Sotomayor Quits Women’s Club.
Do They Discriminate?
June 19, 2009
by The New Agenda
|10 Comments
According to CNN, Supreme Court Nominee Sonia Sotomayor has resigned from an all-women’s club, saying
I believe that the Belizean Grove does not practice invidious discrimination and my membership did not violate the Judicial Code of Ethics, but I do not want questions about this to distract anyone from my qualifications and record.
Here’s how Rush Limbaugh had expressed his concern over the issue earlier this week:
What do you think, readers? Are women’s clubs and gyms discriminatory?
I don’t care about a women’s or men’s club. I do care that the judge has impeccable credentials and 18 years of judical experience and seems to be a decent, honest woman. She should be passed in the Senate with a unanmious YES vote . The male Republican Senator Imhofe who showed poor manners and non professionalism by refusing to meet with the Judge will hopefully be defeated in his next election. For poor judgment, at least. I voted for the Governor and will again.
Well, I dare say… all the world is “the Boys Club.” Especially the US Senate and House. Oh, and the Supreme Court.
What do they have to complain about?
I am glad to know the Belizean Grove exists. More clubs like that should exist. I think one way to counteract the male domination of so many social, political and media organizations in this world is to create our own parallel, female dominated organizations. Organize our power and emerge as the better role models of how things should be done.
I find it sad that she felt that she had to quit this particular organization. For centuries men have had exclusive clubs and organizations that have not admitted women. Many of these organizations have changed in order to comply with non-discriminatory laws and practices by admitting a small number of women into their ranks (as one of my co-commentators pointed out, Congress is a great example of this). Access to these organizations is limited.
The Boy Scouts only admits boys (I won’t get into their other political beliefs, this is supposed to be a short reply afterall.) The Girl Scouts only admits girls. If we were to find out that she supports the Girl Scouts would we label her as “discriminating” against boys? Or if she were to support La Leche League would we do the same thing?
Ridiculous.
Agree that this is unfortunate. Our country lacks in venues for women to mentor and support one another. We have a lot of catching up to do in this area.
Then again several nominees and candidates have withdraw from all male clubs( ie Bohemian,Augustus,Friars Club etc) as well. Either it is ok to join gender specific groups or it isn’t. Equality is equality-
Then again several nominees and candidates have withdraw from all male clubs( ie Bohemian,Augustus,Friars Club etc) as well. Either it is ok to join gender specific groups or it isn’t.
Actually there’s a huge difference between members of an oppressed group with limited access to power joining together in an organization or club to support each other, and members of society’s most powerful/dominant group forming a club that keeps out the very people they’ve always discriminated against and oppressed. I guess next you’re going to argue that there shouldn’t be a Congressional Black Caucus unless they admit whites or unless there’s also a Congressional White Caucus?
Sasha- I dont believe in them either- To me it is hypocritical to say “you cant do it but I can”, because…I’ll betcha Those” white men’s” clubs can articulate “good ” reasons for their exclusivity too- but to me all of them are divisive. That goes back to the old game of exclusion- when I am an inclusivist- Women and minorities must share in power because that is correct, and no one should exclude anyone from power sources and groups that exclude do just that- and the reasons for so doing by that group ALWAYS makes sense to them, and never make sense to those” EXCLUDED”. So yes Sasha I would say such a caucus is wrong- it creates a slippery slope- unless the opposite is also right.Would you support a Jewish Caucus- How about a Christian caucus? Or other such exclusionary groups? how about a white man’s caucus? A KKK Caucus? Who is to determine which are good and which aren’t? Any argument you make to support your “ok” groups others will criticize- and any group you say isnt ok- some one else will tell you why it is ok. Who should decide-Best, in my view ,not to have groups which exclude anyone because of race, religion, ethnicity, gender, orientation Because the alternative is to allow all of them and that would be truly bad.
are we sure that non of the sitting judges are in clubs? and in history did they all have to leave their all male clubs?
it is typical that the Belizean Grove comes up with a female contender.
marille- in history no- but in the recent( say 20 yrs or more yes). it is a kiss of death to belong to Bohemia, Frairs,Augusta for a male nominee- but it seems that they dont resign until the nomination- just like judge Sontomayor- she acted as they( males) do- resign at nomination
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
January 7, 2012 at 10:10 pm
January 5, 2012 at 9:31 am
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...