'Women only' groups

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Mark Hamill

Thaedydal wrote: »

If those mixed environments were welcoming to women and didn't expect women to be like men in them then you would see change.

Strawman. Since when do mixed enviroments expect women to be like men? None of the mixed situations in college I've come across (various societies, sports clubs, acedemic meetings) have.

Thaedydal wrote: »

Women dont' need to be protected from that shíte, women jsut get fed up of putting up with it and being attacked when they point it out so they get pissed of with the lack of change and choose to walk away and seclude themselves from the idiocy.

And yet still expect change to happen? Theres the idiocy.

Thaedydal wrote: »

Mark Hamill wrote:

It just seems like its building up ot someone asking "well seeing as a woman now cant read a book with a man, why the hell should I employ one to work with a man (or a man to work with her)?"

Speaking of idiocy.

The only idiocy here is in your response. Or can you explain why someone couldn't come to the conclusion I outlined?

Thaedydal wrote: »

Yup should have said 1 in 6.

Where did you get that from?

Thaedydal wrote: »

In work there is some level of protection, professional conduct is expected and there reporting procedures and penalties for anyone of either gender who behaves in an unacceptable fashion.

And, what, this just doesn't exist in gyms or private book clubs or protest groups or something?

Zulu

Kooli wrote: »

I don't see what harm they are doing at ALL!

The primary concern I'd have would be that, while they can provide an environment where a sex can feel "more at ease", they do nothing to combat the cause.
So, while the Curves gym provides an environment where a woman can feel she can sweat to her hearts content without having to worry about looking bad in front of men - this does nothing only compound the underlying issue that women feel objectified!
Women should be able to go to a gym and sweat regardless of whos looking because, humans, when exercising, sweat.

As for the "nearly all women will have been sexually assaulted in some manner by the time the [sic] reach 25" tripe... Utter bullshit!

Kooli

Mark Hamill wrote: »

The only idiocy here is in your response. Or can you explain why someone couldn't come to the conclusion I outlined?

Oh come on!

First of all, no one is saying 'a woman can't read a book with a man', so I needn't even read the rest of the sentence, because no one actually said that.

Secondly, even if you replaced it with the more accurate 'some women prefer to discuss literature in women-only settings', I still don't see how that logically leads on to 'so why should I employ one to work with a man?'
Perhaps you could explain the employer mindset you are describing?

Mark Hamill

Kooli wrote: »

This whole argument seems a bit mad.

I haven't heard one man say they actually want to be a member of these women-only groups, or know of a man who wants to be in one, they just don't want women to be allowed/facilitated/encouraged to have them.

I don't see what harm they are doing at ALL! If they provide a space for a defined group to feel comfortable doing an activity with people they identify with, without any of the dynamics present that often accompany a mixed-sex environment, then I don't see who gets hurt.

Some here seem to be trying to claim that they are somehow causing or contributing to the casual sexism prevalent in society, when in fact it should be completely obvious they are more likely to be a response to it.

And, as a response, they do nothing to remove it.

I am not saying they should exist or that I want in, its no hair off my back (unfortunately:(). I am just pointing out that they work against the idea of gender equality.

Gender inequality is wrong because, bar the biological, there is nothing fundamentally different between men and womenl, the differences are due to individual personalities being different. "Women only" groups and services, imo, contradict this, by claiming that there is something more between men and women, something that will effect only women in such a way they cant fix it and so have to segregate themselves (if only for the short time they partake of that service).
Given that this idea would be reprehensible if employed in the workplace (lets start describing housework as "women only" employment, because men are too boistorous to use a hoover and wash the dishes and see how far that gets us) it just seems ridiculous that its accepted in the recreational parts of life.

Kooli

Mark Hamill wrote: »

And, as a response, they do nothing to remove it.

.

OK seriously, we're talking about a book club here (for most of these posts that has been the example used). That is not complete segregation. In the rest of our lives we are working with men, living with men, studying with men, training with men, doing hobbies with men.

And despite all that time we spend 'integrated', and despite your assertion that there is no difference between men and women, there are STILL women that find the company of women more comfortable for certain defined activities. Not all activities. Not even necessarily one activity all the time. It really is such a small issue. One hour a month maybe? Why do you still insist that these women are wrong in wanting this? Can't you accept that maybe you don't understand what drives them to seek this out, but that doesn't mean there isn't something genuine and valid there?

