But ladies, you must answer too - "what would we do without 'em"?

I think you're asking a really good question--I didn't realize there was a shortage of women in the jazz audience. Keep at it, and let us know what you find out!

Musicologist Susan McClary has taken a lot of heat for suggesting that the the deepest structures and technical apparatus of classical music may reflect the patriarchal values of the wider society, but why should it be a surprise that an art form would deeply embody its culture's values? (McClary has also pointed out that some of the earliest bluesmen were women, but men got the credit for inventing the form.) Until very recently men were entirely in charge of public musical life, saying what music was good, what music mattered, what music would be heard, and the most basic issue: what music should sound like.

If women listeners are staying away from jazz, maybe that's because they suspect that it won't speak to them. This impression might flow from the way the music is presented, from the way it is promoted, from the way it is performed, from its sound and structure, or from all of the above. Meanwhile, just as women writers are bringing perspectives and experiences that were previously absent from literature, women musicians aren't just competing successfully with men; they are probably expanding music's possibilities.

Women instrumentalists in jazz have been comparatively few, historically, though there's never been a shortage of female jazz vocalists. But consider Carla Bley, incredible composer-bandleader-piano soloist, or Toshiko Akiyoshi, another amazing pianist; or the later Emily Remler, or Jane Bunnett, or more recently Teri Lynn Carrington, or Hiromi, to name a few. They're out there, they're gifted artists, and they deserve a much wider hearing. Compared with other genres, jazz itself has a small (but passionately devoted!) audience,but as an art form its nature is such that there are no barriers, no limits. Wherever you're from, whatever your ethnicity or background, whatever your gender (or sexual preference),this music offers every aesthetic satisfaction there is-- earthy and cerebral,nitty-gritty and abstract, introspective and gentle or boiling with rage and fire, no boundaries contain the possibilities of expression that have been liberated by jazz music. For the past 40 years critics have been pronouncing jazz dead, but for those of us who "get it," this vital art form will continue to grow and change, transcending all artificial constraints and petty labels. Through the deep empathy and honesty this music fosters among musicians, and the life-enhancing experience it provides for those listeners, women and men, who are prepared to HEAR, jazz music will continue to survive and thrive, even though 98% of humanity may choose to ignore it.

Miles Davis would be on your side of this issue. I was once told by a reliable source (a member of Davis' band) that Davis would find it upsetting if audiences were predominantly male, remarking that "it looks like a gym in here" [expletives deleted] when he perceived a gender imbalance in clubs.

Me and Miles Davis: like twins separated at birth. Thanks for commenting! -AA

The lack of women who appreciate jazz has always amazed me. I've loved it from my teens, when I started following Count Basie and Art Blakey. I had no particular reason to like it. I liked classical music and pop as well. I've grown more and more impassioned about it and write about it when I get a chance. But I hardly can ever interest a woman friend in going to performances. (I was at the Mehldau with a man friend). Some men friends have sarcastically said it's too intellectual for most women and a woman friend has said it appeals to men in their groins and women don't react to things that way. I've asked jazz musicians and they haven't been able to say. Very strange. I hope your column inspires some answers.