[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Lawsuit says gym's women-only policy illegally discriminates
posted by Matt on 06:33 PM December 30th, 2005
News Anonymous User writes "
Article published - Dec 29, 2005
BODY CENTRAL
State sues SR health club
Lawsuit says gym's women-only policy illegally discriminates against men
By STEVE HART
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
A state agency that enforces civil rights laws has filed a lawsuit against a Santa Rosa women's health club, charging its women-only policy unlawfully discriminates against men.

The state Department of Fair Employment and Housing is seeking a court injunction against Body Central, a fitness center on Ross Street in downtown Santa Rosa.

(snip)"

Woman Killed By Son During DV Was Justified | "HOSTEL" is hostile to men  >

  
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Hey, I Love it.... (Score:2)
by Tumescent on 03:53 PM December 31st, 2005 EST (#1)
A lot of times, these sorts of lawsuits are done to make a point, and a valid point in this case. I'm glad this guy has taken the trouble to pursue it. Where I live, I've often wondered how Bally's gets away with what they are doing. At Bally's, women have their own private area to exercise with all the machines and weights that the general area has. The women’s only area can only be entered through the women's locker room. Sure, they are able to come out into the general area and do their thing with everyone else, but if it’s crowded, they can go to their own private area. Of course women don't pay more than men for their own private area.

As for the article linked here, this is my favorite part...

"Supporters of women's health clubs say they're necessary because many women aren't comfortable exercising in front of men."

Oh boo-hoo, a lot of people are embarrassed about their bodies when they join a health club, not just women.


Golds Gym are bad... (Score:1)
by Jimbiz on 04:39 PM December 31st, 2005 EST (#2)
I went to join with my wife at my local Golds Gym and we got the full sales pitch of course. For $400 plus $39 a month for the first 2 years we could use both locations.

A slight catch for the men though. One of the two locations was classified as 'women preferred', so I couldnt use that one. Also, nearly half of the gym I could use was boarded off for women only. Also, whilst the women had private stalls, lockers and changing areas, the mens locker room was just all open, including the showers. The sales person told me it was because I didnt care about my privacy (thanks for the choice), but the women had to be catered for. To say nothing of the class schedule which again was 50% for women only.

My wife asked me in front of the sales person as to why I had to pay full membership for use of about 40% of the facilities at Golds Gym in our town. The sales person couldnt understand why my wife was upset (we wanted to work out together whenever we wanted). I told the person it was because my wife believes in equality.

Weve since joined another gym that doesnt discriminate me. Wonder how long the gym Im at will be based on equality.

Jim
Re:Golds Gym are bad... (Score:1)
by Davidadelong on 08:19 AM January 1st, 2006 EST (#3)
Yes, I once joined the Elks so that my ex-wife and I had something to do together. Women were an equal part of the lodge, and also had their own Womens division. Wouldn't you figure, the Women ran the lodge. No more fraternal organization, no more sanctuary. I guess Men aren't supposed to fraternize without Female supervision, even at the gym.
Re:Golds Gym are bad... (Score:1)
by Hunchback on 03:33 PM January 1st, 2006 EST (#5)
Also, whilst the women had private stalls, lockers and changing areas, the mens locker room was just all open, including the showers. The sales person told me it was because I didnt care about my privacy (thanks for the choice), but the women had to be catered for.

That's because...
...MEN DON'T COMPLAIN. And when they do, they don't complain in concert. I'll bet that every man that used that gym deeply resented those conditions, but only a handful ever (timidly) objected to them. Like the salesperson, I simply can't imagine women putting up with this even if feminism never existed.

'not sure what to think, on this one... (Score:1)
by Thundercloud on 01:21 PM January 1st, 2006 EST (#4)
I don't know.
I don't mind male or female exclusive gyms, clubs, etc. As long as both are allowed.

Men and women have to have SOMEWHERE to get away from each other, sometimes...

  Thundercloud.
  "Hoka hey!"
I've always wondered how Curves (Score:1)
by ASDJKL on 10:22 PM January 2nd, 2006 EST (#6)
Seems to outright flaunt their female exclusivity and nothing seems to happen.

However I als thought all those femocrats in congress had signed laws which all but made female exclusitivity legal at fitness clubs. But only for females.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]