Why The Society of Women Artists Still Matters

This essay was first published on my Substack in February 2026. As it continues to reflect conversations I am having with artists and visitors alike, I've reproduced it here on my website...

As Vice President of the Society of Women Artists, I have often reflected on a question that arises with increasing frequency.

Do we still need a women only art society?

Sometimes the question comes from outside the organisation. Often it comes from women themselves.

I have spoken with women artists who hesitate to join because they feel it is no longer necessary to exclude men. Some worry it feels like a sisterhood in an ideological sense. Others just say, “I am not really into feminist groups.” For many, there is a genuine belief that we have moved beyond the need for separate spaces.

These concerns deserve respect. Women today graduate from art schools in large numbers. Women exhibit widely. Women curate, teach, and lead institutions. On the surface, the doors appear open.
It can therefore feel counterintuitive to step into a women only organisation. For some, it feels like choosing separation over integration. For others, it carries assumptions about ideology that they do not necessarily identify with.

And yet, history matters.

The Society of Women Artists was founded in 1855, at a time when women were excluded from many formal art institutions. They were denied access to life drawing classes. They struggled for visibility. Their work was often marginalised or dismissed. The Society, originally called the Society of Female Artists, was not created as a gesture of defiance. It was created because women needed a platform that did not otherwise exist.

To dismiss that legacy too quickly risks forgetting how recent many freedoms are. The right for women to vote was secured through sustained effort within living memory. The idea of a glass ceiling emerged from lived professional experience. Progress has been real, but it has also been gradual and hard won.

Respecting a women only art society is, in part, about respecting that inheritance.Nearly one hundred and seventy years later, the context has changed. Women are no longer formally barred from entering the art world. But the existence of access does not automatically erase structures shaped over centuries.

The question, then, is not simply whether doors are open, but whether the wider cultural landscape has fully recalibrated in response to the long history that preceded this moment. When I use the word recalibration, I do not mean a dramatic correction or a rigid symmetry. The landscape has evolved significantly. Opportunities have expanded. Many women navigate the art world with confidence and agency. Recalibration, to me, is quieter than that.

Institutions built over long periods of time do not shed their histories overnight. Cultural patterns shift gradually. Systems of recognition and value evolve over generations rather than in a single decisive moment.

To honour a women only art society is to acknowledge that long arc. It is to recognise that the space created in 1855 was intentional, not incidental, and that intentionality still carries meaning.

The Society’s Annual Open Exhibition, as its name suggests, invites submissions from both members and non members. Openness in that context means precisely that. The distinction lies in membership. Membership of the Society of Women Artists is reserved for women. That limitation can raise thoughtful questions, and it is right that it does.

Membership and exhibition, however, are not the same. One speaks to the identity and governance of the organisation. The other speaks to the public platform it offers.

Perhaps the day will come when a women only art society feels entirely unnecessary. That would not diminish its legacy. It would signal that the conditions which gave rise to it have been fully absorbed into the broader fabric of the art world.

Until then, its existence is not about exclusion for its own sake. It is about stewardship, continuity, and respect for a history that shaped the opportunities many of us now benefit from.
​
As both a practising artist and an officer of the Society, I do not see our role as exclusionary. I see it as custodial. We are simply holding open a space that others worked very hard to create.

______
What do you think? I'd like to hear your thoughts. Do you think organisations like the Society of Women Artists still have an important role to play, or has their purpose changed? Or indeed do they no longer have a purpose? Do share your thoughts in the comments below.