[All these points apply to sex and to gender, so for ease of reading, I'll just discuss gender]
Gender-exclusive groups are common in many societies, such as men-only and women-only social clubs and casual activity groups like a men's bowling group or a women's reading circle.
Sometimes this is de-facto, but sometimes this is enforced by rules or expectations, treating the club as a safe space for airing issues people have with other genders, or avoiding perceived problems with other genders.
I came across this old comment in a garbage subreddit by accident when researching. The topic is Men's Sheds:
"Here's the thing. No reasonable person has an issue with women having their own women's activity groups. The annoying part is that whenever men try to do something similar, that's a problem. Women either want them banished or demand entry, EVERY time."
I think their claim is nonsense, grossly exaggerated at best. I also know of many counterexamples of men trying to get into women-only groups (as an extreme case, the Ladies Lounge of the Mona art gallery in Australia was taken to court for sex discrimination, with the creator claiming they would circumvent the ruling by installing a toilet). But nonetheless, I can understand why they feel this way, patriarchal social relations change how most people see men-exclusive spaces vs. women-exclusive spaces.
But my response to their claim is that, I am reasonable and I do have an issue with any group setting up places which discriminate based on gender. These safe places can form as a legitimate rudimentary form of protection, yes, but they maintain and often even promote sexism, and should all be challenged and turned into something better which serves the same purpose.
Of course, I'm limited by my own experiences and perspective, so I'd love to hear your opinions on the topic.
Bonus video: "Why Do Conservative Shows All Look the Same? | Renegade Cut" - a discussion about fake man-caves and sexism.
By most measures, I'm a pretty stereotypically "manly" guy, and you can say pretty much the same thing about most of my male friends.
I've never really felt as though a woman being present in any way impeded anything we were doing. If anything it improved things in a "the more the merrier" kind of way. As long as they're ok with the cigar smoke, fart jokes, having to pee outside, etc. anyone is welcome to participate in our bullshit.
But I do feel like we can get in the way of women bonding and venting it the ways they need and want to. The old "it's not about the nail" kind of thing.
And of course, there's a whole lot of guys who are just dangerous toxic assholes who probably shouldn't be allowed to be around women in general, but trying to figure out which ones can and can't be trusted is a tall order and it's a lot easier to just say "women only."
So I don't really see much point in men-only spaces, but I do see it for women-only spaces.
There's some exceptions, sure, like men who have certain kinds of trauma that involve women may need some safe places to work that out. And it's not that women can't also be dangerous, toxic assholes, but in terms of numbers, severity, and actual risk, things are kind of on a different level than with men, so it's easier to deal with that on a case-by-case basis.
What does it's not about the nail refer to?
I know it as a reference to this video.
In my marriage this is often reversed. I find myself telling my wife, sometimes, “It’s not about the nail!”
Can you help me understand what the video means?
It seems like the guy is right that the nail is causing her the problems, but the woman is right that the guy keeps interrupting her?
I don't always pick up on social things like this.
Frequently when someone complains about something they are looking not for a solution, but for commiseration. They want the other person to connect with and empathize with them.
This isn’t inherently gendered, but the stereotype is that men always try to fix a woman’s problem without really hearing her.
The video makes the cause extremely obvious on purpose, both because it’s funny and also because in practice it often does seem obvious to the person listening. But learning to empathize before offering solutions is a really important step in learning to communicate, because humans are emotional beings and can feel like our problems are being minimized if the response to them is a solution.
Thank you <3
No problem! Before my wife and I got married our counselor showed us this video and explained it the same way, and it’s been very useful for both of us to be able to gently correct the other by saying, “it’s not about the nail.”
Lol for me personally this mental image would be counterproductive because if someone really did have a nail in their head, I'm calling 911 first and listening to them 2nd while 911 is on the way. We are literally trained to do this for any emergency. (The patient can always decline EMS but we don't want them to arrive too late.)
But I agree for non-emergencies its good to let people speak uninterrupted and not push solutions, while recognizing your own boundaries and frustrations (if the other person is not trying an obvious solution).
Well sure, if someone actually did have a nail in their head absolutely call 911. 🤣