Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!ora!daemon
From: mittmann@ral.rpi.edu (Michael Mittmann)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Power economics, genders, and the status quo
Message-ID: <NJX^++-@rpi.edu>
Date: 14 Jan 91 20:25:10 GMT
References: <X19VZCH@cs.swarthmore.edu> <#}W^KZ&@rpi.edu> <9101072114.AA06178@rutgers.edu>
Sender: ambar@ora.com (Jean Marie Diaz)
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY
Lines: 27
Approved: ambar@ora.com

In article <9101072114.AA06178@rutgers.edu> jdravk@speech2.cs.cmu.edu (Jeanette Dravk) writes:

>But all in all, what is the purpose of outlawing same sex groups?  It
>was a good idea 20-30 years ago, when women had no real power in the
>social structure other than the power to vote, but now that's no
>longer the case.

>So should this club be outlawed?  I think not.  Why resort to laws
>that can be gotten around and take time and money to pursue when the
>means of making the "female membership" clause a reality already
>exists? 

I think I agree with you.  All I realy care about is that the laws are
unbiased.  I proposed outlawing all single sex groups because
sdk91@swarthmore wanted to outlaw all-male dining clubs because of the
values they might hold.  I just pointed out that if these clubs had to
be made illegal, then the only moral (IMHO) way to do it was to make
all single sex corporate dining clubs illegal.

Just as long as neither gender has an legally instatutionalized
advantage I'm happy.

>And all of this without any laws, or court battles.

Probably even better.

-mike