What is your opium?

@Magnus Anderson

How is what FC originally posted masculine? :-k

Sounds like a woman running around naked in her apartment, having a manic episode.

It’s disorganized, frenzied and ecstatic.

This…
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0V-bY9UpHM[/youtube]

You have excellent taste in music.

Check this shit out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dq8YcRi7DD4&index=153&list=WL&t=0s

And this:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVmZjEJ03Rc[/youtube]

This is some of the weirdest shit I’ve ever heard in my life.

Utter ego resignation:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ft901QVvWnk[/youtube]

This sounds something like what it must feel like to face ones physical or psychic execution.

It is actually very much organized. It is all written, note for note, in rigid schemata.

A bit ahead of its time.

I feel this post could have done in viewtopic.php?f=24&t=187071 <— here, right here.

Anyways. I had thought it really be life. Yet nobody can sustain and procure life. So I returned to ART, have it be known Pneumatic-Coma is an artist. So but my art hadn’t transformed humanity to think, learn, listen, observe, question and actually live this life for it’s intended purposes. So then I thought, hm, Love? Although I hadn’t really clarified the definition of love. I guess if I were to quickly sum it up. Love would be something that had been offered and given just the same. Something of such beauty you’d need not another source of happiness. Needless to say this interpretation distorted my mind when I came to see that it is really our own intentions which drive us to ‘think’ in ourselves that we love something out of this our Life. Yet that really wasn’t it either. I leaned onto philosophy even more in hopes it expressed such a critical way of understanding, just a few simple human emotions and this our entire planet altogether. Although come to think of it the only thing I’d use to bring me back to ground level will always be music. “Music is a moral law. It gives soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination, and charm and gaiety to life and to everything.” I ultimately believe this. And for reasons unknown I seem to always bring myself back to where it all began and that’s learning. Philosophy was that rough patch of learning to think for myself. All in all it would be the gift of being able to comprehend complex and simple bits of information. For me Music was always that rush of inspiration that drove my soul to be compelled to such emotion. Even more so through the whole entirety of lyricism and poetry through-out all varieties of song. It really was sound I was enthused with my whole life. Listening and having the ability to commune with only the best of minds on a rhythmical level. We must all vibe in order to get along if not vibe. Than in scribe. Both are Art and that just warms my heart. :mrgreen:

Love is great in part because it is risky. If truly in love, we risk our structural integrity. A broken heart causes a completely transformed being, if not the perishing of one.
What doesn’t kill makes deeper. Not necessarily stronger.

Okay-Dokie. Than I remain vigilantly unmoved in my last post, yet reverting to re-state that this topic deserves to be posted in the Philosophy forum. At least…My bad.

“Music is a moral law. It gives soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination, and charm and gaiety to life and to everything.” I ultimately believe this."

So do I.

audiomack.com/song/fixed-cross/ … en-files-2
audiomack.com/song/fixed-cross/ramon

Masculine motion is typically characterized by sharp, crisp, discrete movements. Crisply defined movements means change and whatever changes frequently tends towards noise/chaos.
Feminine motion, on the other hand, is typically characterized by smooth, vague, continuous movements. Fuzzy movements means little to no change and whatever does not change tends towards silence/order.

So yeah, men are attracted to complex, harsh, loud, mathematical, energetic music whereas women are attracted to simple, mellow, dreamy, emotional, relaxed music.
That’s the same reason/intuition or systemizer/empathizer distinction.

MASCULINE

Alexander Scriabin - Etude opus 65 no. 3 [20th century classical]
youtube.com/watch?time_cont … Pvfq5H8PgQ

Hiromi’s Sonicbloom - Time Out [jazz]
youtube.com/watch?v=qXsuPkyFQuQ

Aphex Twin - Meltphace 6 [intelligent dance music]
youtube.com/watch?v=lwMjpEXwz1c

Blind Guardian - Nightfall [metal]
youtube.com/watch?v=IoyToHOWSV8

FEMININE

Enya - Caribbean Blue [new age]
youtube.com/watch?v=Jl8iYAo90pE

Franz Schubert - Serenade [romantic-classical]
youtube.com/watch?v=ZpA0l2WB86E

George Benson - Breezin [smooth jazz]
youtube.com/watch?v=kVc5rCl0BIs

Pink Floyd - Comfortably Numb [rock]
youtube.com/watch?v=_FrOQC-zEog

Notice how fuzzy Enya’s music is? Everything flows into everything else – there are no clear boundaries. Very dreamy.

