Conundrum of the Day
Nov. 23rd, 2012 01:41 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cryptogirlOoh, blog. I used to write in this. *silently curses Twitter and FB*
So, I have a Conundrum which I'd appreciate some feedback on. I've anonymised the organisation because I want a few non-bloggers to give their opinion, hence public post. WITHOUT FURTHER ADO.
Some of you will be aware that I now run a local group for women to network, eat dinner and generally be awesome. It was set up by a friend last September, who moved abroad for work in June and passed the reins to me and a few friends. We'll call this group LNM, or Lady Nerd Meals if you prefer.
When my friend set up the group, she did it all on her own initiative, starting a Wordpress, GMail, Twitter and Facebook, emailing companies, the University and other places for members and guest speakers, and going round potential dinner venues. Now, the original umbrella group was set up by a woman in London. She has a website to which local chapters' sites can be added, and obviously promote them. My friend emailed her to introduce me as the new organiser, and she requested that we fill in a form so the Cambridge group could be added. It was 'very important' we tick the box declaring I'm running it not for profit, which my fellow organiser did. (Some groups get corporate sponsors, but usually everyone just pays for their dinner and that's that.)
One of the questions was 'I agree to invite men to the dinners'. Now, at the first ever LNM meal, my friend asked the group their view on this. The conclusion was that men would be welcome at the informal drinks gatherings, but that they preferred the meals to be women-only. Call it 'safe space' or whatever, but certainly I know a few members who basically wouldn't come if men were at the dinner. Fair enough, vote carries, everyone's fine with it, save for one woman recently who refused to come to dinner *unless we invited her brother*. *sigh*
Fast-forward to now. The next dinner is tonight, we have a healthy number of people, a few newcomers, a great bunch of core girls who get on well with each other. Over a month ago I had emailed the founder to ask how the site integration was coming along. Then, I and another LNM organiser get this:
In order for you to be able to officially take over the Cambridge LNM group you MUST agree to allow men to attend the events if female attendees wish to invite them. Each female has only 1 invite per event. The reason for this rule is so that we can bring the men with us in our journey and not create a gender divide. Men need to be included in the change otherwise they will feel hostile and block more women coming into the IT sector. Most groups find that they don't have anywhere near 50:50 ratio and are lucky to have even a couple of men attend. The power is in the hands of the attendees with the ratio. If you agree to this then I will set you up on the main LNM site with an official email address for your group as well.
If you do not agree to this I will ask $friend to take down the current site and resources until we find someone suitable to take over the events.
Now, to be brutally honest, I don't see much need to integrate our blog/email as it is; they only get sporadic interest and mostly spam, since the majority check the Twitter/FB groups. Also, promotion/sponsors could be found by us local lot if we really needed it. And, more importantly, we want to make sure our ladies are comfortable attending and have a good time. I don't want to block men out, not by a long shot. But by the same token, I don't want to start having an increasing number of men showing, and *potentially* dominating conversation and the women feeling like they're being shut down. (Hey, some women do this too, but ALL WOMEN ARE WELCOME REMEMBER.)
Secondly, it wasn't originally made clear that we HAD to invite men. The cynic in me would say that this is stopping the gender divide by that hilariously stupid tactic of positive discrimination. ('Quick! Invite the menz, or they'll think we're plotting against them!') The menfolk sometimes rock up at the end of dinner to pick up their girlfriends and snaffle leftover food, which is cool. We even had a rival event in the same venue one night, and when our speaker invited them over after we'd had food, most of them scarpered because they were 'too scared'. (A couple did come over in the end and were perfectly lovely...)
In the interim, my fellow organiser smoothed things a bit, and responded along the lines of 'sure, we'll fix this'; and as if by magic, the founder talked over my head at her and suddenly our site is instantly on the main website. Just fancy that!
Of course, I'd put this to the vote in the group and go with whatever they felt- it's only fair to do that I think. What was bang out of order, though, was threatening to tell my friend to take down all the things SHE set up because I'm 'not suitable' to run the group. Yes, because I'm listening to what women want from a monthly networking event, I'm a bad feminist. EXPEL ME FROM THE SISTERHOOD FORTHWITH.*
My friend will most likely laugh in the face of the organiser if I send her that email. My fellow organisers have rallied round and said if the worst came to the worst we could carry on as a rebel outpost, although I then worry that this woman will try and get us shut down if we keep using the LNM name. (A quick Google will tell you she's high up in a certain operating system-producing company, and has a lot of marketing bullshit clout) Speaking of clout, we have quite a lot as a group. We patronise bistros and bars regularly, they get a good income and often give us special deals, and they would be gutted to lose us. So, much as I'm pissed off by this talking down to and the occasional struggle to get interest and stop dropouts, I really want to keep this going. I've made a lot of good friends and business contacts, and it's just a great place to be once a month.
