In fact, the norms, gender roles, oppression, and discrimination arguments most often used by de facto or actual Whimmin’s Studies types to explain the paucity of female achievement compared to male DON’T hold up to the tests of time-period permissibility, and awards actually received by whimmin, therein.

For example, while right brain-centric people excel in artistic pursuits – such as painting, writing poetry, singing, and composing music – these pursuits have been equally open to both sexes SINCE awards related to such have been doled out; YET the vast majority of prizes given for superior achievement in such, have been won by >>>

MEN.

That’s right – even if historical convention, mores, or even discrimination were involved in much earlier times to explain such disparities in the arts, how can you (logically and tenably) assert such conditions as accounting for the disparities contemporarily?!

Hmmmm?!

And the disparities are H U G E:

1)As for the (predominantly) right-brain pursuit of literature, less than 10% of its Nobel Prize awards have gone to whimmin; even with the first woman to receive one occurring in 1909

2)As for the (predominantly) right-brain pursuit of poetry, only 10% of its average prize winners for superior output have been whimmin, as greatly exemplified by the Bollingen Prize in Poetry winners list; yes, even with one of its earliest awards being to a woman

3)As for the (predominantly) right-brain pursuit of photojournalism (think of it as creating a story largely in pictures), I have yet to see or hear of a woman who has won a Pulitzer Prize for News Photography

4)With additional objective research, you will find that the vast majority of songs and complicated musical pieces – past AND present – have been written by >>>

MEN.

But in your ignorance, you construct your opening sentence thusly:

“The only reason that you don’t find women composers in history is that it wasn’t considered sophisticated for a woman to compose music.”

Instead of composing it more objectively, such as:

“The only reason that you don’t find women composers in history is that their music isn’t sophisticated enough for the annals of greatness.”

(The few exceptions to this rule need not be regurgitated).

ObjectiveThoughtCombinedWithDeepEmotion=MaleGreatness

Some women, however, (often those who grew up in musical families) did extend their musical careers beyond only playing music composed by others. Two very famous female composers were Clara Schumann and Fanny Mendelsohnn – married to Robert Schumann and Felix Mendelssohn. Clara’s music especially was quite wide-spread – she was almost as famous as her husband. Some popular pieces by her include Four Polonaises (for piano) and Piano Trio in G Minor. Her music influenced both the format of public concerts and the tastes of the general public. Some lesser known female composers are Louise Farrenc and Marianne Martinez.

Furthermore, what’s this nonsense about “practicing too much to be good at music”? I really hope that you’re joking with that. I’d like you to please point out one good musician who didn’t get where they were through practice and hard work.

I suggest brushing up on your history and proof-reading your argument before trying something like this again. The only thing your post achieves is making you look ignorant and proving you have a superiority complex that needs to be taken care of. It’s a bad mix.

Yet another ignorant “The woman got the shit end of the stick” comment. Guess composing influential and timeless pieces of music doesn’t quite stack up to “his wife played piano better”.