• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Segregation between the sexes

theleastofthese

Seasoned Member
Female
I considered asking this in ladies only, but I'm curious to hear men's opinions on it as well. I was recently watching a documentary about polygyny in Islam. Many of the men have rules that their wives can't be alone with men who aren't closely related to them. "Some" of the men even follow the rules themselves. Basically, neither the wife nor the husband can be in the company of the opposite sex alone unless they are a relative. This is customary in their culture and even applies to singles. There are also women and men only businesses such as restaurants, movie theaters, clothing stores etc.

I couldn't help but think this would be a bit comforting and peaceful. Curious what everyone's thoughts are on a bit more segregation between the sexes?
 
During Crusades, Saracens couldn't believe how much trusting Franks (Westerners) were with their wives.

Remember, Arabs are special. They start sexual segregation at 7 years (I think, certainly before adolescence).

Arabs practice FBD (father's brother' daughter) marriage type, so sexual segregation helps keep children for cousins only.

Strangely, their culture seems to result with male affection to boys too much. Not even Western gays match them.

Muslims from Indonesia and around seems normal.
 
It just sounds overly complicated to me.

Today our older, male, neighbour came around to bring our dogs some bones. Samuel wasn't home and the children were inside the house. We stood outside and chatted for about 30 minutes about God, sheds, birds, lifting weights, etc. He is new to learning about God and reading the bible, it was a good, friendly conversation. Eventually my son joined us, and then my father-in-law and nephew too. I wouldn't want to restrict that conversation at all, I know that Samuel wouldn't be bothered.

I have no issue with others doing this, if it's right for your family then go ahead. I trust Samuel, and he trusts me, and I just don't think something that complicated needs to be introduced to every family.

Random thought I've just had. Before I was married I worked in a petrol station sole charge. I was often alone with men when it was quiet and only 1 person coming in at a time. How could anyone do that job? A man would be alone with women, a woman alone with men. What are we all afraid of here? It's just a job, there is no temptation, it's just work, pump fuel, take money, chat with people, check oil, clean clean clean. Literally no time for dilly dallying.
 
There is a time and a place for such rules in specific circumstances. I understand Billy Graham for instance set himself extremely strict rules around who he was with, he wouldn't be alone with a woman in a lift for instance, but that was not really to avoid actual misconduct. It was to avoid giving opportunities for anyone to falsely accuse him of misconduct. That was a very understandable precaution given his public profile. But it is really the exception that proves the rule - this sort of strictness is simply impractical for most people.
 
Personally, I don’t speak to men who aren’t blood related to me unless it is a very short or business related. This is out of respect for my husband and his desire to keep his wives safe. Not all men are good or have good desires.

Actually, I believe that as women we have to safe guard and place boundaries because of the day and age in which we live. Even God has boundaries. When you were a baby the boundary was your crib, as you got older it became okay you can play outside but only on our block well don’t let Dad catch you at Carl’s house two blocks away or the boundary was taken to grounded inside your room and this wasn’t to harm you, this was to protect you. As a married woman , I respect my husband enough to follow the boundaries that he has for our marriage and if that includes not speaking to certain individuals then this is what happens.
 
I was often alone with men
Many, many evil men have taken advantage of this type of situation to violate women in the worst way. There are many wicked men who would take any opportunity to overpower an unsuspecting woman and she is left with the scars forever. Even if it is only 1 in 1,000 men that might do this, why take the chance. I'm not in charge of your family, but I would not recommend this.

It is my job to protect my women at any cost from harm. I personally would not put them in a position where there is a chance harm can come to them, even if it is a small chance. If that means they interact with a few less men, then so be it. It has nothing to do with trust. I trust my women completely. I don't trust random guys I don't know. By the way, I'm not alone with married women either.
 
Many, many evil men have taken advantage of this type of situation to violate women in the worst way. There are many wicked men who would take any opportunity to overpower an unsuspecting woman and she is left with the scars forever. Even if it is only 1 in 1,000 men that might do this, why take the chance. I'm not in charge of your family, but I would not recommend this.

It is my job to protect my women at any cost from harm. I personally would not put them in a position where there is a chance harm can come to them, even if it is a small chance. If that means they interact with a few less men, then so be it. It has nothing to do with trust. I trust my women completely. I don't trust random guys I don't know. By the way, I'm not alone with married women either.
You didn't read what she wrote properly, she wasn't just talking about dangers in women working alone, and nor is this thread about that. Go back to the premise of this thread:
Basically, neither the wife nor the husband can be in the company of the opposite sex alone unless they are a relative.
And read what Sarah actually wrote:
Before I was married I worked in a petrol station sole charge. I was often alone with men when it was quiet and only 1 person coming in at a time. How could anyone do that job? A man would be alone with women, a woman alone with men.
If a man is working alone at a petrol station (or any customer-service role), and a woman comes to buy something, then he is alone in the company of the opposite sex. Sarah's point is that if we are to be that strict, then it is impossible for anyone - man or woman - to run a sole-charge shop. Or even to be a customer at one - the wife wouldn't be allowed to go to the local butcher shop or greengrocer if they are run by men, and vice versa if run by women. Which makes the rule impractical.

