A problem: Although there are pockets and waves of enlightenment in some institutions women continue to be marginalized in music and technology in institutions. They are rarely given teaching positions or assistantships in technology and music composition.

A solution: In order to restore the balance of power between all beings, women have to acknowledge their secret feelings, devise coping strategies to deal with men of power and privilege, bond with and support one another in dedication to evoking the most positive and creative personal and professional behavior from themselves and others in every way that is possible. Creativity at all levels of society in every possible action is the only solution to the evolution of consciousness free of the limitations of fear.

A former graduate student who attended the University of California at San Diego in the past has revealed her feelings and complaints about her perceptions of the department and her treatment by male faculty and students. Since I taught at UCSD from 1967-81 I feel inspired to reply to her perceptions and her expression of feelings about the department. I would like to thank this woman at the outset for opening the door to this article with the courage to express what she felt about her time as a graduate student at UCSD.

I was invited to apply and was hired by Robert Erickson and Will Ogden who were the founders of the Music Department to help establish the graduate program in Electronic Music. At the time I was one of a few composers on the West Coast qualified to do such a thing. Most Universities did not have studios or courses in Electronic Music. (After my first year at UCSD I was invited by Easly Blackwood to apply for a similar position at the University of Chicago. I used that invitation to advance my position at UCSD.) I was the only woman included in the new music faculty until the appointment of singer Carol Plantamura around 1979. Harpsichordist Rosalyn Tureck was an incumbent professor before the formation of the new department.

Robert Erickson was my principal composition teacher from 1954-60 and my professional mentor. His teaching was notable for supporting me to work in my own way as he did with all his students. His attitude in teaching composition was devoid of sexism or racism. He was ethical. His delight was helping others to be creative and professional in composition what ever the style. Erickson was skillful in drawing out the best abilities of his student's. He was tireless in his investigation of music and had a wealth of advice and pointers to relevant musical resources - always useful and specific. His guidance was invaluable to me and to my peers (all male). None of us sounded alike in our compositions even though we liked and admired each other's work.

Erickson and Ogden wished to establish a Music Department that would be "comfortable for composers". The ideal was to have no theory without practice in any course. Having more than one composer on the faculty was a practical solution to this ideal and would give composition students exposure to many differing interests and methods. Under their leadership graduates were admitted to the program without discrimination regarding race or sex. Women were present in the composition program from the beginning even though there were always more men. When I began to compose in 1951 there were other women in my first composition class at the University of Houston. In the next class at San Francisco State College there was one other woman out of twenty five. None of the women from that period are visible as composers today. Generally during the fifties and sixties my experience was to be the only woman interested in composing or in other activities dominated by men. Fortunately for me my male peers were supportive if unconscious of their bonding habits. The Women's Movement did not surface until the seventies. I often felt like the solo fish swimming opposite the group - a feeling with me since childhood. When the group turned to swim in my direction I was delighted to have some company.

As the department evolved I had to work very hard to maintain my position. I was hired during a window of opportunity which I am sure could not exist today. I had a BA from San Francisco State College, 15 years of professional experience as a composer, 6 years as a co-organizer of the San Francisco Tape Music Center a prototype alternative space and studio founded in 1960 and one year as director of the Tape Music Center at Mills College. I was hired as a lecturer (non tenure track). It took two years to achieve the tenure track and the title of assistant professor. It took one year for a male colleague of the same rank hired at the same time. I was given a wonderful opportunity and at the time I was one of the only women (maybe the only woman) qualified for the position that Erickson and Ogden wanted me to create. There were also very few men who qualified for the position. Electronic music was new to academia. I had been in the vanguard since 1958 of a new form which is now commonplace in academic and industrial music.

It was terrifically hard for me at UCSD. I considered myself an anti-. establishment avant-garde composer in those days. Here I was joining the establishment! I had a conflict of interest. On the one hand I had struggled uncompromisingly for 15 years determined to be a composer and to support myself in music. My free lance work included teaching private lessons, performing, music copying and occasional small commissions. The innovative work in Electronic Music accomplished and presented at the San Francisco Tape Music Center was recognized. Now I had a real job with a salary that I was not so sure I really wanted. By the end of the first year I considered resigning. It took me 14 years to act on that consideration. I resigned my position as Full Professor step III in 1981.

What was hard? I was keeping my feelings to myself. I was not getting the support I needed to cope with the pressured atmosphere of a University. The community of peers that I enjoyed in San Francisco was absent. I was not much older than some of the graduate students. I was not sure that I was qualified or even able to teach University courses and advise MA and Ph.D.. candidates. At times I felt like an impostor. Every day I was confronted and sometimes threatened with what I did not know or my lack of wisdom. My creative work as a composer did not seem to fit in academia. There were too many classically minded scientists looking down their noses at me - or so I felt. Scientists most often prefer Baroque and Classical music rather than new music. Social functions were uncomfortable in a decidedly heterosexual community. Everyone on the faculty recognized that my partner was a women and acted decently but beyond that inner circle awkward situations could arise. Women's Studies programs were non existent much less Gay and Lesbian Studies. My former teacher was now a colleague. I was challenged to my edges.

