Impossible Thing To Believe Before Breakfast #6:
It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or
participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is
absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which
men are excluded.
DAVE SIM:
Hi Erick!
I've decided to do one of these a week: Wednesday! I'll leave it up to Tim W if he wants to keep "Impossible Things" commentaries from other people going after that.
#6 - I think virtually ALL (i.e. 95% or better) men and women are fine with men meeting with men and women meeting with women absent the other gender; sports clubs exclusively for men and sports clubs exclusively for women, etc. -- and take it as a given that INDIVIDUALS are the ones best suited to choose their personal circumstances for themselves.
I really think feminists are the only people who have a problem with it because of their misandry mind-set. They infer that the only reason men would want to be together without women being there is because any meeting that doesn't INCLUDE women is directed AGAINST women. Another instance of the most aggressive women intimidating normal women.
Definitely up until 1970, it was taken as a given that you would have sewing bees for women, lodge meetings for men, etc. etc. Everyone would have found it inconceivable that it could be considered an issue. Husbands and wives need the time away from each other and time with others of their own gender.
I think the only explanation for thinking otherwise is misandry and paranoia.
3 comments:
Hi Dave,
without making this a reductio ad absurdum proposition i.e.unisex everything, the opposition to your statement would be to point out that it is not access to the club as much as it it access to the 'club'. That is to say, far to often having access to the club meant you had exclusive access to the deals that are made at the club. Exclusion from the club based upon gender, race, religion, sexual orientation etc. meant a very real disadvantage in the business world.
I do not believe that every aspect of the genders must be intertwined, but beyond a shadow of a doubt hiding behind gender exclusivity and lets be honest here. that means male exclusivity, has been detrimental to lots of women.
Lastly, 'sewing bees' ?
Really?
You think that's all women got together for prior to 1970?
maybe that was 1770
I think you're just trying to champion the feminist cause by parroting the feminist line. I really don't think that excluding men from women's environments or women from men's environments is a Big Deal to anyone except feminists and I think it's just paranoia and misandry that it results from. I don't think many deals are made at clubs and certainly not because of the club. It's a cover story to make sure that feminists can be anywhere they want to be because feminists are "that way". If they don't have "victimization" to hide behind they really don't have anything. So they make themselves into "victims" of men-only clubs. Women are no more victims of men-only clubs than men are victims of women-only clubs. In my opinion.
Women get together for lots of reasons and sewing bees used to be one of them. I don't think there's any need to belittle sewing bees, but I understand that Feminist Theocrats feel compelled to do so.
It's rude and uncalled for.
I do not believe that I belittled anything. You may have inferred that, but it does not mean it was implied. How rude.
As for deals closed just on golf course, i literally typed for three seconds on google
and this is what I found. Now i do not wish to give you the vapors, but this was written by a woman. However nowhere in the piece does she bemoan deals being made or feel excluded. On the contrary, although she admits to not liking golf she acknowledges the deal making aspects, and provides tips.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/cherylsnappconner/2013/01/24/19-tips-for-closing-a-deal-on-the-golf-course/#70b080fa205a
Post a Comment