Men's groups vs. women's groups

[Vort]

I notice a lot of women's specialty groups, such as hobbyists of various types, that are exculsive (that is, they exclude men). There used to be many men's groups like that, but such groups are so politically out of favor that there are precious few. If you want to join a model airplane hobbyist group, for instance, you will find mostly men, but women will be welcome. But if you want to join the local reading group, you will very likely find it is women-only, no-men-allowed -- and you will probably find that there are no equivalent men's-only groups at all, and the only groups that even ALLOW men are SF-oriented or something like that.

I am not yet ready to conclude that such an arrangement is inherently bad. I would like to hear opinions/arguments as to why such an arrangement is good and proper.

[Dravin]

What exactly do you mean by such an arrangement? That such exclusive groups can exist? Or that they do? I suppose to some it may seem a fine distinction, but I see a difference between the questions. For instance one can debate if the group is benefited by such exclusion and one can debate if such exclusion should be allowed and reach different conclusions to the two questions.

[Vort]

Sorry, Dravin, but I'm not sure what you're asking for clarification about. Such groups do indeed exist, and in fact are common, as I'm sure you know. As an e.g. Austen lover, I might seek to join a Jane Austen group to read and discuss her literature, only to find that the group welcomes only women -- no men allowed.

I'm looking for input describing why this is a good thing and ought to be tolerated and even encouraged. I would also like to know, from those who think the described system is good, if it's equally good for men to form exclusive popular groups, and if not, why not.

[Guest]

I can think of half a dozen lodges within an hour of here that I'm pretty sure don't allow women.

[Dravin]

Sorry, Dravin, but I'm not sure what you're asking for clarification about.

That it's a good idea that something be allowed does not mean it's a good idea to go and do it. I think it's a good idea that I could legally sit down on my couch and eat a pound of butter. That does not mean I think doing so is a good idea. It's not entirely clear to me if you're asking if it's a good idea that they can form such exclusive groups, or if it's a good idea that they do form such exclusive groups.

My response to the first is that it is a good idea that people are free to choose whom they associate with even if it may be for silly or even hateful reasons. My response to the second is going to be case by case, a Jane Austen group that has a no men's policy because over the years they've been bombarded by cads who are just looking to try to pick them up and/or flirt with them is more reasonable in my mind than one who's sole reasoning is, "Men can't possibly appreciate Jane Austen as there are not enough explosions for those Neanderthals."

Edited October 30, 2012 by Dravin

[Backroads]

Frankly, I love the idea of "No Boys/Girls Allowed" clubs, but it really ought to be fair without the double standard.

[Guest]

I always kind of thought that lds.net has its own little He-Man Woman Hater's Club.

[Just_A_Guy]

i always kind of thought that lds.net has its own little he-man woman hater's club.

Who told????

That was supposed to be a secret. Vort, was it you?

[Guest]

Alfalfa.

[annewandering]

I know a nice little crochet group on facebook. They have the cutest guy who runs it. The weaving group also welcomes men although admittedly most are women. Men are just too shy.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/rigidheddleweaving/members/

https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Crochet-Crowd/116482731742088

Edited October 30, 2012 by annewandering

[pam]

But if you want to join the local reading group, you will very likely find it is women-only, no-men-allowed

Isn't that because when you ask men how a book is the response is: "It was good. The end."

[Guest]

I wish my husband and his brothers and like-minded friends would start a movie critique club, so I wouldn't have to endure all of his criticisms of every single thing every movie got wrong, and why. I just want to enjoy the movie. To escape for a bit. He enjoys picking it apart and talking about how it could have been done better. It would be great for him to have more opportunity to have those discussions with someone who enjoys having those discussions. I do try, but a club would be great.

Strangely, I do enjoy doing that with books. We've read and discussed several books together.

[volgadon]

As an e.g. Austen lover, I might seek to join a Jane Austen group to read and discuss her literature, only to find that the group welcomes only women -- no men allowed.

Depends on the JA group. The JA Society in the UK has a high percentage of men.

[Vort]

That it's a good idea that something be allowed does not mean it's a good idea to go and do it. I think it's a good idea that I could legally sit down on my couch and eat a pound of butter. That does not mean I think doing so is a good idea. It's not entirely clear to me if you're asking if it's a good idea that they can form such exclusive groups, or if it's a good idea that they do form such exclusive groups.

My response to the first is that it is a good idea that people are free to choose whom they associate with even if it may be for silly or even hateful reasons. My response to the second is going to be case by case, a Jane Austen group that has a no men's policy because over the years they've been bombarded by cads who are just looking to try to pick them up and/or flirt with them is more reasonable in my mind than one who's sole reasoning is, "Men can't possibly appreciate Jane Austen as there are not enough explosions for those Neanderthals."

