Segregated Party

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

It's still a poor generalisation by Outrider based on lack of knowledge and experience of the culture. Lots of women prefer segregation at events - it's a simplistic assertion to say it continues because men want to maintain male privilege.

Lots of women just feel more relaxed and comfortable being among women at an event and don't want men "invading" their space. They are not going to give up their freedoms and individulaism in order to comply with Outrider's arbitrary cultural impositions, without putting up a fight against those arbitrary cultural impositions.

My daughters go to segregated schools largely because they prefer a boy-free environment when trying to learn. Of course it may be that at some point British society will ignore their preferences based on their intelligence and experiences as young women, because a man who knows better thinks segregated schools are wrong.

[Walter]

It's still a poor generalisation by Outrider based on lack of knowledge and experience of the culture. Lots of women prefer segregation at events - it's a simplistic assertion to say it continues because men want to maintain male privilege.

Lots of women just feel more relaxed and comfortable being among women at an event and don't want men "invading" their space. They are not going to give up their freedoms and individulaism in order to comply with Outrider's arbitrary cultural impositions, without putting up a fight against those arbitrary cultural impositions.

My daughters go to segregated schools largely because they prefer a boy-free environment when trying to learn. Of course it may be that at some point British society will ignore their preferences based on their intelligence and experiences as young women, because a man who knows better thinks segregated schools are wrong.

substitute female references with male and this post would be berated as overtly sexist .

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

substitute female references with male and this post would be berated as overtly sexist .

Certain parts of British culture do seem to come under the barbaric cudgel of political correctness. I don't have a problem with men not wanting women to "invade" their space. I do have a problem with people being unfairly denied access to employment or educational or service opportunities.   

[Outrider]

Well done for finally spitting out the reason why segregation is unequal and wrong instead of blathering on about barbaric cultural taboos, primitive superstitions and other irrelevancies or expressions of disgust and prejudice.

You need it spelt out why sexual and gender segregation is barbaric, and then you patronise me... 

O.

[Outrider]

It's still a poor generalisation by Outrider based on lack of knowledge and experience of the culture.

You don't think that this is a demonstration of the underlying fundamental Islamic doctrine that men and women should be segregated?

Lots of women prefer segregation at events - it's a simplistic assertion to say it continues because men want to maintain male privilege. Lots of women just feel more relaxed and comfortable being among women at an event and don't want men "invading" their space.

Lots of women go back to their abusive husbands, that doesn't make the abuse any less, does it? If you bring people up to think that they 'deserve' to be segregated, they will believe it.

They are not going to give up their freedoms and individulaism in order to comply with Outrider's arbitrary cultural impositions, without putting up a fight against those arbitrary cultural impositions.

Except that they weren't choosing the segregation, it was being imposed on them from the leadership of their group.

My daughters go to segregated schools largely because they prefer a boy-free environment when trying to learn. Of course it may be that at some point British society will ignore their preferences based on their intelligence and experiences as young women, because a man who knows better thinks segregated schools are wrong.

Probably more on the basis that it's demonstrably detrimental to boys and young men to be educated in a single-gender environment, even whilst it's generally beneficial for girls. Someone has to compare those two effects and determine what they believe is the best overall outcome for society - that's a tough call, and I don't have the detailed information to be able to make the decision.

O.

[Walter]

Certain parts of British culture do seem to come under the barbaric cudgel of political correctness. I don't have a problem with men not wanting women to "invade" their space. I do have a problem with people being unfairly denied access to employment or educational or service opportunities.   

to clarify my thinking, please give some examples

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

You don't think that this is a demonstration of the underlying fundamental Islamic doctrine that men and women should be segregated?

I was talking about your generalisation that this is imposed by men on women.

Lots of women go back to their abusive husbands, that doesn't make the abuse any less, does it? If you bring people up to think that they 'deserve' to be segregated, they will believe it.

If you bring people up to think they 'deserve' to have arbitrary cultural practices like non-segregation imposed on them, they will believe that too.

