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?

Yes, there are, and I think they've brought up a lot of interesting points and I appreciate the discussion. I just don't understand so many comments saying things like, obviously that is a ridiculous question, or even, well, just don't go if you don't like them. I don't see how the existence of single sex groups for what you might call leisure isn't a feminist discussion. Maybe not an earth-shattering one but I do think it's one that introduces some ideas that are new to many people.

FYI I didn't say it was a ridiculous question I DID say it was a ridiculous leap from I want to spend time with just women to feminists hate men. And it is ridiculous, I haven't changed my mind. Nor do I think saying use another group which is mixed is a problematic response since that is my opinion and the OP asked What are your views? - so I gave it. It is unfortunate you don't like it or that you are 'shocked' by such a response. There has been a great deal of fuckery going on on fwr the last few days so my patience is now limited.

Some women (and men) prefer single sex groups but there are plenty of mixed sex groups around and their existence doesn't logically lead to hatred nor to inequality which was implied in the OP.

OP: 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.

^^ I meant the existence of single sex groups doesn't lead to inequality.

Don't be too sure about there being no affirmation available in the WI

Thank you all for your responses - I was busy but am back now. I can see that some of you feel I have some agenda other than to ask the question I've asked. And I agree that the implied question was along the lines of "As a feminist, should I disapprove of single-sex groups?"

Many of you have taken the time to explain why, in fact, I should not. You've put some very powerful arguments in favour of women-only groups, all of which I've read carefully and taken on board.

And I can tell you that between you all, you have convinced me that, as a feminist, I should be positively in favour of women-only groups.

Thank you.

I'm not entirely sure what the trans issue is as I haven't really researched it. I know one PP suggested I should have done, but the rest of you have proved me right in thinking you could explain these issues to me more clearly.

For the record I was born female and identify as straight female. I don't think about gender issues much, tbh. Most of the people I know are straight males or females. Or, if they're not, I don't know it. I don't (knowingly) see many trans people but have met a couple of them. I don't have a problem in socially accepting men who want to live as women, or vice versa. I can see that former men might as 'women' continue to behave in dominant ways, but I've never been in a group which didn't have one or two dominant personalities, not always male. Isn't the point of transitioning that they don't feel they ARE male and want to behave like women (if one can generalise about the sexes)?

I can see that there are some reasons (eg sports) why bio males shouldn't be regarded as female. And I don't regard men with penises as anything other than men - transvestites if they dress as women. If they've had the chop I'd be more accepting of them as women. But if they look female and behave female, why is it such a big deal? Would be interested to hear more for clarification.

I am not a member of the WI but would have been likely to have joined...but with the policy of mixed sex denitely not. What I want to know is, was this new arrangement voted in by members in branches, or by delegates or was it imposed from the top down?

Is anybody else craving jam?

Having just skipped across a couple of threads, jam and Kendal Mint Cake.

But if they look female and behave female, why is it such a big deal? Would be interested to hear more for clarification

Hi OP

This thread is from last year but still a good place to start. It should give you the basics.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me

OP there are millions of trans threads on here. I'd suggest reading some of them if you're interested.

I am not a member of the WI but would have been likely to have joined...but with the policy of mixed sex denitely not.

I'm not really intending to pick out your post specifically, I few people have said this about the WI, and I've seen it about groups like Guides and other female groups with more of a social purpose.

It's not something I naturally would tend to think, that I would avoid joining just because of such a policy, even if I disagreed with it, unless it affected me directly. The vast majority of WIs will never have an issue with a male identifying as a woman joining, so I would tend to just join and deal with that eventuality if it ever came up, even if it meant retiring. And in the meantime lend my views on the policy if necessary, groups like that are really very much created by the views of the members.

I also wonder to what extent lack of women joining tends to inform their view that if transwomen want to join they will let them. Civic organisation membership is down generally in many areas and it is a problem for some groups.

I suppose part of my thinking is that I think this opening of everything to gender identity is something of a fad and will likely go by the wayside somewhat in time.

@EmpressLesbianInChair thank you - I've started reading!

Sort of in response to your original post, a few years ago, I thought about volunteering to help run a Guide unit. One of the things that made me waver was that it was single sex. Having been to an all girl's school I had some misgivings about that! So I can see where you are coming from.
However, my experience of it a few years down the line has been nothing but positive. I know there has been a lot of (deserved) fuss about the mixed messages they're currently giving over certain issues, but the everyday reality is a really healthy, happy place for the girls and Leaders. The removal of males creates a different atmosphere. Given Guides is for girls aged 10-14 I think it's a particularly good time to be in a place where you are not judged on your appearance, your academic ability but are encouraged and supported to be your best self.
I'm not a member of my local WI but several of my friends are (women aged in 30's/40's and 50's) and they really enjoy it.

