James Levine

[Todd]

which typically includes verbiage to the effect that "we are an equal opportunity employer and value the contribution of all individuals, regardless of gender or ethnic background, etc, etc, etc."

Perhaps in the US, but it would surprise me if that were the case for all the orchestras Jansons has conducted.  I seriously doubt the Vienna Philharmonic has verbiage to that effect.

[Parsifal]

Parenthetically:  the female conductor in whose orchestra I played for three years was a conductor superior to four male conductors whose batons I followed in the six years following.

Reminds me of a story. A few decades ago there was a controversy that there were many black baseball players but few black pitchers. In the everyday racism that was tolerated in the day, the rational was bandied about that black people just were not suited to be pitchers (which was considered to be a high prestige position which involved intellectual skill). An elementary statistical analysis showed that the average black pitcher had significantly better stats that the average white pitcher, providing fairly definitive proof that black pitchers were discriminated against. (A black pitcher had to pass a higher criteria to be admitted to the baseball league.)

[SurprisedByBeauty]

But when 98% of the tea on the shelf is male conductors, that is for all intents derisory, isn't it?  At the very least, condescending.

I am not sure that people who hold Jansons' opinion in some form would agree with that. If you asked them if MALE conductors were their cup of tea, they'd be forced to distinguish and say: Well, I like SOME.
The discriminatory part, if it's that much, of Jansons' answer was actually the bit where he didn't distinguish between the class (female) and the individual (Sophie Bansraueuter, a highly mediocre conductor I just made up). If I defend him, it's in part because I say that there are as of yet so few, and conducting so specialized an activity so dependent on others to work, that the lack of distinction is understandable.

[Florestan]

But when 98% of the tea on the shelf is male conductors,

A situation for which Jansons bears no responsibility, and one that will not be remedied (if it is indeed in a dire need for remediation, which is debatable) by forbidding people to express other points of view than those which are deemed "progressive".

that is for all intents derisory, isn't it?  At the very least, condescending.

100% of the composers constituing the canon of Western music, and who are listened to and discussed here on GMG on a daily basis, are male. 98% (and I'm being generous) of the great pianists or violinists (men and women alike) discussed and listened to here on GMG on a daily basis recorded music written by males only. Why is this amply documented GMG behavior not deemed derisory or condescending towards women? (Or maybe it is, who knows...)

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Reminds me of a story. A few decades ago there was a controversy that there were many black baseball players but few black pitchers. In the everyday racism that was tolerated in the day, the rational was bandied about that black people just were not suited to be pitchers (which was considered to be a high prestige position which involved intellectual skill). An elementary statistical analysis showed that the average black pitcher had significantly better stats that the average white pitcher, providing fairly definitive proof that black pitchers were discriminated against. (A black pitcher had to pass a higher criteria to be admitted to the baseball league.)

That is in fact a great measure and point. Fortunately baseball works quite well with statistics, where such a pernicious bias can be measured.

[Karl Henning]

Reminds me of a story. A few decades ago there was a controversy that there were many black baseball players but few black pitchers. In the everyday racism that was tolerated in the day, the rational was bandied about that black people just were not suited to be pitchers (which was considered to be a high prestige position which involved intellectual skill). An elementary statistical analysis showed that the average black pitcher had significantly better stats that the average white pitcher, providing fairly definitive proof that black pitchers were discriminated against. (A black pitcher had to pass a higher criteria to be admitted to the baseball league.)

Aye.

I am not sure that people who hold Jansons' opinion in some form would agree with that. If you asked them if MALE conductors were their cup of tea, they'd be forced to distinguish and say: Well, I like SOME.
The discriminatory part, if it's that much, of Jansons' answer was actually the bit where he didn't distinguish between the class (female) and the individual (Sophie Bansraueuter, a highly mediocre conductor I just made up). If I defend him, it's in part because I say that there are as of yet so few, and conducting so specialized an activity so dependent on others to work, that the lack of distinction is understandable.

"Female conductors are not my cup of tea" does seem to presuppose that (while he is coyly expressing 'an opinion') it is a matter of reviewing the nature of the musical world, and the nature of female conductors.  But per Scarps's observation above, there are environmental barriers (not absolutely impermeable, but that is perhaps the best that can be said) to women getting in the game, so that they can try themselves and develop.

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

I don't have that nationalist element to my predilections, I think... so I can't quite relat. I want good music be played, Australian, American, Austrian or otherwise. And I want my conductors to manage to lead exciting performances, not wear a skirt or trousers or be this or that.

I think there should be some space for cultural nationalism or cultural protectionism or whatever you want to call it, provided it doesn't get out of hand. Think of "Canadian content," for example. Otherwise I agree with everything else you say.

But how is that related to 'really enjoying female conductors', anyway?

What matters is not whether Jansons enjoys this or that, but whether he is actively obstructing the progress of female conductors. If he isn't, no big deal. I don't care what a person likes or doesn't like, as long as he isn't breaking the rules.

Same thing with my hypothetical Muti example. If Muti doesn't like American composers, I don't care, that's just his opinion. But as someone who wants more American music played, I would support potential other MDs for that reason, as a matter of policy.

