Senator Ted Kennedy collapses

[Kuciwalker]

Except that social organizations of the level of the Owl Club are in some ways just as important as educational institutions. As I noted, clubs like that are often where people form connections that lead to jobs, positions of responsibility, family ties, etc.; and by closing women [or racial minorities or ...] out of them, they perpetuate the old boy's club - literally - and give women an inferior chance to succeed.

The problem is the level of influence this sort of thing has (which I believe is vastly overstated), not the discrimination.

... and that is called sexual discrimination.

Yes. Yes it is. It's also true..

Assuming that women cannot have the same understanding as men innately is simply wrong - while perhaps most women might not share much in common with most men in that way (rah being a shining example of that ), it would be incorrect to assume that it is impossible.

Strawman.

In any event, it's one thing to have a loose, informal social group that is entirely men. It's entirely another thing to form an organization that explicitly forbids women into its ranks. The social harm to the latter is quite significant, and quite real; and if you think that this sort of conversation is any different from how the conversation over segregation occured fifty years ago, you are wholly wrong.

It's very different. For one, it's not okay to have a loose, informal social group that excludes blacks. QED. (That's what you get for using a universal quantifier.)

Moreover, have you read the Brown decision? It found that "separate but equal" was invariably separate but unequal in practice, and used that factual finding to strike down racial segregation. I don't believe you can reach the same factual finding for fraternities versus sororities; AFAICT all the differences are superficial/procedural.

(No, I'm NOT starting an argument over whether they're constitutional or any stupid **** like that, I'm just pointing out that one of the major philosophical arguments against racial segregation doesn't apply to [voluntary!] sex segregation in this particular case.)

[Kuciwalker]

If you take away physical differences..........it could easily be argued that differences are equal.
If you're talking about a club like the OWL club, what difference would physical differences make?

The physical differences results in substantial differences when it comes to relationships. Men and women typically enjoy having sex with each other.

[rah]

Have you had sex with every women you've met?

If so, I bow to your greatness, otherwise, what the hell does that have to do with anything.

Be careful also with that line of arguement, there are a lot of gay men at this site and in those clubs that keep women out, unless they're exlcuded also.

[Ming]

Be happy you added the word "typically" to your last statement...

[snoopy369]

The problem is the level of influence this sort of thing has (which I believe is vastly overstated), not the discrimination.



Yes. Yes it is. It's also true..



Strawman.



It's very different. For one, it's not okay to have a loose, informal social group that excludes blacks. QED. (That's what you get for using a universal quantifier.)

Moreover, have you read the Brown decision? It found that "separate but equal" was invariably separate but unequal in practice, and used that factual finding to strike down racial segregation. I don't believe you can reach the same factual finding for fraternities versus sororities; AFAICT all the differences are superficial/procedural.

(No, I'm NOT starting an argument over whether they're constitutional or any stupid **** like that, I'm just pointing out that one of the major philosophical arguments against racial segregation doesn't apply to [voluntary!] sex segregation in this particular case.)

Separate but unequal in practice. That's the point, Kuci. Things like the Owl club are where men with power congregate; forbidding women from congregating with them ensures that women will not have the same access to power as men. So, I'd say Brown supports my belief fully.

It is not voluntary on the part of the excluded women...

[Kuciwalker]

Have you had sex with every women you've met?

If so, I bow to your greatness, otherwise, what the hell does that have to do with anything.

Be careful also with that line of arguement, there are a lot of gay men at this site and in those clubs that keep women out, unless they're exlcuded also.

Dude, my roommate (and fraternity brother) is gay. I'm well aware of that sort of thing

IME fraternities typically don't have enough members that the gay members dating each other would be a problem - mine is definitely too small, and it's frowned upon anyway. However, something of the same size but with women and men would inevitably have relationships, and therefore would inevitably have bad breakups, and therefore would inevitably have breakups bad enough to threaten the cohesion of the house. When a group of friends gets broken up because two members had a bad breakup, it's sad; when a permanent instution has that kind of problem, it's a lot worse.

That's not the only argument along these lines, but it's an important one.

[Kuciwalker]

Separate but unequal in practice. That's the point, Kuci. Things like the Owl club are where men with power congregate; forbidding women from congregating with them ensures that women will not have the same access to power as men. So, I'd say Brown supports my belief fully.

It is not voluntary on the part of the excluded women...

Do catch up, I'm still talking about Greek organizations. The only problem with the Owl Club is that it has that kind of influence at all (though again, you overstate it), not that it excludes women.

The voluntary segregation bit refers to the fact that most fraternity brothers and sorority sisters actually prefer the segregation, AFAICT.

[Boris Godunov]

It is not voluntary on the part of the excluded women...

If it's a private organization, they can exclude whoever they choose, provided they aren't subsidized by the government.

[snoopy369]

Do catch up, I'm still talking about Greek organizations. The only problem with the Owl Club is that it has that kind of influence at all (though again, you overstate it), not that it excludes women.

The voluntary segregation bit refers to the fact that most fraternity brothers and sorority sisters actually prefer the segregation, AFAICT.

I am talking about any organization, frankly. Frats are no better; separate but not equal still applies. Frats have the sons of the wealthy, who are inheriting their money and power, while sororities do not (some women will inherit the money/power of their parents, but far, far fewer). The only potentially valid justification for frats/sororities is for the PARENTS, keeping boys/girls apart so they don't have sex with each other; and you I'm sure know how well that works. (Not to mention the gay question...)

[Kuciwalker]

I am talking about any organization, frankly. Frats are no better; separate but not equal still applies. Frats have the sons of the wealthy, who are inheriting their money and power,

There are at most two people in my fraternity who that could even conceivably apply to.

[Grandpa Troll]

In other breaking news, word has come out of Senator Ted Kennedy's camp that the group that sang Funky Town did so because of a trip to outer space as they now have confirmed that LIPPS,Inc. has landed on the Planet Uranus and that was the inspiration for Funky Town

[snoopy369]

If it's a private organization, they can exclude whoever they choose, provided they aren't subsidized by the government.

We're not talking about "legally". We're talking about "should".

[Boris Godunov]

We're not talking about "legally". We're talking about "should".

I guess I'll fire off a letter to the SFO Gay Men's Chorus...

[snoopy369]

You do that.

[Solomwi]

Byrd probably just finally realized a black man was president.