[All these points apply to sex and to gender, so for ease of reading, I’ll just discuss gender]
Gender-exclusive groups are common in many societies, such as men-only and women-only social clubs and casual activity groups like a men’s bowling group or a women’s reading circle.
Sometimes this is de-facto, but sometimes this is enforced by rules or expectations, treating the club as a safe space for airing issues people have with other genders, or avoiding perceived problems with other genders.
I came across this old comment in a garbage subreddit by accident when researching. The topic is Men’s Sheds:
“Here’s the thing. No reasonable person has an issue with women having their own women’s activity groups. The annoying part is that whenever men try to do something similar, that’s a problem. Women either want them banished or demand entry, EVERY time.”
I think their claim is nonsense, grossly exaggerated at best. I also know of many counterexamples of men trying to get into women-only groups (as an extreme case, the Ladies Lounge of the Mona art gallery in Australia was taken to court for sex discrimination, with the creator claiming they would circumvent the ruling by installing a toilet). But nonetheless, I can understand why they feel this way, patriarchal social relations change how most people see men-exclusive spaces vs. women-exclusive spaces.
But my response to their claim is that, I am reasonable and I do have an issue with any group setting up places which discriminate based on gender. These safe places can form as a legitimate rudimentary form of protection, yes, but they maintain and often even promote sexism, and should all be challenged and turned into something better which serves the same purpose.
Of course, I’m limited by my own experiences and perspective, so I’d love to hear your opinions on the topic.
Bonus video: “Why Do Conservative Shows All Look the Same? | Renegade Cut” - a discussion about fake man-caves and sexism.
I would think the core difference is how testosterone and estrogen affect us differently.
Testosterone makes people more physically aggressive, meatheads if you will. Estrogen makes people more mentally aggressive, intellectuals if you will. (Note that by aggressive I mean dominant and engaging in form of activeness rather than purely violent.)
So when puberty kicks in, usually, boys get much more physical and girls less as they are more attuned to the dangers involved. This leads to a somewhat natural separation between the two.
The meatheads are far more likely to do dumb shit than the intellectuals, but the intellectuals are also far more likely to distance themselves from the meatheads due to that dumb shit. Which is why, in my momentary opinion, the sensible thing to do is to more closely manage the levels of testosterone and estrogen levels where they are more moderately balanced so as there will be no need for either fear or exclusion due to our differences.
Biological Essentialism my dude, that’s simply not true.
What’s not true? And what is true instead?
The amount of effect on mentality based on hormones is far far far far less of an effect than you state.
Most evidence points to the main effect coming from society, and not from biology
So what are you saying? The trans state of mind is less biological impulse and more societal pressure?
Don’t be silly. That’s too far the exact opposite way.
I’m stating that you’ve oversimplified an incredibly complex process, and there’s is no singular thing which affects behaviours that is provably linked to hormones.
– https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK222297/
Thanks for clarifying.