It seems I stirred up some commentary in AAUW-land among those who are in favor of dropping the membership requirement. I was told I wasn’t being helpful. Well, here it is. Anyone who writes a blog will tell you this is purely the matter of a writer who has a need to write, it’s a form of self-gratification, and we get to spout opinions. If I happened to be in a face-to-face discussion about this issue, I wouldn’t dream of being critical without also having a solution ready to present. But on my blog, I have the luxury of pontificating, so I do!
Last night over dinner, my inimitable spouse, the Big Kitty, the two-legged feline love of my life, commented that women tend to be more egalitarian than men, so they will actively seek to be inclusive while men generally don’t give a rip. I invited him to guest write a piece and he said he’d think about it. He’s the president of the local procrastinator’s association (Q is the vice-president, according to his sister), so I’ve gone ahead and swiped his thunder.
Now let’s be clear on one point. My spouse says I think like a man a lot of the time. My brother-in-law has said the thing he likes about my sister is that she thinks like a man. I am not sure where we get this. But if our spouses say it is true, it must be. Maybe that is why I’m not looking at the membership requirement as a BARRIER. To me, it’s a low wall, and easily scaled.
A lot of organizations are suffering from a lack of new members. Everyone from the masonic groups to the civic groups like Kiwanis is looking for new blood. We have had some forward momentum in terms of allowing women to join, such as the big shift when women could become Rotarians, and even some of the formerly exclusively male clubs began to admit women as full members. But let’s be honest and realistic. They all needed more members, and who better to tap into than those who were excluded?
The question AAUW should be addressing is whether those changes have affected those organizations’ membership levels in the long run. The answer is a definite no. And it isn’t because of anything more than a societal shift regarding memberships in general. Young people have very full lives. They all work, they are in time-consuming relationships, they marry and have children later, and they are very involved in their children’s activities. (Recall all the articles you’ve read about helicopter parents, overly-scheduled children, etc.)
Is an education requirement really a barrier? Not really. Is it bad to have any requirements for membership? No. To be sure, it can be awkward to have to find out if a woman has attended college in order to invite her to join AAUW, but there are so many ways around that problem that I find the argument to be fluff. All it takes is a little creativity - an educated woman oughta be able to manage that, dontcha think?
Then there is the complaint that it prevents some women who believe in our mission from joining. That’s not so bad, when you think about it. I believe in the missions of a lot of organizations, but I’m not eligible to join because I’m not a doctor, lawyer, caver, hiker… I can still support those missions by the way I choose to live and treat other people. You don’t have to be a Kiwanis member to buy tickets to their pancake breakfast fundraiser, but buying those tickets supports their mission, just as the people from our area support ours when they patronize our annual used book sale.
Sure it could be embarrassing to have to tell someone that s/he can’t join AAUW because s/he hasn’t the minimum degree, but it’s just as embarrassing to tell your boss her skirt is caught up in her pantyhose. An educated woman can handle a situation like that with grace.
Big Kitty says we women are tender-hearted and can’t bear it when we have to say no to people we like. I believe he’s on the right track with that idea. I have a hard time saying no to people I like. That’s why I wrote a check for my dues in the first place! The president of the chapter told my boss and me we were joining and we did as we were told - because we adore her! But if I wasn’t eligible, she would have had to tell me no. Oh, well. Those are the breaks. That doesn’t mean I should shun the annual used book sale. If I support the mission, then I can motor over and buy way too many books anyway, can’t I?
To me, the requirement of even a two year degree is not too much to ask. It really is not a barrier when you put it into perspective. A barrier is when an organization can pick and choose its members at will. For example, a girl may set her heart on becoming a Kappa. If the chapter doesn’t think she’ll fit in, they will not issue her a bid. And you don’t see the upper reaches of Kappa Kappa Gamma-dom suggesting that the chapters do otherwise. Now, that is a barrier.
I’m going to return to my original premise that I don’t believe removing the requirement will fix the problem. Instead, our branches have to decide for themselves, much the same as a church decides, that they do or do not wish to grow. They have to examine their existence in terms of the organization’s mission and decide if they need more members in order to carry out the mission. Along with that, they must come to grips with the idea that a branch could die out and need to be pruned from the organization when its membership dwindles to minimum number.
Growth is challenging. Just ask a church that is trying to grow in the face of dwindling church membership across the denominational board. As Americans retreat to their homes where they can be in touch with the whole world with the flick of a computer or television switch, they don’t need to come out. The one thing that will draw them out is the sense of community they may eventually crave. Now that is where AAUW can really shine. A branch of women who enjoy each other’s company, who will support one another, who will happily network and show up for triumphs and tragedies, now that is something we should be aiming for.
We can’t depend on our great book groups and the same old activities to draw in younger women. We have to change with them and we have to shift our focus to the kinds of things that create community for them. An AAUW mothers’ day out? Hey, we have grannies and aunties in spades among our ranks. Could we not run some kiddie activities so our young moms can get together and go out to a movie and later for cocktails? (Thanks, Lori - your night out inspired that!) An AAUW babysitting co-op? Proceeds benefit the scholarship program?
This is the kind of thinking that should be guiding us. There is no excuse why an organization of educated women should be lowering its standards instead of raising its expectations of creativity. If branches are too stuck in the mud to get with the times, then maybe they do need pruning. Oops. There I go, thinking like a man…