It seems significant that your allowed "male only spaces" are only for rich elite; whilst the objection was against lauding the provision of housing that exclud

It seems significant that your allowed "male only spaces" are only for rich elite; whilst the objection was against lauding the provision of housing that excludes men (given the number of men without accommodation far exceeds the number of women in that situation). How does the uber-elite having men-only spaces make it OK to exclude men from housing opportunities. This often seems the case to me, the ruling classes (and the very wealthy) do something and because this group is dominated by men then all men, no matter their station nor their moral objections to this groups actions, get tarred with that brush. Then we get "it's fine to exclude men from housing because this group [of HNW, rich, uber-elite] have no housing problems". It's almost like discrimination on irrelevant characteristics is wrong.