Except that they weren't choosing the segregation, it was being imposed on them from the leadership of their group.

If people were informed that it was a segregated event before they freely chose to buy tickets to a segregated event, it was not imposed on them - but of course the courts can determine otherwise, if they want to barbarically impose non-segregation on charity events.

Probably more on the basis that it's demonstrably detrimental to boys and young men to be educated in a single-gender environment, even whilst it's generally beneficial for girls. Someone has to compare those two effects and determine what they believe is the best overall outcome for society - that's a tough call, and I don't have the detailed information to be able to make the decision.

O.

Yes that's a bit like an argument that I heard from a teacher that private education is better for intelligent/ more able individuals but the less able children in society benefit from those more able kids being in their classroom with them rather than being segregated in a private school and working to their full potential. So even though it is detrimental to the more able kids, the teacher argued that it is better to abolish private education for the sake of society.  But she did say that this argument does not apply to her own children, and she would want them to have a private education, because she prioritised the needs of individuals over the generalised needs of society, where her own children were concerned.

Personally, I would prioritise my kids' needs for the best education they can get over the needs of boys in society to have a non-segregated education, and find another solution to counter the detrimental effect on boys of segregation e.g. by giving boys other educational opportunities to interact with girls e.g. in science or music and arts projects/ camps.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

to clarify my thinking, please give some examples

Examples of what?

[Walter]

Examples of what?

see! even you don't know what you're talking about.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

see! even you don't know what you're talking about.

You seem to have forgotten what you wanted examples of. Feel free to come back to your question when you remember what you were confused about and what you wanted examples of.

[Walter]

You seem to have forgotten what you wanted examples of. Feel free to come back to your question when you remember what you were confused about and what you wanted examples of.

as one of those men who knows better, you're not worth it love.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

as one of those men who knows better..

So you claim but no evidence of it in your posts. Must be just your sincerely held belief. Love.

[Outrider]

Certain parts of British culture do seem to come under the barbaric cudgel of political correctness.

Ah, the 'political correctness gone mad' canard. How is giving people personal freedom a 'cudgel'? If women at these events want to sit in their own corner, they can, but then it's their choice, it's not a diktat from on high.

I don't have a problem with men not wanting women to "invade" their space.

I do. It suggests that there are activities that women should somehow be excluded from, that there is a general need for sexes to the segregated - there are specific times and events where it's warranted, but it should not be a blanket expectation.

I do have a problem with people being unfairly denied access to employment or educational or service opportunities.

Which at least some of the people implementing these policies don't have a problem with, and the fact is that this sort of segregation increases the likelihood of that happening.

O.

[Walter]

So you claim but no evidence of it in your posts. Must be just your sincerely held belief. Love.

you're so cute when you're angry, awww!

[Outrider]

I was talking about your generalisation that this is imposed by men on women.

And you don't believe that's the case?

If you bring people up to think they 'deserve' to have arbitrary cultural practices like non-segregation imposed on them, they will believe that too.

Personal liberty is an 'arbitrary cultural practice' now, is it?

If people were informed that it was a segregated event before they freely chose to buy tickets to a segregated event, it was not imposed on them - but of course the courts can determine otherwise, if they want to barbarically impose non-segregation on charity events.

No, if they were informed in advance they had the Hobson's choice - they didn't have the option to choose between a barbarically segregated or non-segregated event.

Yes that's a bit like an argument that I heard from a teacher that private education is better for intelligent/ more able individuals but the less able children in society benefit from those more able kids being in their classroom with them rather than being segregated in a private school and working to their full potential.

That may be the case, I've not seen the evidence one way or the other.

So even though it is detrimental to the more able kids, the teacher argued that it is better to abolish private education for the sake of society.  But she did say that this argument does not apply to her own children, and she would want them to have a private education, because she prioritised the needs of individuals over the generalised needs of society, where her own children were concerned.

Understandable, if not necessarily morally justifiable depending on your frame of reference.

