|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Religious gender segregation in public spaces
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
I had an experience in a crowded London bus recently. There were only a few available seats so I sat down next to a gentleman upstairs at the front, and when he saw me he shot daggers out of his eyes at me. As the bus turns around a corner or over a bump naturally you will end up in some form of physical contact with your neighbor - inadvertent. The first time this happened he recoiled as though I'd slapped him.
Eventually I glanced at what he was reading and saw that it was the Quran.
My first reaction was "Oh God, I'm completely offending this man by sitting next to him like this."
But then I thought "Why should I feel bad? It's a London bus during rush hour, he has no reasonable expectation of sitting alone or only with another man."
So my thought now is that if he is that opposed to sitting next to a woman, he should either stand or find one of the seats downstairs that is a single with no seat neighbor. But I wonder if that would be considered unfair to people with strongly held religious beliefs about how men and women should interact.
I also think of this in light of some schools in the UK attempting to bring in gender segregation in response to parental requests based on religion. Do we need to accommodate these wishes as a society?
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
No. We don't. It's entirely unreasonable.
I read the other day that a Spanish Muslim's boy's family are taking the school to court because said child was offended because the teacher spoke about ham. Ham!
The courts are saying there is no chance of it going through but it just shows the attitude of some intolerant people who believe we should accommodate their petty 'pharisaism'.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
There are gender segregated schools in England as it is. Why does the motivation make a difference? Most of the ones claiming to do it for educational reasons are basing it on bizarre essentialist ideas of gender.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Do we need to accommodate these wishes as a society?
We already do: if you don't like who you're sitting next to on the bus, you can get off.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
When I lived near Bluewater, I used to drop in occasionally to the pan-religious quiet room, which had facilities for Christians, Hindus, Jews and Muslims - two sorts of washing facilities, no less. It was interesting to read the visitors' book. There was an ongoing argument about the Qibla direction (possibly from people who used a compass in their prayer mat - the floor was of a rock which distorted the magnetic field). And several suggestions that there should be separate prayer facilities for women. Last time I looked, nothing had been done about that, and quite rightly. That would have immediately changed the openness of the place to all religions. I was, in a way, amused that it was a separate room for women - not men. Since that would not have involved excluding non-Muslim women from the main room, it would have been a much less divisive suggestion. Except for non-Muslim men who turned up when women were in the main room, of course.
This expectation that others should respect and change their behaviour in line with rules which are not part of their tradition is a bit extreme.
By contrast, after the big anti-war demo that no-one took any notice of, a friend (male) and I got into conversation with an observant Muslim who had been praying, about the way that prayer times fitted in with such activities. It was an interesting conversation - I knew more about things than my friend because of teaching in RE, but it became clear as we separated that some things had simply not sunk in. As we parted, my friend offered his hand to shake, which was done, and then I offered mine as well. The man shook it, but I felt through his hand that I had made a mistake. None the less, he shook mine, even though he clearly felt odd about it. I think he saw in my eyes, too, the moment I realised what I had done. But nothing was said. Good manners ruled. On his part. So some people have taken on board that we don't have to follow imported rules.
Of course, male possession of bus seats is a British tradition as well! Legs akimbo and a thin sliver left for the invading woman. Just done without the dagger eyes.
[ 30. July 2014, 09:35: Message edited by: Penny S ]
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
I agree that folks coming to live here might be expected to work around local standards of what is, and is not, appropriate between the sexes in public. Though it occurs to me that given patterns of immigration and settlement in these parts, the (very) local standard at the start of a bus journey may well be entirely at odds with that which exists at the destination - which I guess can be disorientating for everyone.
I guess this is a big experiment in the possibility not of mutual acceptance, but of mutual tolerance. We have to gently be ourselves; perhaps this is difficult because we dislike the vulnerability.
It also strikes me that in late C18 Methodism, women sat on one side of the church, and men on the other - so we are separated not only by culture from those now living in the same geography, but from those of our own culture or tradition, in time.
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
It also strikes me that in late C18 Methodism, women sat on one side of the church, and men on the other - so we are separated not only by culture from those now living in the same geography, but from those of our own culture or tradition, in time.