And I didn’t make this up:
theconversation.com/what-your-mu … lity-50492
cam.ac.uk/research/news/mus … -you-think

Staccato and legato might be the words to sum up your “masculine” and “feminine” archetypes respectively.

What then of the piece I posted? Legato, dreamy and emotional for sure, but loud, aggressive and overpowering in equal measure. Is it masculine or feminine? Both? In between? Neither? It is a gigantic sound, old and weary but effortlessly dominating from all sides with its rawness.

I would characterise Enya’s song most of all as light, maybe even playful, perhaps more childlike than feminine or masculine - Nightfall’s song has a lot of femininity to it, a lot of music of that type even has a “beauty and beast” dynamic where both feminine and masculine play off one another in the music as well as the vocals. Comfortably numb is a mindset that affects anyone on certain drugs or with certain kinds of fevers regardless of sex, or at least the Roger Waters verses are. Is being high or ill feminine?

There’s a musical term known as “brightness” that might be of interest to you - in the context of degrees of frequency dissonance. The closer two frequencies are together, the less bright they are, and the difference of just one semi-tone in the 3rd of a scale is the difference between the major “happiness” and the minor “sadness”. Scriabin and others employ a great deal of dissonance and discontinuity in their phrasing and pitch transitions. Schubert’s Serenade has some of all of this but much less, making it smoother and more continuous. Are females brighter and males darker?

Perhaps you might want to work these observations into your model, but personally I find it a bit forced.

It’s okay if you made it up, I made up what I’m posting, but not arbitrarily.

When I think of quintessentially masculine music, I think of heavy, loud, rhythmic (altho it can be melodic if it’s done right), aggressive music.

On the one hand, I think of hard rock, heavy metal, gangsta rap and outlaw country:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edBYB1VCV0k[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkFqg5wAuFk[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNctreabb38[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fG16w9IJrbo[/youtube]

On the other hand, I also think of epic film scores such as:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzig0qI7SFg[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZY2mRG5mzg[/youtube]

And some classical music like:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOk8Tm815lE[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGU1P6lBW6Q[/youtube]

These tracks are full of action, and adventure…bold, daring, imbued with a sense of grandeur, and profundity, full of masculine virtues, like valor.

Additionally when I think of masculine music, I think of what’s avant-garde, and technical.

Conversely when I think of feminine music, I think of the antonyms of the aforementioned words: light, quiet, melodic and agreeable:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULbfVgaMfdE[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E6b3swbnWg[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6Kspj3OO0s[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3WMMwlHgZI[/youtube]

essentially what is challenging is masculine, what is gentle and accommodating is feminine.
Pop music is feminine, because it’s nice, and normal.
So is the sweeter, softer, safer side of every other genre.

There was little that was macho about what FC posted, it was too soft.
It was avant-garde, however, sort of.
But ethereal, which’s feminine.
Disorganized, which’s neither here nor there, in my opinion.
Overall I’d say it was manic, ethereal and eerily ecstatic, erratic, like a woman or effete man having a bout of psychosis.

Now to me, silence isn’t order, it’s the absence of sound, both organized sound, and disorganized.
I wouldn’t conflate order with simplicity either.
There’s such a thing as simple, and complex order.
Order is synonymous with patterns, and you can have relatively complex patterns, like 1 5 3 4, 11 19 15 16, 21 37 29 30, or you can have simple ones, like 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12.
That being said, complex patterns can appear random.
They can be difficult, or impossible for humans, with their limited memory and intelligence, to identify.
The universe might be full of patterns, even ones with profound implications for our lives, we’ll never recognize.

As for whether order is more masculine or feminine, again I think it’s neither here nor there.
Both males and females are, organisms, and they’re relatively complexly, organized, and they produce relatively complexly organized behaviors.
I don’t view males and females as polar opposites in any way, even where they’re most different, like they’re genitalia, they’re still more similar than different, in that they both have genitalia, sex organs, nor do I view them as relative opposites in every way, they are relative opposites in some respects, and virtually identical in others, like in terms of their complexion, their pigment, one sex isn’t lighter/darker than the other.

