TBD on Ning

Well - actually It seems at present only two. Or three . One is quite adamant and the other is unhappy about my dictate, he finds it discriminatory. The third is ranting that we have a right to our group because  we have been so downtrodden - mind he is not happy about us - but we poor gals have a right because of what we have all gone through to  (possibly) have our own space. He suggested that we are "male bashing".  

In Guys & Gal Connecting two men have made it quite clear that they are not at all happy with being excluded from participating in our group, citing the bromides that if the roles were in reverse  we would be upset about being excluded and well - you can read the words of Peter James  and the concern by Apposite at your leisure. Click on the Peter James profile and you will see yet the  third voice of Tim Elston whom  I mentioned who is  protesting in Peter's  comment box. It is he who cites  "male bashing".

If it is not visible - I have it to post as I've a copy of the men's comments for Mr. James.

Shall we invite men to comment - or not. If so why ? If not - why?

Let us be clear about where we all stand on this issue. I will bow to the majority - which must constitute 15% of the active  membership which will constitute a  quorum.

Yes:   We permit  men to join and comment at will within this group

No:    We do not permit men to join and comment within this group

Thank you everyone.  This poll now closed.  It's unanimous. The group continues ~
For Women Only!

Tags: activism, equal_rights, gender_relationships, girl_talk, privacy, reciprocity

Views: 5

Replies to This Discussion

Actually poker night is exactly one of the problems. Our Chemistry department was all male and then when a woman was hired, she was completely left out of the decision making in the department, because the guys got together for an all male poker night and all the department business got discussed and settled there. By the time she would get a chance to comment, everything was a done deal.

And as far as being feminine (different post) - well, that is a subjective term and I hope we aren't required to be feminine to be on this group. Being female is also ultimately subjective - again, are we going to have chromosome tests? (grin) Do we get to self identify? I simply think we should be careful about getting too narrow minded here.
I agree, Wanda and of course there's the rub. If we use gender instead of sex for determining membership, then some male people should be allowed to join. It's all kind of silly, really, since both gender and sex are a continuum and not hard and fast (haha) antithetical categories. As Maricel points out any male person can join the group simply by creating a female or even ambiguous avatar/profile. Why he would want to is another question. James seems to be making a stink just to be able to do so. In that same thread he suggests that the men on tbd aren't manly enough, i.e. he doesn't want to hear from them and their feminine sides. I say let him take a complaint to the TBD chiefs if he wants. I suspect his case would fall flat!
Oh, and the (Chemistry) guys claimed that Poker night was just innocent guys getting together - but the fact of the matter is that it was not just that. Since our group is readable by the public, I think we don't have to worry about it, but I just wanted to note that this is not a simple as it seems.
I appreciate what you have said and it's impact WS - but this is a social networking group whereby there are groups for everything and everyone. I am adamantly opposed to being pressured into opening up this group to men. I value men's opinions when required and asked for - but their input is not needed here - and if they wish to bring up an issue for debate or discussion which includes both sexes they may do so elsewhere.

They can start their own group and we would respect their right to do so. This is a social online network and as such has different parameters than situations in our daily life. This is a recreational vehicle and as such - and because I created this to be a fun group for women only to share their wisdom, and because there are thousands of women's groups on the Internet, I am at a complete loss as to how this recreational vehicle is discriminatory.

In my opinion it just sounds like sour grapes because Peter James refused to leave after stalking a member here and was banned. Since he created a firestorm in Gals & Guys Connecting I have put it to a vote here.

>I vote NO. I'm tired of bullies.
So it shall be written, so it shall be done! (grin)
Thsk . WS .
Well - am awaiting more members to chime in - but it is looking rather clear that we are comfortable the way it is - so far.

The debate about my group has been re-opened in Guys & Gals Connecting.
Oh, and I have no problem with banning obnoxious individuals! It is your group, so please run it the way you see fit!
Not to worry Wanda - you know me well enough by now - I don't cave! But I will bend so as not to break and requesting a poll is the best solution to this issue at present - and will prevent the issue from being raised again. Obviously (and not at all surprisingly ) the vote is unanimous (well - I may need to double check with WS ;) so far.

