Feminism and the WI

[FlamedToACrisp]

My friend suggested I should join the WI. I feel uncomfortable with the idea of joining any group which excludes certain people based on their sex, because I consider women and men should be treated equally. What are your views?

Good point.

I think the WI provides a valuable woman only space.

If you don't agree with its aims then don't join.

*5. I’m a trans woman, can I still join?

If you gender-identify as a woman you can join us and expect our full support. Members who cannot tolerate being part of a group that accepts all women are free to leave. We have yet to come across any such members!*

Maybe not a female only space after all.

It doesn't exclude people based on their sex. Males who want to join can do so, as they define woman as "anyone who wants to join the WI"

Why are you against women only spaces, and why would you post that you disagree with women-only spaces on a feminist board? (not that WI are women-only, as they accept men anyway as they're yet another institute captured by the transcult)

I'm not against women only spaces in principle, for example toilets and changing rooms which are separated by sex. I posted on this board because I consider myself a feminist and wanted to hear your opinions on this. There are many groups which to my mind are unnecessarily men only or women only. I have no problem with joining say a cookery class only to find that, as it happened, only women have joined, but I wouldn't join a women only cookery class. What is the importance of women only groups like these? Has feminism changed to mean hating men and not wanting to spend any time in their company? Because that isn't what I mean when I say I am a feminist.

Because sometimes women need spaces away from men.

If you don't feel that need, that's fine. Personally I need it. I don't hate men. But I don't want to be around them all the time.

The women-only classes around my way are things like car/house maintenance (mixed classes are available), or for women new to the country (there are also mixed groups, and male-only groups for this). My gym has a women's section. I should mention I'm in a self-id country, so actually these are all mixed sex spaces in practise.

The reasons are that it's been shown that in a mixed class, men (and boys) talk over women and dominate. Therefore, for the comfort of women, and so they have more of a chance to ask questions and learn, there are some women only classes - generally in the more traditionally male area where women might lack confidence.

I doubt I need to explain why some immigrant women might want separate classes (obviously depending on the culture they came from), and why it's good to be able to talk to, and educate some women on their rights without male relatives around listening.

Has feminism changed to mean hating men and not wanting to spend any time in their company?

What a ridiculous thing to say. I spend most of my time in the company of boys and men who I love very much, or who are strangers or colleagues sharing public space. Doesn't mean that I should be forced to share with men in every space. Feminism, as ever, is about liberating women. Sometimes, it's only possible, or better, or just more comfortable, to do that with men not around.

Doesn't mean we hate men.

I don't want my son following me into the toilet while I do a poo. Doesn't mean I hate him.

There are many groups which to my mind are unnecessarily men only or women only.

Not sure why this is seen to be such a negative thing.

When exclusion is one sided, and results in the less dominant group losing out (for example years ago, when women were excluded from bars, and if there was a space women could enter, it was still shared with men) then there is a problem. But if people value single sex groups, then I don’t see it as inherently negative.

Many women value single sex spaces or groups. As soon as a man enters, the dynamic changes.

Many women find it enjoyable and comfortable to engage in women-only groups.

Some women are very religious and conservative and have faith based reasons for not wanting to associate with males who are not close family members. If there are no female only groups then they are restricted from being able to engage in life outside home.

For others, it's a relaxed space away from men. I enjoy having the option of women only groups. I feel less anxious or embarrassed in women only spaces. I work in a field that is heavily dominated by men. I interact with men all the time in general everyday scenarios. And I'm really annoyed that lots of women only groups are jumping on the self identified bandwagon because I enjoy having spaces where women can be themselves and interact with each other without feeling self conscious or anxious around men.

If you aren't interested in such groups, you don't need to join them. It's the irritating pressure and harassment from TRA types that target women only groups that get up my nose. They can easily set up their own trans inclusive groups and stop shaming and badgering other organisers into changing membership rules to accept self identifying women.