I think there’s a tendency in right wring oriented philosophy to extrapolate masculinity/femininity to absurd lengths.
Masculinity/femininity are human qualities, I don’t think they can meaningfully encompass every dichotomy in the cosmos, or in our language.

Air is my opium… for the times when I do breathe fully, it provides a natural high. :banana-rock:

I agree. You can also say “non-harmonic” and “harmonic” but then these terms are not used in English speaking countries. They appear in my native tongue and what they mean is “noise” and “tone” respectively. (English people apparently don’t but here where I live we make a clear distinction between “sound” and “noise”. Sound is partially harmonic whereas noise is completely non-harmonic. Percussion instruments, for example, would be classified as producing sound.)

Silence means no change. As you introduce change, you start moving towards noise. The music becomes louder, and harsher, as more and more change is crammed within a short period of time. It also becomes more energetic.

So I stand by what I said: masculine sound is characterized by change.

It’s difficult to tell. I’d say that Colosseum’s track is in a mixed state that is dominated by feminine tendencies.

Nightfall alternates between the two poles every half-a-minute or so. It leaps from one extreme (mellow, quiet, singing) to another (harsh, loud, screaming.) Most of their music is like that – very abrupt. They are too focused on the details i.e. the parts indivdiually. The whole suffers as a consequence, so their music has little to no structure. They don’t know how to gradate – to smoothly interpolate between two states. Their music is very high-energy – much more than the piece you posted. Consider Wheel of Time. If that’s not an energy-drain then I don’t know what is. Frequent changes, constant action, a lot of going on at every single point in time, massive stress on vocal chords, no silence, no rest at any single point in time, and all of that for 9 minutes straight . . .

I would say so. Light, heaven, happiness, positivity, etc is associated with women whereas the opposite which is darkness, hell, pain, negativity, etc is associated with men.

Who looks more masculine to you?

Satan or Jesus?

@Magnus

Associating men with negativity and women with positivity gives men a bad rap.
I’d rather associate men with a different side of positivity, and negativity.
I, and I suspect many, tend to associate men with pride (I like myself, which can be (un)healthy, mind you, like all the feels) and anger/hate (I dislike you), and women with guilt/shame (I dislike myself) and love (I like you), giving men a more self>other attitude, and women a more other>self attitude, but of course both sexes are more than capable of experiencing both.
I associate men with courage, but also foolhardiness, and women with cowardice, but also caution.
Oddly I associate men with both happiness (things are pretty good), and despair (but they’re going to get worse), which gives them a conservative outlook, and women with sadness (things are pretty bad), and hope (but they’re going to get better), giving them a progressive outlook.

And all of these qualities have implications for the kinds of music men and women tend to create, and gravitate towards.

Satan is one of our negative male archetypes, and Jesus one of our positive ones.
They appear equally masculine, in that they both look strong, but Satan looks antisocial (the attacker), and Jesus social (the defender).
Men’s sociality manifests in their capacity to protect and provide (ensure survival), and their anti-sociality manifests in their capacity to destroy.
There are negative and positive female archetypes in the bible and elsewhere in popular culture, such as Eve, Lilith and Delilah on the left hand, and Ruth, Esther and the three Marys on the right.
Women’s sociality manifests in their capacity to give birth, and to nurture (ensure health and wellbeing), women’s anti-sociality manifests in their capacity to abort, and to deprive.

Disclaimer: even if it ought to go without saying on a philosophy forum, I just want to say I’m sure some of what passes for masculinity and femininity is socially constructed, as I’m sure some of it has a biological basis, it’s just often difficult to distinguish nature, from nurture, and of course there are exceptions, no two individuals are entirely alike, but a few exceptions don’t disprove the rule.

Try to think of (excessive) negativity as a type of excess that is most commonly associated with men.

Right. So what you’re saying is that excessive lack of fear (recklessness) is a type of vice that is typically found in men whereas excessive fear (cowardice) is a type of vice that is typically found in women. I wouldn’t disagree with that.