Yes, you are right in your analysis. The question is "should", not "can". "Ought it to be done" rather than "ought it to be allowed".

[Vort]

I wish my husband and his brothers and like-minded friends would start a movie critique club, so I wouldn't have to endure all of his criticisms of every single thing every movie got wrong, and why. I just want to enjoy the movie. To escape for a bit. He enjoys picking it apart and talking about how it could have been done better. It would be great for him to have more opportunity to have those discussions with someone who enjoys having those discussions. I do try, but a club would be great.

I think I would like your husband.

[Guest]

I think you would, too. :)

[BadWolf]

I notice a lot of women's specialty groups, such as hobbyists of various types, that are exculsive (that is, they exclude men). There used to be many men's groups like that, but such groups are so politically out of favor that there are precious few. If you want to join a model airplane hobbyist group, for instance, you will find mostly men, but women will be welcome. But if you want to join the local reading group, you will very likely find it is women-only, no-men-allowed -- and you will probably find that there are no equivalent men's-only groups at all, and the only groups that even ALLOW men are SF-oriented or something like that.

I am not yet ready to conclude that such an arrangement is inherently bad. I would like to hear opinions/arguments as to why such an arrangement is good and proper.

You just have to be gay. And flamboyant about it. Gay men are allowed in every women's club known to man. (Known to women? Huh. Troublesome wording, that.)

Including the ladies room.

Edited October 30, 2012 by BadWolf
I hate my phone.

[BadWolf]

I notice a lot of women's specialty groups, such as hobbyists of various types, that are exculsive (that is, they exclude men). There used to be many men's groups like that, but such groups are so politically out of favor that there are precious few. If you want to join a model airplane hobbyist group, for instance, you will find mostly men, but women will be welcome. But if you want to join the local reading group, you will very likely find it is women-only, no-men-allowed -- and you will probably find that there are no equivalent men's-only groups at all, and the only groups that even ALLOW men are SF-oriented or something like that.

I am not yet ready to conclude that such an arrangement is inherently bad. I would like to hear opinions/arguments as to why such an arrangement is good and proper.

Out! Out!!!

No men allowed in the harem!

Off with you! Scoot! The NERVE....

[MorningStar]

Do you remember the show Bosom Buddies? This is a great way to get into women's clubs.

[BadWolf]

I notice a lot of women's specialty groups, such as hobbyists of various types, that are exculsive (that is, they exclude men). There used to be many men's groups like that, but such groups are so politically out of favor that there are precious few. If you want to join a model airplane hobbyist group, for instance, you will find mostly men, but women will be welcome. But if you want to join the local reading group, you will very likely find it is women-only, no-men-allowed -- and you will probably find that there are no equivalent men's-only groups at all, and the only groups that even ALLOW men are SF-oriented or something like that.

I am not yet ready to conclude that such an arrangement is inherently bad. I would like to hear opinions/arguments as to why such an arrangement is good and proper.

Okay... Actually both my tongue in cheek responses are a LITTLE serious:

1) Sex. As in there's never any concern, or at least a very minimal concern with gay men.

2) Sex. As in our husbands and sweethearts never forbid us to go have deep conversations about romance... With other women.

3) Sex. As in we don't have to keep up appearances with other women (although we will largely STILL put the nearest pillow over our stomachs when sitting), a d getti g highly animated in our discussions is rarely if ever misconstrued as flirting.

Now... I'm not saying those are VALID reasons, nor indeed ALL the reasons for the discrepency... But while I was joking. There's actually a lot of truth in them.

Here's some more:

4) Sex. As in the appearance of virility. Most men would be far too uncomfortable in their masculinity to go to court over not being welcome in a women's only group.

5) Bravery : To the victor go the spoils. We FOUGHT (and continue to fight) for the right to be in men's only groups. Meaning thousands (and millions) of women had their/our femininity called into question, our 'everything' (intellectual capacity, motives, physical ability, emotional stability, motivations, sexuality, etc.) tried in hundreds and thousands of courts (legal, public opinion, ecclesiastical, dinner tables). As if men had the right to call those things into question (ditto all equal rights groups who have fought for the same rights as another group... Not say men are the enemy, just that they were the opposing body at the time. There have always been women and men on both sides of the line, but the line for women's access to previous men only areas was large drawn us/them...women/men). This is still not past tense. I qualified for sniper school. A tiny tiny fraction do. But I wasn't allowed to go: because I'm female.

4+5= ) Until men are willing to suffer the indignities of expecting equality... They won't get it.

6) But wait theres more: 1,2,3 + 6 = And it will be an uphill battle (as it was with women's lib) because of #1-3. Other men won't WANT men around their wives and sweethearts in a place that was formerly "safe", and many women won't want them "invading" either

7) Cluelessness. Whaddayamean men aren't allowed? Of course they are!

