<http://columbia.patch.com/articles/women-only-swim-times-praised-by-columbia-muslims>;

In old, New Delhi women can now gather in (some) mosques and pray together
and thanks to Howard, in Columbia they can now gather and swim together,
so long as no guys with inquisitive eyes are permitted to do either with them together.
Regarding the situation in old, New Delhi, the move toward gender quality in mosque-access for prayer does not extend so far as to include permitting women-immamship.

The situation today in the latter regard appears to be much like that which obtained in the Western world a couple of centuries ago, when to accept women as preachers the public still was slow. As Sam Johnson put it c 1752 the notion of women preaching was not to be taken seriously. In his considered view, " . . . a woman's preaching is like a dog's walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all." [Boswell: Life Link .] www.samueljohnson.com/dogwalk.... -

In any event, access to a mosque for praying together or to a pool for swimming together represents some progress, albeit limited and historically belated, toward gender-equality for members of Muslim communities in old, New Delhi, and Columbia, respectively. Full speed ahead toward elimination of gender segregation in mosque and in pool, and down with rules of the "Old School".

More about antiquated cultural behavior
.By Special K Monday, 01.19, 2009
Reference: NY Times story on gender-related effects of changing form of welfare payments to the Aborigine.

Said Elder Nelson in a sharp reaction to the new program,:'The government has listened to a minority group of women . . .who do not have any power in the eyes of Aboriginal law . . ." . . . [The “powerless” women referred to had endorsed the GIM (governmental income management) designed to give welfare recipients half-payment in a food-stamp type card to limit misuse of cash].

The cards until recently were honored only at local stores owned by the elders (naturally men), who adamantly refused to accept them, effectively undermining efforts to phase the program in.

But some enterprising women succeeded in opening a local participating store in Yuendemu, in 2008, thus permitting local card holders to use cards locally and not have to travel miles to a “superstore” that did participate.

The GIM program is perceived as an affront by male elders who say “. . .(t)hey want to shelter their 40,000-year old culture from the corrupting outside world”--and think of the women involved as “traitors” against “their own people” with the flag of modernity quite brazenly unfurled.

In the matter of changing 40,000-year old culture(s) the mills of the gods grind exceedingly slow, because folks who’ve lived the same way for 40K years are slow to change their ways.

I commend the Columbia Association for giving modest women the chance to swim without compromising their faith.

" . . . Curves, WOW(! .et al.) you guessed it ''WOMEN ONLY SWIMMING'... if there wasn't a demand, there wouldn't be a market for('em)"

When displayed at WOS, viewing 'em does relieve stress-- even if seen only while swimming-- in contrast to what may be seen on full-frontal display at OWS.

It poses a problem complex, as to why 't would some women still vex to swim with men in a pool when to do so is "cool" in an era that coined the concept :"unisex".

But trying for a solution is fun even though one can't produce one, especially when those at WOS, on occasion grant to men guest access--albeit for an only too brief (happy) day in the sun.

At the Jewish Community Center where I swim, two times each week are reserved for female-only swimming and two times per week reserved for males only. The modesty needs of Orthodox and other Torah-observant Jews seem to be quite like those of Muslims. I am a non-observant Jew, but enjoy being in the pool with the women & small children without the presence of men.

This is a welcome reversal from some of the political correctness of the past 20 years. Boys in Girl Scouts, Girls in Boy Scouts, etc. etc. Men and women need separate times for activities and separate organizations in addition to gender neutral organizations.

Swimming is a very personal thing. I am a big man and would love to swim for exercise to slim down, but would be embarrassed to be in mixed company. For once, I agree with CA.

Wondering why Patch would chose to make the most immature comment "newsworthy."

The Columbia Association is a private organization, for what that's worth. My state university was taxpayer-funded and we had women-only swim times; like CA, we also had an abundance of pools and lanes. There's nothing wrong with the people who use the service speaking up and asking for things they want, whether they're women with specific ideas about modesty or people with disabilities. Or even, horror of horrors, people who don't look good in bathing suits.

Exactly.

I was wondering when someone was going to get to the fact the Columbia Association is a PRIVATE ORGANIZATION exclusive to Columbia area residents and workers ONLY.
You would need to understand the vision of James Rouse, how the Town of Columbia was developed, the establishment of the Columbia Association and the role it plays in the community, to understand why this decision is right in line with their mission statement to be an inclusive organization that is responsive to the citizens it serves.
Each resident and business pays a yearly assessment to CA, and in return, they may have access to the facilities for an ADDITIONAL FEE like a country club of sorts.... and just like a country club, it's members have the right to make certain requests of the organization.
Columbia Association has 23 swimming pools. ONE of the TWO pools at Wilde Lake was hardly being used before the women-only swim times were established. The swim times are only 2 hours a day, 2 days a week. This leaves PLENTY of time for patrons to enjoy both pools for co-ed mingling.

I am still confused as to WHY this has erupted into a firestorm of national dialogue.

I love that I was able to raise my daughter in such a culturally diverse area. I believe it's made her a better person.

The rest of the country could take a page out of Jim Rouse's book...
or better yet, read the whole thing !!

The underlying reason this is a national dialogue is that a Muslim woman is pressing for rights NOT to be viewed in a semi-public place by men. I believe in separate access to facilities based on gender if those help people be more active. HOWEVER, when there is the tinge of religious overtone brought by the petitioner for this, it is national news because we resist, and I think rightly so, any change of rules or regulations to suit one religion over another. And we all know that just because women are alone together does not mean any unwanted sexual advances do not occur. There could be those that are woman on woman, something I witnessed and feared when in a public high school locker room many years ago.
I like that there are Mommy and me times and special times for children or even for those who want a quiet swim with with others. But the emphasis being brought that it is a Muslim woman demanding this because of her religion is national news.

BTW, your link to a supposed story on the same topic in the Baltimore Sun is a dead link in that it leads to no such article. At least have all the links up to date, please. And being cited in the Huffington Post is no great journalistic feat. If you were cited in the Washington Post I might take more note of this issue. More and more of these religions tinged articles makes me wonder if I really think this was the purpose of Jim Rouse's ideals. If I understood it correctly he wanted everyone to get along but not for any one set of beliefs to prevail over the others.

Thank you Special K for recognizing what I meant I think. The difference I see is that no where in the past have other religious groups asked for special rules for themselves in the name of 'protection of gender'. I believe strongly in assimilation and it is where we as a people of this nation are strongest. When we protect a gender because of the gender alone it is one thing, but when we protect a gender due to religion, I think that sets a precedent to create other rules based on religion and I fear that for our country which is a nation of laws and not of religions.

A recent post includes "That the rest of this discussion has become so controversial is strange . . ." Not if one considers the import of observations by C Feletz et al. to the effect that the controversy is more about culture than swimming.

I am so incredibly proud of my daughter Katlin, who tonight addressed Columbia Association's Board of Directors, thanking them for the thoughtful decision they made in choosing to approve the women-only swim times at the Wilde Lake Swim Center. 56 PATH people came out tonight in a show of support (It was a tight squeeze to all fit in that room).
It was a little curious though, there was NOT ONE PERSON who was there to oppose the idea.