I think, for me at least, my reaction on gender segregation is going to depend on what the point of it is. Why is this golf club "men only" compared to why the restroom is "women only" are pretty obviously two very different things.

I go back and forth on this issue. But what truly bothered me was the comment "I do believe in this country private clubs have the right to allow or block anyone they please." This leaves the door open for blatant discrimination based upon race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, whatever. Is that really an idea we want to promote? While I believe that sexism is a type of discrimination, that specific comment made it acceptable to have open discrimination in a private club setting. So is it okay for me to open a new book club and limit my membership to white women, ages 30-33 with three children and a good husband? Absolutely not. We learn from one another and our differences.

Just my thoughts...

Caryn,

I can understand how this can be both maddening and confusing. Often the "men-only" adjective may send connotations of the "old boy's club", or worse, a "gentleman's club." Both have grown out of a culture of patriarchy that uses power over women or the marginalized to promote some idea of maleness or success, etc. etc.

However, I don't think "men-only," "women-only," "Christian-only," or any "specific-type-of-people only" gatherings should be outlawed in this free country. But, within our Christian community, we may discuss the place of gender-only events. Sometimes, women feel more linguistic space to share at a women-only Bible study. And a men-only golf club...maybe we could discuss the Christian fiscal responsibility and priority being a member of an exclusive club demonstrates...or the environmental consequences of said clubs...

Ultimately, I'd suggest this is another of those tricky gray issues best resolved within the specific community of Christians it encompasses.

there is nothing wronog with male only bonding time or female only time

Yeah, this is wrong. There are two problems with this. First of all, does the gender segregation serve a legitimate purpose would could not be effectively served without barring a sex?

For example, women's only health clubs, men's bible study groups, single sex bathrooms all serve a legitimate purpose. Allowing the opposite sex in would substantially change the experience of each. However, allowing women into a golf club would not force men to play golf with women - they could still play in single sex groups. Since groups of players interact with each other only superficially, unless they desire otherwise, running into a group of women or mixed sex group would not substantially change their experience. So the single sex golf club fails on the grounds of serving a purpose which could not be achieved otherwise.

The other problem I see is that the church has historically been very insensitive to the damage and pain caused by sex discrimination. To me it's an issue of character for the church.

Men need time in men only pursuits as women need women only times. We will not like or agree with others choices or ways in some situations. Live and let live I say.

Your quandry is understood. To discriminate or not is a big question. Personally, I don't have a problem with a men only golf event, or a women only swim club, or any other men only or women only events. I think that society should allow for these boundaries between men and women as well as age groups.
However, I also think there should be conditions. For example, who's the sponsor of the event? Is the event funded with tax dollars-which means every working person is paying for it, therefore, every working person should be allowed to participate.

If it is a private event or organization, I don't think anyone should have any say except those who belong or who pay for the group.

Men, go ahead and do your thing. Just know this, when I want to do my thing, you may not be invited. This may include a shopping trip for which my husband may have absolutely no say, but for which he may have to foot the bill.

God made us all different. I don't know why in our human understanding we should want to force similarities. Some traditions should be eliminated, and some should be preserved.

Tough question. I graduated from a prestigious women's college. I LOVED it. So, it's hard for me to argue that single-gender activities are somehow wrong. I believe that single-gender education can be beneficial for both men and women. But I would be outraged if, say Harvard, decided to revert to admitting only men. It's a tricky question, and I think it really must be taken on a case-by-case basis. In this case, I honestly don't think I would address it, for this reason: this is a donation given by a member of the golf club. It's not as though the school is sponsoring an all-male event at the club, thereby endorsing it. It seems like a different issue to me. Counter-example: three women will enjoy a luxurious spa day at the exclusive women-only retreat including massages, pedicures, and facials. Do you have a problem with that one? I don't.

For me, in this situation, it's the fact that as a woman, they are taking away my choice. I don't appreciate limits in this manner.

If my husband said, "Honey, I'm going golfing with the guys, you okay with that?" Then that's one thing because I would have the *resemblance* of a choice, even though what woman would first say “No, you can't have fun with your friends!” neither would she likely say, "I'd like to go with you." Even if she would like to go golfing with her husband... she would just go another time with him and respect his need for male bonding. At least this is how I think most women would react, at least those who trust their man.