Personally, I would prioritise my kids' needs for the best education they can get over the needs of boys in society to have a non-segregated education, and find another solution to counter the detrimental effect on boys of segregation e.g. by giving boys other educational opportunities to interact with girls e.g. in science or music and arts projects/ camps.

That's fine, but the people making education policy shouldn't be predicating their decision on what's good for your children particularly, they have to balance the general good against the good of subsections of the populace.

Similarly, the people deciding whether it's justifiable to segregate genders need to look at all the cultural and societal impacts of that segregation against the immediate benefit - and they've decided, in this instance, that where there's no immediate benefit that the ideological throw-back of segregation for its own sake should be put off for the betterment of society.

O.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Ah, the 'political correctness gone mad' canard. How is giving people personal freedom a 'cudgel'? If women at these events want to sit in their own corner, they can, but then it's their choice, it's not a diktat from on high.

Ah the 'political correctness gone mad is just a canard' canard. As I explained if they chose to buy the ticket knowing it was segregated, it isn't imposed. If they did not know when they bought the ticket that it was for a men only or women only section, then it was being imposed.

I do. It suggests that there are activities that women should somehow be excluded from, that there is a general need for sexes to the segregated - there are specific times and events where it's warranted, but it should not be a blanket expectation.

Which at least some of the people implementing these policies don't have a problem with, and the fact is that this sort of segregation increases the likelihood of that happening.

O.

I am not supporting banning women from engaging in activities either - there is nothing preventing them from organising and engaging in those activities themselves and allowing men to engage in the activities with them. Nor am i arguing for a need for segregation at social events - it's a preference or a personal freedom to have segregated events, which people are free to attend or not.

Who decides when segregation is warranted - you? And any other time except when you say it is warranted, it is an example of barbarism. So much for personal freedom.

[Outrider]

Ah the 'political correctness gone mad is just a canard' canard. As I explained if they chose to buy the ticket knowing it was segregated, it isn't imposed.

And I pointed out what a Hobson's choice argument that was - choice is between segregated and non-segregated, not between segregated event or self-exclusion.

I am not supporting banning women from engaging in activities either - there is nothing preventing them from organising and engaging in those activities themselves and allowing men to engage in the activities with them. Nor am i arguing for a need for segregation at social events - it's a preference or a personal freedom to have segregated events, which people are free to attend or not.

It's not acceptable for an organisation to segregate people based purely on a desire to segregate, whether it's gender or race or sexuality.

Who decides when segregation is warranted - you? And any other time except when you say it is warranted, it is an example of barbarism. So much for personal freedom.

At the moment, the courts, though we can all have an opinion. Do you have a justification for the segregation in this instance, because I've not heard one offered.

O.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

And you don't believe that's the case?

As a generalisation, no. I know lots of women who like segregation - when they are at events, when they are working out, just because ...e.g. men can be loud, opinionated, annoyingly patronising, steal food of your plate, talk about boring stuff and can generally be a pain in the neck at events and it's sometimes a relief to get away from them...and I know lots of men who feel the same way about women. At moments like that it's good to have the option to buy a ticket to a segregated event.

Other times your own gender can be really annoying and you want the option of attending a non-segregated gathering. For example, at the mosque men generally shut up and listen to the sermon, while women generally talk. I would love to either be in the men's section at the mosque so I don't have to struggle to hear over the chatter or in a section for people who want to listen and not talk and so won't be disturbed by other people talking - I don't mind if that section is segregated or not.

Personal liberty is an 'arbitrary cultural practice' now, is it?

Seems to me that you're the one barbarically advocating restriction of personal liberty.

No, if they were informed in advance they had the Hobson's choice - they didn't have the option to choose between a barbarically segregated or non-segregated event.

Nothing preventing people who don't want to attend a segregated event from organising a non-segregated event. Again you seem to be the one barbarically advocating that people have to go with your arbitrary opinions on how to organise events.

That's fine, but the people making education policy shouldn't be predicating their decision on what's good for your children particularly, they have to balance the general good against the good of subsections of the populace.

