Gender Segration

dragon wench · #1 (**permalink**) 01-12-2007, 01:15 PM

I seem to be on a gender kick here...

But, there was an article today in the print edition of our paper about a group of women who are launching legal actions against one of the local golf clubs because there is an area in the clubhouse that does not allow women, even "escorted."

Now, a few questions rise to mind. I'm not really sure why a woman would want to join a golf club like that in the first place, why not just join something that doesn't have the restriction? (actually I'm not even sure why anyone would want to play golf, but I digress

)
Secondly, while I strongly oppose any type of segregation period, I have to wonder at a certain double standard at work. It is now considered perfectly legitimate for political parties and similar organisations to have women's only committees....
Granted, women have endured segregation for years, and there is something of a "Well, it's time to reverse that pendulum," mentality going on, but I don't think reversing a trend that has always been wrong solves anything.
People also argue that only women should be on women's committees because they understand the issues best. I counter that we need to work on further bridging the gender gap, and I assert that we can't have one half of humanity divided against the other if we want to have any hope of solving the many issues threatening humanity. Finally, I feel that different perspectives, from both men and women, even if the issues at stake only ostensibly impact one or the other, are valuable, and can add significantly to any discussion.

Sure, the golf club example is different to a political organisation, but I still think there's some hypocrisy going on. We are at a point now where groups composed of women only are perfectly fine, whereas similar organisations for men are perceived as discriminatory. In my view, they are equally wrong.

Thoughts?

er, and spam light please

Kipi · #2 (**permalink**) 01-12-2007, 01:48 PM

Totally agreeing you here...

About the golf club, I in a way understand that, since for centuries golf has been game only meant for men. Yes, the attitude is changing, but there are still some clubs that want to hold with the old etiquets and way of behaving.
(yes, I play golf myself...)

But generally, I have too noticed that it's okay that there are only-for-women things, but fi such are presented for men only, then it's totally wrong. Also, linked to the same topic, I have noticed that at least in my country that if you don't have any women in your organization, you are bad and there is segregation going on... dependless of their skills...

In some extreme cases, there are even regulations that you have to have at least certain percent of women, least you are segregating... But if the commitee, or what ever it is in question, it's totally fine.

Now, is this right towards men? Hardly. But still, many, especially women, seems to think that since women have been segregated, the same can be done to men now... and that's not right IMO!

Lady Dragonfly · #3 (**permalink**) 01-12-2007, 05:22 PM

There are many women-only clubs... Fitness clubs, golf clubs, outdoor clubs, even hunter (huntress?) clubs. I don't usually try to comprehend what is going on in the feminists' collective heads but I can see why some women interested in radical improvement in the "problem-areas" prefer to join women-only fitness clubs.

Quote:

I'm not really sure why a woman would want to join a golf club like that in the first place, why not just join something that doesn't have the restriction? (actually I'm not even sure why anyone would want to play golf, but I digress

)

Wholeheartedly agree.

dragon wench · #4 (**permalink**) 01-12-2007, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lady Dragonfly

There are many women-only clubs... Fitness clubs, golf clubs, outdoor clubs, even hunter (huntress?) clubs. I don't usually try to comprehend what is going on in the feminists' collective heads but I can see why some women interested in radical improvement in the "problem-areas" prefer to join women-only fitness clubs.

Wholeheartedly agree.

Fitness clubs I can definitely see since, as you say, some women feel uncomfortable at revealing their bodies with a bunch of men about, in addition to the fact that sometimes they fear assault. But the rest, you are right... I just don't see the need. Maybe I'm also biased, because I went to a girls school from grades 9-12, which was enough to scar me for life..

I suppose many say I am a feminist in a lot of areas, most particularly where reproductive rights are concerned, but I'd be more inclined to say I believe in gender equality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kipi

In some extreme cases, there are even regulations that you have to have at least certain percent of women, least you are segregating... But if the commitee, or what ever it is in question, it's totally fine.