Also, a woman is perfectly entitled to wanting to spend as little time with men as possible for whatever reason. It could be for reasons of past trauma or simply preference. Women's lives don't have to revolve around men if they don't want it to. There's plenty of spaces in this world that are already open to men.

I think you have to ask yourself what the space is for, and what the asymmetries in power/ oppression within a society are.

So - should a black rights group interested in supporting its members to negotiate the job market (which numerous studies have shown is institutionally racist) be forced to take a white member?

Should the Men's Sheds movement, set up to combat loneliness and mental health issues among men, be forced to take women members?

Should an ovarian cancer support group be forced to extend its remit to prostate cancer sufferers?

Should a women's rugby club be forced to take male players? Or a male rugby club be forced to take female players?

I think the answer to all of these is a pretty clear no (though the Welsh RFU appears to disagree with me on the last of these ).

I think freedom of association is an important principle. The difficulty comes when that clashes with equality - eg a Gentlemen's club (of the old-fashioned At James, Piccadilly type) which doubles as a place to network, or somewhere like the Royal and Ancient golf club.

FlamedToACrisp

I think there are many people who struggle with this kind of question. Many are happy to have separation where there are issues like security or privacy, or other special reasons like political meetings about affected groups.

But they struggle with the idea of separate sex based social groups or charity organisations like the WI or men's lodges and so on. I think there are often two lines of thought behind this. One is that if we think that men and women are in all important ways mentally and socially similar, or that they would be if not socialised with negative gender constructs, would we not expect groups like this to be mixed? If fact, might they not tend to add to the formation of those kinds of constructs around gender, even if people don't intend that?

The second element which is related is that if you can argue for groups like this for women you can equally argue for them for men. If you can argue that Guide ought to be girls only than surely you can argue that Scouts should be boys only for similar reasons. And people are often very uncomfortable with that, even if you say these are not organisations about power, because they see mens groups of that type as perpetuating male gender stereotypes and patterns.

On the other side, you really do have a lot of people who really just enjoy the camaraderie and culture that arises in single sexed groups which they find to be different than in mixed sex groups, and they see real value come out of it.

I think there can be some cognitive dissonance at times involved in this. I don't think there has to be, I agree with separate sexed groups having value. But I do think that if you believe that gender has to be and should be totally abolished to have equality it becomes difficult to justify groups that don't fall within pretty narrow confines (politics, physical issues, etc) and I think the idea that there is value in groups like this does suggest that male and female are categories that have differences besides reproductive plumbing and that is ok.

But my experience is that often people want to maintain the idea that such groups are ok (at least for women) while also being uncomfortable with those ideas.

I thought your way until very recently when I was invited onto a women’s only work related thing. I went out of curiosty as I work in a very male dominated field, but am good at holding my own. Well respected as expert.

It was a real eye opener. How much being around men actually affects how i behave.

For example, it was much easier to network. I discovered by I have no problems approaching random women to talk to them. With men there is always a fear they will think you are coming onto them in some way.( because sometimes they do) . It was also discussed how women and men actually network differently. Women will always expand a circle to include others where as it’s pointless to try to talk to men in a circle, you need to wait till they have opened it into a more linear form. That’s Male signalling.

Also, women tend not to talk as much as men, when men are present. You don’t realise how much until you have the freedoms

And sometimes women are afraid to bring up some subjects. From motherhood, women’s health , any kind of emotion,. I guess subconsciously we worry these will make us seem weak and so be even more ignored.

It’s worth going too true women only events just to learn more about yourself.

If you can argue that Guide ought to be girls only than surely you can argue that Scouts should be boys only for similar reasons

This old chestnut. Scouts opened to girls because they couldn't get enough members. Not enough boys wanted to be scouts, so it was either open to girls, or close even more packs.

Being treated equally in the sense of fairly or the same? Men can have male spaces too. I belong to a women's group and it would completely change the dynamics if men were there.

