Ladies only or co-ed

[stdave1]

Just want you people's opinion on this. There is a guy in my city who is taking a ladies-only gym to court because he thinks its discrimination to ban him from the gym. My thoughts are that ladies have fought to get men only clubs etc. to let women in it seems to me that they want their cake and eat it too. Now don't get me wrong ladies, I have always been for womens rights in all things but is'nt this reverse discrimination?

 

[nessonite1]

I think it's rediculous, personally. If women want a woman-only club then they should have it. Likewise if men want a man-only club then they should have it too. I don't feel a need to have female boyscouts or male girlscouts.

 

[eener]

I think it has to depend on the situation in this instance it is more a social club ( much like the Boy Scouts of which I was a member and the Girl Scouts) than a neccessary service privately owned therefore women should be able to have thier own club . Were it for instance a college then I would say "Foul" as it seems there are no more Men only schools (though I doubt the guys are too upset) but Women only still exist in this instance I do see hipocracy and the institutions should become coed.

Of course if Im wrong and men only schools are still around then I would reverse my thinking.

 

[Duke Diablo]

Well... there are for priests. Males only.

 

[nessonite1]

I dont know if there are any men's only universities out there but I'm sure there must be. Schools like that though are completely different and, aside from being certified to hand out degrees, are really no different from a private club (like the Freemasons). Personally I have no trouble with the idea of a men-only or woman-only school.

 

[Yet_One_More_Idiot]

On the mention of Boy Scouts; over here, we have the Scouts (which was always for boys only) and the Girl Guides (which shouldn't need explaining. 😛).

Now, somebody decided that it was discriminatory for Scouts to bar girls from joining, so the Scouts became mixed (sorry, co-ed is the correct term, isn't it).
Then a boy tried to join the Guides. Needless to say, they refused on the grounds that they're a girls-only organisation.

My personal reaction is "wtf?". Now, I know most boys wouldn't WANT to join the Girl Guides, but since girls have the choice of which they want to join (one girl I know was a Guide and a Scout at the same time, even), the exact same level of choice should be given to the boys. One thing, or the other. If you're gonna take with the left hand, you have to give back with the right hand...is that paraphrased from some proverb...? :wooha: Sorry, went off-topic there at the end. 🙂

 

[nessonite1]

That's exactly the sort of ludicrous situation I'm talking about. Gender equallity has been bastardized to mean gender "identicalness" (not a word is it...).

 

[Goodieluver]

I dislike the whole "oh i wanna be noble and fight" issue

Why does this guy want to join a womens only gym? Cuz he thinks the girls will see him as macho and cool? I dont wanna join womens rugby....because i have no desire...and id get my ass kicked.

A private institution should have the right to conduct business how they want. To put into perspective, whats next, is someone gonna come out and sue the tickle industry because there a monopoly over M\F and F\F tickling but no F\M or M\M tickling.

 

[nessonite1]

A private institution should have the right to conduct business how they want.

They DO have that right. This is why the boyschouts were able to ban gay scout leaders. I'm not saying I agree with their view (it doesnt matter whether I agree or not) but I fully agree that it's their right as a private group to choose who is allowed to join and who isn't and I am satisfied that they were allowed to retain control over their own membership.

 

[Janus4385]

Why does this guy want to join a womens only gym?

Personally, I just think his out off his goddamn mind... :weird:

Now about the whole co-ed thing, I don't see why there can't be female only or male only clubs, if you don't like it then go somewhere else or start your own club...

I wonder what the members of this ladies-only gym think about this guy... and would they do if the gym is forced to let him in... :question:

 

[Goodieluver]

IM gonna start a crusade to make all bathrooms co-ed

Its just urine

 

[nessonite1]

I wonder what the members of this ladies-only gym think about this guy... and would they do if the gym is forced to let him in...

If it were me I'd quit and find a new gym.
Partly on principle as them backing down and allowing him in goes against what I think is right. And partly because the whole point of a female-only gym is to provide a place where you can get sweaty in tight clothing without men sitting there looking at you.

 

[Yet_One_More_Idiot]

True. No-one ever complains about single-sex schools, and there's LOADS of them.

On the other hand, the mens-only club that met at Lords Cricket Pavillion were taken to court by their wives, for refusing membership to women, even though they have always been a male-only organisation.
The court ruled in favour of the women. Why? 🙄

 

[MistressValerie1]

Personally, I am opposed to gender segregation except when necessary for privacy reasons (restrooms, locker rooms, etc.), but if people want to have single-sex private clubs, the same laws and rules should be applied equally to both men's and women's clubs.