Should we ban 'lads nights out' and 'girls nights out' too? Because it is our duty to avoid all types of segregation? And of course you would agree that here is no difference between a lads night out and night out that involves lads, girls and couples, because we are all the same?

Mark Hamill

Thaedydal wrote: »

Not at all, it is one of the many things I am thankful for.

But how do you know he didn't give you some skewed view of men, seeing as he was (I assume) at least 20 years older than the guys he was talking about? You cant know without actual experience.

Thaedydal wrote: »

Why not? and if not your parent some other older person in your life who is a positive influence on you. Seems daft to leave such a gap in a young person's education.

And how would an older person understand the mind of a girl my age? I'm in my 20s, I'm fine with girls near my age now but I dont understand young teen girls! (Justin Bieber and Twilight WTF is that all about?)

southsiderosie

Kooli wrote: »

- wanting to talk about things from a female point of view without being told that the female point of view is 'not true' (like what's happening in this thread!)

This. It is nice to have a conversation with people who take your feelings at face value and don't try to tell you to suck it up or you are just being silly.

Zulu wrote: »

The primary concern I'd have would be that, while they can provide an environment where a sex can feel "more at ease", they do nothing to combat the cause.

Why should women have to 'combat the cause' every moment of the day?

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Gender inequality is wrong because, bar the biological, there is nothing fundamentally different between men and womenl, the differences are due to individual personalities being different.

There are certain experiences that women have that men generally do not. Women give birth. Women are judged more on their appearance than men. Women get brazilian waxes. These are things that women like to discuss with other women. I would also say as a woman and an ethnic minority, that I do belong to some 'identity' groups, in part because it is, again, nice to not have to justify my feelings all the damn time.

Mark Hamill

Kooli wrote: »

- wanting a space where there are no sexual dynamics, no flirting, no pressure to be 'attractive'

Ok, while the flirting would be gone, the pressure to be attractive would not. That sort of pressure comes from you gender peers, either from comparing or bullying, which has nothing to do with gender (or do girls in all girl schools not wear as much make up and as little skirt as possible when going to school?).

Kooli wrote: »

- wanting the type of interaction that is more typical in all-female groups (I know lots of people, including women, have disagreed with me on that one but I genuinely do find discussions with women to be less argumentative, more collaborative and less competitive, with less pressure to be right or to be funny!)

I think its incredibly ridiculous to want to avoid having to be right. It screams of low self esteem.

Kooli wrote: »

- wanting to talk about things from a female point of view without being told that the female point of view is 'not true' (like what's happening in this thread!)

Who said the female point of view isn't true? I dont think it exists, and that it's a tired cliche. Maybe I have just spoken ot more women that you, but from people I've spoken and debated with, it seems like girls have just as varied and crazy opinions as men in all subjects. People aren't more or less likely to have overlapping opinions because of gender, but because of personality and experiences. Limiting yourself to one subset of humanity when discussing general topics seems shortsighted and stupid to me.

Mark Hamill

Kooli wrote: »

Oh come on!

First of all, no one is saying 'a woman can't read a book with a man', so I needn't even read the rest of the sentence, because no one actually said that.

Weren't you the person who said they find womens only book clubs easier because they are less boistorous without men?

Kooli wrote: »

Secondly, even if you replaced it with the more accurate 'some women prefer to discuss literature in women-only settings', I still don't see how that logically leads on to 'so why should I employ one to work with a man?'
Perhaps you could explain the employer mindset you are describing?

A female employer, who had a unisex education and goes to women only book clubs, pilates, yoga gyms, protest groups etc. An employer who was brought up that she is equal to a man, except in all the places where men aren't allowed.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ntlbell

Kooli wrote: »

OK seriously, we're talking about a book club here (for most of these posts that has been the example used). That is not complete segregation. In the rest of our lives we are working with men, living with men, studying with men, training with men, doing hobbies with men.

And despite all that time we spend 'integrated', and despite your assertion that there is no difference between men and women, there are STILL women that find the company of women more comfortable for certain defined activities. Not all activities. Not even necessarily one activity all the time. It really is such a small issue. One hour a month maybe? Why do you still insist that these women are wrong in wanting this? Can't you accept that maybe you don't understand what drives them to seek this out, but that doesn't mean there isn't something genuine and valid there?

Should we ban 'lads nights out' and 'girls nights out' too? Because it is our duty to avoid all types of segregation? And of course you would agree that here is no difference between a lads night out and night out that involves lads, girls and couples, because we are all the same?

