Sexism at Dancing Rabbit

Placeholder image for Foundation for Intentional Community website.
Codicts Team
  • April 17, 2014
  • Relationships
Man with a beard wearing a green shirt and colorful patchwork skirt in a narrow hallway.

(Pictured: Dancing Rabbit member Coz Walker.)

Dancing Rabbit is a growing community outside Rutledge, Missouri, made up of about 70 individuals with different backgrounds and experiences. We’re an ecovillage, founded in feminism but not focused on it and without a unifying idea of exactly what feminism looks like. I’m offering my perspective, which is certainly not universal, on how sexism affects us here. What you’re about to read is my opinion, and not the official stance of Dancing Rabbit by any means.

Sexism

I’m a woman. I am genetically and physiologically female. I have some masculine traits but I don’t think I’m mannish. I’m pretty tall for a woman, but not at all tall compared to all humans. I have pretty strong arms for a woman, but they’re probably less strong than the average adult’s. I’m extremely messy compared to the women I know, but only sort of messy when compared to my friends and neighbors who are men.

Let me be clear: I absolutely do not think that we can make a conclusive statement about the relative heights, strengths, or messinesses of two people based on their gender. I do think we can draw some bell curves based on observations, and make statistical predictions based on what we see. Maybe the curves will change with time and culture shifts, or maybe they won’t. I might be able to pass as a tenor, but how many women are there who can pull off a baritone or bass part as well as an average man? That’s not to say that a woman couldn’t be a very good bass singer, only that those people are more rare and it’s reasonable that their representation in their field should reflect that.

Noticing, speaking, or accepting that different genders have different tendencies is not what I would call sexist. Some folks might, and I think that’s their way of helping others avoid making assumptions and decisions based solely on gender. We’re sensitive to the fact that the assumption that a person of a certain gender is necessarily incapable of a given task has led to many missed opportunities for people to rise to their full potential and created much injustice in the world. That sensitivity helps us to be aware of what sexist mistakes have been made and to avoid them.

Discrimination is what happens inside a person when they lack the information, the energy, or the motivation to make decisions based on what they see, rather than assumptions based on culture, habit, or previously observed trends. At Dancing Rabbit we’re pretty good at making many choices based on actually taking the time to look at people’s characteristics rather than just lumping them according to gender. For example, this past spring a woman announced at the WIP (our weekly meeting) that she needed “some strong people” to help with moving her propane tank. By identifying the trait she was hoping to maximize she got what she actually needed.

What if I were looking for a wet nurse? I could advertise for a “person who is lactating” instead of “a nursing mother” so I don’t exclude anyone based on their gender alone, even though I’m pretty sure the best person for the job will be a woman. In short, sexism is making decisions or having reactions based on gender instead of some more relevant characteristic.

Avoiding sexism is not as easy as I just made it sound. People are generally pretty bad at knowing why they make the choices they do and even worse at accurately communicating those motivations to others, which makes it really hard to know whether sexism is at play in a given individual action. Plus, we make so many decisions throughout our days and years, and so many of them are sub- or barely-conscious, that some amount of lumping into groups seems necessary for getting though the day.

In order for people of all genders to have the same opportunities and rights, we need to put in the extra effort necessary to consider the possibility that people might surprise us, to be open and aware enough that we can see things even when we don’t expect them. The surprise could come from a person being an outlier for their gender or from the assumptions of previous generations being wrong, or both. Such a moment could cause confusion, fearfulness, and insecurity, or curiosity, wonder, and humility. Openness to people being their very best selves, whatever their gender—that’s the antidote to sexism.

Counter-Discrimination Tactics

Folks at Dancing Rabbit are generally good at being open to the possibility that a woman might be the best choice for a job that has historically been done mostly by men, or vice versa. I’ve seen folks get really excited about it. In fact, I’ve seen us consider as a group whether we should choose a woman for a traditionally male role even if there’s a more qualified male available. During that discussion I heard from my fellow community members that the aim of this calculated sexism would be to give an advantage to women in historically male fields to help correct for disadvantage they’ve experienced otherwise. I think there’s merit in that. I also think we have to acknowledge that it is a kind of sexism, because it includes or excludes people based on gender. On the whole, I think Dancing Rabbit is in favor of this kind of corrective discrimination.

