You see, what I'm trying to do is turn it the other way round. Instead of setting up criteria and then seing what fits them, I'm seeing what seems intuitively right to me, and then trying to work out what the criteria are from thta.

I think that's deductive logic rather than inductive logic. (I'm not too sure about that - but anyway, that's what a term like deductive logic ought to mean.)

So let's say I was playing in a band for a Morris side and they wouldn't allow a woman to play on that basis, I'd walk without hestitation. But if it was a women's Morris side collecting musicians, and they said no thanks - we just have women play for us, I wouldn't feel my nose had been put out of joint. (This is a thought experiment, because that's not the music I normally play anyway.)

Now tryingbto work out why I'd feel that way, it would probably be something along the lines - "There are reasons I can imagine why a group of women would want to have a piolicy like that which could be reasonable - they might be trying to get the message across that women can do this as well as any man, they might be wanting to include particular women who might have have had very bad experience with men, violence and so forth"

On the other hand with a Men Only band, those reasons wouldn't apply, or at any rate my assumption would be that they didn't. I'd see this policy as being directly discriminatory by people who wanted to stay in charge and enjoyed throwing their weight around.

Again, I could be wrong. I suppose it might be they had wives who had told them "I can just about put up with you going off cavorting with that bunch of yobs in funny costumes - but if I hear you've been having women playing tunes for you to jump around to, you'll regret it."

These thought experiments have a knack of turning into soap opera... I should quit horsing around like this.