EmpressLesbianInChair thank you - I've started reading!

Great!

But if they look female and behave female, why is it such a big deal? Would be interested to hear more for clarification.

Hi OP, this is best explained if you ask yourself questions. What does looking and behaving like a woman actually mean?

You begin to see how sexism weaves its way insidiously into the the entire issue.

Is it baking what women like? Flicking their hair? House work? Crying at films?

It's bad enough to stereotype women. It's worse when you say a man can only do certain things if he says he's woman. Because only women do it.

It's regressive. Women have struggled for centuries for equality. Saying there is a certain way a woman thinks, acts or feels, is what has been used to hold them back. Women are too stupid to educate at uni, to uninformed to vote, too irresponsible with money to get a mortgage, should provide sex on demand, (rape within marriage was only made illegal the early 90s), etc.

All gender stereotypes.

Just ask yourself, what is man actually doing to make you consider him female?

If they've had the chop I'd be more accepting of them as women.

I can't bear the thoughts of a man 'having the chop' to be able to feel more female. It's dreadful that someone feels they have to mutilate themselves :( I'm not happy about trans people coming into female spaces, at all, but don't think 'having the chop' should be required of anyone ever in any circumstances.

Me neither Juells.

Apart from anything else it's yet again incredibly sexist. Women are now just men without a penis?

Women are fully paid up members of the human race. As a concept, a notion, an idea and a reality. In their own right. With shared characteristics which place them in the same category with one another. Characteristics that no man on the planet has.

A man without a penis is a eunuch. Not a woman.

What does looking and behaving like a woman actually mean?

Most people can accurately identify male and female persons quite easily and quickly.

OP, they don’t look female. And we know.

"Most people can accurately identify male and female persons quite easily and quickly."

But what does it mean? To look or to act like a woman?

But what does it mean?

I don't understand the question. What does what mean? Do you mean that it isn't possible for a man to look or act like a woman? I'd agree with that.

I want to know what it means to act like a woman. What is your definition of acting like a woman?

I don't understand the question. What does what mean? Do you mean that it isn't possible for a man to look or act like a woman? I'd agree with that.

Exactly. When people say look or act like a woman, they mean wearing a dress or make up. Completely disregarding that the majority of women do neither. And feminine clothing, wigs and make up have been the preference of men, in the past, just as much as women.

It's a man wearing a dress and make up. Not a woman.

OP I would say I read your statement as men and women should be treated equally as something I agree with but I interpret differently to you.

You mean it as - there should be only mixed groups.

I see it as - men and women should have equal opportunities for everything but this does not always mean they should be treated the same

For example if you only provide mixed groups, you exclude women of religious beliefs who can't mix with men, women who might want to talk about issues that solely affect women (and vice versa for men), sexual abuse survivors etc etc. Plus the evidence that women's voices are silenced when men are present - the list goes on and on.

So for men and women to be treated equally, there needs to be space for a variety of groups, mixed and single sex. Mens Sheds and WI are great examples of this.

The classic example of treating men and women equally is provision of loos - to do this you should provide far more women's loos than men's and as we all know this never happens. Equally doesn't always mean the same.

But what does it mean? To look or to act like a woman?

Looking like a woman is having a woman's body, proportions, hip angle etc. It is very easy to tell women from men by looking, regardless of whether those women and men are believers in 'gender identity'.

Acting like a woman does not exist outside of very specific biological functions. The only 'womanly' acts are menstruation, pregnancy, childbirth, things no male ever has or ever can do regardless of belief in 'gender identity'.

All else is just personality.

What is your definition of acting like a woman?

I said LOOKING. Yes, it is quite easy to assess people by their sex, we have enough physical characteristics for that. We don’t go around not knowing do we?

There is no way to ACT like a woman. They’re different questions.

Unpack the sentence But if they look female and behave female, why is it such a big deal?

What are you thinking of when you say that someone looks female and behaves female. What precise traits of looks and behaviour are to be counted? Have you ever heard of someone who is definitely female not having these traits? Just thinking about it for 2 minutes makes it obvious that you can only believe a man looks female and behaves female if you accept gender stereotyping as truth.