Endangered Species

Just a few hours before he was to give a speech the other night, Massachusetts governor, Deval Patrick cancelled a scheduled appearance at a local gathering of a men's club when he found out that women were excluded. Until this news item, I had never heard of The Clover Club either.

Today, the Boston Globe editorial praised Patrick for "Skipping boy's night out". The Globe thinks that it is evil for white males to get together to eat, drink and be merry.

On the other hand, the Globe thinks it is OK for women and "other minorities" to establish gender or even race-based clubs - because "there are substantial differences between a club that literally perpetuates an old-boy network and an organization formed to encourage networking among underrepresented groups." Really? Substantial differences?

The only difference I see is a double standard. Maybe the Globe needs to do a recount of who the minorities are these days. In 2009 English speaking white guys are out-numbered by "underrepresented groups."

I don't disagree with Gov Patrick making a personal statement about his participation at a club that excludes a selected group. What bothers me is the editorial assumption that people do not have the right to congregate with people who they feel most comfortable with - even if that means to exclude some groups of people. Secret societies, leagues, clubs, fraternities, associations, cults - Such groups have existed since men lived in caves.

It is clear that the government needs to intervene where "clubs" that are really fronts for criminal gangs, violence-preaching (eg, skinheads) or other illegal activity.
If the group is not conspiring to actively hurt nonmembers, leave them be.

These days, the government enforces a public policy of inclusion. Equal opportunity (ie, minority preference) is mandated at every level of federal, state and local organizations. Government and civil contracts, grants, job opportunities are all subject to affirmative action.

Family wise things have really changed. Women have (understandably) rebelled against their former role which primarily involved childcare, housewifery and provider of connubial bliss. Nowadays, the tables have turned.

Men long for the days when they were treated as kings of their castle, inscrutable Martians who were exempt from the hospital delivery room. Heck, they aren't even the principle breadwinners,anymore. Today, guys have to do everything women do: they are expected to come directly home after work instead of having a few pops at the local watering hole; in many cases they have to shop, cook, clean, watch the kids, etc. Most social engagements are still decided by women, friendships with other couples are dictated by females.
She "owns" all the rooms in the house; if he is good, she lets him have a corner where he can have a TV and a comfortable chair. She monitors his meals, drinks and wardrobe.

So what is wrong with a bunch of guys getting together a few times a year to smoke cigars, tell dirty jokes and have a few drinks.

It used to be The American Way.