During the next few years as the department grew male colleagues of my age or younger were hired at higher ranks than me. I felt jealous even though they had more credentials than I did. Somehow it did not feel fair. Threatened I faced my fears and channeled my anger: I worked very hard to increase my publications to make up for my lack of credentials. By 1976 I was promoted to the rank of associate professor with tenure, I had been a Guggenheim Fellow and I was appointed Director of the Center for Music Experiment and Related Research. I was holding my own and contributing to the evolution of the department. Every Spring as the third quarter of teaching wound down and summer approached I would ask myself questions such as "What are you doing here? Where are you going? What is the meaning of life?"

In 1979 I was invited to teach composition at Stanford by Professor Leland Smith who was taking a sabbatical leave. While I was there I noticed how much I enjoyed my teaching and how good it felt to be free of University administration. I took Sabbatical leave from UCSD in 1980. After performances in Seattle and Minneapolis I spent the summer in the Hudson Valley in up state New York reflecting on what occupied my time as a university professor. I came to the conclusion that I needed to act on my feelings. I did not want to continue working in an institutional structure which was consuming my time and drawing me into a bureaucracy that felt increasingly inhospitable to creative work. I wanted to devote my time to composing and performing and to creating my own organization. I wrote a letter of resignation and took a leap of faith.

At present (1995) only two colleagues from the time of the founding of the department are still teaching. Robert Erickson's debilitating illness unfortunately took him away from the department early. Will Ogden has retired as have others. I returned to teach for two weeks as a Regent's Lecturer in February of 1990. I was told that the graduate students felt that they had missed something of the former more avant-garde days of the department. They wanted me to provide for what they seemed to consider a gap. I could not tell much about the attitudes of the faculty in such a short time. Certainly the atmosphere is more conservative as so much has been codified since the excitement of initializing what was an innovative department. There were some excellent students who seemed to be very creative in their work. None of the women complained about sexism during the one to one sessions we had.

Following are from the former student's post about UCSD and my attempt to comment and provide some thought, tools and strategies for coping in what is generally a sexist, racist environment no matter how enlightened the men in power.

Former Student - "Secrecy is one of the means that those who discriminate against women use to perpetuate themselves and to avoid change".

Men with privilege and power are not inclined to share it. They do not have to know or care about the feelings of those who do not have privilege and power. The traditional roles for men and women- deep programming reinforced by family and society - are sometimes used unethically to continue to divide and discriminate as well - . Study of the enemy is necessary. What is the modus operandi? Leverage points have to be found. Traditional values have to be questioned. Investigative fact finding with informed or innocent questions is the tool to use constantly. Matter-of-factness is the strategy that can expose secrecy. It is necessary to know the system that is in operation. It is not necessary for men of privilege and power to know who you are or how you feel. This by the way can be used to advantage. Secrecy is used on both sides. Men hide their methods - women hide their feelings and vice versa.

"At that time no women were ever hired for the teaching assistantship in electronic music. Having completed the M.S., electrical engineering, I had more qualifications than all of the men. Also, there was a woman graduate student there with a Ph.D. in a scientific field, and she wasn't offered that position".

The former student's observation is a good motivation for fact finding by faculty and students in Music Departments everywhere. Privilege and power are relative not absolute. Some men do not realize that they are holding privilege and power to the detriment of others. Privileged powerful men need prompting to reach out and invite women to participate in discussions and decision making. Women need to follow through and never let their applications and proposals disappear into the bureaucracy. Never assume that you will be treated fairly. That assumption must be your secret.

Former Student: "I admired UCSD's interest in experimentation and innovation. However, the open-mindedness never extended to a commitment to affirmative action for women. Innovation was often treated, unconsciously, as a male trait, associated with the characteristics traditionally ascribed to masculinity. Many people there view themselves as being very avant garde, but somehow when it came to the issue of women, the progressiveness disappeared. They did not view themselves as opposing equality for women - it's just that the actions (funding) didn't seem to go in the direction of any good intentions."

My research was supported with funding at UCSD. I was the first faculty member given release time to carry out a research project at the Center for Music Experiment. I was awarded more than one grant from the University Research Board. There was a clear initiative on the part of the Faculty to find qualified women to be Research Fellows at CME and for Faculty recruitment. It remains difficult to find women who are as qualified as men for positions in technology. There needs to be more out reach though to women. It is not enough to just open the door. It needs to be safe to cross the threshold

Women need to constructively evaluate and support their peers in technology and help others to overcome *technophobia* - help to change technology and music. Technology and music guide the evolution of society. Males bond through technology and music and take charge. Women are excluded because of the bonding which comes from deep programming. Women more often choose not to take part in the external organization of community and society even if invited. More likely women fear to take part. The submissiveness of women has come about through centuries of yielding to insensitivity, cleverness, brute force and murder by those holding power. Men have co-opted technology and music for thousands of years. It will take more than a few generations and a huge effort to restore the balance of power.

