"No, it's not sexist to ban men from women-only spaces — here's why"

Article here. Excerpt:

'It’s true that allowing businesses to not sell tickets to someone based on race or gender or religion is a slippery legal slope. And just telling men that they should “calm down” about a group of women gathering for a comedy show is not enough. Men have been telling women that same thing for generations when they banned them from social clubs and other man-only zones. They should technically be allowed to buy tickets.

But men should think long and hard about taking up front row seats, chiming into a conversation, on top of examining exactly why they would want to be in a woman’s safe space or party in the first place. Much like a white woman shouldn’t be upset when women of color at work form their own group to talk about issues, or LGBTQ students form a club at school, or people of any religion have their own weekly prayer groups and meetings.
Maybe these dudes should stop trying to infiltrate women’s safe spaces to prove that feminists are *so mean* and should form their own groups to figure out why we need these safe spaces to begin with. (Then again, we already know what happens when a bunch of butthurt men get together.) Considering the very real fear and discomfort that women experience every day in mixed company, maybe men should stop whining that they’re not invited to the party. Their “problems” are not problems. Or hey, they can come in, fine, but they have to at least try to respect what’s going on in the room. If they can’t do that, they’ll just have to be escorted out. That’s not against the law.'

Like0 Dislike0


I look forward to the day when feminists realize that the logic they use re: women only spaces can also be used to argue that men only spaces have merit. After all, why shouldn't a man be able to have a good time without risking having his life destroyed by a false accusation? Men deserve spaces to be free from this possibility, regardless how unlikely it may be.

Of course, feminists' heads would likely explode just at the thought of a male only space.

Like0 Dislike0

Feminists have already rationalized the dbl-standard saying that male-only spaces are in fact oppressive to women by their very nature while female-only ones exist as zones of safeness for women away from the actions, gaze, etc. of men.

The principle of single-sex spaces in general in effect is dismissed by feminists as being inapplicable to the matter for practical purposes.

Nymphotropism kicks in such that mainstream thinking employs cognitive dissonance to acquiesce to the feminist position w/o necessarily endorsing it. That is all they need. That's why so long as feminists pursue woman-only spaces, man-only ones will continue to be deprecated or denied and feminists will deny any double-standard while the public says nothing. MRAs who cry foul will be villified and declared "part of the problem".

How do I know all this? Because it's already happened this way repeatedly.

Like0 Dislike0

You would think that a with the plethora of women's sites available that Mastodon would be content to spewing thinly veiled female chauvinist garbage on those sites. Why are women incapable of understanding that men can have male only gatherings and get along just fine? Women seem to think that unless they stick their noses into every place a man is, that they are being excluded and that should be banned. The world was getting along just fine without mastodons for thousands of year and this site will flourish in a mastodon free world. Female chauvinism is not welcome on this site. We get enough of that crap every day in regular society.

Like0 Dislike0

Mastodon, like others who post here, sometimes submit items like these as examples of particularly egregious misandrist garbage. One must know what the enemy is saying/doing in order to know what to fight against.

If something gets posted on MANN, it's because I approved it. So if you want to accuse anyone of propagating thinly-veiled feminist nonsense, accuse me. But it won't do you much good.

Let me explain the only rule it has in re comments. Just this: No personal attacks. You can criticize what someone says. You can make all kind of suggestions or even pick well-phrased ways to kinda sorta dig at them a bit. But direct personal attacks are not allowed for one reason: It distracts from the ideas and turns discussions into flame-wars. A personal attack is when you call someone names, impugn their motivations, etc.

"That idea sucks" is not a personal attack. "You suck" is. "That is a feminist kind of thing to say," is not a personal attack. "You are a feminist in disguise," however is.

Unlike feminist blogs of all kinds, if Catharine McKinnon, foul beast that she is, had an acct. on MANN, and posted herein, she would not be blocked, so long as she abided by this one rule. MANN values the exchange of ideas and even heated debate is fine. Flaming and name-calling, etc., is not.

I have had to suspend users temporarily in the past to deal with that. The stages are: warning, then 3-day suspension, then 1-week suspension, then banned from the site. That said, there is forgiveness. You get a re-set if after you respond well to the penalty box you go on for some time without further personal attacks.

I have only once had to ban a user from MANN for personal attacks. I have had to penalty-box maybe 3 or 4 people in my entire history of managing MANN and they handled the matter fine.

OK, orientation is over.

Like0 Dislike0