This is an event open only to “womyn” – or more correctly, I suppose, any who claim to be womyn. Men are not allowed in. The Festival website says no such thing. I can’t find anything that suggests men will be turned away. But so many Dopers have attended and agree that such is the case, that I believe it.
I understand that private membership organizations can restrict their membership in any fashion they please, and hold whatever kind of events they want for the exclusive benefit of their members.
But that’s not the case here. Entry to the event is not restricted to the membership. It is open to approximately HALF the general public, but not the other half, based soley on gender criteria. In truth I can’t tell from the website the nature of the organizing entity – whether it is in fact a female-only member organization is not stated. It may be my assumption.
So on what legal basis can this event, which allows any woman to attend for a fee, bar men completely?
So on what legal basis can this event, which allows any woman to attend for a fee, bar men completely?
[/QUOTE]
Not my specialty, and I don’t have time right now to give this a great deal of thought, but I suspect that one reason is that no man has cared enough about attending that he’s been willing to finance or otherwise instigate a lawsuit.
(Also, the test for permissible gender discrimination is somewhat more liberal than the test for, say, racial discrimination. That’s why women-only restrooms are okay, and whites-only restrooms are not.)
Here’s an article on a related issue – women-only healtch clubs.
Two comments: (a) I have not verified the statements made in the article; and (b) a case upholding a health club policy like this would not necessarily govern in the women’s music festival situation. I think the situations are distinguishable.
Wasn’t there a case a few years ago where a woman was denied a job as a PE teacher because the school already had several female PE teachers and only one male and they needed someone able to supervise the boys in the lockerroom before/after class?
Hiring can be gender-specific if the position is related to gender. For example, when Plimoth Plantations needs a new actor for one of the roles in its community, it runs an ad that says at the bottom something like “bona fide gender qualification.”
Also note that gender discrimination by a private person/organization may be legal (e.g. Masons) or illegal (e.g. housing or employment)
[/QUOTE]
**SaintCad ** has expressed some important distinctions. Regarding the second one:
[QUOTE=Michigan Civil Rights Act]
37.2302 Public accommodations or services; prohibited practices.
Sec. 302.
Except where permitted by law, a person shall not:
(a) Deny an individual the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation or public service because of religion, race, color, national origin, age, sex, or marital status.
[/QUOTE]
(Emphasis added.)
[QUOTE=Michigan Public Accommodations Act]
750.147 Denial of equal public accommodations.
Sec. 147.
Any person being an owner, lessee, proprietor, manager, superintendent, agent or employee of any such place who shall directly or indirectly refuse, withhold from or deny to any person any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges thereof or directly or indirectly publish, circulate, issue, display, post or mail any written or printed communications, notice or advertisement to the effect that any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any such places shall be refused, withheld from or denied to any person on account of race, color, religion, national origin, sex or blindness or that any particular race, color, religion, national origin, sex or blindness is not welcome, objectionable or not acceptable, not desired or solicited, shall for every such offense be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not less than $100.00 or imprisoned for not less than 15 days or both such fine and imprisonment in the discretion of the court; and every person being an owner, lessee, proprietor, manager, superintendent, agent or employee of any such place, and who violates any of the provisions of this section, shall be liable to the injured party, in treble damages sustained, to be recovered in a civil action: Provided, however, That any right of action under this section shall be unassignable. In the event that any person violating this section is operating by virtue of a license issued by the state, or any municipal authority, the court, in addition to the penalty prescribed above, may suspend or revoke such license.
[/QUOTE]