”
It’s very blokey to start arguing about stuff that doesn’t matter. Jenny Eclair has a great joke about two men arguing about which would win in a fight between a tiger and a shark.
Agree, my wife is into social media on various platforms there doesn’t seem to be many blokes involved as most of the feedback I get from her revolves around what other women are up to.
I use What’s App for family group stuff but otherwise I got bored with all the social media stuff and came away from it.
Wives aren’t involved, for those of us who have one, because as Guardians of the Purse Strings, they are basically opposed to any expenditure on anything that seems ???...frivolous perhaps……
Consequently HiFi doesn’t register in their perception of enjoyment……sound is sound ……
So they have no interest in a forum for Sound Addicts and even less in spending the household budget on such pursuits ….
Now some may say I am being very biased but in my personal experience that’s exactly where I am….
Same goes with buying more guitars ….
I had a friend in Wales who ALWAYS bought black guitars ….
When I asked him why …
He said my wife never realises it’s a new one !!!