What you all are not seeing behind this scene is the (unsolicited ) mail I've received from the many men who are in support of our group and have been since day one. It's really quite nice. One chum who has applauded our group in the past wrote " it's a relief to visit a thread and just read without the pressure of having to come up with some clever solution or response." Another is with Chez - not only did he agree with the "grow a pair" he's called the whole exercise one of "a case of attention seeking whining because they can't get their way" . TSD laughed at the situation and says the men involved are starving for attention (and possibly angry about rejection) with nothing better to do. It was TSD who suggested the poll - as he said, "if all the gals want their own group with no male interference, than any guy who continues arguing will end up sounding - well . . . use your imagination.

I tend to find men's opinions of things that other men are doing pretty spot on. We certainly have more champions of our group then one might think - which is nice.

This exercise is productive. It solidifies our feelings about our group and our relationship to one another, and for this alone - I'm pleased that we have addressed the issue and will continue to do so for a bit longer.
We have not one whiff of "male bashing" here - mind we have teased a few times. This group is almost a year old - July 15th. I have decided to bring this to a vote so that there can be no doubt as to how the membership feels. This group may not be a complete democracy ( bottom line is I call the shots ) but I try and be as fair and even handed as humanly possible and my moderators are cut of the same cloth as I .

This way the men with a gripe can see for themselves where we stand as a group.
This issue with Peter James had to be closed for the present in Guys & Gals Connecting. He re-opened the discussion again - that 2nd discussion has been deleted, as it was accusatory towards me personally and entirely unproductive.

There is a link in the comment box I suggest all check out.

DD3 - YES? or NO ? please ;-) thanks.
Thank hon! /;-D
Holy Guacamole! I just read the comments on Peter James' page...
In particular, I haven't seen male bashing in this group.
I haven't seen male bashing on this site...am I missing it? Or, do I not recognize it?
That bothers me...

That aside, I vote no to boys ;-)
I find it curious that they want to join, what's in it for them? Do they really care what face cream we use?
Hi, All,

This is a thorny thicket and I am unsure about what I think is best. (Good Old) Boys Clubs are one of the instruments that allowed women to be taken advantage of in the past, because business deals were made and networks formed all in a place where no woman could set foot. There are of course institutions still that are male or female only (private schools and such), but as a woman who was unable to apply to Yale as an undergraduate because it was a male only institution, I have very mixed feelings about this.

On the other hand, if we want to talk about menstruation or wife battering from a woman's point of view (and there is a biological difference that could play a role here) then what is the point of men joining in (and do they really need to comment on whether 4 milligrams of replacement estrogen makes someone have fewer hot flashes and sleep better?)

On the other hand, gender is a social distinction and not a biological one. Some people feel they were born female with male genitalia, or identify more with a feminine perspective. Who should be granted membership? Surely we don't want tests! I wonder if Mr. James would be clamoring to enter a Transgendered Only group, or a Mothers Only group. Does he really want to discuss whether mascara X clumps more than mascara Y? (I know we discuss much more significant things than that in this group, but most men run like crazy when a group of women get together to chat about woman stuff. )

This group is public and can be read by anyone. (Something I wasn't too happy about when I first joined. Do I really want the details of my struggles with menopause public to any Tom, Dick or Harry? Not really, but Diana made some good points about why it was left the way it was.)

I guess, my suggestion would be to put a polite request at the top saying to men to please be understanding about leaving this a group for women to discuss things from their/our own vantage point, but to allow men to join if they feel they must. My suspicion is that they would become bored so quickly that they would soon leave. If someone became obnoxious or unruly then s/he should be made to leave. If the group got invaded, then a new group could be set up that was by invitation only. I think that the word Only may be somewhat offensive and perhaps if the group were reconfigured/renamed to reflect "Women's Point of View" or something similar that it would be less open to attack.

My initial vote is a hesitant yes.




© 2024   Created by Aggie.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service