Music and technology has been shaped by men. We are now in an era where the balance of nature is threatened by men's technology (organizations, methods and machines). The earth is being ravaged by lack of care or regard for the land. Witness the wounded mountainsides, stripped forests, rivers sucked dry or polluted, relative silence raped by the violent noises from combustion engines. Men of power and privilege do not have to care unless there is creative action on the part of everyone to redress the balance of power. The negative use of the planet reflects the use and treatment of women by unethical men.

Former Student: "I was asked by a faculty member to provide my resume to be listed as a co-investigator in the SDF grant. I had trusted that I was included via this request for my resume. Months later I saw the grant application. My name had not been listed and I had been tricked. No women received funding, except as secretaries, there under this grant. A professor at Stanford had asked me, later, why I wasn't present at the organizational meeting for the project. I had to reply honestly that no one had told me about it. "

A woman who finds herself in situations where her qualifications are overlooked or minimized needs support. Her perception of her self worth is challenged. She needs to acknowledge her feelings which is not always very easy. Her feelings need to be heard (and sometimes located) by a trusted witness or counselor. Someone who will listen without judging or criticizing. Men of privilege and power do not have to care about her feelings. Feelings can change when recognized and acknowledged by the woman and a witness who does not try to repair or revise her feelings. The difficulty in admitting what one is feeling comes when the feelings seem unacceptable either to her or to her social paradigm (deep programming). Acknowledgment of feelings can bring the strength to cope. Anger (which always covers fear) can be channeled toward creative and constructive solutions. Fear always blocks any kind of creativity. The first step is realizing the fear and then taking action to face the fear and find resolution. Discussion with peers who face similar problems can help, a mentor who can give wise advice and assist the formulation of coping strategies could be very helpful. Finding such support and inner strength can help either to change the situation or to leave it for something better.

We buy into and help perpetuate the negative technology of institutions (bureaucracies) by participating. Organizations such as a University are machines for educating and administrating people. No matter the initial good intentions machines that become bureaucracies are self perpetuating blocks to creative solutions. A University is a technology. The nature of technology is innovation. No technical advance is ever definitive. Changes are imperative.

A prospective woman graduate student who also posted to the list was very smart to inquire about the programs in various Universities before making a choice. Unfortunately many students enter Universities with a lack of awareness of the selected educational system or wrong assumptions.

What questions need to be answered? How do I feel about what I want to learn? How will any program support me to learn what I want to learn? How do I learn how to learn? How can I unlearn anything that is detrimental to my creativity? How can I detect what I don't need to learn? How can my creativity contribute to the evolution of consciousness? What learning will open the doors of creativity? Creativity means that I discover new ways to use my knowledge and I discover new information in new patterns.

Although the University structure was not right for me I feel grateful to those men who were supportive of me as a composer and opened the door for me to participate and learn and to create an economic base for myself. Since leaving the University I have continued my free lance work as a composer/performer and established Pauline Oliveros Foundation Inc. a program for the arts. The Foundation is celebrating ten years of activity with the mission of creating new work in music, literature and theater. It is a platform for creating a community of artists worldwide. My challenge is to engage the local community in the higher purposes of culture - the evolution of consciousness. My faith is in the creative process. I am never sure from one year to the next how financial support will arrive. All I know is that it does.

Pauline Oliveros

Monterrey, N.L. Mexico

November 13, 1995

Date: Sun, 19 Nov 1995 05:34:13 -0500 From: [email protected] Reply to: [email protected] To: [email protected]

Subject: Graduate Student Concerns

First I respect very highly Pauline Oliveros' morality and sincerity in giving up a life of assured income and comfort in order to pursue the path most consistent with her artistic ethics and ideals.

>A solution: In order to restore the balance of power between all beings, women have to acknowledge their secret feelings, devise coping strategies to deal with men of power and privilege, bond with and support one another in dedication to evoking the most positive and creative personal<

>Since I taught at UCSD from 1967-81 I feel inspired to reply<

>Men with privilege and power are not inclined to share it. They do not have to know or care about the feelings of those who do not have privilege and power.<

>Music and technology has been shaped by men. We are now in an era where the balance of nature is threatened by men's technology (organizations, methods and machines). The earth is being ravaged by lack of care or >regard for the land. Witness the wounded mountainsides, stripped forests, rivers sucked dry or polluted, relative silence raped by the violent noises from combustion engines. This is true, and also we should be concerned for the health, safety, and compensation for those who work in the US and abroad in the manufacturing occupations. At the same time, technology has also contributed to the eradication of many diseases and to the health and comfort of many people, particularly women. My only regret is when there are classes and nations that do not have access to enjoy the benefits as fully as we do. While there are some people who can live without technology, there are others who do not have that kind of robust health and stamina and who need more comfort just to avoid becoming sick and dying. Technology has very severe disadvantages but it has also offered society valuable benefits. We are stimulated by computers that inspire our intellects and creativity and enhance communication, but the manufacture of these computers does have an ecological impact. Does that mean we should stop using computers? The balance between technology and the environment is a crucial issue.<