So, thoughts?
*Yes, this is where you say 'but you're a bad feminist anyway!' AND YOU'D BE RIGHT <3
So, I have a Conundrum which I'd appreciate some feedback on. I've anonymised the organisation because I want a few non-bloggers to give their opinion, hence public post. WITHOUT FURTHER ADO.
Some of you will be aware that I now run a local group for women to network, eat dinner and generally be awesome. It was set up by a friend last September, who moved abroad for work in June and passed the reins to me and a few friends. We'll call this group LNM, or Lady Nerd Meals if you prefer.
When my friend set up the group, she did it all on her own initiative, starting a Wordpress, GMail, Twitter and Facebook, emailing companies, the University and other places for members and guest speakers, and going round potential dinner venues. Now, the original umbrella group was set up by a woman in London. She has a website to which local chapters' sites can be added, and obviously promote them. My friend emailed her to introduce me as the new organiser, and she requested that we fill in a form so the Cambridge group could be added. It was 'very important' we tick the box declaring I'm running it not for profit, which my fellow organiser did. (Some groups get corporate sponsors, but usually everyone just pays for their dinner and that's that.)
One of the questions was 'I agree to invite men to the dinners'. Now, at the first ever LNM meal, my friend asked the group their view on this. The conclusion was that men would be welcome at the informal drinks gatherings, but that they preferred the meals to be women-only. Call it 'safe space' or whatever, but certainly I know a few members who basically wouldn't come if men were at the dinner. Fair enough, vote carries, everyone's fine with it, save for one woman recently who refused to come to dinner *unless we invited her brother*. *sigh*
Fast-forward to now. The next dinner is tonight, we have a healthy number of people, a few newcomers, a great bunch of core girls who get on well with each other. Over a month ago I had emailed the founder to ask how the site integration was coming along. Then, I and another LNM organiser get this:
In order for you to be able to officially take over the Cambridge LNM group you MUST agree to allow men to attend the events if female attendees wish to invite them. Each female has only 1 invite per event. The reason for this rule is so that we can bring the men with us in our journey and not create a gender divide. Men need to be included in the change otherwise they will feel hostile and block more women coming into the IT sector. Most groups find that they don't have anywhere near 50:50 ratio and are lucky to have even a couple of men attend. The power is in the hands of the attendees with the ratio. If you agree to this then I will set you up on the main LNM site with an official email address for your group as well.
If you do not agree to this I will ask $friend to take down the current site and resources until we find someone suitable to take over the events.
Now, to be brutally honest, I don't see much need to integrate our blog/email as it is; they only get sporadic interest and mostly spam, since the majority check the Twitter/FB groups. Also, promotion/sponsors could be found by us local lot if we really needed it. And, more importantly, we want to make sure our ladies are comfortable attending and have a good time. I don't want to block men out, not by a long shot. But by the same token, I don't want to start having an increasing number of men showing, and *potentially* dominating conversation and the women feeling like they're being shut down. (Hey, some women do this too, but ALL WOMEN ARE WELCOME REMEMBER.)
Secondly, it wasn't originally made clear that we HAD to invite men. The cynic in me would say that this is stopping the gender divide by that hilariously stupid tactic of positive discrimination. ('Quick! Invite the menz, or they'll think we're plotting against them!') The menfolk sometimes rock up at the end of dinner to pick up their girlfriends and snaffle leftover food, which is cool. We even had a rival event in the same venue one night, and when our speaker invited them over after we'd had food, most of them scarpered because they were 'too scared'. (A couple did come over in the end and were perfectly lovely...)
In the interim, my fellow organiser smoothed things a bit, and responded along the lines of 'sure, we'll fix this'; and as if by magic, the founder talked over my head at her and suddenly our site is instantly on the main website. Just fancy that!
