Society & Politics

Women's-Only Hours at Gyms and Pools - A Load of Bulls***

I was reading an article about this university gym having "women's-only" hours, and I read one of the stupidest articles I've ever had the chance to lay eyes on. I'd like to lay the article out for you, and then show you the level of bullshit present in said article.

Original Article:

"Imagine you’re going to the university gym for the first time, perhaps after making a New Year’s resolution to get yourself in shape. You don’t know much about how to use the equipment, and when you walk in, the entire football team is there lifting weights. It’s probably intimidating.

Now, consider what this might feel like for a young woman. Or how it would feel for a young woman who’s also religiously observant, and wearing conspicuously modest clothing. If you can put yourself in this person’s runners, you’ll have a sense of why the Carleton University Students’ Association, the Muslim Students’ Association, the Graduate Students’ Association and a residence association are asking that the gym at Carleton University reserve one hour per day for women only.

There has been backlash to this suggestion, with some opponents claiming the initiative is sexist. Yet it’s a bit odd that the grievance is being raised; after all, the school’s pool already has women-only swim times. It’s the same principle.

There is an inherent value in encouraging more people to get interested in fitness. While body image isn’t just a women’s issue, it does affect more women than men: according to a 2014 parliamentary committee report, for instance, roughly 80 per cent of all eating disorders are found in girls or women.

Contrary to what opponents argue, this gym proposal is not sexism or segregation. It’s a perfectly reasonable accommodation, a minimal imposition in order to make a diverse community comfortable. True, it isn’t the role of a university fitness facility to insert itself into societal debates about religion and gender roles. But it is its role to encourage fitness and ensure that as many people as possible are participating. This measure would help. We should be leery of enforced religious modesty, but also recognize that religious modesty isn’t necessarily coerced. Young university-educated women are likely to be making their own choices on such matters. And other young women may simply prefer not to be working out with the entire men’s basketball team hefting weights around them. (There’s a reason private women-only fitness facilities, such as Curves, exist.)

Opponents of this proposal should be asking what they’re doing that is making their fellow classmates uncomfortable at the gym. Other universities, with more than one gym, have resolved the issue fairly easily. At Carleton, there’s only one, however. But reserved times work for the pool, so they can work here as well. And if this proposal gets more young women – of any faith or culture – to spend time on fitness, it’s worth the small compromise involved."

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. "Imagine you’re going to the university gym for the first time, perhaps after making a New Year’s resolution to get yourself in shape.You don’t know much about how to use the equipment, and when you walk in, the entire football team is there lifting weights. It’s probably intimidating. Now, consider what this might feel like for a young woman. Or how it would feel for a young woman who’s also religiously observant, and wearing conspicuously modest clothing."

As a young women, and one who tends to wear a baggy band t-shirt and longer shorts, an outfit I'm sure almost everyone would consider "conspicuously modest" (thank you, body insecurity), I would be absolutely fine with being surrounded by guys, even if they know how to use the equipment and I don't. If you aren't, you are the problem and you don't need a special "women's-only" hour, you need to learn how to deal with the problem, whether that means coming back at a different time, or finding the root cause of the problem and taking steps to eliminate it.

2. "Contrary to what opponents argue, this gym proposal is not sexism or segregation. It’s a perfectly reasonable accommodation, a minimal imposition in order to make a diverse community comfortable. True, it isn’t the role of a university fitness facility to insert itself into societal debates about religion and gender roles. But it is its role to encourage fitness and ensure that as many people as possible are participating. This measure would help."

No, it isn’t the role of a university fitness facility to insert itself into societal debates about religion and gender roles, and it shouldn't insert itself by putting this new policy into expect. Diversity is fine and all, but in order to make a diverse community comfortable, you need to tear down walls between different people, not build them up and reinforce them with sexist or segregationist policies. Besides, what if "women's-only" hour falls at the only time when certain male students go to the gym? Then you're excluding people even more.

3. "We should be leery of enforced religious modesty, but also recognize that religious modesty isn’t necessarily coerced. Young university-educated women are likely to be making their own choices on such matters. And other young women may simply prefer not to be working out with the entire men’s basketball team hefting weights around them. (There’s a reason private women-only fitness facilities, such as Curves, exist.)"

It's ok to dress modestly, whether it be for religious or personal reasons. However, if you try to make everyone around you adapt to your needs, by forcing policies that exclude people simply because of race or gender. Furthermore, it's a public place, that everyone pays dues to use, and you want to block certain people off at certain times, which is incredibly unfair.

4. "Opponents of this proposal should be asking what they’re doing that is making their fellow classmates uncomfortable at the gym. Other universities, with more than one gym, have resolved the issue fairly easily. At Carleton, there’s only one, however. But reserved times work for the pool, so they can work here as well. And if this proposal gets more young women – of any faith or culture – to spend time on fitness, it’s worth the small compromise involved."

These "opponents" are making their fellow classmates uncomfortable simply by existing, and they should not need to bow to the whims of those that are paranoid of everyone who is unlike them. Gender-specific pool time is a load of rubbish, and if it were the opposite (male-only pool time) everyone would go completely apeshit. This proposal will get less and less people to go to the gym, either as they boycott the establishment or get their normal gym routine disrupted by the time time change.

______________________________________________________________________________________

While this change may masquerade as "good for everyone" or "non-discriminatory" it's an absolutely terrible policy. Don't get me wrong, I support Affirmative Action, when done right, but barring people from working out because people might feel "uncomfortable" is blatant discrimination.

Women's-Only Hours at Gyms and Pools - A Load of Bulls***

Women's-Only Hours at Gyms and Pools - A Load of Bulls***
Post Opinion