I do not think the Women’s Lounge in the Union is still a necessary space to have here for women at MSU. I feel that it does provide a quiet and relaxing area where women can study, pray, or take a mental break, but in the broad spectrum of things, I feel it is strongly outdated. A personal experience that I had related to this lounge, (which probably has something to do with my opinion here), was during my sophomore year when I told my boyfriend I was going to study in the Women’s Lounge, and he told me he’d meet me there and I had to tell him he couldn’t do that. When I told him I’d have to meet him somewhere else, and that he was not allowed in the lounge, I not only felt weird about it but also extremely guilty. Even though I myself did not create the lounge, I am still connected to it in how I am a female and have studied there from time to time. If women continue to use such a space it must prove as being a positive area, right? Not necessarily. I do agree it is a beautiful room, with comfortable chairs, and provides a nice view of campus, but the fact that it’s all women is a bit eerie. For a big ten school that is not an all-girls or all-boys school, this lounge seems very out of place.
“Safe space” for women means a place where women feel protected and free to express themselves without being judged or dominated by others. Although, I don’t feel a space has to be restrictive towards males, in order to be considered “safe”. Perhaps some female students and faculty here consider the Women’s Lounge a “safe place”, and I respect that, after all it has been on this campus for a very long time. At the same time though, there are plenty of other places in which I feel are “safe” on this campus, that don’t ban males from entering (e.g. the little library connected to Wells Hall).
I think a lounge in the 1970’s and 1980’s would have served the purpose of providing women with their own environment and in return a greater sense of freedom. I think during this time it served as a place where women could comfortably express themselves without feeling inferior or fearful that they would be criticized or judged. I think the purpose a women’s lounge serves today is providing a place where women can continue to feel “safe” and free to express themselves, whether that be through prayer or other cultural expressions. But, I feel this enhances separatism—something many feminists today are trying to eliminate. Based on the readings and our class discussion it is evident that many men feel alienated concerning the issue of feminism, and there is no doubt in my mind that some males here may feel alienated from the Women’s Lounge in the Union, and perhaps maybe even a little upset by it. I know my boyfriend was.
I think we still have this lounge because many women still use it and it seems to be quite popular; but in keeping it here, I feel we are not moving forward. We are still focusing on a sex-class analysis. The structure of this women’s lounge can change in a way that welcomes males as well. Does this stand a chance? For now the likelihood is not very high, but at least I know where I stand on this issue. I choose to recognize my moral identity rather than my assigned sex-class. I understand and recognize the difference between fairness and unfairness, and this lounge only being open to women I feel is not fair. I also choose to live beyond gender and accept that “safe spaces” can include both males and females, and still be considered safe. My hope is that this lounge opens its doors to the male student/faculty body someday, but that it doesn’t change its other qualities of being a quiet and beautiful place.