I personally have concerns that giving preferential consideration to one gender over others, especially for paid work, could have the opposite effect that folks are hoping for.

In addition to the offensiveness of the implication that a woman in a man’s world must need our help to succeed, I have concern about how giving such advantages affects the resulting workplace. Imagine, for example, that you’re hiring a work crew of six carpenters and want to have 50/50 gender balance. If you get applications from qualified candidates in a ratio proportional to the ratio of carpenters in the US as a whole, which according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics was 1.4 percent women in 2010, you have to turn down about 194 qualified men even if you hire all of the female applicants. If the three men you hire are the best three for the job, then those men are almost certainly going to be better at the job than the women, not because men are necessarily better carpenters than women overall, but because you had to hire the best, middle, and worst woman candidates available, but only the top 3 percent of the men. On the worksite, then, those guys, and those gals, are certainly going to see more evidence to back up the very stereotype we were trying to counteract.

It’s hard to be patient, but I think that’s what we need to do to effectively correct the erroneous perceptions that are harming women’s ability to earn a living, participate meaningfully in fields that excite them, and live up to their full potential. Pushing men out of the way isn’t the way to do it. My suggestion to folks at Dancing Rabbit who wish to help women who have interest and talent in very male-dominated fields is that they should run educational workshops in those fields and welcome women to join, and show them as much respect and encouragement as the men in the group.

There have been a few workshops at Dancing Rabbit open only to women. This is another example of sexism aimed at counteracting the historical trend. I appreciate that some women might not feel comfortable exploring a new skill while there are men around, and they should have a chance to learn. At the same time, though, it’s that very argument that feels degrading to me, which bothers me even more than the simple, overt sexism of excluding men and other genders out of hand. It feels degrading because it implies that women are not emotionally strong enough to do something we want in the face of discomfort or fear—that we need to be protected from our own feelings of embarrassment and inadequacy in order to succeed. To me that feels patronizing. It also seems counterproductive to building a global culture in which we are equally open to accepting the particular gifts of everyone, and in which we feel able to confidently offer those gifts, regardless of gender. While I am thankful for folks’ efforts and good intentions in offering skill-building opportunities to a segment of the population less likely to have gotten those opportunities elsewhere, I question the overall wisdom of using sexism to fight sexism.

The Boys’ and Girls’ Clubs

One of the behaviors that comes up the most for me when I think about sexism at Dancing Rabbit is the gathering of people together for emotional support, divided by gender. Men’s Group and Women’s Circle are not official Dancing Rabbit events or organizations, just gatherings of people who want to get together for a shared activity, open to anyone to participate in, with one catch: Women’s Circle is for people who identify as women, and Men’s Group is for people who identify as men. There is not yet a group of or for people who don’t identify as either of those genders.

Were a group of people to decide, after getting to know one another, that they feel safe together and want to get together to talk about some tender things, without the whole village looking on or bringing unwelcome energy, and they all happen to be of the same gender, I would not call that sexist. Choosing all woman friends does not make a person sexist, it simply belies a preference. On the other hand, being explicitly open to any woman-identifying person and closed to any non-woman-identifying person is overt sexism. Ditto with men. I don’t go because I’m not sure the kind of sexism embodied by the existence of gender-specific groups is healthy for the kind of culture I hope we’re growing here. Many people think it is healthy, the groups are well attended, and the reports I get from Men’s Group, at least, are that those who attend are better people for it.