>A woman who finds herself in situations where her qualifications are overlooked or minimized needs support. Her perception of her self worth is challenged. She needs to acknowledge her feelings which is not always very easy. Her feelings need to be heard (and sometimes located) by a trusted witness or counselor. Someone who will listen without judging or criticizing. Men of privilege and power do not have to care about her feelings. Feelings can change when recognized and acknowledged by the woman and a witness who does not try to repair or revise her feelings.<

>Fear always blocks any kind of creativity. The first step is realizing the fear and then taking action to face the fear and find resolution.<

>Discussion with peers who face similar problems can help, a mentor who can give wise advice and assist the formulation of coping strategies could be very helpful.

>We buy into and help perpetuate the negative technology of institutions (bureaucracies) by participating. Organizations such as a University are machines for educating and administrating people.<

>What questions need to be answered? How do I feel about what I want to >learn? How will any program support me to learn what I want to learn? How >do I learn how to learn? How can I unlearn anything that is detrimental >to my creativity? How can I detect what I don't need to learn? How can my creativity contribute to the evolution of consciousness? What learning will open the doors of creativity? Creativity means that I discover new ways to use my knowledge and I discover new information in new patterns.

>My faith is in the creative process. I am never sure from one year to the next how financial support will arrive. All I know is that it does. Let's hope that continues.<

Linda Seltzer

11/19/95

Dear Linda,

Thank you for your very kind remarks at the beginning of your reply to my essay. Your words certainly made me feel good!

Your disagreements will give me the opportunity to think more deeply about what I have said, learn more and I hope fuel more dialogue on the subjects of controversy and concern. I welcome your disagreements.

(Quotes from your words are enclosed in **. Quotes from my words are enclosed in << >>

Regarding <<coping strategies>>: I believe coping strategies are necessary. Every one has to cope in one way or another with all kinds of problem for which there is no protection. No matter how many rules and regulations in effect or how finely thought out policies and procedures may be - daily life in or out of academia can be full of unexpected forms of unethical behavior. By Unethical behavior I mean any expression of disrespect - racism, sexism or other unethical concepts. For sparring with those kinds of opponents I need strategy.

One strategy that has worked very well for me is to respect my opponent no matter what is said or done. This is an ethical strategy and it only works if respect on my part is real. It is not easy. It guarantees that I will not engage in an unethical (disrespectful) response.

Respect means that I listen to my opponent. Listening means that I study the opponent's behavior. Studying the opponent's behavior means that I have a chance even if it is only a split second to gain an advantage to raise consciousness. For example in a panel discussion where I am the token woman the male moderator says to me "Ladies first" I feel an inner contraction at this imposition. I say "Thank you very much I prefer that one of the other panelists have the opportunity to be the first lady". The moderator's comment is sexist, isolating and inappropriate for the circumstances. I don't believe that this apparently innocuous little piece of language is covered in a policy and procedure manual nor in rules and regulations. My tone is respectful yet humorous. My point is made. Nobody got hurt and especially not me.

Would you favor the following: An unethical opponent says to you "girls shouldn't play with electricity" Your emotion is rage and you effectively assassinate his character or kill him spontaneously while in the rage.

*policies can protect students from the potential from discrimination (or other abuses such as nepotism or favoritism)*.

Policies are strategies. Do you have any personal policies?

Regarding funding policies: Maybe IAWM could give a letter of distinction to the music department that demonstrates the most equitable funding policies for graduate students. Is there anyone out there interested in doing the research? I believe Jann Pasler conducted a research project on NEA funding that was very revealing regarding the funding of women composers. The results of such research then could be published, given to the appropriate administrators and used publicly to raise consciousness and maybe more funds.

<<It remains difficult to find women who are as qualified as men for positions in technology.>>

Here is a revision: It remains true at this point in time that more men are qualified for positions in technology than women. It is also true that technophobia (fear) prevents many women (and some men) from training in technology. This does not mean that there are no qualified women. My statement was with respect to quantity and the remaining imbalance of trained women versus men.

I was very frustrated in reviewing applications during my time at UCSD. There were never enough women applying as composers or technologists as graduate students or for research and faculty positions. It was necessary to do outreach. Even with outreach it was difficult. Today the picture is changing. There is still danger though and retrenchment as you have experienced and described. Having the appropriate degrees does not necessarily qualify one for a position. A faculty defines the position and has feelings about the kind of person who can work in that position harmoniously with them. Ah - feelings! Well we are all a bunch of humans. It's objectivity that is the myth.

but it is not true there anymore.*

Is the balance of women to men in science and engineering equal? Are Science departments more enlightened and ethical than Music departments?