That is methodism, one tiny branch of Christendom, has gender segregation during worship ever been the norm in Christian worship in RC, Anglican or Orthodox churches? Also I listened to an Australian Muslim woman on tv the other day, she said she didn't got to Mosques anymore because in all of them women were segregated to vastly inferior spaces compared to men. At least in Christian services the spaces were of equal "value".
I think another problem might be that in polite western society, men would stand and let women have the seats, it seems to me the Muslim man referred to in the OP seemed to think that a female having the temerity to sit next to HIM was an outrage and an imposition on him-erh no get off your arse mate and stop sinning if that's what you think it is, stop holding women accountable for your sleaziness. Talk about wanting your cake and eating it too At least in western society the plus side of being considered the weaker sex was you got doors opened for you and men gave you their seats on trains.
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
It's interesting that there is an assumption that the man in the OP must have been reacting on religious grounds to a woman touching him. Could it not be that he has a strong sense of personal space, or was absorbed in his reading and was startled? I think the responses say a lot more about the people posting them than they do about the man on the bus.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
It's interesting that there is an assumption that the man in the OP must have been reacting on religious grounds to a woman touching him. Could it not be that he has a strong sense of personal space, or was absorbed in his reading and was startled? I think the responses say a lot more about the people posting them than they do about the man on the bus.
You don't think it's a fair assumption that a man with a long beard reading a Quran in public is a religious Muslim? (I should note he was in a suit, not shalwar kameez).
And there is no reasonable expectation of personal space on a London bus at 8:30 AM on a weekday, particularly if one chooses to sit all the way at the front by the stairs which is the most accessible seat for a passenger who comes from downstairs to reach.
ETA: I have also had this experience as I work near a mosque, if I pass by someone who is on his way to Friday prayer and get too close (narrow pavement) I have gotten a similar reaction. I have now learned to give a very wide berth so as not to offend.
[ 30. July 2014, 11:05: Message edited by: seekingsister ]
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
That is methodism, one tiny branch of Christendom, has gender segregation during worship ever been the norm in Christian worship in RC, Anglican or Orthodox churches?
If I've understood correctly then in the early Church at least the women stood on one side (the left) and the men on the other (the right). I don't know is any congregation still practice that. Many Orthodox and traditionalist RC women still do cover their hair in Church though.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
I just want to also clarify that this is not an anti-Islam position. Orthodox Jews in both the US and Israel have introduced gender-segregated buses for the same reason.
My inclination is that the burden to adhere to the religious standards is on the religious person - that is, if you can't sit next to a woman on a bus don't sit on the bus, or don't take the bus period.
However in places where the majority of residents belong to a religion that supports gender segregation (as in Brooklyn where the Orthodox tried to separate genders on buses and close bicycle lanes to avoid looking at women's legs), does society have any obligation to accommodate those?
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
However in places where the majority of residents belong to a religion that supports gender segregation...does society have any obligation to accommodate those?
I would answer that with an emphatic 'no'.
As I'm sure you know, some Moslems in East London (admittedly only a few) started to put up posters saying that their area was a 'Gay Free Zone' and an 'Alcohol Free Zone'. If their views were widely held, should we accede to them?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
No, we should not attempt to 'accommodate' people wishing to have gender segregation.
If people like your man on the bus really object to living in a society where women and girls have equal rights with men and boys then he is living in the wrong country.
You live in the UK you play by UK rules - and these should not be bent or softened to accommodate people with backward views on race, gender, etc.
And before people start talking about 'culture', I'd also say that if you want to preserve your own ethnic culture that should be taken to apply to art, music, cuisine, etc - it does not apply to things like disfigurement or mutilation of children, covering of face and hair in public, sitting in gender segregated groups in public spaces, etc.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
ETA: I have also had this experience as I work near a mosque, if I pass by someone who is on his way to Friday prayer and get too close (narrow pavement) I have gotten a similar reaction. I have now learned to give a very wide berth so as not to offend.
This concerns me. Might it not be seen, not as a polite gesture, but as acceptance that you should not come near, thereby colluding with the attitude?
I don't think that anyone should deliberately try to offend someone who has religiously based sensibilities, but neither should the latter try to offend those who don't share them. We can live side by side with tolerance and understanding, but only if exercised on both sides.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
There are gender segregated schools in England as it is. Why does the motivation make a difference? Most of the ones claiming to do it for educational reasons are basing it on bizarre essentialist ideas of gender.