Similarly, the people deciding whether it's justifiable to segregate genders need to look at all the cultural and societal impacts of that segregation against the immediate benefit - and they've decided, in this instance, that where there's no immediate benefit that the ideological throw-back of segregation for its own sake should be put off for the betterment of society.

O.

So you are barbarically advocating limiting personal freedom and choice.

[Walter]

Ah the 'political correctness gone mad is just a canard' canard. As I explained if they chose to buy the ticket knowing it was segregated, it isn't imposed. If they did not know when they bought the ticket that it was for a men only or women only section, then it was being imposed.
I am not supporting banning women from engaging in activities either - there is nothing preventing them from organising and engaging in those activities themselves and allowing men to engage in the activities with them. Nor am i arguing for a need for segregation at social events - it's a preference or a personal freedom to have segregated events, which people are free to attend or not.

Who decides when segregation is warranted - you? And any other time except when you say it is warranted, it is an example of barbarism. So much for personal freedom.

too much hidden 'between the lines' there and I'm guessing its not just me who sees it .

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

And I pointed out what a Hobson's choice argument that was - choice is between segregated and non-segregated, not between segregated event or self-exclusion.

Is your solution that people who want to go to a segregated event self-exclude?

It's not acceptable for an organisation to segregate people based purely on a desire to segregate, whether it's gender or race or sexuality.

Yes it is acceptable to segregate based on gender - schools and gyms do it all the time.

[Outrider]

Is your solution that people who want to go to a segregated event self-exclude?

No, my point is that people who want to go to a segregated event need to be introduced to the idea that people are far more alike across divides like gender than they are between examples of given gender, and that isolating themselves and each other is bad for everyone.

Yes it is acceptable to segregate based on gender - schools and gyms do it all the time.

And, as I've said repeatedly, there are times when it is appropriate. Do you know of any reason why it would be appropriate in this instance, I asked.

O.

[Sebastian Toe]

. I would love to either be in the men's section at the mosque so I don't have to struggle to hear over the chatter

Why dont you go there regularly ?

[Udayana]

You need it spelt out why sexual and gender segregation is barbaric, and then you patronise me... 

O.

To be honest, I fully expected a developed argument from you at the start, but for some reason you just seemed to want to vent about barbarian culture, after that I couldn't be bothered. And, such segregation is often wrong, but that does not mean that all sex/gender segregation is always wrong or "barbaric". 

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

No, my point is that people who want to go to a segregated event need to be introduced to the idea that people are far more alike across divides like gender than they are between examples of given gender, and that isolating themselves and each other is bad for everyone.

They probably are more alike than different.  But as we are not talking about permanent segregation at all times, you have not demonstrated why that point is relevant or that there is some critical degree of "alikeness" that determines whether people at specific events are allowed by you to exercise their personal freedom to segregate themselves or whether their personal freedom will be barbarically over-ruled in favour of imposing your arbitrary culture norms on them with the false argument that segregation at that event is bad for everyone.

Are you suggesting that people who don't segregate and don't attend segregated events are somehow harmed by segregation at this event? Sounds very similar to the argument that gay marriage is bad for people who want to have heterosexual marriages, and therefore gay marriage is bad for society.

 

And, as I've said repeatedly, there are times when it is appropriate. Do you know of any reason why it would be appropriate in this instance, I asked.

O.

Yes. See reply #67. Also it is good for the individuals to be able to exercise their personal freedom in relation to choosing to attend segregated events.

ETA - oh I forgot. I went to a women only charity event where over £100,000 was raised for humanitarian aid in Syria. Because there were no men there, other than one of the speakers who was male and who left straight after his speech, the women could take off their head scarves and the abayas covering their cocktail dresses and could dance. So they exercised their personal freedom to dance without being watched by men and have a good time and raise money.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

you're so cute when you're angry, awww!

I'm not angry, but you're most welcome to believe I am if it helps you feel better about your inability to perform on here.....love