*If a student from a wealthy family spent the summer studying in Europe and another student was working as a secretary in a law office to save money for tuition, is the wealthier student more *qualified*?

The answer is not necessarily. What seems to be implied is an example of financial inequity and classism. Those people who have gained are or born into the milieu of <<power and privilege>> are not necessarily inclined to share it unless they have developed ethics. It is true that privilege is used unethically to place some students over more deserving students that are not privileged. Literature as well as the theater of life is full of such stories that are played out in a variety of ways. The redressing and balancing of power and privilege is one of the major tasks of our time. It will take a concerted creative effort on the part of many enlightened people to change what is inequitable. In the meantime I recommend <<coping>> strategies until new rules and regulations, policies and procedures are agreed upon and effective. Coping strategies are also needed to gain agreement in groups who formulate policies and procedures.

*We are stimulated by computers which inspire our intellects and creativity and enhance communication, but the manufacture of these computers does have an ecological impact. Does that mean we should stop using computers?*

We cannot stop using computers even if we wanted to stop - they have amplified our intelligence and our ability to help others. Tools and technology are not evil. People are not evil. Inappropriate use of tools and technology though unethical behavior is evil. There is a very deep need for ethical behavior concerning the earth and environment. Native peoples of the world had a deep understanding of their relationship to the earth and practiced ethical behavior in this respect. We would do well to study those practices that could be beneficial today. Unethical behavior could eventually kill the earth's life sustaining eco systems and destroy humanity. The major tasks of our time is to raise consciousness, engage in creative activity with technology informed by ethics and help oneself and others to evolve as ethical human beings

For these comments do not correspond to my situation at all.*

My words were general and meant for those who could be helped by them by their own choice.

emphasis should be very strongly on the practical, external situation too. Getting involved and changing policies is as important as minding the interior.*

I am glad that you brought up the necessity of social action to work for policy changes. I believe that all means are necessary and need to be included in working together as long as they are ethical means. There is no single way to accomplish the complicated tasks ahead. Balance between exterior and interior is important too.

*If a mentor just listens privately and offers emotional support, that is fine, but it is not enough. Public support and practical mentoring are needed too.*

You are right. The ideal mentor would be able to guide a person skillfully in as many different ways as necessary - an excellent generalist. I certainly did not mean to limit the functions of a mentor.

honestly don't know what Pauline is referring to here.*

Numerous people are afraid of the unfamiliar and do not engage in the adventure of creative activity. The rewards and punishments of our public institutions do not generally encourage creative activity. People find safety in what is familiar. For example: At age 77 my mother was asked to compose a musical. Her reaction was fear - not that she did not want to do it but that she could not do it right since she had never done it before - Self defeating fear yes?. She is a song writer and lyricist who had never had any songs performed. I encouraged her to do the musical. She faced her fear and composed the musical which had 80 successful performances in the Houston Independent School District. Since then she has composed four more musicals equally successful with as many and more performances and yet each time she tangles again with her "can I do it right" fear. .

<<My faith is in the creative process. I am never sure from one year to the next how financial support will arrive. All I know is that it does.>>

*Let's hope that continues.*

Thanks Linda! Maybe I should amplify this a bit since funding is such a deep issue. My determination to pursue a creative life in the arts has been a guiding force and if you will a strategy. When I look back on my life I feel astonished that I got from A to B financially at any time. I was never taught anything about managing money. Budgets were an arcane mystery until fairly recently in my life.

My mother is a "working class" piano teacher. At 81 she is still teaching and has no margin of support other than social security and her home to sustain her financially.

My father worked in boat repair and maintenance all his life. At 86 he does Marine surveys for insurance companies and also has to continue as long as he can. I left home at age twenty with three hundred dollars and my accordion as my assets. I could not depend on support from either of my parents. I worked my way through college. I have found my way to this point in life with enough resources to keep going. I am definitely not wealthy financially. I do not have health insurance. It is my creative activity that continues to fund me and keep me healthy. I have put my faith in my creative activity. It is my skill in seeking resources informed by that faith that keeps the money arriving. It is not always enough for everything that I would like to have or to do. Grant makers are a dollar too short these days as well. There are set backs at times.

My faith is that I can discover creative and ethical ways of securing the funding that I need to continue my work year by year. This allows me to change with the times and challenges my edges. I would like to continue my work at the highest level that I can achieve artistically with respect to my ability and to help others as well. Rather than give time and energy to obstacles I want to direct my time and energy to finding solutions that dissolve obstacles. This is empowering. At this point I would like to offer my sincere wishes that all the women of this list and any others who read these words receive the resources that they need for their creative work. Faith is also an important ingredient as we engage in our own processes in our own way.

