Eh, I like 'em all right.
They ain’t Rush, but they’re good smoke music.
“Sausage fests”?
“Swordfights”?
Guys, get with the times! Everyone knows we call it a “helmet party” these days!
Yeah, it could just as easily be read as “why do guys take this over-dramatic, artsy stuff so seriously,” and certainly the term fanboy for obsessive follower is sex-specific for a reason.
Like – why aren’t women audiophiles – hardly a slur since I think audiophiles (people who are, after all, willing to pay for Monster Cable, biggest scam ever) are hardly to be admired or are hardly an exclusive club from which I’m seeking to ban the fairer sex. Yet there you have it – chicks don’t dig spending money on high end stereo equipment or finding the perfect re-mastered director’s cut (insert exceptions, but still).
So many comments already . . . is it too late for me to come in and say I’m a woman and I really, really like Pink Floyd? My ex-husband used to tell me how great they are and I’d just roll my eyes, but then one day I sat down and really listened . . . and yep, he was right. They are fantastic.
On the other hand, I absolutely hate Rush.
:dubious:
Women have terrible taste in music.
DO NOT DISPUTE ME
Well, to use an argument I’ve made before…
Picture an ordinary American family in the year 1972. 10 year old Susie loves David Cassidy and the Partridge Family. She likes to dance around while listening to “I Think I Love You,”
Her big brother Randy is 19, a sophomore in college. He likes to listen to prog rock, while marveling at the deep meaning of Pete Sinfield’s lyrics.
Well, here we are, 38 years later. 48 year old Susie is a lawyer, and 57 year old Randy is a dentist. Which of them is more likely to likely to be a bit embarrassed about the music he/she used to listen to?
My hunch is, if “I Think I Love You” came on the radio, Susie and her friends would laugh, squeal, dance and sing along happily.
On the other hand, if someone dug out an old 8-track of “Tarkus” or “From Genesis to Revelation,” or “Ummagumma,” Randy MIGHT still love it… but I’m guessing he’d be more likely to shake his head and groan, “Oh man, what was I smoking? I actually thought that was good!”
I say this as a prog rock fan… NEVER assume that your favorite stuff will hold up better than the seemingly cheesier stuff.
Me too! I was like the only person in high school that didn’t like Rush! 
In high school, there was this girl who would fall asleep whenever listening to Pink Floyd. This was during the height of my Pink Floyd fandom. We’d sit in the bus, I’d give hear one of the sides of the earphones and BAM she’d be asleep by the second song.
The cheesier stuff holds up better BECAUSE it’s cheesy.
The serious stuff often ends up coming out as overwrought and pretentious, once you’ve moved on in your life, and it’s no longer speaking to your current issues.
The cheesy stuff, though…it’s never supposed to be anything but fun. It’s more likely to remain fun, than the ‘deep’ stuff is going to continue looking deep.
More likely shake his head and groan “Oh man, where can anyone get an 8 track player?”
Though I always thought “Ummagumma” at least was supposed to be fun stuff, not serious. I mean, how can anyone ever take “several hundred species of small furry animals grooving in a cave with a Pict” (title may not be exact) seriously? It was intended, I thought, to set off the giggles when the audience was stoned. 
For a lot of us guys, dope was the consolation prize for no sex. And Pink Floyd was dope-smoking music. After a few hours of being indulged with Boston or Supertramp, the girls would be satisfied to ride off with the guys who had TransAms & Chevelles to park and have sex, while those of us without cars would smoke up the rest of the dope and change the record to Pink Floyd.
The other consolation prize was that, on the rare occasions we did get to have sex, it wasn’t with girls who expected we do it to Boston or Supertramp.
Most of the women I know liked or loved Pink Floyd at one time or like them currently.
I’m a woman. I don’t like Pink Floyd. (I do like “Comfortably Numb”, though.) I don’t have a philosophical reason behind my dislike; I just find them boring. Melodically, they are generally uninteresting. Sorry.
But I fucking love Led Zeppelin.
I added Momentary Lapse of Reason to my playlist at work today, and everyone loved it. I work with primarily under-30 women; only two guys in the whole place.
And I have always liked Floyd, enough to still think of Momentary as their ‘new’ album. (And I absolutely love it, all of it, and I don’t typically care for whole albums)
Count me in with the confused women; I don’t think ‘Women generally don’t like Floyd’ is correct at all.