Are men wrong in wanting to be able to have a drink in a bar without listening to a group of women cackling?

is this so wrong?

Aprrently it is. but women who want an hour to to refelect on some cecilia ahern novel is not a problem?

LenaClaire

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Ok, while the flirting would be gone, the pressure to be attractive would not. That sort of pressure comes from you gender peers, either from comparing or bullying, which has nothing to do with gender (or do girls in all girl schools not wear as much make up and as little skirt as possible when going to school?).

My last two years of secondary school were in an all girls school. During the day 80% of the girls did not wear make up and the nuns had to nag us to brush our hair. Of course the second school was over the bathrooms were filled with girls doing hair and make-up before they went out for the afternoon. When it was just girls we dressed as we pleased, it was refreshing not to worry about your appearance - and lets face it - when you are 16 your appearance is a big worry.

But back to the main point. How is my going to a book club once a month hurting anyone? The other hundreds of hours in each month are spent in co-ed environments. Can you honestly tell me you never just hang out with male friends?

donfers

The argument about having these groups to see things from a female point of view is utter garbage in my opinion.

You are a female, you will always have your point of view no matter where you are or who you are with. Then the complaint is "well i don't like having to justify my beliefs or having people question me" which in my opinion digs an even bigger hole for that garbage argument.

Every day, no matter where I go, no matter who I meet, I am accountable for my opinions and beliefs and am prepared to defend them if people question them. Sometimes people will have a go at you and not go along with everything you have to say, it's called life....but if you want to cocoon yourself off with others who have the stepford wives in reverse type mentality then by all means go ahead but to me that is a sign of weakness and cowardice. Instead of confronting those who queston you and probe you, you run off to your nice comfy sanctuary with sheep-minded friends who won't hold you to account, it's so utterly pointless.

In conclusion though I have no problem with women only groups because the type of woman who is interested in these groups is thoroughly uninteresting in my view and I'm delighted they're cordoning themselves off from the rest of us (who thankfully are not so pained by debate, questions and those holding different views)

Kooli

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Ok, while the flirting would be gone, the pressure to be attractive would not. That sort of pressure comes from you gender peers, either from comparing or bullying, which has nothing to do with gender (or do girls in all girl schools not wear as much make up and as little skirt as possible when going to school?).


I think its incredibly ridiculous to want to avoid having to be right. It screams of low self esteem.


Who said the female point of view isn't true? I dont think it exists, and that it's a tired cliche. Maybe I have just spoken ot more women that you, but from people I've spoken and debated with, it seems like girls have just as varied and crazy opinions as men in all subjects. People aren't more or less likely to have overlapping opinions because of gender, but because of personality and experiences. Limiting yourself to one subset of humanity when discussing general topics seems shortsighted and stupid to me.

I would feel more pressure to be attractive if I was going to be in a mixed group with men who I might find attractive, particularly if I was single. If I was going over to a mates house for a book club I would not feel that pressure. Call me crazy!

I don't really understand your point about the low self-esteem. Sometimes I like having discussions where the goal isn't to be right. The goal is to have a discussion and to draw out others' points of view. I don't particularly enjoy having to debate and defend each point I make. (Other times I actually do like the more argumentative discussions where people's points are picked apart. Just sometimes I don't). I don't really see the connection to my self esteem.

And finally, I am not talking about a global women's point of view. I am under no illusions that we all have the same opinion on anything. But if I want to talk about my experience of being a woman, or an experience I've had from the point of view of being a women, then sometimes I just can't be arsed trying to argue that point or justify it to a man who doesn't understand it.

LenaClaire

ntlbell wrote: »

Are men wrong in wanting to be able to have a drink in a bar without listening to a group of women cackling?

is this so wrong?

Aprrently it is. but women who want an hour to to refelect on some cecilia ahern novel is not a problem?

Did anyone in this thread say there should not be men's groups? I think I stated specifically in an earlier post that I would recommend men spending time with just other men.

ntlbell

jujibee wrote: »

Did anyone in this thread say there should not be men's groups? I think I stated specifically in an earlier post that I would recommend men spending time with just other men.

Try and make a few public houses in dublin city men only.

uproar, bra burning the lot. we would never hear the end of it.

Mark Hamill

Kooli wrote: »

OK seriously, we're talking about a book club here (for most of these posts that has been the example used). That is not complete segregation. In the rest of our lives we are working with men, living with men, studying with men, training with men, doing hobbies with men.

