BRetain’s “Old Boys Club” suffered a blow last night. The Garrick Club, an exclusive gentlemen’s club in central London and a relic of 19th century male-dominated fantasies, has voted to admit women to membership for the first time in almost 200 years. Approximately 60% of the votes were in favor.
In the 21st century, there is simply no good reason to justify the exclusion of women. Actually it never was. That the Garrick Club’s xenophobic policies have been so steadfastly defended in recent weeks speaks to the deep-seated misogyny that persists in Britain. What happens to the club’s sophisticated, rarefied atmosphere when women join? Do we pollute it with our chit-chat? Our nagging? Are our feminine charms too distracting?
The phrase “I don’t see anything here” is familiar to many women. It’s not a work meeting, it’s just playing a few holes on the golf course. It’s just blowing off steam. Just a few drinks with the guys. We didn’t think you’d want to come. But it is implausible to say that a space like the Garrick is not a place where work is not done and where broad but important decisions are made. Clubs like Garrick are built for sidebar conversations, soft networking, where real power comes together, unencumbered by annoying women. The feeling of belonging to an exclusive group is itself a means of maintaining male power.
The evidence lies in the disclosure of the names of about 60 of Garrick’s most influential members. Senior civil servants, politicians, the head of MI6 (who has since resigned from the club) and even King Charles. These men literally reign in our nation’s most powerful institutions, where women are consistently undervalued and underserved. Rhetorically speaking, they are committed to promoting equality. Some people tweet on International Women’s Day. But these promises ring very hollow when you realize that those in power choose to spend their leisure time at a club that was founded in 1831 and has remained largely unchanged since.
We also have to consider what we stand to lose by keeping women at the door. Do the 40% of Garrick members who voted against allowing women believe that only men make valuable contributions to art, politics and culture? These men wonder what we are missing out on when we fail to recognize women as equal contributors and thinkers with the right and ability to have conversations, share ideas, and shape culture. It should be given to you. What would the world be like if women were treated as true equals in these conversations?
I would like to ask about the women-only space. If men’s only clubs have to admit women, what happens to women’s clubs? But there is an important difference. It is very much the current situation where men congregate in places of influence and exclude women. They’ve been doing it for hundreds of years. When senior politicians and policymakers lunch together at Garrick, they are reinforcing a power structure that has existed for centuries. There are many women-only spaces that continue to exclude men, not to hoard power but to resist power. (For the record, faucet association We welcome and encourage our male allies to join us).
Last night’s vote may be a step in the right direction, but of course there are still plenty of reasons to be uncomfortable. Garrick remains an elite club to which only a select few are invited, and even fewer can become members. That’s a conversation we have to have. But it is important that the majority of members accept that continuing to exclude women is harmful and self-defeating. From now on, the real work begins by actively accepting diverse women. And Gallic members, old and new, need to ask themselves what they are doing to ensure that power is shared and distributed fairly, rather than kept among themselves.