8) Cluelessness. Oh! I'd never have thought to invite Billy Bob & Sven & Gregor to the " insert 'girly' name here" group.

9) False Marketing. I'm on a parenting board with a Female name (mama...). We have maybe 6 dads and hundreds of women. We TOTALLY welcome dads and grandfathers. Most of us. There's maybe 1 "go away" post (out of 1000s) each year. And that post gets STOMPED on. Men are totally welcome. But the name of the board is just not indicative of it. Better than it USED to be (for Moms, by Moms... Even though we're the same group, and welcomed our TWO dads back then... That we know of... In Internet land we could all be purple people eaters)

10) Attempt at legal fairness flop : As in 2 groups (men & women's) both CHARTERED, but the men's group never attended... So in practicality, there's only a women's group (this kicks back to To the Victor... If someone doesn't stand up and insist (and risk being mocked), the status quo remains

11) Polite attempt to "excuse" husbands and sweethearts from something they'd otherwise feel obligated to go to (and be miserable)

12) Not so subtle attempt to have a child-free night (Honey... I have my book club. You're on.)

13) Subtle attempt not to have mom's book club something mom can never go to, because dad goes to it now, and SOMEONE has to stay home

_______

Again... Not saying this are why men shouldn't , just why men aren't.

[dahlia]

I notice a lot of women's specialty groups, such as hobbyists of various types, that are exculsive (that is, they exclude men). There used to be many men's groups like that, but such groups are so politically out of favor that there are precious few. If you want to join a model airplane hobbyist group, for instance, you will find mostly men, but women will be welcome. But if you want to join the local reading group, you will very likely find it is women-only, no-men-allowed -- and you will probably find that there are no equivalent men's-only groups at all, and the only groups that even ALLOW men are SF-oriented or something like that.

I am not yet ready to conclude that such an arrangement is inherently bad. I would like to hear opinions/arguments as to why such an arrangement is good and proper.

My son goes off on this stuff all the time, and rightly so. They had a special women's periodical at his undergrad, a big state school. Each dorm had a minority student lounge. How the heck do you manage to do that using state funds? The indoor soccer team had to let in women, which, according to him, changes the game because the guys won't go all out against smaller women. There's WISE, a group at most universities for women majoring in engineering and science. No such group for men, but you might get a little hand holding if you are a minority male.

Apparently there are a fair number of what I term 'misogynist' sites on the web. I think he knows all of them. We've had heated discussions about this, mostly because I don't want him to turn into a bitter young man. I think men have a right to their own groups, just like whites should have a right to their own groups, but things being what they are, that's not likely to happen.

[Guest]

I have no idea what you guys are talking about. My husband goes to tons of men-only stuff. Church basketball is just one of them. And he has no problem invading the women's stuff as long as there's no explicit women-only rule... like the Twilight fan club - he even lines up with all the women from Church for the midnight showing...

Edited October 30, 2012 by anatess

[Blackmarch]

I notice a lot of women's specialty groups, such as hobbyists of various types, that are exculsive (that is, they exclude men). There used to be many men's groups like that, but such groups are so politically out of favor that there are precious few. If you want to join a model airplane hobbyist group, for instance, you will find mostly men, but women will be welcome. But if you want to join the local reading group, you will very likely find it is women-only, no-men-allowed -- and you will probably find that there are no equivalent men's-only groups at all, and the only groups that even ALLOW men are SF-oriented or something like that.

I am not yet ready to conclude that such an arrangement is inherently bad. I would like to hear opinions/arguments as to why such an arrangement is good and proper.

I dont think such an arrangement is inherently bad or good any more than any other arrangement that has some sort of discriminitory judgement on who can participate or not.

I think in this case the devil is in the details.

[Guest SquidMom]

I think alot of same-sex only groups are merely trying to get some legitimate time away from the opposite sex for awhile! And also, men and women's brains work completley diferent from eachother. As far as some learning/ discussion groups go, I think it's fair, but there ought to be one for both. On the other hand, women have had to work very hard over the centuries to get to the point where they can have groups at all. I think it's fair to be exclusive on some levels, but I surely don't think society should flip over entirely and let women have them and not men. That being said, i think a man wanting to join a book/ sewing/crocheting club is great, and should be embraced.

[RMGuy]

I response to ought it be done, I think that there are individuals that benefit greatly from being part of an all boys or all girls group. I can remember as a kid when Rotary International went co-ed there was a lot of upheaval in my dad's club. Many members left, some that were truly misogynistic. Some left though, not because of the women being allowed in per se so much as because they were there for the male bonding experience and that was now lost to them.

This really is a great philosophical question. On one hand I am all for equality of opportunity and in also believe that separate but equal is NOT inherently equal, but at the same time I also believe in freedom of association. This is one I need to spend some real time thinking about further. Thanks!

-RM