If men aren't allowed to have male only spaces, why should we allow women to have their own spaces?

MarkTwainiac · 2022-03-24T01:44:38+00:00

I'm trying to think of men only spaces that women have no tried to invade and take over

I can't think of any other organization or event that was male centered that women didn't try to get into.

WTF is this misogynistic bullshit? Has "Gender Critical" suddenly become a MRA sub?

Maybe there's a lot of news I have missed, but before the recent rise of "trans men" what men-only spaces have women "tried to invade and take over?" Even back in the 1960s, 70s and 80s when women were lobbying to be allowed access to previously male-only facilities and orgs from which we were once totally excluded, I don't recall women trying to "invade and take over" any of them.

Women and girls wanted to be able to run marathons and join orgs like the NY Road Runners Club; join Little League; and join some previously male-only clubs where men met to do business, network and advance their careers. But I don't recall any women trying to "invade and take over" these orgs.

I was one of the first women to attend a previously all-male college/uni as an undergrad admitted as a "freshman" - and whilst women who entered such schools wanted equal access to places like the libraries, labs and classrooms, we never sought to end men's right to have their own dorms, loos, sports, locker rooms or fraternities. And we certainly didn't try to "take over" higher ed or the Ivy League.

I was part of the group that pushed for women alums to be able to use the pool and other athletics facilities at the Yale Club in NYC from which we were barred because of our sex. We wanted ample opportunity to be able to use the pool, squash courts and such - but we never tried to take over. On the contrary, we though that men should still be able to have the pool to themselves at certain times so they continue the YC tradition of swimming naked.

Maybe I have been asleep, but has there been a mass-scale movement in which large numbers of women have been pushing for entry into the RC priesthood, to attend orthodox yeshivas and become orthodox rabbis, to join college fraternities, to compete in men's sports, to use men's locker rooms and loos, to join men's gyms, to become members of support groups for guys dealing with erectile dysfunction, prostate cancer, gynecomastia and male-pattern baldness? In addition to meetings open to both sexes, there used to be male-only AA, AA and SA meetings in many places; I don't think women ever pushed to integrate them.

AFAIK, women never have tried to force the Masons to go "co-ed," or to open up the men's swimming pond at Hampstead Heath. Some women distressed about the decision to open up the women's pond to males whilst keeping the men's pond male-only did don fake beards and barge in on the men's pond a couple of summers ago - but that was to make a point; they were not trying to have the men lose their male-only space.

I hung out with a lot of gay guys in the 80s and 90s, and lived in a very gay nabe in NYC, but don't recall women seeking access to gay male bath houses, back rooms in gay clubs set aside for guys to have sex, the loos where men were known to seek sex, the parts of parkland where men used to cruise and have sex (such as the Bramble in Central Park). I used to share summer houses on Fire Island, and none of the women in my house would ever have thought for a second of trying to go with our gay male pals and housemates to all the male-only sex parties or other events like high tea in the Pines.

In ye olden days, there used to be lots of porn theaters and shops that catered to an exclusively male clientele. Women were never trying to get in those places.

NYC still has several posh male-only clubs such as the Union Club and the Knickerbocker that women aren't trying to get into AFAIK.

In the 80s, women never had a problem with the name or concept behind Gay Men's Health Crisis. A lot of women volunteered there, but as more and more women became ill with HIV and died of AIDs, there was never a push from women for orgs like GMHC to become "inclusive" of women. Though over time as AIDs crisis orgs morphed into HIV orgs, many orgs like GMHC expanded their services to some female clientele.

In my old nabe in NYC (Chelsea and the West Village) there were tons of men's gyms and men's hangout places that women never tried to "invade and take over."

There are lots of religious and conservative orgs and events that are male-only or male-centered that women haven't tried to "invade and take over." Like the Million Man March, all sorts of Muslim events, and those gross seminars and courses for men to learn to be PUAs.

I really resent the contention that there are no male-centered orgs or events "that women didn't try to get into" and "invade and take over." I think you are projecting male behavior onto women and blaming us for behaving like men when, in fact, we haven't behaved like men. Women of my generation and earlier generations who made inroads into previously male domains did not march in with weapons en masse and try to "invade and take over." We are actually pretty FUCKING polite and restrained.

This rewriting of history and trying to portray women as tyrants always trampling men's boundaries due to our custom of trying to "invade and take over" feels very similar to what's going on now with crimes. Male violent criminals in droves are identifying as women so large numbers of rapes, murders, serial killings, assaults, child molestations, dick-flashings and such that men commit are now getting recorded and reported as crimes committed by women. I don't think women are innately angels and morally superior to men. But still, there are patterns of behavior that are typical of the two sexes - and "invading and taking over" isn't female-typical behavior.

However, characterizing women's efforts to obtain access to places and programs from which we were historically excluded as attempts on our part to "invade and take over" sounds pretty typically male.

What's next - alleging that because of women's habit of trying to "invade and take over," the world's wars were started by women? Putin is a woman? Hilter was a woman? Papa Joe Stalin was a woman? Mao? Napoleon Bonaparte? LBJ, Dick Nixon, William Westmoreland, Henry Kissinger, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Yasser Arafat, Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, the leaders of ISIS - all women? Sheesh.

Chocolatepudding · 2022-03-24T11:10:44+00:00

I think having no boys' only clubs isn't good for boys. Children need access to both single sex and mixed activities imo.

WildApples · 2022-03-24T01:05:48+00:00

First of all, there are still men's only spaces. They have to operate as purely private clubs to not run afoul of discrimination laws, but they do exist.

Secondly, the argument assumes a version of equality that is regressive in its ignorance about how certain groups are at a disadvantage. An NAACP meeting has a very different connotation than a KKK gathering. Marginalized groups do not have the power to subjugate the majority group (unlike the reverse) and require segregated spaces to further their equity agendas. It is ironic to me that that political ideology that is notorious for its safe spaces and trigger warnings in the end advocate an ideology that would completely destroy the concept of safe spaces for those people who actually need it.

womanual · 2022-03-25T04:34:01+00:00

Men do not need their own spaces because women do not pose a threat to men. Male privilege means men are more likely to be taken seriously than women. If a man says he's raped by a women, he will most likely be believed, unlike a woman raped by a man who most people will assume she is making false accusations. Yet despite men being more likely to be taken seriously, I can't find a single article online about a man being raped by a woman, or a woman implanting a camera in a public bathroom. Yet I can find plenty of news articles of men raping women. Trust me if a man was raped by a woman it would be all over the news because men are privileged like that. Men would also be more openly sexist.

I also think it's OK for black people to reclaim the n-word but it's racist for white people to use that word, and its OK for black people to have black only spaces but "whites only" is racist. Black people did not systematically enslave white people, or beat and murder white people on a regular basis. They did not deny rights and opportunities to white people.

In 2015, Dylann Storm Roof shot an entire black church after they let him pray for an hour. Later the same year, white supremacist Gregory Bush shot 2 black elders at a Kroger's in Louisville, Kentucky. Minutes before moving to Kroger's, he tried to enter a black church but was denied. See that church had a safety reason to keep out white people, but what reason would a white church have for excluding black people?

Women need their own spaces because many men don't know how to act appropriately or control themselves, as we women know.

IMO men's bathrooms, changing rooms etc. should be made for everyone as men have no need to keep those spaces to themselves. Women's facilities should remain for natal females only. Women should have the option of using both facilities. Some women want to be away from men. Others do not care. Men should use the common facilities which should be designated for both sexes.

GenderCritical

MODERATORS