This is an inclusive community for all things women. Whether you’re here for make up tips, feminism or just friendly chit chat, we’ve got you covered.
I feel like men can do all of those things, so I don’t see why we are excluding them. Just because it’s a women-centric community doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be allowed. I think we should exclude people who are bigoted instead, or even people who just don’t “get” women’s issues.
Aside: I’m personally irritated that make-up is what’s considered a woman-centric topic. That’s kind of reductive – not everyone is femme.
Well, your response is identical to, for instance, the response given in terf communities I used to peruse. (Relax – I’m a better person now.) The reason I am asking is that I think exclusivity is a bad thing, rather than the absence of a good thing – i.e., the world would be better with fewer exclusive places.
I’d counter with this – why don’t you want men in the community? And does the answer you give to that apply to every man, or just a subset? I understand, of course, that the easiest way to exclude that subset is to exclude all men, and I wouldn’t want to ask the mod team to do more work for free.
I think the core of why women-only spaces (or any affinity-based spaces) exist is that sometimes, people need a “room” where they don’t have to explain themselves from scratch, justify their feelings, or brace themselves for misunderstandings, no matter how well-intentioned. It’s about having a place where you can relax and be understood without constantly translating your experience or others.
Exclusivity sometimes matters
It’s a bit like why people form Chinese-only groups, or native women-only circles, or even expat meetups. It’s not necessarily about thinking outsiders are bad or unwelcome as people; it’s about the relief of not having to explain cultural references (like 关系, say), background pain points, or subtle social cues. Even the most well-meaning outsider, by virtue of their different life experience, can unintentionally disrupt that sense of “home base.” And sometimes, you just want to be with people who get it, so you can drop your guard for a while.
Constant explanation is draining
Even when outsiders are respectful and curious, their presence often means the group’s energy shifts from sharing and healing (or even just shooting the shit) to explaining and justifying. It’s not about active hostility; it’s about emotional labour. Imagine a Chinese-only group where a non-Chinese person keeps asking (genuinely!) for explanations of idioms, jokes, or cultural references. It’s not malicious, but it’s exhausting for the group members who just wanted to chat freely.
By way of analogy, imagine a French-language only room that permits monolingual anglophones. How much time would be wasted on translating things people say to a non-francophone? How much energy and effort would be spent on servicing the needs of the anglophone participants at the expense of the people the group is ostensibly for?
Yes. That masculine/feminine divide can sometimes be that vast.
The “Five Geek Social Fallacies”
This ties into the “Five Geek Social Fallacies,” especially the first one: “Ostracizers are Evil.” The idea is that some people believe any exclusion is inherently bad, but in reality, boundaries are necessary for healthy communities. (I stressed that because it’s an incredibly important point.) Not every space has to be for everyone, and that’s okay. Sometimes, the most supportive thing you can do is recognize when your presence isn’t needed, and respect that boundary.
It’s not #AllMen (or #AllOutsiders)
It’s not that every man, or every outsider, is a problem. It’s just that the group can’t function as intended if it’s always on alert for the possibility of being misunderstood, having to explain basics, or, in the extreme case, having to defend its existence. The easiest, kindest way to preserve that space is to set a clear boundary, even if it means some good people are left outside. It’s not a judgment on those people, it’s a recognition of the group’s needs.
Exclusivity in these contexts isn’t about hostility or superiority. It’s about creating a rare, valuable space where people can be fully themselves, unfiltered and unguarded. Sometimes, that means drawing a line—not because outsiders are bad, but because the group’s needs come first in that particular space.
I hope that helps clarify where I’m coming from.