Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Peter Lloyd: 'Why I'm suing my gym over their sexist women-only hours' Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji3cx...C4352EC2565987
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by edithwashere)
    Surely if it's a private establishment it can refuse entry to people on whatever grounds they wish? I'm completely against discrimination, but is it not similar to the way that some pubs only let in over 21s? Surely that's age discrimination since anybody over 18 can legally go into a pub?

    I dunno, I think he's got a point but he is making rather a large fuss over something that doesn't really affect his life that much. Are there no male-only gyms he could join?
    Similarly that same argument can be applied to employing women.

    "Surely if it's a private establishment it can refuse employment to people on whatever grounds they wish?"

    This is no different.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Danehill897)
    I agree your second paragraph in that if I was the gym's manager that's what I would have done. However I don't think the law should require them to do that: if the manager wants to risk a mass exodus of their male customers and bad publicity - all to stop some female members from feeling self consious - then that's their decision, just as it's their responsibility if it results in the gym going bankrupt and to their credit if it (somehow) proves to be a comercial success.
    No, it's not their decision. You can not actively discriminate based on gender. Thankfully this country does have principles.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
    No one is forcing him to pay this gym anything. It's not a public service, his sense of entitlement is of his own making.
    He thinks he's entitled to fair treatment? Oh how dare he!
    Being a 'private' service has diddly squat to do with anything, this isn't an uber-capitalist society where big business rules all. All business, private or otherwise has to abide by the principles of our laws.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    He thinks he's entitled to fair treatment? Oh how dare he!
    Being a 'private' service has diddly squat to do with anything, this isn't an uber-capitalist society where big business rules all. All business, private or otherwise has to abide by the principles of our laws.
    Well there are two separate issues: 1) whether he is abiding by the law 2) whether the law is correct.

    I don't think he is going to successfully sue. Just google ladies only gym and swimming and you will see how common this is.

    As for 2), I don't see it as being much different to you having the choice as to who you allow into your home.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
    As for 2), I don't see it as being much different to you having the choice as to who you allow into your home.
    Do you think employers should be allowed to discriminate against women when it comes down to employment?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    No, it's not their decision. You can not actively discriminate based on gender. Thankfully this country does have principles.
    I'm not a law student - so I'm not talking about whether it is illegal or not; I'm just arguing that companies should be able to offer whatever specialist services their paying customers want, even if the service is by its nature unavailable for one gender. This doesn't mean I have no principles, it just means I have different principles to you.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bipolarb3ar)
    A lot of people saying that equality means Men should have men only hours at gyms? I thought equality means that there is no devide between us in the first place..
    the divide is not the point...fact is we are different, the divide will not disappear completely... penis/vagina/etc
    its making sure everyone has equal footing.

    either having no gender specific hours or have gender specific hours for both genders, not one, fulfills this
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
    Well there are two separate issues: 1) whether he is abiding by the law 2) whether the law is correct.

    I don't think he is going to successfully sue. Just google ladies only gym and swimming and you will see how common this is.
    Except this isn't a ladies only gym, which is why there's a problem when they're discriminating against men.

    (Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
    As for 2), I don't see it as being much different to you having the choice as to who you allow into your home.
    How you've come to that conclusion says more about yourself than anything else. Again, completely differenct concepts.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Danehill897)
    I'm not a law student - so I'm not talking about whether it is illegal or not; I'm just arguing that companies should be able to offer whatever specialist services their paying customers want, even if the service is by its nature unavailable for one gender. This doesn't mean I have no principles, it just means I have different principles to you.
    if this doesnt work for both genders then this is discrimination! why should a person pay to be disadvantaged because of another paying member?

    gender only times is not necessarily discrimination... only offering it to one gender is...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Danehill897)
    I'm just arguing that companies should be able to offer whatever specialist services their paying customers want, even if the service is by its nature unavailable for one gender.
    That's not even what's going on here. It's the fact that men have to pay the same rate as women when they don't even get the same service.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Except this isn't a ladies only gym, which is why there's a problem when they're discriminating against men.
    Isn't a ladies' only gym discriminating against men by definition?


    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    How you've come to that conclusion says more about yourself than anything else. Again, completely differenct concepts.
    Yes, it's a personal opinion, no objective reason it should be right.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
    He's being a right little princess.

    So they have female-only hours, big deal, go some other time, or go to some other gym.
    They're not willing to refund him the hours that he can't use it.

    He would've been happy had they done that, but they did not.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I like the women's only hours at the gym. It means I can actually get a chance to use the weights as opposed to not even being able to get a look in because they're all taken up by uni gimps who lift a weight, strut around with a protein shake for a bit, lift another weight, etc.

    Although I do agree that there should also be men's only hours. At my gyms it's always just women on the treadmills so I bet some men wouldn't really want to be the only man on the treadmill, especially if you were a bit self conscious anyway. I think it's a great idea and would encourage newbies/the self conscious. When I first joined a gym 4 years ago I used to only go when I knew it'd be empty anyway because I didn't like the idea of exercising in front of big beefy men!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    They're not willing to refund him the hours that he can't use it.

    He would've been happy had they done that, but they did not.
    Then the pertinent question is whether he was given the facts before hand or they introduced this after he had already signed up. If it's the latter, he has a fair case.

    FWIW, I completely agree on the problem of misandry and hypocrisy when it comes to male rights. But freedoms of private enterprise are more important than equality.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jelkin)
    I agree with you and with him. If the problem is women's insecurity, then we should be dealing with that rather than pandering to it. I'm surprised anyone has the energy to take legal action over such a thing, but I can't fault him for the principle.

    ALTHOUGH, this annoys me: "a group of agenda-driven feminists say a minority of women 'feel' bad about their bodies." Does he know what a feminist is? I am feminist and I am a great believer in not segregating men and women, as are many who would identify as feminists. I don't think he had any reason to link the situation with that term. If anything I'd say it's belittling and anti-feminist to have women-only hours, not to mention that I see feminism as a belief in two-way equality between the sexes.

    The only other argument the gym could apply (and I'm surprised they didn't) is that some religions wouldn't allow women to work out in a gym with men present. Not that I think that's a good reason, but it's a fairly typical line for this sort of scenario.
    just want to ask - since you are a real feminist what is your view of women in front line combat ?

    Do you think that is may be a bad thing if for instance they were captured in combat and then raped and tortured in that this may have a devastating effect on the rest of the troops ?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I agree with other's views that the gym should be prepared to offer men's only opening hours if they are wanted, they should not limit the privilege to only one sex.

    Assuming what he says about not being interested in money is true, then I think it's fair enough... he's obviously trying to bring the issue to more people's attention to try and get it put right.

    xxx
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think the real issue that he is pointing out in the article is that men are still being charged the same price as women, despite having a more limited access to the facilities. I don't have any major issue with gyms having the odd women-only session every now and then, but the fees for memberships should reflect this. I also think it is a bit ridiculous that male staff can't even work during these sessions, although I can see that there are also religious reasons behind this. Political correctness gone mad imo.

    Having said all that though, if you don't like the gym you are going to then why not just change to a different one that better suits your needs?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    He's absolutely right. What are we supposed to look at when we're bored on the treadmill if not women? :rolleyes:
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dirac Delta Function)
    Isn't a ladies' only gym discriminating against men by definition?
    No, because it's not prejudicial or unjust to men. A unisex gym arbritarily banning men for a couple of hours a day despite them paying a full contract however is.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 27, 2013
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.