Maybe the women YOU know don’t like them…
Woman here, and Pink Floyd is my favorite band of all time.
However, out of all the women I know, I only know one other female that also is a PF fan (she’s a poster here too, she knows who she is! 
)
When I go to see this awesome PF tribute band (The Machine) that plays here every few months, the audience is like 85% men and 15% women. I’ve always noticed this, so yeah it does seem like more men like PF than women.
I’m a woman. Not only do I not like Pink Floyd beyond a handful of singles, I don’t like prog rock in general. My mp3 collection is broken into more than 40 subgenres, and prog is one of the smallest - only five songs…vs around 30 hours of various punk genres, as a counter example. I don’t know what it is about prog that rubs me the wrong way, but it just does.
Hey now! The songs on that album are pretty darned good for a bunch of snot-nosed 16-year old public school boys. The lyrics are, well, ok, pretty much what you’d expect from a bunch of snot-nosed 16-year old public school boys. They can be overlooked. It was hot shot producer Jonathan King, an adult, who absolutely ruined the songs by slapping a bunch of horrible, wildly out-of-place strings and horns over the music. The boys didn’t have the clout to tell him to go fuck himself. Which is probably a good thing. The album wouldn’t have been made if they’d told him to go fuck himself. It got them a bold resume mark and they were able to do their own thing by the next album.
If you can overlook the terrible production and oh-my-god-are-you-KIDDING-ME?? horns, this is a beautiful little song, musically, vocally and, this one, lyrically. The strings aren’t too overpowering even though I still cringe a bit, but the guitar and the piano are lovely. I’ve never understood why this song isn’t covered by anybody.
And anyway, who was listening to From Genesis To Revelation for fun because they liked the music? Every Genesis fan I’ve ever met discovered Genesis with a later album (Foxtrot for me), and bought the album retroactively to be completest, listened to it a few times to get a feel of it, then went back to listening to the REALLY good albums. And no Genesis fan worth their salt would ever deny the greatness of anything post-FGTR, even with a couple of dodgy songs here and there. I mean, I don’t even want to KNOW anyone who loved songs like this, then, but now says :smack: “What was I smoking??” They’d have to have brain damage to not still think that’s STILL a fucking GREAT song.
a female who loved Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin and especially, early Genesis, who, yes, owns an 8-track of From Genesis To Revelation
Just to clarify, I’m not saying people who didn’t like the song then, or those who don’t like it now, are brain-damaged. Each to their own. I was specifically talking about people who were upside down in AWE of that song, way back then, listening to it now and not liking it at all. If it was awe-worthy to them then, then it should still be awe-worthy to them now. IMO.
My reading was indeed sloppy.
But you’re high when you state that the hypothesis that women don’t like Pink Floyd “DOES NOT FIT THE DATA.” And you seriously undermine your credibility as a statistician when you say “the number of women posters in this thread who disagree is sufficient to call the hyopthesis into question.” Even worse for your statistical credibility is when you call upon personal anecdotes to discredit the hypothesis. There’s a pretty famous saying: “Anecdotes are not data.” Maybe you forgot that saying, or maybe you never knew it. Either way, you should reacquaint yourself with it.
As a general rule, no, men don’t object to generalizations. Men aren’t as invested in being a unique flowers, and don’t seem to fear a loss of identity quite so much.
I don’t think it’s something particular to men, though. I think it’s particular to the majority. For example, I think you’ll see many more objections to generalizations about blacks than about whites.
And no, the natural conclusion wouldn’t be that women are more logical. (Ha!) It would be that women are more conscious of threats to their individuality because for a very long time they weren’t afforded individual rights. Which is the conclusion I already jumped to. It seems very odd to me that you blasted my conclusion, then spent a nontrivial amount of text asking me what my conclusion to the same damn question would be. I already posted it.
My point was that a consistent logic would have to object to it.
I am quite familiar with a straw man; being alongtime doper you can’t avoid seeing strawman accusations every other thread. But I’m not entirely sold on the idea that any strawman is by definition a lost argument. A strawman points out the logical implication of an argument, or more specifically it highlights logical inconsistency. I don’t understand why that is invalid.
That’s a major hijack, though.
Nobody has ever said anything about “all” women. Only a retard would interpret a generalization to mean unanimous conformity.