Our Past Makes Women’s Groups Necessary

To the editors:



Lucy Caldwell makes some good points about derogatory language towards men in her recent column, “Payback’s a Bitch” (Apr. 4)–after all, words that insult any group of people are unattractive. But her analysis of groups like HUWIB (Harvard Undergraduate Women in Business) is less valid because she fails to fully understand the need for their existence. I’m not sure that a women’s group inherently serves to “suggest an underlying negativity against the other sex,” rather than to create a forum in which women can come together as a community to build their skills and confidence.

Caldwell dismissively acknowledges the argument that women’s groups are necessary because of the historic discrimination against women, but fails to realize that sexism and discrimination still affect women profoundly today. The current lack of women in top leadership positions at most major U.S. businesses shows that women are obviously at a disadvantage (due largely to social norms and attitudes) in rising to these positions. Because of this trend, it makes sense to have a group that provides support and learning opportunities for. Why don’t we need a club for men in business? It already exists. It’s called Wall Street.

I further doubt that the mere existence of women’s groups is disrespectful to society, as Caldwell implies, an instance of “male-bashing,” or a form of “payback.” For example, the Harvard College Women’s Center welcomes male visitors and interns, and its programming is largely open to all undergrads. They must not have gotten the memo about advancing the “bitter female” agenda.

Of course women are achieving equality in some significant areas, such as college admissions, but feminism–including the continued existence of women’s groups –will not be outdated or in poor taste until equality of opportunity between people of all genders exists in all ways.



EVA B. ROSENBERG

Cambridge, Mass.

April 5, 2007