Yes indeed, and sometimes this applies to employment as well. I hate tokenism, personally, and if ever I were hired for a job based solely on my gender I'd be very offended, even if my need were dire.

Lady Dragonfly · #5 (**permalink**) 01-12-2007, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Yes indeed, and sometimes this applies to employment as well. I hate tokenism, personally, and if ever I were hired for a job based solely on my gender I'd be very offended, even if my need were dire.

...or race, or sexual preference, or shoe size.
I agree.

Tricky · #6 (**permalink**) 01-12-2007, 07:09 PM

An area in the clubhouse that does not allow women? Sigh. Unisex bathrooms saves the day.

Philos · #7 (**permalink**) 01-13-2007, 09:04 PM

I realize that this thread started about a golf clubhouse (and I sure agree with you DW about the merits of golf

) but I am going to hazard a slight, but related, rabbit trail. One of the local "public" junior high schools just implemented a gender based classroom environment program. The boys and girls go to same school and even have the same teachers, BUT the teacher will only have girls in their class for one period and then only boys in another period for that same subject. The premise was that without the opposite sex in their class the kids would be less distracted and that they could focus better on the class subject. Personally, having been a teacher, I think it is a great idea. That was the age group I taught and I can attest that a lot of "energy" went into trying to impress.
As you might guess the results have been interesting and not really a surprise. Both genders did dramatically better in their grades. The parents are pleased and even the kids are coming to appreciate it. They can still interact at lunch and breaks so it is not like they don't ever see each other. So in this variety of "gender segregation" perhaps it is a good thing.

Now I am not in favor of snobbish exclusivism, but depending on the situation, I think there may be a place where it is good for gender segregation to occur.

galraen · #8 (**permalink**) 01-13-2007, 09:44 PM

What age range is junior high Philos?

fable · #9 (**permalink**) 01-13-2007, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by galraen

What age range is junior high Philos?

Looks like Philos' is gone at the moment, but Junior High is 7th through 9th, with High School, 10th through 12th.

galraen · #10 (**permalink**) 01-13-2007, 10:18 PM

So around 11 to 13, I really don't remember impressing the opposite sex being a factor when I was that age, well I guess it started at about 13, but it wasn't a factor in the classroom. Teachers did have a lot more authority in those days I suppose, and corporal punishment was still in use. I can testify to that, got caned a total of three times. First time was when I got reported for nicking sweets from the tuck shop (shop lifting as it was then known) never got caught again, and not 'cos I got better at it, just didn't do it again. Second time was for fighting, not serious fighting, just a rough and tumble with the class bully. Third time was technically for fighting, but it was actually me and my friend staging a fight to impress the girls. We were just 15 at the time, and we hadn't realised that the head teacher was about, he came in just as two chairs flew across the room, one of which nearly hit him, woops.

What undermined the effectiveness of the cane in my experience, was that once you'd had it, you weren't frightened of it any more, so it's deterrent factor was extremely limited.

Edit: Apologies if this is a bit too OT

Faberge · #11 (**permalink**) 01-14-2007, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragon wench

I seem to be on a gender kick here...

But, there was an article today in the print edition of our paper about a group of women who are launching legal actions against one of the local golf clubs because there is an area in the clubhouse that does not allow women, even "escorted."

Please excuse this silly question, but what was that forbidden area?

Lady Dragonfly · #12 (**permalink**) 01-14-2007, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by galraen

So around 11 to 13, I really don't remember impressing the opposite sex being a factor when I was that age, well I guess it started at about 13, but it wasn't a factor in the classroom.

I think the junior high is a bit older, 13-16 or so. And BTW I remember boys tried to impress me even in the kindergarten.

I agree with Philos.

Returning to the topic at hand...
I've found an interesting article about gender difference in the golf world:

Women's golf - cheating separates men and women golfers - Jennifer Mario column

a few quotes:

Not too long ago I was golfing with three gentlemen. Just for fun I threw out a question: what's the difference between male and female golfers? One of the men blurted, "Women are slow!"
.....
...All else being equal, what's the real difference between men and women golfers?

