[raganwald]

Let's compare this to golf, circa 1965. Caving to pressure, a local club opens its memberships to Blacks. One or two tokens with strong business relationships to Whites join, but where are all the other Black businesspeople and professionals?

A liberal White member sighs, "I don't understand why the Black people don't want to relax in our luxurious club, play a round on our excellent course, and eat our sumptuous dining fare. What is the problem?" Meanwhile, the Blacks are thinking, "Who needs to join the club and have all these racist assholes resenting the fact that we're in their club and tiptoeing around us in case the N-word slips out in our presence. How fucking uncomfortable."

p.s. Did I say 1965? What's the deal with Agusta National and Blacks and/or Women?

[BCM43]

For those of you who will undoubtedly complain that this is an unfair/exaggerated analogy, think back to how many posts have been on HN about the rampant sexism women have experienced at tech conferences.

[raganwald]

To be perfectly clear, I am not saying that conferences are sexist. I'm not denying it either, but I'm trying to make a slightly different point, which is that when a group is overwhelmingly underrepresented, members of that group might fear that they will feel uncomfortable if they join.

I can't really speak for women (for that matter, in 1965 I was too busy potty training to join any golf clubs). But I do wonder whether a certain number of them might look at the industry and shy away even if they haven't been personally exposed to any hostility or overt discouragement.

Just a conjecture, I am not speaking from data or anecdotes.

[mbell]

> Did I say 1965? What's the deal with Agusta National and Blacks and/or Women?

Augusta National isn't remotely comparable to the issue at hand. Its a VERY private, invite only club. There are numerous private clubs of all sorts that only allow men, only women, only blacks, etc. You can't compare a private club to a employment profession.

I don't necessarily agree with Augusta's position but they are a private club, so I just wouldn't join. If you were going to force Augusta to admit everyone then you'd have to go tell the Junior League they have to let men in, head up to the Ladies Golf Club of Toronto and tell them they have to admit male members, etc.

That said, Augusta National has invited black members since ~1990 and two women as of last month, Condoleezza Rice and Darla Moore if it tells you anything about the exclusivity of this club.

[raganwald]

I'm familiar with Augusta National even if I just noticed that I misspelled the name!

I think it's very relevant to the discussion at hand. We're talking about a profession that outght to be nothing at all like a private club, but the point is that it does behave like a private club. if we in fact didn't behave as if we were members of a club, not only would my comment be irrelevant, these kind sof blog posts wouldn't exist in the first place.

So.

Yes, I agree that the social dynamics of a private club ought not to have anything to do with the social dynamics of a profession, but alas they do in this case.

[protomyth]

I will protect Augusta's right to have just male members (not true anymore), just as I will protect the rights of every female-only gym. I will further bet that the female-only gyms have larger benefits than Augusta opening up to female members.

It is an unfair comparison between a profession and a club. They do not hold even close to the same place in society.

[raganwald]

Who said Augusta shouldn't have male-only members? The point is that IT departments shouldn't behave like private clubs. The industry behaves like a private club, but it isn't a private club.

[protomyth]

Well, I interpreted you p.s. to mean that. A lot of industries in the US (cannot speak for outside the US) need to be more receptive to members of the opposite gender. I am hoping both CompSci and pre-K education both make strides in the coming years.

[JulianMorrison]

Female only gyms protect women from being leered at and feeling objectively and justifiably unsafe.

Male only anything is bullshit. Nothing but sexism and the preservation of privilege.

[protomyth]

Equal rights means equal ability to free association.

"Female only gyms protect women from being leered at and feeling objectively and justifiably unsafe."

So, the basic premise is all men are leering and will act on their animal instincts. That isn't true as some men aren't interested in women, yet they too are not allowed. Others, were taught by their parents to be gentlemen. They too are not allowed. Never mind the women interested in other women.

"Male only anything is bullshit"

There is so much wrong with this statement, I don't know what to make of it. I could go with the basic support groups as one basic example.

If you expect female-only to be allowed then male-only needs equal protection.