Well, there is quite a lot of segregation, e.g. swimming sessions, gym sessions, toilets, and so on, but buses are in a different category, aren't they?
I went to a boys' school, and there were a few secretaries, and when their high heels went tip-tapping down the corridor, you could feel the hormone level rise throughout the school, a sort of sweaty armpit kind of atmosphere. But one of my mates actually dated one of them, cool sod.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
If people like your man on the bus really object to living in a society where women and girls have equal rights with men and boys then he is living in the wrong country.
You live in the UK you play by UK rules - and these should not be bent or softened to accommodate people with backward views on race, gender, etc.
Careful - people have been called racists around here for expressing views like that.
Though it will be interesting to see if any of the posters who always defend both equality for women and the right of minority groups to retain their own culture without any integration whatsoever into the wider British culture will post on this thread, and if so on which side. My suspicion is that they'll stay well away lest the inherent contradiction force them into accepting that at least one of those views is wrong.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Phantom Flan Flinger
Shipmate
# 8891
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Of course, male possession of bus seats is a British tradition as well! Legs akimbo and a thin sliver left for the invading woman. Just done without the dagger eyes.
It's not an exclusively male activity.....
--------------------
http://www.faith-hope-and-confusion.com/
Posts: 1020 | From: Leicester, England | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
It's interesting that there is an assumption that the man in the OP must have been reacting on religious grounds to a woman touching him. Could it not be that he has a strong sense of personal space, or was absorbed in his reading and was startled? I think the responses say a lot more about the people posting them than they do about the man on the bus.
You don't think it's a fair assumption that a man with a long beard reading a Quran in public is a religious Muslim? (I should note he was in a suit, not shalwar kameez).
<snip>
I'll back seekingsister on this one - it's an attitude I've encountered working in the Whitechapel and Bethnal Green areas of London.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Though it will be interesting to see if any of the posters who always defend both equality for women and the right of minority groups to retain their own culture without any integration whatsoever into the wider British culture will post on this thread, and if so on which side. My suspicion is that they'll stay well away lest the inherent contradiction force them into accepting that at least one of those views is wrong.
Well, I'm happy to say that commitment to one's own culture without integrating doesn't allow one the right to segregated public transport. That's a legal question not a cultural question. We think that equal access to public services isn't merely a cultural issue but an issue of fundamental justice that we need to observe to enable multiple cultures to live together.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Well, segregation is clearly permitted in some areas, e.g. gyms, swimming, toilets and changing rooms. I don't know whether such 'rules' or conditions are changing or not, to adapt to Islam or Orthodox Jews, or whomever. But segregation on buses seems to be going too far to me.
I think some countries have women's carriages on trains, but I think this is for safety.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Well, segregation is clearly permitted in some areas, e.g. gyms, swimming, toilets and changing rooms. I don't know whether such 'rules' or conditions are changing or not, to adapt to Islam or Orthodox Jews, or whomever. But segregation on buses seems to be going too far to me.
I think some countries have women's carriages on trains, but I think this is for safety.
There used to be regular women-only compartments on lots of Southern Region electric trains when I were a lad. They don't exist now, but I'm not sure when they were phased out.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Segregated swimming? The activity itself, not the changing rooms? I haven't seen this in the U.S.
ETA: well, excepting sports teams.
[ 30. July 2014, 14:16: Message edited by: Lyda*Rose ]
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Though it will be interesting to see if any of the posters who always defend both equality for women and the right of minority groups to retain their own culture without any integration whatsoever into the wider British culture will post on this thread, and if so on which side. My suspicion is that they'll stay well away lest the inherent contradiction force them into accepting that at least one of those views is wrong.
I think you overspeak. Both of those views can be correct, just not absolutely so. A lot of our values have places where they contradict other of our values, in practice if not in theory. That doesn't make one of them "wrong" -- it just means life is complicated. When this kind of conflict comes up, you have to make difficult decisions about how to bend. Which we're all doing all the time, unless we have anally fitted sticks (not referring to you here but people in general potentially including self) that prevent bending. Then, indeed, something is likely to break.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
There have been women's only sessions at my local pool for a long time. I didn't think they were particularly for Muslim women.