Now, if my husband were to say, "Honey, I'm going golfing with the guys at a men's only club, you okay with that?" Well my choices are then limited because even if I'm okay with it, I really have no choice, even if in the first scenario there really wasn't much give in the first place for a choice. This is, to me, where the line gets fuzzy.

I guess I'd also like to know if this club had a refreshment cart driving around and if so that it wasn't a perky 20 something female in a bikini! Grrr! ;0)

I think part of the problem with the auction item is that it was offering up an item for bid that both men and women would enjoy but women were excluded from bidding on that prize. If there were a spa day offered, most guys wouldn't be interested, but most spas would allow a man to purchase the package for himself as long as they had the ability to accomodate him (although they may not let him in the sauna if it was not normally co-ed). There are, however, many women who enjoy golf and most courses allow women (actually I'm not aware of any in my area that don't allow women - I didn't know any still existed in North America), so perhaps the school should have turned down the offer of that prize. The school does have the right and responsibility to turn down offers of auction items that go against their values and beliefs. They would likely turn down a prize such as the book "The God Delusion". So, if they are trying to teach the girls in their school that they are able to do anything God calls them to do, they should turn down a prize that says "anything ... except stuff men don't want you to do."

I completely understand, and would react in exactly the same way - the first reaction of anger, AND the second reaction of second-guessing. I have done it many times.

My perception is that "men-only" has often been the result of, or the precursor to, a power imbalance. "Women-only" ... not so much. Those who have historically been in a position of power have to work a lot harder to ensure that they are not inadvertently continuing this. I think this is true for race issues as well.

I often cringe when Christian men are called to "rise up and take their place," and I finally realized it was because I was hearing a subliminal message of, "so the women can step aside into THEIR place". Whether that message was intended or not, it was my perception, because I had to fight so hard to take my place in leadership.

For Christians, "those that got the power" (whether because of gender, race, income, or the size of the church), need to work a lot harder to ensure that "those who don't" are perceived as highly and equally valued members of the Body of Christ.

I'm surprised by this... I honestly do not see anything wrong with men playing golf at a men's only club. The Women's Club has been around for ages! Having a husband, father and father-in-law who truly love the sport, I am happy that they have an opportunity to spend time doing something that encourages healthy competition. My father-in-law is a member of a men's only club and I have no problem with it.

Sometimes the issue is not what is said as much as it is HOW it is said. An invitation for men-only or women-only needs to be framed so that it doesn't offend, or doesn't convey a message that perhaps wasn't meant to be conveyed or even intended.

Sometimes as women, our "antennas"get much too high (something aggravated by living overseas, believe me!) and we "read" into things what wasn't there in the first place.

It's always better to calm down, ask for God's wisdom and grace, and then quietly ask for clarification before letting our emotions carry us away (since women are always dismissed by men as too "emotional" we have to be extra careful to in control).

That discrimination exists—no question. The truth is that it exists on both sides of the argument.

Can I highly recommend "Let Me Be A Woman" or "The Measure of a Man" by Elisabeth Elliot? Her wisdom and knowledge of the Scriptures can answer your questions so much better than I could ever try because her source is not herself, but Christ.
But let me also tell you...some of the chapters require a struggle to reach the end, and you are forced to truly decide where you stand.
Many blessings

This has touched on a sensitive area for me. A number of years ago, a Christian mens group known for their outreach & evangelism solicited my father to be part of this group. My father was honored to be sought out, got along great with the guys & took part in some of their outreach activities, but when the time came to actually join, the group said that he couldn't because they just 'found out' that he was a blue collar worker & not a business man & this group was only for business men! The group who had solicited my dad even questioned those over them in leadership if an exception could be made for my dad & were told, 'no'. And a friend of mine who is a lawyer was not allowed to join another chapter of this same group because she is a woman! I've yet to hear anyone in the Church finding this behavior to be offensive. When I asked who to contact in this group about my concerns I was told there wasn't anyone to contact & besides, it would reflect poorly on me to cause a 'conflict' in this area. It seems at times that we in the Church are quick to point out the speck in the other person's/group's eye yet ignore the redwood tree (or sacred cow) in our own.