I enjoy women only groups. I am currently a leader at Brownie's, and like the fact that it's women and girls only. The girls like the fact that it's girls only. We don't hate boys or men, we just quite like having some time away from them. I am perfectly happy for men and boys to have social groups away from us too. We don't have to do everything together.

My Grandma joined the WI many, many years ago. She had tried mixed groups although there wasn't really anything similar to the WI that was mixed. In the mixed choir she went to she was "chatted up" repeatedly by the men in the choir, even though they were aware of her happily married status. In the end she left the choir she loved because of the behaviour of the men there. She found a women's choir in the WI, where she could enjoy singing without worrying that she would be chatted up. She valued the chance to just be herself, and have women in leadership positions (remember she was from a different age and women were barely allowed to work, let alone become bosses). For women like my Grandma the WI was a massive relief, and a massive comfort when she was widowed (some mixed groups may have been a similar comfort I'm sure)

Anyway, do men actually want to join the WI? I've never met a man who cares about being excluded from the WI, or girlguiding, or any other women only groups. There are men only groups around as well, my dad's in one, but I don't think any of them are as well known as the WI.

they define woman as "anyone who wants to join the WI"

Nutshell

If you gender-identify as a woman you can join us and expect our full support. Members who cannot tolerate being part of a group that accepts all women are free to leave. We have yet to come across any such members!

Wow.

It’s not the Women’s Institute then, so OP there is no issue. It’s a mixed sex group.

There are many groups which to my mind are unnecessarily men only or women only.

And you felt obliged to share that thought.

Why not give the Men's Sheds movement the gift of your opinions.

We have yet to come across any such members!

...because members understand that if they voice unease they'll be cast out into darkness.

I'm guessing the WI was set up because historically there were few opportunities for "respectable" women to socialise. Maybe doing some research into the history of the movement would help to answer your questions OP?

I am currently a leader at Brownie's, and like the fact that it's women and girls only.

This is incorrect. Men who identify as women are welcome as leaders, and boys who identify as girls are welcome in the pack.

Guides and brownies are now single gender, not single sex.

I consider women and men should be treated equally.

And when they actually are, we may no longer have any need for women's only organisations. (Leaving aside for the moment there's precious few of those left nowadays).

I agree with Tinsel op - read up on the history of the WI and you'll find it's one of the original feminist organisations!

Women shared skills and learned ways to be self sufficient while the men were at war. After the war the skills gave employment where there was no longer a man to support the family. They also have a history of campaigning.

Even simple things like all members voting on things - I imagine that could be very powerful for women who didn't have a political vote and was used to having men make decisions in the home.

What are your views?

My view is that freedom of association is an important right and that includes association on a single sex basis.

I am not personally at a stage in my life where I feel the need to join a single sex group but that doesn't mean I never have been or never will be.

My grandmother joined the WI after my grandfather's death. She found it invaluable at the time as there were many other women in the same position as her. It was a place where she could speak freely without feeling she had to hide her emotions be they sorrow, anger or humour.

My father in law currently belongs to a men's walking group. He is not a widower himself but several other members are and as with my grandmother and the WI this group provides a place for those men where they can deal with their grief in the company of others who 'get' where they are coming from.

Grief is but one of a myriad issues where men and women alike sometimes feel more comfortable and freer to speak in single sex space. You may not want that for yourself now, or ever, but if others do I see no reason why their preference should be restricted. There are plenty of mixed sex spaces for those who prefer them so it isn't as if anyone's choice is limited by the existence of a few single sex ones.

Trans privilege activists demanding single sex groups become mixed sex is, by contrast, limiting the choice of others and infringing on their right to free association.

Don't join then.
Here's a thought, people join clubs and groups for all kinds of reasons. If you want a mixed sex social group I'm sure there are plenty to choose from.
Some groups tend to be single sex (Freemasons, Guides - I'm going to ignore the trans issue for now) and that's fine and others are mixed, and that's fine too.
If you think feminism=men hating you need to read a bit more widely.