Obviously there are practical dangers in women working alone, your points on that are entirely valid, but are a different matter from the issue being considered in this discussion. This discussion is about setting boundaries to avoid sexual temptation and misconduct, and is about boundaries set for either women or men.
 
Personally, I don’t speak to men who aren’t blood related to me unless it is a very short or business related.
And that is practical.

Anyone setting such rules for their family will either make pragmatic exceptions like you have done, or will be a hypocrite and not actually follow the strict rules they have set because they're impossible.
 
I have experienced both positive fruit and problems as a result of allowing friendships and interactions between wives and males, so I definitely see the reasoning, but I don’t prohibit such.

I don’t see that a man having a policy to protect the women while being free to interact at will as being hypocritical.

Edited to add that emotional adultery is a thing.
 
Last edited:
Before I was married I worked in a petrol station sole charge
Sarah's point is that if we are to be that strict, then it is impossible for anyone - man or woman - to run a sole-charge sho
Many, many evil men have taken advantage of this type of situation to violate women in the worst way. There are many wicked men who would take any opportunity to overpower an unsuspecting woman and she is left with the scars forever
I see what you're saying, sometimes it's just not practical and the situation is nearly impossible to avoid at all times. I think the concern here is due to the crime rates being so high in the US. Gas stations in the US are notorious for having high crime rates. They're mostly run by solo female workers who close and lock up the store between 10 pm and 2am, alone.

When I was first of working age in Baton Rouge. The only job opportunities we had at the time were convenience stores. I'd work alone the entire time, close to the store at midnight and walk alone to my car. Men would just stand at the counter all day long, forcing you to interact with them while working because it's not like you could go anywhere else, and it would be rude of you to ignore customers in the eyes of management. Most ladies quit due to the sexual harassment and even worse because they were held at gunpoint and robbed. I was never robbed while working in the store, but one night while leaving work, a man was in the backseat of my car with a gun that he held to my head. I was so shocked and panicked that I drove about 100 ft, got out, and took off running to someone's door.

We recently moved to a more rural, lower crime area and a few weeks ago a man shot and killed three people at a gas station. The cashier always works alone, her boyfriend checks on her throughout the day. He happened to be there at the same time a customer pulled up in as well, so the shooter executed all three of them over a little cash and some cigarettes 😢

I worked at a casino for nearly 15 years. At times the place was empty, our security guards would be asleep or smoking weed outside. We'd be left alone with male customers often- the same things would happen here: the men would attempt to come behind the counter/bar area, touch women who worked there, and say inappropriate things the entire time. One time a male security guard was alone with my friend/coworker and grabbed her breasts. Another time I was alone in a stock room outside the building with a security guard who was supposed to be escorting me for "safety reasons." He pinned me against the wall and said, "You know I could rape you right now, and you couldn't do a thing about it." These were in mostly public environments where we were only alone with the opposite sex for short periods of time. Yet these sorts of things happened constantly. Those are just the situations I can remember at the moment but I can think of hundreds more.

@steve Sorry, I couldn't quote your post. I don't see it as hypocritical either but more as a safety precaution even for men.

For instance, many men in management positions struggle with women making false accusations of sexual harassment against them. At one point we had a very attractive Australian man as our boss, women practically threw themselves at him constantly. He refused to be alone with women; if he needed to speak with one of us in the office, he'd ask if we wanted to bring a co-worker. If we absolutely had to be alone with him, he'd leave the office door open. He was a nice man and by no means gave off any sort of creep vibe, but he had to protect himself.

My experiences obviously haven't all been bad. I'm still friendly with some of the men I met through work, we still text and check on one another once in a while. Still, as I've gotten older, I see the value in a more segregated environment. The safest I've ever felt in a work environment was while working under my dad, I certainly miss those days.
Personally, I don’t speak to men who aren’t blood related to me unless it is a very short or business related
Actually, I believe that as women we have to safe guard and place boundaries because of the day and age in which we live. Even God has boundaries.
As a married woman , I respect my husband enough to follow the boundaries that he has for our marriage and if that includes not speaking to certain individuals then this is what happens
I agree with you. But I think the struggle is a little different for single ladies. For instance, the other day I gave my phone number to a new male neighbor, I was just being friendly because I'm super outgoing. He mistakenly thought I was interested in him. It's super common where we're from to have one another's phone number, the entire neighborhood exchanges numbers and often text one another if we need help with something. I didn't think anything of it, and now this guy won't leave me alone, lol. I've learned that I need to be more careful in these situations.
 