But I can’t help wondering what the reaction would be if Dancing Rabbit had a richer racial diversity than we do and there existed something like “Whites’ Night” which anyone who identified as white could attend. They’d participate in deep sharing and mutual support in their whiteness, and everyone else was explicitly excluded, though free to form their own group if they so desired. The reason for that racism might be given as some white people not feeling safe sharing some parts of themselves in the company of other races, perhaps because in the past they’ve been hurt by a non-white person. That’s kind of how Women’s Circle looks to me.

It’s hard for me to lodge a complaint with something that my fellow communitarians find so rewarding, and it’s not totally clear to me whether the net effect will be toward an end I’m hoping for or not, but, if you ask whether the gendered support groups are sexist, the answer is clearly yes. Genderist? I’d say so. Will I participate? No thank you. Will I think less of those who attend? No. I wish we had a culture in which people could be more thoughtful about including and excluding people based on criteria more relevant than their gender, but it takes so much energy to do so, maybe that’s better spent on other things.

Gender Balance

Another clearly sexist occurrence at Dancing Rabbit is the pretty frequent talk of seeking or needing “gender balance” on a given committee. We are likely, as a group, to give preference to people who round out the gender diversity on a committee, over those who might be more interested or more proficient in the task at hand. Honestly, I haven’t seen it happen very often, but it is talked about an awful lot.

Warren Siting is the committee responsible for helping people figure out where and how to build their homes and other structures in order to be harmonious with the existing village and with the plan for growth. I heard a concern that with all men on the committee there was no one that a woman might feel comfortable talking with about the sensitive topic of where and how to build her house, that she would feel intimidated. That’s both sexist in the assumption that a man cannot be easy to talk to and disempowering in the implication that women shouldn’t be expected to communicate with a man without a woman-savvy liaison. On the other hand, it could be that it’s another kind of discrimination to not accommodate the needs of everyone, and maybe help communicating with men after a lifetime of oppression by them is a need some people have.

Our mission at Dancing Rabbit is partly to be an example for others to follow, so I can see the merit in creating a tableau of what we hope the future will naturally look like. It’s hard to know how much of the unequal representation of genders in certain fields is related to inherent differences among genders, and how much is due to cultural influence stemming from some long-standing and arbitrary or outdated bias. Maybe in a perfectly un-sexist world those committees would still end up mostly made up of one gender. We won’t know that until we live in an un-sexist world.

Are We Sexist?

Yes, there’s sexism at Dancing Rabbit. Of course. We’re a community made up of individuals who came from the wider US culture and tens of thousands of years of human history before that. Some of our sexism stems from noble intentions, some from confusion or lack of energy to examine our motives and our goals closely. At the organization level, our membership agreement contains a pledge of non-discrimination based on sex, among other things. It seems to me that we’re letting some things slide as far as overt discrimination, but at least our paperwork is in the right place.

Men wear skirts, women wear pants, and we have at least a stated norm that wherever a woman must wear a shirt, so must a man, though that last one’s not always remembered and observed. Long hair, short, whatever. Armpit and leg hair is totally acceptable, regardless of gender.

We’re also doing well insofar as sharing chores across established gender lines. Most people here take a cook shift, most people clean public and private spaces, all parents (and many others) participate in childrearing. There’re men and women in leadership roles here, and on physically, technically, and socially strenuous tasks. More importantly, there’s not the expectation or requirement that people of a certain gender are the ones who perform a certain task. We’re free to choose how to contribute based on our interests and talent—one reason I am proud to be a part of this community.

We’re far beyond most of the country in terms of accepting people for who they are and the contributions they bring, regardless of their gender. Part of that’s thanks to Dancing Rabbit’s foundation in feminism, for which I’m grateful. I think there’s room for us to be more open-minded and objective around gender, and I look forward to watching that unfold at Dancing Rabbit and beyond.