And despite all that time we spend 'integrated', and despite your assertion that there is no difference between men and women, there are STILL women that find the company of women more comfortable for certain defined activities. Not all activities. Not even necessarily one activity all the time. It really is such a small issue. One hour a month maybe? Why do you still insist that these women are wrong in wanting this? Can't you accept that maybe you don't understand what drives them to seek this out, but that doesn't mean there isn't something genuine and valid there?

If these people can accept that they are missing out on something valid by just throwing out vast swathes of society because they dont think they will find complimentary personalities or discussion, then maybe. If you want a book club then just have one and discuss the books, why leave out anyone? You cant know if someone you dont like being around might actually contribute something very useful or interesting to the discussion.

Kooli wrote: »

Should we ban 'lads nights out' and 'girls nights out' too?

I have not called for the banning of anything.

Kooli wrote: »

Because it is our duty to avoid all types of segregation? And of course you would agree that here is no difference between a lads night out and night out that involves lads, girls and couples, because we are all the same?

Segregation not based on reality, then yes. Social activites happen between friends, and if someones (available) friends happen to one sex, then there is no issue with a lads noght or girls night out. But services and groups claiming that their segregation is an improvement based on no real evidence is what should be avoided because, even ignoring the sexism part, its always a disadvantage ot unfairly limit yourself.

liah

For all of you scoffing at the amount of women under 25 stat, I urge you to speak to every single one of your female friends about it.

From my experience and the experiences of every single one of my female friends, each one of us has dealt with physical sexual harassment or abuse at at least one point in our lives.

This includes unprovoked ass-slapping and boob-grabbing all the way up to abuse and rape.

No man has the right to grab me whenever he feels like it unless I've given permission to do so. Why those men think they're above this, like they're entitled to us, I don't know. But I cannot count the amount of times I've been out and had my ass grabbed or been grabbed around the waist or pulled over to a guy or a variety of other things. And there's no way in hell I'd be vain enough to think this only happens to me. I'd wager it happens to nearly everyone.

This isn't even including general harassment such as wolf-whistles and sexual things shouted at me from across the street and passing comments.. and I won't even get into the 'net. That's a different sort of demon altogether.

So for all you men saying there's no way it's 1/4, talk to your female mates. I'm an average-looking girl, it's not like I'm a stunner or anything-- if it can happen to me on this scale it can happen to anyone. Ask them if a stranger has ever grabbed their ass or any other wide variety of things.

I honestly think the figures will surprise you.

Kooli

donfers wrote: »

The argument about having these groups to see things from a female point of view is utter garbage in my opinion.

You are a female, you will always have your point of view no matter where you are or who you are with. Then the complaint is "well i don't like having to justify my beliefs or having people question me" which in my opinion digs and even bigger hole for that garbage argument.

Every day, no matter where I go, no matter who I mate, I am accountable for my opinions and beliefs and am prepared to defend them if people question them. Sometimes people will have a go at you and not go along with everything you have to say, it's called life....but if you want to cocoon yourself off with others who have the stepford wives in reverse type mentality then by all means go ahead but to me that is a sign of weakness and cowardice. Instead of confronting those who queston you and probe you, you run off to your nice comfy sanctuary with sheep-minded friends who won't hold you to account, it's so utterly pointless.

In conclusion though I have no problem with women only groups because the type of woman who is interested in these groups is thoroughly uninteresting in my view and I'm delighted their cordoning themselves off from the rest of us (who thankfully are not so pained by debate, questions and those holding different views)

OK if you've read every page of this thread, and still believe that the reason women want to spend time together is so that they can all agree with each other, never challenge each other, never question each other and just have big hugs then you certainly don't know many women, and you certainly haven't listened to anything that's been said on this thread!! I get the impression you decided in advance that that is what women's groups were about, and so you have stuck to that idea without actually trying to understand what anyone here is saying.

Valmont

I distinctly remember the ubiquitous "1 in 4" statistic being rubbished here a few months ago. It's disheartening seeing some of the same proponents from that argument throwing such outright lies around again so easily. I've come to expect little else from hardcore feminist groups and I suppose that is because their ideological foundations are apparently built on sand.

ntlbell

liah wrote: »

For all of you scoffing at the amount of women under 25 stat, I urge you to speak to every single one of your female friends about it.

From my experience and the experiences of every single one of my female friends, each one of us have dealt with physical sexual harassment or abuse at at least one point in our lives.