No, it's not pace of play. It's not even the fact that men pee in the woods. It's something a little more subtle.
.....
Unless there's a tournament going on, guys tend to be a relaxed bunch. They laugh. They joke. They run over each other's ball with the cart. And while they're generally aware of the USGA rules of golf, they often play under a set of rules no USGA official would condone. With the exception of a few purists, men inhabit a world of breakfast balls, gimmes and mulligans.
.....
Much discussion takes place on the first tee to determine what the rules shall be, because among men, it's not so much rule-breaking, it's rule-creating. Prime example: think former president and 12-handicapper Bill Clinton. During an outing with Don Van Natta Jr., author of "First Off the Tee," our ex-prez took two or three "Billigans" per hole and accepted numerous gimmes. At the end of the day, he signed his card for an 82. With a straight face.

Okay, okay, I know it depends on what your definition of the word "par" is. But still, you get my point.
.....
Women, on the other hand, play by the rules. The USGA rules, that is. In a women's tournament, you can bet that the winner's score was honest and true. Just like you can any day, any time, whether it was the U.S. Women's Open or just four friends out having fun.
.....
Men and women can learn a lot from each other. Men could stand to post an honest score every now and them. Women should relax and live a little. Somewhere in the middle lies a truly excellent golf experience.

What do you think?

Moonbiter · #13 (**permalink**) 01-14-2007, 10:51 AM

I remember a few years ago, when some women decided to start a female-only bar in downtown Oslo. They allied themselves with a couple of hardcore feminist journalists and tried to make a media splash, like:

“Look! We have a girls-only bar where we’ll do super-duper-secret girlie things and you boys can’t come in! Nyah Nyah Nyah!”

*Complete silence as the guys head for the sports bar*

“HEY! WE SAID WE HAVE OUR OWN SUPERCOOL BAR WHERE WE PARTY ALL NIGHT AND HAVE LOTSA MORE FUN THAN YOU SMELLY NASTY BOYS HAVE AND YOU CAN’T COME! SO THERE!”

*More silence as the guys are out fishing*

“WOW! WE’RE REALLY HAVING FUN NOW! NO PEEKING!”

*zzzzzzzzzz*

Finally there was a desperate front page news story that read “Equal Rights Council ready to crack down on girls-only bar!” in fat type, written by one of the journalists. The only problem was that for the Equal Rights Council to take legal action, somebody actually had to file a complaint, and nobody did.

The whole experiment lasted for about 4 months. Nobody gave a hoot, and “the girls” stopped showing up because it turned out it wasn’t that much fun after the novelty had worn off. Clue bankruptcy.

The vision of the furious suffragette charging into the exclusive gentlemen’s club where no woman has set foot in 500 years is one of the greatest clichés of our time. What did she want there? Read the newspapers and drink coffee in complete silence with a bunch of mouldy old geezers?

Gilliatt · #14 (**permalink**) 01-15-2007, 12:59 AM

Maybe these men want their clubhouse men only because it is the only place where they can still pretend they are big machos and act like it; while if it was open to ladies they would have to bring their wives who would tell everyone how kind their husbands are because they do the cooking, wash the dishes, etc.

Some segregation is OK tough: all Tupperware conventions could be ladies only.

That would be fine with me.

I too understand the women only fitness clubs. Many guys in gyms act like dogs when the see women: they stare at them for minutes and you wonder when they are gonna stick their tongue out and start sniffing their rear.

fable · #15 (**permalink**) 01-15-2007, 08:10 AM

Interesting that while selected feminists scream murder at male-only clubs, their sense of injustice doesn't extend to recognizing the economic and social barriers in those clubs, as well. Or are they places that welcome the underprivileged? Gender bias is only one of several traits linking the club members. I'll bet not a soul inside wears an off-the-rack suit.