I, like several of the women who have posted before me, do not have a problem with a Christian school promoting men playing golf at a men-only golf club. Unfortunately, I don't have the perspective of a married woman, but being not too many years out of college, I (sadly) see a lack of real fellowship among Christian men that I know. I personally would have been thrilled when I read that announcement, which is my reaction to our church's annual men's ministry (men-only) golf tournament. If the Church or Christian school can find a way to encourage men to spend time together and support the school financially, then I think we should encourage our men to take part in that. While you can't always make the same argument for secular organizations as you can for Christian ones, I do think that men-only events, groups, Bible studies, and social gatherings are healthy and beneficial to men...just as ladies-only events, etc. are for us. We should be affirming Christian men in their need/desire to spend time together, not getting upset because we're not invited or "allowed." A men-only golf club is hardly the same as the "He-Man Woman Hater's Club."

Perhaps you should donate an item or event and put the same instructions within the 'package'. But in order to make the point without raising an angry voice, make it something that perhaps men would have wanted to bid on or may have enjoyed participating in. It's not that "two wrongs make a right", the greater principle is that we as the 'outgroup' are supporting our cause just as effectively as the 'ingroup' is. An example of an item that men might have wished they could bid on might be a recliner or a remote control with lots of shiny buttons.

Being on a site specifically for women leaders, I'd be hard-pressed to justify the belief that there should never been gender-exclusive activities or events. Caryn, maybe you're like me in that it's the types of segregated activities that that ruffle my feathers. When there's an implicit message of hierarchy or subjugation, or perpetuation of stereotypes, that's when I find the gender-exclusive stuff needless and offensive. But, as is seen throughout history, there is value in the meeting of a voiceless, persecuted, or under-represented minority group, who can find solidarity with one another.

I go back to Genesis 1:27: "So God created human beings in His own image, in the image of God He created them, male and female He created them."
We (as the people of God) best reflect the image of God when we come together - both men and women. I actually believe this is true "even" in things like Bible studies... I personally believe we miss so much about the character of God when we divide according to gender! I also believe that we are stronger when we minister together. When the church operates in parallel universes of separate men's ministry and women's ministry, we all miss out. Having said that, are there times for "just men" or "just women" to get together? Sure. I think social outings and accountability groups are two times when it's healthy.

As long as we continue to make issue of every little thing that we 'perceive' to be discriminating against us little women, we will continue to feed into the perception that many men already have of us. Change in attitude comes from proof in action. We stand as leaders, we'll be perceived as leaders. We stand as whiners, we'll get handed a hankie!

As for a men-only club, the community in which this exists obviously condones it. It's a cultural icon that continues in that area. I agree with another post that I am surprised that a club like this still exists, but that is not a Christian fight. It's society's fight. Bottom line is that women can play golf, but somewhere else. Wasn't the golf course where the Master's is playe once an all-men's club, changed by the pressure of society (and probably potential loss of TV dollars!)

The struggle we have within the church community needs to stay focused on changing the longheld patriarchial attitudes that keep women from leading where they are gifted by God. We lose that focus whenever we get into nitpicking the men - and society's icons - apart. They want to play golf together - let 'em. Women want to do spas together - let us! But when it comes to my gift of leadership, I'll fight and comment and blog and say to men...change your attitude or stand aside and get out of my way; cause God's bringing me through!

As for the school accepting the contribution - it depends on your community. I don't think allowing this gift to be accepted is going to change how the girls perceive their equality with God unless the women questioning handle it wrong. Not to say that a letter to the head of the school was wrong, but the issue has been raised, it's done. If done in a professional, level-headed way without judgement then the issue just might get heard - and considered for what it is. An issue to consider. Not a slam on womanhood!

I think it goes back to that discussion you have with your kids. "It's not fair!" Is it really fairness or is it equality they want?

Fairness means that every person has their needs met. If your need is playing golf, then go to another club. Equality means that each person has THE SAME opportunity or situation. If you want equality, then start an all-women's golf club and donate a women-only golf game to the auction if it's that important to you.

God didn't create male and female EQUAL. He created Adam to work the earth (Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. Gen 2:15 NAS) and Eve to be Adam's helpmeet (...but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. Gen 2:20 NAS). We were designed differently, but each reflecting aspects of God.

In answer to your question, Jesus would have golfed wherever there were sinners to love, IMHO.

As for me I see absolutely nothing wrong with men only or women only clubs or any other activite...Some time each just needs the fellowship of their friends. Golf is something that men like to do to be with their buddies as well as playing the game. There are girl activites that would be ruin if men were there.I also see the need for clubs and activites for both sex as well. Co-ed is ok if all agree. Oh for the days when people just let things be with out so much ado made about it.