Comments

Featured Blogs

Keep the conversation going with these pieces

Codicts Team
Fri Mar 2010
  • New to community
“We’re all in this together” is the headline of a recent article in the Real Estate section of the TimesOnline that looks favorably on the rise in sustainable communities in the UK. What do you share with your neighbours? A cup of sugar? A dividing wall? Despair over the way that your recycling boxe…
Codicts Team
Sun Feb 2015
  • Sustainability
For those who harvest honey, “the worst part of being a beekeeper is pulling out the honey-laden frames from the box and tearing them up to get the honey. The bees hate it and so do I. That’s why this new hive design, called Flow, is so cool.” Check out this New Beehive Design does not Disturb Be…
Codicts Team
Mon Apr 2013
  • New to community
  • Economics & Law
“In a legally binding move, founders of The Integral Center, LLC have voluntarily relinquished their rights to control their company as owners. Instead they have ceded authority to a purpose-centered governance process called Holacracy, a model that distributes authority across the organization and …
Cynthia Tina
Wed Aug 2019
  • Searching for community
Are you seeking a community to join? Well, here’s some good news, we know communities looking for you! 950 intentional communities are open to new members right now. See the full list here. People choose to join intentional community for many reasons – better quality of life, sense of purpos…
Codicts Team
Mon Mar 2008
ABC News in DC did a short video spot on Catoctin Creek Village out in Loudon County, VA and compared the rural cohousing community to both a 60s commune and a golf community. Not the most flattering or accurate description of community but I guess there is no such thing as bad publicity. The commun…
Cynthia Tina
Tue Apr 2019
A letter from the new Communications Director, Cynthia Tina In the face of global crises of unimaginable scales and complexity, our strength is found in simple local solutions. Weaving relationships and choosing to take action together defies rampant isolation in modern life. Social isolation is a…
Codicts Team
Thu Jun 2012
  • Living in community
  • Governance
When a member of a minority population claims racism, how does a group committed to racial nondiscrimination respond?
Codicts Team
Fri Mar 2019
What did you think about this exploration of community? The web film adventure of Season 1 of Planet Community was possible thanks to the over $11,000 donated from 135 supporters, the cooperating communities, our filmmakers Aaron and Rae of Skillly Media, and co-producers Corneilu Rusu, Runchero Un…
Codicts Team
Mon Nov 2018
  • Sustainability
What keeps living community thriving? Foundations: Mission, Vision, Values Being among young communards, elders in the movement, and aspiring community builders I have witnessed what can make community living thrive and what can cause strife. Having an interest in community building and socia…
Codicts Team
Tue Nov 2007
  • New to community
  • Sustainability
Neighbors are suing the city of Boulder, CO for changing zoning to allow a cohousing development called Washington Village. The cohousing community is being planned by Wonderland Hill Development Company Jim Leach, president of Wonderland Hill, said the timing of the lawsuit couldn’t be worse. He sa…

Insights & Stories from the Communities Movement

Subscribe to our newsletter for fresh stories and community updates delivered to your inbox.

Join the Communiversity Community

Get unlimited access to courses, exclusive member events, and a supportive network of community builders

Unlimited Learning

Access all courses, books, and premium content

Community Network

Member-only workshops and community builders

Exclusive Events

Member-only workshops and gatherings

Information

Communities

A residential project: people live here as their primary home.

Organizations

An institution, business, network, or project that isn’t a residence (e.g. a learning center, farm, or network with no one living there full-time).

Plus Community Memberhsip

  • Find people with Profile Match
  • Access to your community listing statistics
  • Create Discussion Groups
  • 50% commission when your members purchase a Plus Membership
  • Access to our affiliate program
  • Member badge on your community profile
I am an official member of this community
Disclaimer
I affirm that my information is accurate and I am authorized to manage this listing
Foundation for Intentional Community FIC Member badge logo.

Free Plan

Free Membership
Free

Intentional Advertising

  • Subtotal

    {{ currencyFormat( pricing_summary.total_amount ) }}

Icon representing community connections and collaboration for intentional communities.

Plus Membership

  • Find communities with Profile Match
  • View detailed reviews about communities
  • Direct message and view contact information
  • Create free listings in Needs & Offers
  • Plus Member resources in CommUniversity
  • Plus Member badge on your profile