Hampstead Heath is famous for its Ladies pond, Men's pond and Mixed pond, but again, I don't know how far that goes back.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
There have been women's only sessions at my local pool for a long time. I didn't think they were particularly for Muslim women.
Hampstead Heath is famous for its Ladies pond, Men's pond and Mixed pond, but again, I don't know how far that goes back.
I know I would be more comfortable with a women's only pool session (not that I swim) and definitely women's only train carriages, and I am not Muslim.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Segregated swimming? The activity itself, not the changing rooms? I haven't seen this in the U.S.
ETA: well, excepting sports teams.
My local swimming pool (and the gym) doesn't have any segregated sessions. I've occasionally seen them elsewhere, though I've only seen women-only sessions, and it's only been for an hour or two each week. But maybe it varies according to locality.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
It also strikes me that in late C18 Methodism, women sat on one side of the church, and men on the other - so we are separated not only by culture from those now living in the same geography, but from those of our own culture or tradition, in time.
That is methodism, one tiny branch of Christendom, has gender segregation during worship ever been the norm in Christian worship in RC, Anglican or Orthodox churches?
My parish church ( C of E) had gender segregation until 1967.
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
London certainly has quite a few women-only gyms, and some of them have pools also. Again, nothing to do with Islam, I think.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
I was in a Coptic Orthodox church in the Middle Est a few months ago.The men sat on one side and the women on the other .
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I know I would be more comfortable with a women's only pool session (not that I swim) and definitely women's only train carriages, and I am not Muslim.
A lot of men would be more comfortable with men-only stuff as well, as evidenced by the chap in the OP and a decent number of golf club committees. But for some reason, when it's that way round it suddenly becomes sexist and wrong...
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I know I would be more comfortable with a women's only pool session (not that I swim) and definitely women's only train carriages, and I am not Muslim.
A lot of men would be more comfortable with men-only stuff as well, as evidenced by the chap in the OP and a decent number of golf club committees. But for some reason, when it's that way round it suddenly becomes sexist and wrong...
True. Men also need places where they can hang around with other men and do men things, such as watching football, drinking beer, farting and telling mother-in-law jokes. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
Not so sure that there's much women only swimming available now: The Sanctuary closed recently, at the end of May.
The Bathing Ponds on Hampstead Heath have been used for 200 years and there's a photo here of the Ladies' Pond in use from the 1920s. The Bathing Ponds are under threat from the dam proposals. (The Ladies' Pond is surrounded by trees and cannot be seen from the path and there are a couple of equally secluded meadows there for sprawling in the sun, so clothes are an optional extra.)
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
A lot of men would be more comfortable with men-only stuff as well, as evidenced by the chap in the OP and a decent number of golf club committees. But for some reason, when it's that way round it suddenly becomes sexist and wrong...
Probably because one is motivated by a fear of sexual violence and/or harassment and the other by... sexism.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
I have no more problem with the Men's Pond on Hampstead Heath than I have with the Ladies' - both are available and there's a Mixed Pool too, so we can all choose our own preferences. The problem with many male only options is that there is no female option at all.
I am not sure how we deal with the multiculturalism issues and the imposition of Sharia Law by Muslim groups in some areas of London (Tower Hamlets and Waltham Forest). Some groups are being very vocal in insisting on proper behaviour - my daughter has had a lot of hassle from Muslim men telling her she isn't properly dressed and should be wearing a hajib in certain areas. But there are also no-go estates with other groups setting the agenda and Jewish eruvs in London.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I am not sure how we deal with the multiculturalism issues and the imposition of Sharia Law by Muslim groups in some areas of London (Tower Hamlets and Waltham Forest). ... But there are also no-go estates with other groups setting the agenda ...
Very firmly, I think has to be the answer: people have to be reminded which country they are living in.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
A lot of men would be more comfortable with men-only stuff as well, as evidenced by the chap in the OP and a decent number of golf club committees. But for some reason, when it's that way round it suddenly becomes sexist and wrong...
Probably because one is motivated by a fear of sexual violence and/or harassment and the other by... sexism.
