[All these points apply to sex and to gender, so for ease of reading, I’ll just discuss gender]
Gender-exclusive groups are common in many societies, such as men-only and women-only social clubs and casual activity groups like a men’s bowling group or a women’s reading circle.
Sometimes this is de-facto, but sometimes this is enforced by rules or expectations, treating the club as a safe space for airing issues people have with other genders, or avoiding perceived problems with other genders.
I came across this old comment in a garbage subreddit by accident when researching. The topic is Men’s Sheds:
“Here’s the thing. No reasonable person has an issue with women having their own women’s activity groups. The annoying part is that whenever men try to do something similar, that’s a problem. Women either want them banished or demand entry, EVERY time.”
I think their claim is nonsense, grossly exaggerated at best. I also know of many counterexamples of men trying to get into women-only groups (as an extreme case, the Ladies Lounge of the Mona art gallery in Australia was taken to court for sex discrimination, with the creator claiming they would circumvent the ruling by installing a toilet). But nonetheless, I can understand why they feel this way, patriarchal social relations change how most people see men-exclusive spaces vs. women-exclusive spaces.
But my response to their claim is that, I am reasonable and I do have an issue with any group setting up places which discriminate based on gender. These safe places can form as a legitimate rudimentary form of protection, yes, but they maintain and often even promote sexism, and should all be challenged and turned into something better which serves the same purpose.
Of course, I’m limited by my own experiences and perspective, so I’d love to hear your opinions on the topic.
Bonus video: “Why Do Conservative Shows All Look the Same? | Renegade Cut” - a discussion about fake man-caves and sexism.
there are women only spaces for our protection and safety… (which is why we’re open to trans people as well)
there are men only spaces because they want to exclude women / maintain their power (fraternities, lodges)
it is VERY important that humans today learn this difference.
Can you give an example for when those safe spaces add more value than for example making it a feminist only space where feminist men are welcome as well? In my experience feminists spaces attract very few men anyways.
sure: when (and that is quite often unfortunately) women who seek these spaces have been abused by men repeatedly and can’t risk another trauma trigger.
and feminist men know where they’re welcome. so it’s rarely (in my own experience never) truly feminist men who want to join those spaces because they understand boundaries.
Cause not all men will be genuinely there for women’s protection?
I’d also say that there wasn’t an issue with men only space to discuss testicular cancer, say.
Not all women will be at feminist spaces for women’s protection either so it’s important to remove people from a safe space whenever they make the space unsafe. I’m open to the idea of women only spaces if they serve a function but in practice the most common function I have seen them be used as is for enforcing gender norms and excluding trans and nonbinary people.
Most queer spaces make a point to not police on queerness because queer people get excluded so often from gender exclusive spaces. Policing on ideology prevents that issue entirely and doesn’t make the space less safe. It actually makes the space safer of it.
Why wouldn’t trans women be welcome at such spaces?
“I’m open to the idea of women only spaces if they serve a function”
and those people know that.
so what exactly is the problem with women only safe spaces?
I’m speaking of my experience of being trans nonbinary and having been discriminated against under the guise of gender exclusive spaces. Cis women have a long history of excluding trans and nonbinary people from ‘women only’ spaces so excuse me for being sceptical of the concept.
Removed by mod
You sound like a terf.
The misuse of AGAB language to exclude trans women from women-only spaces is just transphobia dressed up in “woke” language. “Assigned <gender> At Birth” is a verb. It is something that happened to trans people coercively. It is very frustrating to see cis people weaponize this term that they don’t understand to just do slightly different sounding transphobia. If a space is women only but excludes trans women, then it’s just an admission that the group does not see trans women as “real” women. If a women only space wants to exclude all nonbinary people for whatever reason, that’s fine, but this “AFAB-only” schtick is very transparent and it would be refreshing if those groups would just be honest about their transphobia instead of playing this silly language game that they pretend is still inclusive.
thank you for sharing patiently, I need to learn a lot about this.
It was just an example, perhaps not the best one.
Anyone who can get testicular can show up.
The point is that gender is not binary and that there will always be people who will get excluded for no reason when you try to define a boundary for exclusion.
LGBTQ+ Men’s Groups do exist.
They are open to trans masc also.
The issue is generally for Men’s Groups which are focused on cishet but “accepting” (begrudgingly) of queer folks.
yeah that last point you mention is huge. thank ya