I would definitely encourage a group of men getting together to go out for a round of golf "with the boys", or a church men's ministry organizing a men-only golf tournament since with both of these examples, part of the point is to foster deeper relationships between men which will allow them to open up and be real with each other in ways they wouldn't feel comfortable in mixed company.

However, the purpose of the auction at the school was to raise funds for the school. As such, any prizes should have been open for anyone to bid on in order to maximize the number of people bidding on each item and thus increasing the amount of funds raised for the school. Everyone would have been offended if a photographer offered a photo session but only to people without scars or wrinkles. The primary purpose of the golf outing in this case is not for male bonding, since the golfers may never have met before and may never meet again. The purpose of this golf outing is to have some fun playing golf while benefitting the school. By restricting it to men-only, the donator is saying the golf wouldn't be as much fun or as attractive a prize if women were allowed.

1) I don't believe that adults' secular clubs should be able to bar adults' membership and/or use of club facilities on the basis of race, gender, or age -- all of which are "inborn" traits -- or religious creed, so I do disagree with you on this point. (2) What if the auction had offered the same golf outing to only whites? Or only blacks? I doubt that the school would have accepted their offer -- for all the right reasons! -- and I think that it should have declined the men-only offer for the same reasons.

3) In the church, "men's only" and "women's only" Bible studies too often (but NOT always!) have been developed in service to a complementarian view of women's authority in the church: women can't teach men, so they teach women's bible studies. In a complementarian denomination's church I once attended, only the men had access to the pastor in a small-group setting, which I found offensive; the pastor had never presented anything to an all-women's group, in part, he said, because of the "sexual-attraction" issues that doing so could bring up, -- to which I responded inwardly, "Oh, get a grip!" However, this did show a second reason that women have been neglected by male pastors in small-group settings. (To my pastor's credit and my happiness, he saw the error of his thinking/practice, and led a women's-only retreat a few weeks later that was better attended than the men's only retreat he had offered earlier that year!)

(3) Here's a similar situation to chew on: Now, as a female pastor, I know that men in church men's groups talk about their struggles with pornography, attraction to non-spouses, and other issues they think women would be offended hearing about (or they'd be embarrassed talking about in front of women). It is also true that I am (and, I believe, am called to be) completely comfortable with hearing and talking about those things in "mixed company." I also think that, for purposes of spiritual formation and discipleship by their pastor, the men, as a group, should have the same small-group access to me that I expected of my complementarian male pastor-- and I would like to have the same access to them, so that I can talk and pray with them about what is most pressing for them. But I also know that even to have suggested that I could lead a requested men's group (they are, at base, for discipleship, aren't they?) would have seemed very, very strange and, perhaps, affrontive -- and, truth be told, I didn't even think to do so! But your post has led me both to challenge my own thinking and to think that this issue of across-gender small-group leadership is something that all male and female pastors need to think through in service of the gender reconciliation that God has made possible through His Son and the Holy Spirit. I don't even know what I'll come to in the end, but I believe the time will be well spent!

I stumbled on this post today, and was saddened by it. I am a seminary grad who is currently trying to find a job as a pastor where my gifts can be used and celebrated. For a number of reasons, its been a challenging year, and my gender has figured into some of my disappointments. So I am sensitive to times when there is gender discrimination in churches.

But i got to say, I don't think this is one of them.

When God created men and women He created us differently. That doesn't mean that women (or men) are necessarily less qualified in some areas than others. God gifts us and calls us to different aspects of life -- and we go where He leads us, men or women. But we are different. There are different interests between genders. We have different physical strengths. And let's face it, sometimes we just want to be with "the girls." I value my time with my girl friends as i know my husband enjoys getting out with just the guys. While I am not going to join a Women's only gym, I think they are necessary, because some are not comfortable working out in front of guys, and I will freely admit, that I'm not upset when there are no men in my aerobics classes. There are things I enjoy that my husband doesn't. And there are other things that we both enjoy, but sometimes, I just want to have my girlfriends alone -- is that a problem??

A men's only golf club, is similar to a women's only gym. Either gender could use the equipment etc at the respective facilities, but each club allows for the men or women to get together and be together with their brothers and sisters. We would never question the "right" of women to have a women's only gym, so why not allow men to have some golf clubs. Is this really an act of discrimination? Or is it a generous donation from a parent in the school to the auction?

We need to pick out battles. When we become shrill about things such as "men's only golf clubs" when we have women's only fitness clubs makes us sound like shrill hypocrites who are actually creating the same dual standard that we'd rather see erased.