This includes unprovoked ass-slapping and boob-grabbing all the way up to abuse and rape.

No man has the right to grab me whenever he feels like it unless I've given permission to do so. Why those men think they're above this, like they're entitled to us, I don't know. But I cannot count the amount of times I've been out and had my ass grabbed or been grabbed around the waist or pulled over to a guy or a variety of other things. And there's no way in hell I'd be vain enough to think this only happens to me. I'd wager it happens to nearly everyone.

This isn't even including general harassment such as wolf-whistles and sexual things shouted at me from across the street and passing comments.. and I won't even get into the 'net. That's a different sort of demon altogether.

So for all you men saying there's no way it's 1/4, talk to your female mates. I'm an average-looking girl, it's not like I'm a stunner or anything-- if it can happen to me on this scale it can happen to anyone. Ask them if a stranger has ever grabbed their ass or any other wide variety of things.

I honestly think the figures will surprise you.

I don't think "talking to your mates" is grounds to be pulling out stats like 1 in 4.

it's hear say nonsense.

There's some women who say things like they were sexually harrased even raped because they think it shows they're attractive. :rolleyes:

LenaClaire

ntlbell wrote: »

Try and make a few public houses in dublin city men only.

uproar, bra burning the lot. we would never hear the end of it.

The women's book clubs that I have seen meet in public places where men are welcome, the women just sit around a table and talk. They don't take over a pub and bar the doors to all men. I am sure if you wanted to grab a table at your local coffee shop and have a men's discussion group no one would bat an eye.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ntlbell

jujibee wrote: »

The women's book clubs that I have seen meet in public places where men are welcome, the women just sit around a table and talk. They don't take over a pub and bar the doors to all men. I am sure if you wanted to grab a table at your local coffee shop and have a men's discussion group no one would bat an eye.

then why bother calling it a womens book club and not just a book club?

seems bizzare.

Mark Hamill

southsiderosie wrote: »

This. It is nice to have a conversation with people who take your feelings at face value and don't try to tell you to suck it up or you are just being silly.

Its tiring to have people on here imply that men are all gob****es who can only be condescending to women.

southsiderosie wrote: »

There are certain experiences that women have that men generally do not. Women give birth. Women are judged more on their appearance than men. Women get brazilian waxes. These are things that women like to discuss with other women.

You need book clubs to discuss brazilian waxes?

southsiderosie wrote: »

I would also say as a woman and an ethnic minority, that I do belong to some 'identity' groups, in part because it is, again, nice to not have to justify my feelings all the damn time.

How does belonging to an identity group mean you dont have to justify your feelings? Why is justifying your feelings a bad thing? Do you think that if we had groups and services that catered purely for your ethnic minority ("ethnic minority book clubs") that issues related to discrimination of your ethnic minority would actually improve?

LenaClaire

ntlbell wrote: »

I don't think "talking to your mates" is grounds to be pulling out stats like 1 in 4.

it's hear say nonsense.

There's some women who say things like they were sexually harrased even raped because they think it shows they're attractive. :rolleyes:

Wow, that is really offensive. I would say that the vast majority of women would deny being assaulted because of humiliation and fear. As Liah pointed out harassment can include shouts, grab and anything up to flat out assault. I think you are seriously under estimating the experience of most women.

LenaClaire

ntlbell wrote: »

then why bother calling it a womens book club and not just a book club?

seems bizzare.

Because we don't fear that a man might over hear our discussion? I am sorry I don't understand your point. A group of women get together to discuss a book, hence a woman's book club. The fact that the discussion is not locked away in some super secret women's club does not mean it does not have a female focus.

liah

Just to clarify my earlier post, I'm not trying to say that it literally is 1 in 4. I have no proof for that. I'm just saying that if you actually talk to real-life women about this kind of stuff and ask them how many times they've been grabbed or touched by strangers the figures will surprise you.

I'd say the figure is actually quite close to that, regardless of any studies, just from the simple fact that I've never met a girl who it hasn't happened to.

ntlbell

jujibee wrote: »

Wow, that is really offensive. I would say that the vast majority of women would deny being assaulted because of humiliation and fear. As Liah pointed out harassment can include shouts, grab and anything up to flat out assault. I think you are seriously under estimating the experience of most women.

the vast majority of people may very well deny it, that doesn't mean what I said doesn't happen.

I came across girls in school and if they were raped or harrassed as often as they claimed it would mean practically everyone in the town had a go.

