From: goid@zooid.guild.ORG (Will Steeves)
Subject: Re: Women-Only / Men-Only Groups
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Date: 25 Jan 93 23:49:41 GMT

mara@panix.com (Mara Chibnik) writes...
>I wrote:
>  >MC> Yes.  One of the problems involved here is historical.  That is,
>  >MC> men-only groups have become suspect because they so frequently
>  >MC> became power bases from which women were excluded.  Women-only
>  >MC> groups don't have this kind of history to overcome.
>goid@zooid.guild.ORG (Will Steeves) writes:
> >It's interesting that you would say this, Mara.

> >Perhaps this was true of only men's groups in the past, but with the
> >growing power base in the women's movement, it seems that the same
> >suspicions can now also be drawn about women-only groups...

>I had in mind institutions like Harvard, Princeton, and Yale.
>The Century Club.  Assorted sports clubs.  Business and
>professional organizations (like Rotary International)
>that had explicit charters restricting membership to men.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A very large number of these organisations are now under *very* heavy
pressure to admit women as well.  Soon, they will, I am sure.  And I
*do* consider this a good thing - a very good thing.  However, I do
not as yet see as organised an attempt to pressure women-only
organisations to also admit men.  With the exception of some
women-only YMCA pools, I have heard of no other attempts to open
women-only organisations and/or services to men.  I therefore foresee
a time when all men-only groups will have been pressured to accept
women, while at that time, there will still be a large and possibly
growing number of women-only groups which, if approached, would say
"But that's different!".

Needless to say, my opinion is thus - If men-only organisations should
be required to admit women (and I believe that they should), then
women-only organisations should also be required to admit men.

>I would be most interested to see a comparable list of powerful
>institutions on local, regional, national and international levels
>that forbid access to men.

>Living Well Lady doesn't cut it.  At least, there's no evidence yet
>that it does.

How about EMILY's List?  Certainly, I don't recall them having
supported any male candidates?  There are also a large and growing
number of women- only business and professional associations.  Indeed,
in Ontario, where there is an Association of School Teachers (I don't
recall the *exact* name), there is also an Association of Women
Teachers, which recently refused to accept men.  This is *quite*
ironic, because women are the *vast majority* of Ontario school
teachers.  It would be like firefighters starting an Association of
Men Firefighters!

At any rate, isn't Emily's List *enough*?  Indeed, I don't recall any
groups that went out of their way to support male candidates, *solely*
because of their gender.

(BTW, what is Living Well Lady?)

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876

"Gravity: It's more than just a fragrance.  It's the LAW!"
      - Will Steeves, President, GOiDS "R" We, Inc.

 * SLMR 2.1a * "I hate questionnaires."  - Worf

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.