[Parsifal]

A situation for which Jansons bears no responsibility, and one that will not be remedied (if it is indeed in a dire need for remediation, which is debatable) by forbidding people to express other points of view than those which are deemed "progressive".

Maybe you do not care if it is remedied, but females may care that careers are closed to them.

100% of the composers constituing the canon of Western music, and who are listened to and discussed here on GMG on a daily basis, are male. 98% (and I'm being generous) of the great pianists or violinists (men and women alike) discussed and listened to here on GMG on a daily basis recorded music written by males only. Why is this amply documented GMG behavior not deemed derisory or condescending towards women? (Or maybe it is, who knows...)

It is because women are implicitly told (though the default culture) that this is not a job where you will be accepted. The same is true in science. Remarks like Janson's seemingly innocuous comment are part of it.

Here is another statistic. In 1983 the college degrees awarded in computer science in the U.S. were almost equal by gender, 60/40, male vs female. By 2006 the female share dropped to 17%. Why? In the intervening years personal computers by Atari, Apple and IBM had become popular and computers were marked as a toy for men and boys. Before that girls did not realize that it was not for them.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding

[Karl Henning]

What matters is not whether Jansons enjoys this or that, but whether he is actively obstructing the progress of female conductors. If he isn't, no big deal. I don't care what a person likes or doesn't like, as long as he isn't breaking the rules.

The present discussion is in effect throwing it under the microscope, but, no:  it was rather a snotty thing to say, but to be fair, it isn't any matter of broken rules.

[Florestan]

What matters is not whether Jansons enjoys this or that, but whether he is actively obstructing the progress of female conductors. If he isn't, no big deal. I don't care what a person likes or doesn't like, as long as he isn't breaking the rules.

This.

[SurprisedByBeauty]

"Female conductors are not my cup of tea" does seem to presuppose that (while he is coyly expressing 'an opinion') it is a matter of reviewing the nature of the musical world, and the nature of female conductors.  But per Scarps's observation above, there are environmental barriers (not absolutely impermeable, but that is perhaps the best that can be said) to women getting in the game, so that they can try themselves and develop.

Except that in conducting, the person doing it is only very partially responsible for its success. Your success is how 100 other people react to you. Which is why conducting is such a later reforming position; such a weathervane for progress (real or symbolic).

[Karl Henning]

Except that in conducting, the person doing it is only very partially responsible for its success. Your success is how 100 other people react to you. Which is why conducting is such a later reforming position; such a weathervane for progress (real or symbolic).

Oh, indeed.  And if a student female conductor is trying to do the job in front of an orchestra 45% populated by people whose cup of tea she ain't?

[Archaic Torso of Apollo]

Why?

Because I like it?

[Florestan]

Maybe you do not care if it is remedied, but females may care that careers are closed to them.

Oh, please. There are few female conductors not because Jansons doesn't like them, but because there are few women willing to pursue such a career (as opposed to the numerous females actively pursuing careers as performers, singers and orchestra members). End of story.

[Parsifal]

End of story.

That means your brain is turned off?

[Karl Henning]

Oh, please. There are few female conductors not because Jansons doesn't like them, but because there are few women willing to pursue such a career (as opposed to the numerous females actively pursuing careers as performers, singers and orchestra members). End of story.

Well, I should have known that it was this simple!  Clearly my posts earlier were a waste of everyone's time.

[Florestan]

That means your brain is turned off?

People usually use ad hominem when their stock of rational arguments is depleted, but why you felt the need to use it beats me.

[Florestan]

Well, I should have known that it was this simple!  Clearly my posts earlier were a waste of everyone's time.

Could you (or somebody else, for that matter) indicate a person, or an organization, who / which hindered the career of a female conductor?

[Parsifal]

People usually use ad hominem when their stock of rational arguments is depleted, but why you felt the need to use it beats me.

Nothing ad hominem about it, you stated "End of Story" which implies you consider the discussion closed. That's fine with me.

One final though. It is okay for Janson's to say "woman conductors are not my cup of tea." It would also be okay for him to say "Black conductors are not my cup of tea," or "Jewish conductors are not my cup of tea?" If these statements are not the same as the first, what is the difference?

[SurprisedByBeauty]

Oh, indeed.  And if a student female conductor is trying to do the job in front of an orchestra 45% populated by people whose cup of tea she ain't?

But that's exactly the point I'm trying to make: It takes a far broader and more broad-minded change, to level THAT playing-field. Some think that aggression speeds up the process; I say patience, within limits, may do more... depending on the situation. Moreover, the "cup of tea" statement doesn't suggest that someone's mind is closed. Prejudice is actually OK, within fairly wide limits, if one is aware of it and if one doesn't discriminate based on it. I go into concerts with prejudice all the time -- but I don't think I've never not been swayed by a great performance. Arguably I would be more critical of something middle-of-the-run by someone I feel less well inclined about... but then I'm also aware of the bias and may try to compensate. In any case, we can't outlaw feelings and change attitudes by force. We can do that only with the soft power of conviction, setting examples, understanding, compassion yaddayadda.