Houses

1
Houses Sheds An exploration of the genesis
growth of neighbourhood houses mens sheds in
community settings

• Barry Golding, Annette Foley Mike Brown
  (University of Ballarat)
• Helen Kimberley (Equity Research Centre)
• Workshop to ACEVic Conference
• Melbourne, 15-16 May 2008

2
Opening discussion questions

• Are they houses or sheds?
• What are the differences?

3
Our research question focus

• What is the desirability of neighbourhood houses
  or mens sheds being either gender specific or
  gender neutral?
• A tentative exploration of the complex, strategic
  political choices made around gender in informal
  community learning.

4
This presentation in context

• ACE Mens Sheds research.
• Informal discussion with Helen Kimberley our
  reflections on previous research experience.
• Paper to ALA Conference, Cairns, Dec 2007
  (submitted for publication to AJAL 2008)
• Invitations to present something on a similar
  theme at ACEVic ANHLC (Vic), CANH (SA) LCL
  (WA).
• Reading into literature on single sex-work
  learning in the UK.
• Our research papers on gender roles in
  community-based learning (see Handout)
• Our international, collaborative research into
  mens learning wellbeing.

5
Introduction

• Two basic choices be overtly gender specific
  (discriminatory) or gender neutral (de-emphasise
  gender as part of an inclusive politics).
• Limitation Neighbourhood houses have a longer
  history (30 years) compared to mens sheds (very
  recent, mostlt10 years).

6
About the genesis growth of neighbourhood
houses for women since 1975

• Participant perceptions of the gender rationale
  relations
• Helen Kimberly perceptions recollections

7
Our perception of neighborhood houses as
originally designed

• Essentially established by women with a desire to
  come together to learn, socialise and to
  establish play groups for their children.
• In the 1980s the growing target group for the
  neighbourhood houses was disadvantaged women.

8
Some illustrative sheds

• Presentation

9
The what, who, why, where howof community
mens sheds in Australia

• Sheds provide a familiar setting for men
  (informally, in a community setting).
• Meeting regularly with others (mostly men).
• Meeting under the guise of making or fixing
  things.
• Auspice by other, existing community
  organisation.
• Lack of compulsion.

10
The what, who, why, where and howof mens sheds
in Australia

• 50 over 65 years old.
• Most are recently retired or involuntarily
  withdrawn from the workforce.
• 20 war veterans.
• 20 unable to find work but expect to in future.
• 75 on some kind of pension.
• 50 heard about the shed through friends.
• 33 referred by community health worker.

11
About the genesis growth of community sheds for
men since 1995

• The sheds are a conducive environment and setting
  for learning.
• The need . . . . the pillar . . . learning to be
  . . .
• Learning and development through the stages of
  life and living.
• Changing demographics . . . increase in number of
  men making it into older age and need for them
  to get together.
• Nursing homes and retirement villages set up for
  activities for women.
• Gerontology studies in the early and mid
  nineties.
• Mens sheds made popular through media . . Book
  and film Blokes and their sheds in Australia.
• Broader than retirees . . . Men being active
  together in community settings.
• A positive strategy in older mens health and
  wellbeing.
• Differences between men with, and without,
  partners.
• A growing sector in the contemporary mens
  movement in Australia (?

12
Some parallels (1)

• A shared commitment to informally meeting the
  different needs of men women in community
  contexts.
• Both houses sheds identify the preferred
  territory for establishing their communities of
  practice.
• Both are simultaneously conservative
  revolutionary by reinforcing gender
  stereotypical roles of houses sheds, but at the
  same time drawing a line in the gender sand
  recognising the benefits of gendered communities
  of practice.

13
Some parallels (2)

• Somewhat similar demographic (though men are
  older - median 60) and less likely to be
  ordinary suburban.
• Preferred pedagogies.
• Participants (not students) experience no loss of
  face or self esteem, move in and out of learning
  experiences, learn as well as teach to match with
  their stage of life.
• Both emphasize success.

14
Some differences (Annette Helen)

• Women have been unable to effectively and
  officially claim their house space or sector as
  gendered other than through practice.
• Women who worked to establish neighbourhood house
  were more overtly political in intent.

15
Womens role in community sheds?

• As participants?
• As managers coordinators?
• Advantages for women ( men)?
• Problems?
• Compromises and accommodations?

16
The irony

• The feminist values processes that provided
  time space in neighbourhood houses for
  reassessing a participants life and directions
  and offering support for making changes taking
  risks, also underpin the model common to most, if
  not all, mens sheds.

17
Some qualifications - We come to this with
different

• histories and experiences
• values priorities
• theoretical positions
• views about social inclusion equity
• gender positions.

18
Tantalising questions about the value of gendered
spaces in community settings

• To participants
• For informal learning
• For health wellbeing
• For community connectedness.

19
We conclude that both houses sheds

• Create and perpetuate effective, gendered
  communities of practice.
• Are particularly effective for women men with
  negative self-images as learners, mainly as a
  consequence of negative prior learning, life
  and/or work experiences.

20
Common principles

• Non-hierarchical
• Community ownership empowerment
• Access equity
• Lifelong learning
• Inclusion
• Networking
• Advocacy
• Self help
• Social action.

21
Questions?

• Discussion