I am happy for any one who finds that the pleasures (which are many) of University life out weigh the displeasures. I have great respect for those who are managing to change outmoded policies and are warriors for equality. Equality is an ethical concept.

Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 15:18:36 -0500

From: [email protected]

Reply to: [email protected]

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: Graduate Student Concerns

> For sparring with those kinds of opponents I need strategy. One that has worked very well for me is to respect my opponent no matter what is said or done. This is an ethical strategy and it only works if respect on my part is real. It is not easy. It guarantees that I will not engage in an unethical (disrespectful) response. Respect means that I listen to my opponent. Listening means that I study the opponent's behavior. Studying the opponent's behavior means that I have a chance even if it is only a split second to gain an advantage to raise consciousness. For example in a panel discussion where I am the token woman the male moderator says to me "Ladies first" I feel an inner contraction at this imposition. I say: "Thank you very much I prefer that one of the other panelists have the opportunity to be the first lady". The moderator's comment is sexist, isolating and inappropriate for the circumstances. I don't believe that this apparently innocuous little piece of language is covered in a policy and procedure manual nor in rules and regulations. My tone is respectful yet humorous. My point is made. Nobody got hurt and especially not me.

>Would you favor the following: An unethical opponent says to you "girls >shouldn't play with electricity" Your emotion is rage and you effectively >assassinate his character or kill him spontaneously while in the rage.

If a man made that remark to me I would simply tell him that girls should learn about electricity and physics because it is not in the interests of society to have a class of persons who are ignorant about technology.

Instead of a strategy, I always just tell the person what the behavior was that bothered me or let them know in an indirect, but not mean, way.

I also want to say that although Pauline comments on respecting opponents, I hope not to consider anyone to be an opponent. At the same time, I do not respect everybody. Some people act so badly that they lose my respect. One way to handle the situation of unrespectable people is that I just remove myself from the sitation. If a situation gets to be that bad it's not worth the energy or time to deal with it when I could do something else or be somewhere else and be happy.

The other point to make is that if a person engages in backstabbing towards me, that person hurts oneself. The person who engages in backstabbing has just diminished him/herself in an interior way, as if one were an apple inviting a worm to crawl inside. So I would not ruin myself by attempting to get back at the person. Also I would not want to escalate a situation since one hopes there could be improvement. However, I think it's necessary to tell a person very simply and directly what they have done. The backstabber may move oneself another notch up, but the ladder will crumble from underneath. If a person makes a remark that is polite on the surface, but hurtful underneath in an undermining way, they may get some sort of perverse satisfaction out of it, but they have ruined themselves more than than they have hurt me. Spiritual practices in the Asian tradition train one to concentrate and not be diverted by such intrusions.

>Regarding funding policies: Maybe IAWM could give a letter of distinction >to the music department that demonstrates the most equitable funding >policies for graduate students. Is there anyone out there interested in >doing the research? I would be interested in working with others on this. I have access to S+ to do data analysis.

>at this point in time that more men are qualified for positions in >technology than women. It is also true that technophobia (fear) prevents In electronic music I am not sure I agree with this. Many men who are not knowledgeable use a lot of high-sounding terminology even through their knowledge is quite superficial. At SMT there was a paper in which one man reported "results" which were not valid from a mathematical point of view. Several women praised this man highly for his claims (which were erroneous). The more dramatic the claim, and the more simple the techniques sound, the more skeptical one should be. The main difference between many of the men and many of the women is that most women do not tend to make so many grandiose claims. They don't call a mixer a signal processor and they don't call a speech recognizer a silicon ear. Also there are cases in which men have put their own names on women's ideas,where the women didn't "capitalize" on them.

>experienced and described . Having the appropriate degrees does not >necessarily *qualify* one for a position. A faculty defines the position >and has feelings about the kind of person who can work in that position >harmoniously with them. Ah - feelings! Well we are all a bunch of >humans. It's objectivity that is the myth. The "needs of the department" argument is one which is now being used to avoid obeying the discrimination laws. Somehow an interest in women's issues and women studies never seems to be a priority. When one talks about "needs of the department," "kind of person," "complements the current faculty" perhaps there is a real gap which the department has to fill (e.g. a pianist retired and they need a piano teacher) but there may also be some other politics going on.

>Are Science departments more enlightened >and ethical than Music departments? Yes. There are more Women in Science programs than Women in Composition programs. There are funds in almost every major university to attract and hire outstanding women scientists. Also, scientists are more open-minded about crossing disciplines and doing multidisciplinary research. In the humanities, sometimes people are very closed-minded about people from one area exploring ideas in another area. Also, many corporate managers are more ethical and enlightened about women's issues than many male composers who claim to be avant garde. Also, men in science would not get grants for some of the shoddy work that men in computer music have gotten funding for.

>Numerous people >are afraid of the unfamiliar and do not engage in the adventure of >creative activity. I guess this is a matter of semantics again. What you have referred to as fear is what I would describe as lack of self confidence. I once had a composition teacher who was always tearing down people's self confidence by subtle means, and I stopped studying with him.