Last edited:
I considered asking this in ladies only, but I'm curious to hear men's opinions on it as well. I was recently watching a documentary about polygyny in Islam. Many of the men have rules that their wives can't be alone with men who aren't closely related to them. "Some" of the men even follow the rules themselves. Basically, neither the wife nor the husband can be in the company of the opposite sex alone unless they are a relative. This is customary in their culture and even applies to singles. There are also women and men only businesses such as restaurants, movie theaters, clothing stores etc.

I couldn't help but think this would be a bit comforting and peaceful. Curious what everyone's thoughts are on a bit more segregation between the sexes?
Islamic cultural settings might provide the opportunity for some degree of separation, but in other cultures and religious environments not the same. And unless someone went to considerable lengths, it would be mostly unworkable as has already been pointed out. Grief, I went to a mall not long ago and the female security guard groped me as she patted me down. She's been friendly in the past, but I was surprised at how blatant she was. That was by no means the first incident of the kind and some women don't even try to be discreet. People think it's men who act inappropriately toward women but I know it's not uncommon for women to step way over the line with men. Another guy I worked with used to tell me about the problems he had from women. This is the world we live in and you have to keep your wits about you. I don't see how a person could avoid every possible potential problem without becoming a hermit and living in a cave in the jungle. As far as I'm concerned, it's life, just deal with it.
 
I see what you're saying, sometimes it's just not practical and the situation is nearly impossible to avoid at all times.
The strawman that you are starting from is that society as structured today is the position that we need to judge the custom from.
I’m sorry, but today’s societal norms are a perversion that people have accepted.
Sadly, while the Religion of Peace (the one with the crescent moon) has the wrong god, they do follow Yah’s cultural expectations more closely than do most of us who claim Him.

Why do young women need jobs?
They are exposed to inadequate protection because of the expectation that they support themselves or their families. This is not the norm in a culture where the women move from the protection and support of their fathers home into the support and protection of their husbands home.
🎶All the Single Ladies🎶 ain’t a song in the Bible. It just wasn’t a reality nor an expectation. Our present reality is a perversion of the Devine design.
 
@steve Sorry, I couldn't quote your post. I don't see it as hypocritical either but more as a safety precaution even for men.
As I like to say, legalism is easy.
Just create enough rules and nobody gets in trouble.
Meanwhile, everyone lives in isolation. Afraid to violate a code of conduct because of what “might happen”. Sometimes wisdom and discernment are the best way to judge a situation.
 
@steve and @theleastofthese, you misunderstood what I called hypocritical.
Anyone setting such rules for their family will either make pragmatic exceptions like you have done, or will be a hypocrite and not actually follow the strict rules they have set because they're impossible.
What would be hypocritical is someone who set rules on who they could speak to which were so strict that they were impossible to obey in a Western societal context, so they kept breaking them in a range of circumstances just to live life, but still claimed they were following those strict rules. In contrast, @ASyers41 recognised the need to accommodate brief interactions between the sexes, and had a pragmatic middle ground approach.
 
@steve and @theleastofthese, you misunderstood what I called hypocritical.

What would be hypocritical is someone who set rules on who they could speak to which were so strict that they were impossible to obey in a Western societal context, so they kept breaking them in a range of circumstances just to live life, but still claimed they were following those strict rules. In contrast, @ASyers41 recognised the need to accommodate brief interactions between the sexes, and had a pragmatic middle ground approach.
I actually wasn’t responding to your statement.
I was skipping directly to the accusation that always gets made when there are rules for one, but not the other.

Your original statement was well made, as to what it addressed.
 
The strawman that you are starting from is that society as structured today is the position that we need to judge the custom from.
I’m sorry, but today’s societal norms are a perversion that people have accepted.
Sadly, while the Religion of Peace (the one with the crescent moon) has the wrong god, they do follow Yah’s cultural expectations more closely than do most of us who claim Him.

Why do young women need jobs?
They are exposed to inadequate protection because of the expectation that they support themselves or their families. This is not the norm in a culture where the women move from the protection and support of their fathers home into the support and protection of their husbands home.
🎶All the Single Ladies🎶 ain’t a song in the Bible. It just wasn’t a reality nor an expectation. Our present reality is a perversion of the Devine design.
Not that I disagree with you necessarily, but I don't recall scripture setting any specific ratio of how many people can remain single versus married and what the norm should be. Common sense says that a single person must have means to support themselves. There were ladies in scripture who worked to support their families. Widows and singles who had to support themselves somehow.
you misunderstood what I called hypocritical.
I wasn't really responding to what you said directly, I just wanted to tag you both to explain the difference between working alone in the US in a similar environment and why some people are so opposed to it.
 
Last edited:
I think it's more than just you giving him phone number.
I have a very friendly personality (in person), lol. I think he mistook my friendliness combined with me giving him my phone number as interest in him. Which is understandable, but now he won't take no for an answer. Learned my lesson.
 
Back
Top