I'm sorry you're offended but that's the reality of the situation, I would have thought pitty would have been more appropiate tho.

Mark Hamill

jujibee wrote: »

My last two years of secondary school were in an all girls school. During the day 80% of the girls did not wear make up and the nuns had to nag us to brush our hair. Of course the second school was over the bathrooms were filled with girls doing hair and make-up before they went out for the afternoon. When it was just girls we dressed as we pleased, it was refreshing not to worry about your appearance - and lets face it - when you are 16 your appearance is a big worry.

Your personal experience is fairly unique. my sisters wore as much make up as they could get away with.

jujibee wrote: »

But back to the main point. How is my going to a book club once a month hurting anyone?

How is it going to help solve the issues that drive you to wanting a unisex book club in the first place? I realise it may seem that I'm saying you need to fight all these battles all the time, but nothing ever changes until you change it, and creating unisex groups doesn't deal with gender issues, it just makes them rarer because interaction is rarer.

jujibee wrote: »

Can you honestly tell me you never just hang out with male friends?

No, not on purpose (ie I dont go looking for male only enviroments, I just hang out with whatever friends are around).

LenaClaire

Valmont wrote: »

I distinctly remember the ubiquitous "1 in 4" statistic being rubbished here a few months ago. It's disheartening seeing some of the same proponents from that argument throwing such outright lies around again so easily. I've come to expect little else from hardcore feminist groups and I suppose that is because their ideological foundations are apparently built on sand.

I'm sorry but how does wanting a book club mean we are hard core feminists? It seems that anytime a woman brings up the fact that women have different life experiences than men we are feminists?

ntlbell

jujibee wrote: »

Because we don't fear that a man might over hear our discussion? I am sorry I don't understand your point. A group of women get together to discuss a book, hence a woman's book club. The fact that the discussion is not locked away in some super secret women's club does not mean it does not have a female focus.

you're saying men are more than welcome to join both men and women.

as far as i know normal book clubs are open to men and women

so why is it a womens book club and not a book club?

do you see the point/question?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

LenaClaire

ntlbell wrote: »

the vast majority of people may very well deny it, that doesn't mean what I said doesn't happen.

I came across girls in school and if they were raped or harrassed as often as they claimed it would mean practically everyone in the town had a go.

I'm sorry you're offended but that's the reality of the situation, I would have thought pitty would have been more appropiate tho.

I am not saying that there has never been someone to falsely accuse someone of harassment but to downplay all rape and assault statistics because of it is what is offensive.

Nevyn

ntlbell wrote: »

Try and make a few public houses in dublin city men only.

uproar, bra burning the lot. we would never hear the end of it.

A 'Public house' can not turn away people based on gender, they would loose their leince, but there is nothing what so ever stopping a group of men hiring the function room for their gathering.

ntlbell

jujibee wrote: »

I am not saying that there has never been someone to falsely accuse someone of harassment but to downplay all rape and assault statistics because of it is what is offensive.

I'm not down playing them

I'm stating you cannot come up with statistics because of talking to your female friends.

I'm playing down hearsay, not stats.

Mark Hamill

Kooli wrote: »

I would feel more pressure to be attractive if I was going to be in a mixed group with men who I might find attractive, particularly if I was single. If I was going over to a mates house for a book club I would not feel that pressure. Call me crazy!

Like jujibee, i dont think you are representative of most girls.

Kooli wrote: »

I don't really understand your point about the low self-esteem. Sometimes I like having discussions where the goal isn't to be right. The goal is to have a discussion and to draw out others' points of view. I don't particularly enjoy having to debate and defend each point I make. (Other times I actually do like the more argumentative discussions where people's points are picked apart. Just sometimes I don't). I don't really see the connection to my self esteem.

To me, discussion are about finding out what is right, thats the point. If you just draw out peoples ideas but never evaluate them, then you haven't accomplished anything, its a waste of time. I think a lot of problems in this world would be solved if people would justify all their opinions. I think just by trying, most people would be forced to throw out a lot of the baseless crap they hold to.

Kooli wrote: »

And finally, I am not talking about a global women's point of view. I am under no illusions that we all have the same opinion on anything. But if I want to talk about my experience of being a woman, or an experience I've had from the point of view of being a women, then sometimes I just can't be arsed trying to argue that point or justify it to a man who doesn't understand it.

You are assuming that a woman would automatically understand your point where the man cant. I dont see why, unless you are just looking for someone to agree with you.