Yes, because of course no woman in the history of ever has committed sexual assault and/or harrassment, and no man in the history of ever has avoided doing so. Such a position is completely without prejudice.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I have no more problem with the Men's Pond on Hampstead Heath than I have with the Ladies' - both are available and there's a Mixed Pool too, so we can all choose our own preferences.
Sounds good to me. So if some golf courses are made women-only, some remain mixed, and some are made men-only, then as long as the numbers of each are roughly equal that's OK?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I don't think the country they're living in is the relevant thing. If it were white British Plymouth Brethren demanding people cover up in neighbourhoods where they were concentrated then it would still be out of order. You don't get to tell other people how to dress. And that applies to the far right demanding that Muslim women NOT cover up too. You get to decide how you behave, and that includes shying away from women if you really must. You don't get to demand that others follow your beliefs in their behaviour, except in so far as their behaviour directly affects you (and that is covered by the law of the land).
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Yes, because of course no woman in the history of ever has committed sexual assault and/or harrassment, and no man in the history of ever has avoided doing so. Such a position is completely without prejudice.
I don't recall saying it never happened. It is blindingly obvious that victims are more commonly women, and that women are more likely to suffer fear or anxiety because of this fact. It's easy to forget, as a man, just how vulnerable women can feel. To choose a simple example, I'd quite happily walk through the centre of Preston late at night without more than a passing worry. My wife (who I should point out is taller, heavier and stronger than me) didn't feel safe doing it. You can claim her fears were unfounded, and maybe you'd be right, but that fear still existed and there were many (very many) more reports of women being sexually assaulted while we lived there than there were men.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I have no more problem with the Men's Pond on Hampstead Heath than I have with the Ladies' - both are available and there's a Mixed Pool too, so we can all choose our own preferences.
Sounds good to me. So if some golf courses are made women-only, some remain mixed, and some are made men-only, then as long as the numbers of each are roughly equal that's OK?
Wouldn't be a problem for me, but I'm in the good walk spoiled camp. I also live in an area where there are so many courses around us that I can't see that it would inconvenience people as they wouldn't have to go any further to get to the "right" golf course.
Competitively women and men are segregated or mixed aren't they? So that wouldn't be a huge issue either - so long as women get the same quality courses to play on as men.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
That is methodism, one tiny branch of Christendom, has gender segregation during worship ever been the norm in Christian worship in RC, Anglican or Orthodox churches?
If I've understood correctly then in the early Church at least the women stood on one side (the left) and the men on the other (the right). I don't know is any congregation still practice that. Many Orthodox and traditionalist RC women still do cover their hair in Church though.
Without breaking a sweat, I can name three Orthodox parish churches where women and men stand on separate sides.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
That is methodism, one tiny branch of Christendom, has gender segregation during worship ever been the norm in Christian worship in RC, Anglican or Orthodox churches?
If I've understood correctly then in the early Church at least the women stood on one side (the left) and the men on the other (the right). I don't know is any congregation still practice that. Many Orthodox and traditionalist RC women still do cover their hair in Church though.
Without breaking a sweat, I can name three Orthodox parish churches where women and men stand on separate sides.
Ok. I just haven't seen it, that's all.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Seekingsister, I agree with you. If this man doesn't want you to come and sit next to him, he should not travel by bus.
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
There are gender segregated schools in England as it is. Why does the motivation make a difference? Most of the ones claiming to do it for educational reasons are basing it on bizarre essentialist ideas of gender.
I'm fairly sure that Eton, Winchester and Roedean are still gender segregated.
I can't recall having been to a church in England in my lifetime where men and women sat separately, particularly since there's long been an expectation that families sit together. I have though encountered this abroad, including a non-immigrant and fairly middle class congregation in a major European city less than three months ago.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
chive
Ship's nude
# 208
|
Posted
I've had this issue at work with extremely Orthodox Jews and a very, very strange man who claimed to be a hermit. The Orthodox Jews have refused to talk to me because I'm a woman. As far as I'm concerned that's fine but a male person will be available at our convenience not theirs and if that means waiting it means waiting.
The hermit was more difficult as he refused to speak to anyone who wasn't Catholic. I was the only Catholic on duty so he had to decide whether to speak to a man or me. He ended up choosing a man. To be honest though I think there was a degree of mental illness involved in this situation so we did what we could to accommodate him.