Linda Seltzer

[email protected]

11/22/95

Dear Linda,

Happy Thanksgiving!

Here are my responses to your post of 11/22/95 .in regard to my statements.

(Quotes from your words are enclosed in * *. Quotes from my words are enclosed in << >>)

Your response to my story about the all male panel and male moderator seemed to include some misperceptions: I am the one that made the joke about the "First lady" The moderator made the remark to me "Ladies first". It does make a difference in the meaning of my story in the way that you restated what I said to make your points.

I fail to understand your objection to the word strategy. Could you clarify this objection? I understand strategy to be a guiding principle for interaction with problems, circumstances, people etc. Strategy is non linear and allows for creative interaction. A wide range of tactics can be employed with a strategy. As a composer I use strategies for music making - it gives me freedom as long as I choose appropriate strategies.

I understand method to be a step by step process for learning the techniques of a particular subject or discipline. Method is a linear process (usually- maybe there are some non linear methods which I have not encountered). Method implies the analysis of a subject or discipline into prescribed steps which are to be learned in a specific order. Usually a great deal of repetition is required. Method does not usually allow for creative interaction. For example performers in music need methods for learning the skills and techniques necessary to play music. The creativity in performing (mostly written) music comes after the methodology. You say that you would prefer the word method rather than strategy. Then you tell me how you would have handled the moderator and also the man in the other example "Girls shouldn't play with electricity". What is methodical about your responses? Would you be willing to explain? I would like to understand what you are getting at.

Incidentally I certainly agree with you that the moderator's remark *was not in accordance with the appropriate way to refer to women in an academic forum* and that *girls should learn about electricity and physics because it is not in the interests of society to have a class of persons who are ignorant about technology.* I believe that any ethical means including methods and strategies must be used to change unethical behavior.

Your next remark seems to be a non sequitur: *(Instead of a strategy), I always just tell the person what the behavior was that bothered me or let them know in an indirect, but not mean, way.*

*I hope not to consider anyone to be an opponent.*

I share this hope with you.

It is behavior that is *unrespectable* (sic) not people. *At the same time, I do not respect everybody.*

I respect every human being on the planet. I do not respect unethical behaviour. Murder is unethical. I do not support the death penalty.

*One way to handle the situation of unrespectable people is that I just remove myself from the sitation.*

Opponents pop up at mostly unexpected times often in a most irregular manner and often in circumstances or situations that cannot be easily abandoned at least not in the moment: For example a woman is performing in an orchestra. The conductor picks on her during rehearsal makes an example of her with a sexist remark.

*Spiritual practices in the Asian tradition train one to concentrate and not be diverted by such intrusions.*

There are a great variety of spiritual practices. Would you be willing to write more about your assertion and how it applies to your statements concerning *backstabbing* and *perverse satisfaction?

Regarding research on the balance of women and men in music departments in compostion and technology: *I would be interested in working with others on this. I have access to S+ to do data analysis.*

I certainly hope that others join and support you on accomplishing this much needed research. The results could be well used as an ethical and powerful tool to help bring about the changes needed in academia.

<<---at this point in time that more men are qualified for positions in technology than women. It is also true that technophobia (fear) prevents--->>

*In electronic music I am not sure I agree with this.*

Although what you say in your words below may be true I don't understand how your statements relate to my perception that "at this point in time it is still true that less women than men are qualified for positions in composition and technology. It is also true that technophobia (fear) prevents many women (and some men) from training in technology" *Many men who are not knowledgeable use a lot of high-sounding terminology even through their knowledge is quite superficial. At SMT there was a paper in which one man reported "results" which were not valid from a mathematical point of view. Several women praised this man highly for his claims (which were erroneous). The more dramatic the claim, and the more simple the techniques sound, the more skeptical one should be. The main difference between many of the men and many of the women is that most women do not tend to make so many grandiose claims. They don't call a mixer a signal processor and they don't call a speech recognizer a silicon ear. Also there are cases in which men have put their own names on women's ideas,where the women didn't "capitalize" on them.* Would you be willing to explain how your words above relate to my perceptions?

*The "needs of the department" argument is one which is now being used to avoid obeying the discrimination laws. Somehow an interest in women's issues and women studies never seems to be a priority. When one talks about "needs of the department," <<kind of person,>> "complements the current faculty" *

A solution here is to build tools through research as you and others want to do to help make women's issues and women's studies a priority throughout academia. Would you be willing to say more about how the above arguments are being used to *avoid obeying the discrimination laws*?

*I guess this is a matter of semantics again.*

How is the following a *matter of semantics* ? *What you have referred to as fear is what I would describe as lack of self confidence.*

Well - what is the root of lack of self confidence if it isn't fear? *I once had a composition teacher who was always tearing down people's self confidence by subtle means, and I stopped studying with him.*

The other possibility could have been to continue studying and fight his *subtle means* to get what value he had to give you in your studies and help to change his means.