LenaClaire

Mark Hamill wrote: »

How is it going to help solve the issues that drive you to wanting a unisex book club in the first place? I realise it may seem that I'm saying you need to fight all these battles all the time, but nothing ever changes until you change it, and creating unisex groups doesn't deal with gender issues, it just makes them rarer because interaction is rarer.

Why do you think I am engaging in this discussion? Because I think this needs to be talked about but frankly it is giving me a headache. I feel like you are saying that even though women have many, many experiences that make them wary around men they should never admit that and should just go trooping on as if everything is already perfect when it is not. That every time we feel like we are being mistreated or condescended to we need to scream and shout, we have been for years and things are slowly changing buts sometimes you just get tired and want to not have to argue every point.

And I want to clarify, I have never, ever said that all men are bad or condescending. I have clearly stated again and again that most men are fine but there are a few that never learn and that make women furious because a lot of the time they are the ones that are most vocal.

maggy_thatcher

Kooli, let's change your post slightly:

OK seriously, we're talking about a book club here (for most of these posts that has been the example used). That is not complete segregation. In the rest of our lives we are working with white people, living with white people, studying with white people, training with white people, doing hobbies with white people.

And despite all that time we spend 'integrated', and despite your assertion that there is no difference between white people and black people, there are STILL white people that find the company of white people more comfortable for certain defined activities. Not all activities. Not even necessarily one activity all the time. It really is such a small issue. One hour a month maybe? Why do you still insist that these white people are wrong in wanting this? Can't you accept that maybe you don't understand what drives them to seek this out, but that doesn't mean there isn't something genuine and valid there?

Should we ban 'whites nights out' and 'blacks nights out' too? Because it is our duty to avoid all types of segregation? And of course you would agree that here is no difference between a whites night out and night out that involves blacks, whites and mixed-race, because we are all the same?

Or, let's try:

OK seriously, we're talking about a book club here (for most of these posts that has been the example used). That is not complete segregation. In the rest of our lives we are working with gays, living with gays, studying with gays, training with gays, doing hobbies with gays.

And despite all that time we spend 'integrated', and despite your assertion that there is no difference between gays and straights, there are STILL straights that find the company of straights more comfortable for certain defined activities. Not all activities. Not even necessarily one activity all the time. It really is such a small issue. One hour a month maybe? Why do you still insist that these straights are wrong in wanting this? Can't you accept that maybe you don't understand what drives them to seek this out, but that doesn't mean there isn't something genuine and valid there?

Should we ban 'straights nights out' and 'gays nights out' too? Because it is our duty to avoid all types of segregation? And of course you would agree that here is no difference between a straights night out and night out that involves gays, straights and couples, because we are all the same?

I assume you find both of these acceptable?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

GobBluth

liah wrote: »

I'm just saying that if you actually talk to real-life women about this kind of stuff and ask them how many times they've been grabbed or touched by strangers the figures will surprise you.

Please don't tell me you're talking about drunken carry on in pubs and clubs? If you are then I'd say 3 in 4 women (and men) have been victims of sexually harassment. I know I have (numerous times!), of course sometimes (most times) I've enjoyed it!

Also, to get back on point, the OP made a bad example of talking about a book club, nobody would care about a male only book club, but he does have a point.

I'm sure it's been mentioned already but Portmarnock Golf Club has been taking to the courts at least twice because they don't allow women to join.

Mark Hamill

jujibee wrote: »

I feel like you are saying that even though women have many, many experiences that make them wary around men they should never admit that and should just go trooping on as if everything is already perfect when it is not.

Strawman, show me where I said anything to that effect.

jujibee wrote: »

That every time we feel like we are being mistreated or condescended to we need to scream and shout, we have been for years and things are slowly changing buts sometimes you just get tired and want to not have to argue every point.

Really? Cause I'm pretty sure I said you should talk to the people whose job it is to keep the peace wherever you are being harassed eg doormen, management, mods etc

jujibee wrote: »

And I want to clarify, I have never, ever said that all men are bad or condescending. I have clearly stated again and again that most men are fine but there are a few that never learn and that make women furious because a lot of the time they are the ones that are most vocal.

Get them throw out then?
When you get annoyed and leave and make your own clubs, what do you think happens to the men? Do you think the see the error of their ways now that you are gone?

LenaClaire

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I think partly that is because for a very, very long time being female was vastly restrictive and women have spent a lot of time fighting that. There are still experiences that women have that are different to men. I still don't understand why a one hour book club is so upsetting to people.