--------------------
'Edward was the kind of man who thought there was no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who hadn't done one-to-one Bible study with him.' Catherine Fox, Love to the Lost
Posts: 3542 | From: the cupboard under the stairs | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I have no more problem with the Men's Pond on Hampstead Heath than I have with the Ladies' - both are available and there's a Mixed Pool too, so we can all choose our own preferences. The problem with many male only options is that there is no female option at all.
I am not sure how we deal with the multiculturalism issues and the imposition of Sharia Law by Muslim groups in some areas of London (Tower Hamlets and Waltham Forest). Some groups are being very vocal in insisting on proper behaviour - my daughter has had a lot of hassle from Muslim men telling her she isn't properly dressed and should be wearing a hajib in certain areas. But there are also no-go estates with other groups setting the agenda and Jewish eruvs in London.
I would be inclined to ask them to identify for me the Koranic verse that mentions the hijab - much as I might ask someone to show me where Jesus said anything about homosexuality. Or quote the prophet saying that people of the book should not be subject to forced conversion.
[ 30. July 2014, 17:34: Message edited by: Doublethink ]
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
There are gender segregated schools in England as it is. Why does the motivation make a difference? Most of the ones claiming to do it for educational reasons are basing it on bizarre essentialist ideas of gender.
Not the case for girls' schools at least - they help girls get more confidence in STEM (sciences, technology, engineering, maths) subjects and subjects with a debating aspect (eg history) because girls are more confident to take part without worrying what boys think or boys taking over. Girls' schools can actually help education be less gender essentialist, not more. It's responding to how genders are socialised, not any inherent traits.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
While I was out and about today, the Rosa Parks story came to mind. Her freedom and yours seem not unrelated.
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
There have been women's only sessions at my local pool for a long time. I didn't think they were particularly for Muslim women.
There are women-only swimming sessions at pools in Birmingham. There are also privately-run women-only gyms. These are both aimed at Muslim women, as they're in areas with high proportions of Muslims. If these facilities weren't segregated these women would get less exercise.
I've never worshipped in a place where men and women were segregated, and I don't know how that would feel. It's not so much the sexist angle that would concern me, but coming from a culture where the nuclear family is meant to be the main source of comfort and companionship, I find it hard to envisage husbands, wives and children splitting up when they go to worship. But there are no doubt cultures where marriage and the family are viewed in a less companionate way, and 'hanging out' together all the time isn't considered to be necessary. The Muslims I've seen don't appear to attend mosques in family groups the way Christians do (or like to imagine they do) so the gender segregation probably makes little practical difference.
[ 30. July 2014, 18:38: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
There are gender segregated schools in England as it is. Why does the motivation make a difference? Most of the ones claiming to do it for educational reasons are basing it on bizarre essentialist ideas of gender.
Not the case for girls' schools at least - they help girls get more confidence in STEM (sciences, technology, engineering, maths) subjects and subjects with a debating aspect (eg history) because girls are more confident to take part without worrying what boys think or boys taking over. Girls' schools can actually help education be less gender essentialist, not more. It's responding to how genders are socialised, not any inherent traits.
I also suspect that views on the role of women in society at, say, Cheltenham Ladies College, differ somewhat from the views held by pro-segregationist imams on the subject.
[ 30. July 2014, 18:43: Message edited by: Anglican't ]
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Some of these things would probably attract police attention in Canada, like 'Gay free zone'. I have only had the experience of refusal to shake hands with a woman on one occasion. Given the sparsity of Moslems and way to pick up on what her cultural background was - she looked like a rural Ukrainian babushka or some of our Mennonites or Hutterites - I asked her to explain herself. Which she did.
On London transit, when visiting and using it multiple times each day, I noticed locals are non-chatty and ignoring of each other more than many other places. I took this as stress of living with so many people at such densities.
I'd view the ownership of the 'don't touch me because of your gender' issue the problem of the man. It is not required to cater to the whims of others, nor their preferences, no matter how deeply held. To hold yourself to a standard you value is fine, but don't impose. Whether it is touching or informing your dinner hosts of preferences for food not necessitated by medical issues. If people don't value people first, they might consider staying at home where they may enjoy their own company.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