 

[nessonite1]

The court ruled in favour of the women. Why?

Because that particular judge is an idiot. 😛

 

[Hungarian21]

Do you know if there are any other male-only or co-ed Gyms around the area where this guy lives? It might be possible that the only gym near him is this girls only one. Then I would understand his reasons. :happy:

BUT, if there are other gyms near by, then the court should not even take the case. 😎

BUT, again, BUT, what if the guy is gay? Don't gay guys like to hang around with women? (No offense, everyone) :happy:

 

[coloman]

If a gym or any other private concern is male only or female only then the opposite sex should respect that and stay out of those places no matter what they are. Don't we have anything better to occupy our time with than the topic of gender equality? I think all of this got started when they decided a child could sue his own parents and the lawyers have been making money hand over fist ever since. It's a sad fact of life that because of all the pressure we have to put up with in our everyday lives people are suing other people over anything and everything and no matter if they win or lose the lawyers from both sides take the money that they get in fees and laugh all the way to the bank.

 

[Yet_One_More_Idiot]

Yeah, the compensation culture is sadly well and truly here to stay. I think I even remember reading once about a guy in the States who sued himself (I can't remember what the outcome of the case was though... :weird: ).

 

[wendyandpeter]

On sex discrimination ...

OK, here's the thing. Your friend will never find a lawyer to bring his suit. Why? Because it's perfectly legal for that gym to discriminate against men. It's only illegal for the GOVERNMENT (i.e., public entities) to discriminate. PRIVATE entities (like a women-only gym) may discriminate against anyone. There are some exceptions, like in hiring. But in terms of private membership organizations, no harm, no foul.

BTW, doesn't your friend have some sort of a life to attend to?

 

[Goodieluver]

I dunno, private golf courses were not allowed to descriminate against african american's when they got challenged in court.

 

[nessonite1]

I dunno, private golf courses were not allowed to descriminate against african american's when they got challenged in court.

And yet the UNCF wouldn't consider me because I'm white. Reverse discrimination lol.
I dont want this thread to degrade into a debate over race cause that could get ugly fast...BUT...theoretically you should be able to have a whites-only group just the same as you have blacks-only groups. Though you'd never be able to start one without people going schitzo and calling you a racist.
And remember...just because a judge rules one way doesn't mean it's in accordance with any laws. Judges try to legislate from the bench.

 

[Goodieluver]

As ive noticed, black power\pride groups are seen as heroic\honorable while white pride\power is seen as racist and evil. Whatever, im proud to be white and will proudly proclaim white pride because i have pride in white people. Only reason i dont fly the stars and bars for heritage is because im localized in a state that would frown on it, although i am northern by birth but southern by the grace of god

A judge has extreme power because any judge makes a precedent which then all law must follow(unless challenged by the highest legal authority which is the supreme court)

 

[Yet_One_More_Idiot]

As ive noticed, black power\pride groups are seen as heroic\honorable while white pride\power is seen as racist and evil.

Some examples: KKK, British National Front. Both of these actively attack other ethnic groups though - white supremacy rather than just white pride. Are there any peaceful white pride groups out there?

A judge has extreme power because any judge makes a precedent which then all law must follow(unless challenged by the highest legal authority which is the supreme court)

Yeah, same thing over here - Judges can legislate by setting precedents, though they now have to be extra careful 'cos they have looking down on them the:
a)House of Lords, and
b)European Court.

 

[wendyandpeter]

I dunno, private golf courses were not allowed to descriminate against african american's when they got challenged in court.

I think you're mistaken about that. Can you cite an Opinion of the Court? And the Master's course club in Augusta still disallows women members.

 

[Goodieluver]

I was refering to black descrimination in golf\pga. It wasnt untill around 1976 that the PGA opened its doors to integrating.

And koopa, you have some groups such as the black panthers, uhuru movement, and new afrikans who get treated less severely than any white power group(hell, the kkk is considered a terrorist organization) A man who ran for chicago mayor was a former black panther member, he wasnt seen as a racist, he was seen as a "civil rights activist" and yet the media tried to run the daleys into the mud because the chicago riots happened under Daley and he somehow "deliberately allowed it cuz he was racist"