I don't only identify myself as only female and I am involved in many activities that are based on interests and other issues. I equate women's book clubs to any other meeting of people. There are groups for expats and homosexuals and religious people and sorts of other demographics. Should they never meet because they are isolating themselves?

CDfm

I have seen some studies that are fairly biased and having worked in market research would be sceptical of some studies.

That said, there is a lot of "Allo darlin" stuff that does go on in offices etc. I wouldn't pat my doctors bum or put my arm around my dental hygenists waist and call her love, yet I have a friend who is a senior technical manager in a big company 2,000 + who gets this.

I am sure some people are hyper sensitive about personal space.

A few years ago I was dating someone and when we were out a senior colleague pawed her -that is the only word I can use. I worked closely with the guy but soon after left. Its like the guitarist Jeff Beck says " its flattering but you don't need it".

If it happened today, I would certainly discuss it with personnel and its only after reflecting on the thread that I remember just how uncomfortable I felt about it at the time.

the_syco

Thaedydal wrote: »

I said single sex schooling is a factor.

Single sex schooling can be benifical to males, as they are not distracted by the females. This of course is not the females fault, it's just that if boys becoming men whilst surrounded by the opposite sex, they'll be distracted. Females benifit, as they'll have less distractions caused by males. I was in a mixed sex scool, and looking back, jeasus they were immature if a pretty face came into the class.

jujibee wrote: »

I personally have never been attacked or molested by a woman, so in my experience, yes, it is a gender issue.

I've seen men attacked by women and men. Unfortunately, they don't think they can punch women in the face, and kick them in the head, if the women attack them first, for no reason (other than her being drunk, and thinking the man looks like their ex).

The difference is that if a man is attacked by a man for no reason, the victims' friends have his back, and beat lumps out of the attacker. If a woman attacks him, they're less inclined to get involved.

Kooli wrote: »

I haven't heard one man say they actually want to be a member of these women-only groups, or know of a man who wants to be in one, they just don't want women to be allowed/facilitated/encouraged to have them.

Glad to see that you have nothing against male-only clubs. Oh, wait, they're sexist. But women-only groups empower the women. Although I don't care about women only groups, I do care that men-only groups are labeled as sexist, but women groups are not.

Mark Hamill wrote: »

The cubs and scouts were mixed, but there wasn't much else to do, besides the girls weren't better at talking to the boys seeing as most went to all girls schools too.

The Catholic Boys Scouts of Ireland, otherwise known as the CBSI, but now the CSI, were once male only, as were the girl-guides female only. The beavers, cubs, scouts and ventures were once all male. Girls were only let in in the past 20 years or so. And I welcome it, although not many women were up to it. Those that were, were great craic.

Thaedydal wrote: »

Many young people are confused about what rape is due to how it is portrayed and end up in abusive relationships when they are young as they try to make sense of it all.

I think his point is that if the questions are vague, but the stats are black and white, it makes the report seem very biased, almost to the point that you see an agenda.

CDfm

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I have to say it Donegalfella -you have a lovely way with words.

Every word in its right place and not one I would change or edit.

LenaClaire

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Really? Cause I'm pretty sure I said you should talk to the people whose job it is to keep the peace wherever you are being harassed eg doormen, management, mods etc

A lot of the time you are alone or the "people in charge" are involved. I have reported instances that I think are inappropriate to mods and they have not agreed with my assessment. I appreciate that there are times when we can ask for help and will receive it but my point is I should not have to ask for help. I know it is not a perfect world and it never will be but I can't help wishing for it.

Get them throw out then?
When you get annoyed and leave and make your own clubs, what do you think happens to the men? Do you think the see the error of their ways now that you are gone?

But you see that is the point. By calling it a woman's book club we are making it clear that we don't want to have to deal with that. I have known several women's book clubs that had male members. The point is not to exclude men. The point is to discuss issues pertaining to women. I bet if you found a women's book club and you asked to join on the condition that you followed their charter that most would welcome you (I would not say all because some are strictly female for various reasons). We don't want to exclude men but we want a place to discuss our issues and fears with out worrying that we are going to be labeled as feminazis or what ever the going term is.

Nevyn

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

And we have groups for Homosexuals both men and women and we have ones for bisexuals and those who are kink and those who are poly and there are socs for french people living in Ireland. All of whom share thier experience in common living in society and gain from the support they get in those groups and there is nothing wrong with it nor with male and female only groups.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.