Of course, I'd put this to the vote in the group and go with whatever they felt- it's only fair to do that I think. What was bang out of order, though, was threatening to tell my friend to take down all the things SHE set up because I'm 'not suitable' to run the group. Yes, because I'm listening to what women want from a monthly networking event, I'm a bad feminist. EXPEL ME FROM THE SISTERHOOD FORTHWITH.*
My friend will most likely laugh in the face of the organiser if I send her that email. My fellow organisers have rallied round and said if the worst came to the worst we could carry on as a rebel outpost, although I then worry that this woman will try and get us shut down if we keep using the LNM name. (A quick Google will tell you she's high up in a certain operating system-producing company, and has a lot of marketing bullshit clout) Speaking of clout, we have quite a lot as a group. We patronise bistros and bars regularly, they get a good income and often give us special deals, and they would be gutted to lose us. So, much as I'm pissed off by this talking down to and the occasional struggle to get interest and stop dropouts, I really want to keep this going. I've made a lot of good friends and business contacts, and it's just a great place to be once a month.
So, thoughts?
*Yes, this is where you say 'but you're a bad feminist anyway!' AND YOU'D BE RIGHT <3
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 01:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 02:29 pm (UTC)Also, given the way the male group reacted to us inviting them over for a natter, I get the feeling most guys would be a bit nervous being in an all-girl dinner group as much as some women are nervous about inviting them :P
no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 05:37 pm (UTC)Seems to me that there are two, almost entirely separate, questions here.
One is whether you and the group are potentially prepared to go it alone and stop using the LNM name if you don't want to comply. It seems to me that the answer is probably "yes", given that AIUI you don't really get any benefit from being an official group apart from the name - although I appreciate that the name is reasonably well-known now, which probably helps with getting speakers and so forth. But if the answer to this is "no", then the second question is moot.
The second question is whether you (you as in Cryptogirl, or you as in the group, depending on how democratic it is) are prepared to allow men as guests. I can't offer a whole lot of insight on that.
I tend to be very conflicted in general on "Let's fight sexism by unfairly discriminating based on gender!" ideas, including LNM, but I do understand the reasoning behind this sort of thing. This post was me getting frustrated about my industry's equivalent: http://swaldman.dreamwidth.org/175165.html
Um, apologies if any of that was obvious. This would be a very ironic thing to find myself mansplaining about ;-)
PS - Are you aware that you have included the real name of the organisation in one of your quotes above?
no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 06:11 pm (UTC)Hah, yeah it sort of comes across like that. As Jack said on LJ, it seems like she has a vision for what she wants from the spinoff groups. We're not so fussed about getting their support, I think.
I don't really mind either way on the male guest issue, I'm happy to defer to the majority decision. But I'm a bit uneasy about being forced to allow them for the sake of 'equality' :\
no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 09:53 pm (UTC)Also I'm in favour of respecting the expressed wishes of actual women who have actually turned up to these events & would like to continue doing so, over the theoretical upset of potential male attendees.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 02:24 pm (UTC)I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice!
(S)
no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 02:31 pm (UTC)It has reminded me I ought to find some lovely corporate sponsors for the dinners, should you happen to know any :P
no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 02:39 pm (UTC)(S)
no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 02:45 pm (UTC)Obviously the umbrella woman has a vision for how she'd like to do it, and is inclined to lean very much towards the "this is her group and someone local is just running it for her". But at this point, before the national organisation is massively established, it seems like the balance is more towards "what the local regular members want", unless there's been a lot of help from the central organisation.
So, I'd do whatever you the majority of people want, and if you have to change the name, then go ahead and do so. And stick up a link saying "inspired by" or "breakaway from" or something if you think continued good relations with the ex-parent group would be good.
no subject
Date: 2012-11-23 06:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-11-25 12:24 pm (UTC)As an aside, I don't recall if you mentioned or if you've asked the new woman what her brother feels he can bring to the dinner by being there - where of course 'a male perspective' by itself is not the correct answer, as I doubt many of the women there are short of that on things they can discuss.
the hatterno subject
Date: 2012-11-26 03:55 am (UTC)Not sure how much LJ I'l be reading in the next few weeks, but it's good to see that you're still posting here too sometimes...
no subject
Date: 2012-11-26 01:57 pm (UTC)If the woman continues to actively disapprove, and continues to talk over you, perhaps you could invite her as a guest speaker to meet the local regular members; after hearing their concerns and wishes, and why and how much the majority prefer it to be women only, she might change her position on women-only policies decided by individual branches of LNM.