5 ms·

It’s funny to think that the concept of a female only hotel like the Barbizon was a workable idea in 1900, but would be impossible to establish today in our 20

It’s funny to think that the concept of a female only hotel like the Barbizon was a workable idea in 1900, but would be impossible to establish today in our 2020s political climate, certainly not in NYC. It would be possible to set up a coed hotel for “female identifying” people of all sexes, but female only would be a nonstarter. One step forward two steps back it seems.

alisonkisk 6y ago
How exactly is that two steps back?
- david38 6y ago
  It’s a step back if you are talking about sex and not gender expression. Not everyone is from the US or a Western country. The broader question is would it be allowed even with that. If it was done for safety reasons, you can make an argument that it’s discriminatory towards men because you are assuming they will be violent. Pretty sure the same justification was used against black/poor/immigrants/etc. If it’s not for safety reasons, and just a thing, could you enforce it? You can create a place called “A Woman’s Space” but would men be legally allowed to go?
colineartheta 6y ago
Have you ever just googled what you're saying is "impossible"? There are multiple female only boarding houses in nearly every metropolitan city [0][1]. Your comment is nothing but factually wrong snark with a political agenda that isn't the point of the forum. [0] https://tmhdc.org/ https://tmhdc.org/ [1] https://www.thecut.com/2015/03/why-i-live-in-an-all-women-boardinghouse.html https://www.thecut.com/2015/03/why-i-live-in-an-all-women-bo... (and those two links took all of 15 seconds to find)
- lesstenseflow 6y ago
  It also took 15 seconds to find out that the Brandon Residence For Women is permanently closed. Have you verified that TMH is female only (not self-id based)? If not, what makes you think it's female only? It's understandable if you assumed "women only" meant "female only" (as that's what most people understood it to mean from forever go up til about 10 years ago) but you'd be mistaken if you thought it was that simple. In many (most?) cases these days, "women" = "self-identify as women" which means it is not a single sex facility.

alisonkisk 6y ago

How exactly is that two steps back?

david38 6y ago
It’s a step back if you are talking about sex and not gender expression. Not everyone is from the US or a Western country. The broader question is would it be allowed even with that. If it was done for safety reasons, you can make an argument that it’s discriminatory towards men because you are assuming they will be violent. Pretty sure the same justification was used against black/poor/immigrants/etc. If it’s not for safety reasons, and just a thing, could you enforce it? You can create a place called “A Woman’s Space” but would men be legally allowed to go?

colineartheta 6y ago

Have you ever just googled what you're saying is "impossible"? There are multiple female only boarding houses in nearly every metropolitan city [0][1]. Your comment is nothing but factually wrong snark with a political agenda that isn't the point of the forum. [0] https://tmhdc.org/ https://tmhdc.org/ [1] https://www.thecut.com/2015/03/why-i-live-in-an-all-women-boardinghouse.html https://www.thecut.com/2015/03/why-i-live-in-an-all-women-bo... (and those two links took all of 15 seconds to find)

lesstenseflow 6y ago
It also took 15 seconds to find out that the Brandon Residence For Women is permanently closed. Have you verified that TMH is female only (not self-id based)? If not, what makes you think it's female only? It's understandable if you assumed "women only" meant "female only" (as that's what most people understood it to mean from forever go up til about 10 years ago) but you'd be mistaken if you thought it was that simple. In many (most?) cases these days, "women" = "self-identify as women" which means it is not a single sex facility.