With my best regards.

Pauline Oliveros

"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."

Albert Einstein

Date: Sun, 26 Nov 1995 09:57:17 -0500

From: "Linda A. Seltzer" <[email protected]>

To: [email protected]

Subject: Re: Graduate Student Concerns

11/26/95

Dear Linda,

Thank you for answering my questions. I appreciate your efforts to clarify your points in this dialogue. I have just a few more comments. I will be leaving Mexico on November 29 to return home to Kingston. I mention this because I will have much less time available to participate in this dialogue or at least I will not be able to reply as promptly as I have been.

Your participation and contribution has brought out many issues that need sustained discussion. The issues that we all face together are important to the welfare of many women (and men). I hope that our dialogue will help in winning the war on racism and sexism and any other ism that oppresses people and suppresses their creativity.

Here are my comments on your reply: (Quotes from your words are enclosed in * *. Quotes from my words are enclosed in << >>)

*Concerning strategy, I prefer emotionally connecting with others and not planning out my actions and responses.*

According to my definition and understanding given in my previous response your statement is a strategy - your strategy.

*there are other people who use strategy as a means of control*.

All strategies are means of control. Control is not necessarily negative especially self control. A strategy which is used to control others in a harmful way is unethical. Harmful means any interaction which is purposefully intended to be hurtful to someone else, diminishing of another person or intended to suppress creativity.

*-----other people who use strategy as a means of control. Such people are never really listening, and they use strategy as a means of using others to gain their own ends. They will not consider the concerns of others from the others' point of view and they carefully hone their words and gestures to influence and control. This is what I object to in the concept of strategy*.

You have described the unethical use of strategy. I don't believe that it is possible to live with out strategies. Ethical strategies embody the higher purposes of human evolution. I believe your objection applies to harmful strategies or wrong and unethical strategies conscious or unconscious. You have expressed concern for your way of relating with emotion. Strategy does not necessarily negate emotions. A good strategy though might help promote self control and prevent the expression from an emotional state of a harmful reaction such as character assassination or hateful remarks.

<<----a woman is performing in an orchestra. The >conductor picks on her during rehearsal makes an example of her with a >sexist remark.>>

* This seems to be a place where it would be appropriate for the woman to just show her feelings plainly and yell or cry or whatever emotion comes, if that's what the woman feels like doing. The conductor would then see how he has made her feel.*

Maybe an interesting strategy could be for all women to yell and scream their emotional states whenever a sexist remark is made in any situation, any time any where. If all women did it in a concerted effort how many shouts a day would we hear? I'm not sure after recovering from his shock if the conductor would understand (her feelings) and change his behavior. The woman after making such a scene might feel better for having discharged her emotion. Probably she would then have to cope with the consequences of her action. Her action probably would have to be decoded by the conductor or for the conductor and interpreted in her favor. He may be so focused on the result he wanted in the music that her emotional out break could only register as disruptive and as grounds for dismissal- his consciousness still ignorant of the sexism of his remark. Rosa Parks brought about great change when she sat in the front rather than the back of the bus in Jim Crow days. She really was just too tired that day to walk to the back of the bus. She did what she felt like and contributed to the change of unjust laws which she disobeyed.

*In Buddhist meditation and other forms of Asian arts one learns to concentrate and to block out intruding thoughts. Therefore one develops the ability to deflect negatives that come in from others - to see the means by which they are being produced and to not internalize them.*

I have a rather different take on Buddhist meditation. Mindfulness precedes concentration in learning meditation. The practice of concentration is not for *blocking out intruding thoughts* it is to be aware of thoughts that arise, to let them go and return to the breath or other anchor object of concentration. For example: Siddhartha the Buddha visited a town where a terrorist would come down from the hills on a certain day of the week and kill anyone that he saw on the street. The town people warned Siddhartha not to go out for his walking meditation that day for fear of the terrorist. Siddhartha went out despite the warnings. As he was walking with a slow step measured by his breathing the terrorist appeared in the distance and shouted "Stop or I will kill you". Siddhartha continued his meditation walking toward the terrorist. The terrorist again shouted "Stop or I will kill you!" As Siddhartha got closer the terrorist drew his sword and said " You haven't stopped!" Siddhartha continued his meditative walking and breathing and replied "I have stopped, you haven't." The terrorist dropped his sword and became a disciple.

*----if a woman does not write such things on her resume, it does not mean that the man is more qualified. I would not view this undergraduate as more qualified for graduate school when compared to a woman who did not make any claims.*

Maybe IAWM could help by conducting some workshops on what constitutes an effective resume.

Thank you Linda for your insights and arguments.

With all good wishes,

Pauline Oliveros

"Our deepest fears are like dragons guarding our deepest treasures"

-Rainer Maria Rilke

P>

http://deeplistening.org/pauline