[zoeysaurusrex]

Hey look, I hear you, but why is this always the counter argument when women do this? Men have, in the past and present, held tight knit groups that may not be explicitly stating that women are excluded, but that aren’t supportive of women being in those groups.

If women felt liked they belonged in this industry, they wouldn’t form groups like this at all. Furthermore, don’t strawman them by saying you wouldn’t associate with those who would exclude based on gender, ethnicity, etc. The article clearly states that this is a place for women to seek advice and mentorship from one another. Please don’t bring any other factors into this when the article is clearly about a group that is accomplishing a well-meaning goal.

[belorn]

One group is saying they want equality and accuse the other of supporting the status quo if the other don't support single-sex organizations.

The other group is saying they want equally and accuse the first group of supporting discrimination for having single-sex organizations.

One can accuse the first group of assuming bad faith or the second group for building strawmen, but all that does is signaling which group one identify with. It is unclear how to find common ground when both groups clearly has the same goal but have polarized opinion in how to get there.

[towaway1138]

There has never been a time in my life when I would have considered joining such an organization, no matter how beneficial they might have been to me personally. I believe in the dream.

I'm not saying that they shouldn't be allowed--go for it--but I don't consider them ethical.