Here’s an article about a guy who insists that he has the right to join a women-only fitness club. He says the gym is discriminating against him. Others say women should be allowed to work out in a place where they won’t be mentally undressed by men.
Any thoughts?
It’s from the Press Democrat newspaper in California…
http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060602/NEWS/606020319/1033/NEWS01
I think he’s making a valid point in addressing the blatant double-standard that’s developed in our society; men’s clubs are frowned upon as sexist, but women can segregate whenever the Hell they want. It’s bullshit.
That said; if it weren’t for that contrast, I’d say he’s a twit for intruding on such a place. Sometimes people just don’t want to frickin’ deal with the other gender, and that’s just fine.
I say good for him!
I fucking hate when women do that shit
(that chick who forced her way into the MENS golf tourny) comes to mind.
it’s about time a man did it back to them.
I have nothing against women, i love them… and i’m happily married…
but some shit is MEN ONLY and some shit is WOMEN ONLY… dont know why that’s so fucking hard for some people to understand.
[quote]blitzkrg wrote:
I say good for him!
I fucking hate when women do that shit
(that chick who forced her way into the MENS golf tourny) comes to mind.
it’s about time a man did it back to them.
I have nothing against women, i love them… and i’m happily married…
but some shit is MEN ONLY and some shit is WOMEN ONLY… dont know why that’s so fucking hard for some people to understand.
[/quote]
Maybe some of the men who aren?t quite cutting it in men?s golf should switch to the LPGA.
[quote]evilduc996 wrote:
blitzkrg wrote:
I say good for him!
I fucking hate when women do that shit
(that chick who forced her way into the MENS golf tourny) comes to mind.
it’s about time a man did it back to them.
I have nothing against women, i love them… and i’m happily married…
but some shit is MEN ONLY and some shit is WOMEN ONLY… dont know why that’s so fucking hard for some people to understand.
Maybe some of the men who aren?t quite cutting it in men?s golf should switch to the LPGA.[/quote]
If she hits from the men’s tees, who gives a fuck? Certain people were pissed when a young, black guy won the Master’s. Anyway, that’s besides the point of the original post.
[quote]evilduc996 wrote:
Maybe some of the men who aren?t quite cutting it in men?s golf should switch to the LPGA.[/quote]
Maybe they can just stop trying to compete as a pro when they can’t play in the pros. I like that idea better.
My theory on the Men-Only Clubs, I really don’t care if woman (and men) don’t like it. I go there to get away from woman and they have their own little club. So, feminist (that includes guys) shut up.
People are too PC today, they have “gay clubs” not like I’m complaining because I can’t join. Maybe I should make a straight club, oh yeah it’s the strip club.
[quote]evilduc996 wrote:
blitzkrg wrote:
I say good for him!
I fucking hate when women do that shit
(that chick who forced her way into the MENS golf tourny) comes to mind.
it’s about time a man did it back to them.
I have nothing against women, i love them… and i’m happily married…
but some shit is MEN ONLY and some shit is WOMEN ONLY… dont know why that’s so fucking hard for some people to understand.
Maybe some of the men who aren?t quite cutting it in men?s golf should switch to the LPGA.[/quote]
I agree with the whole reverse prejudice angle and all, however; it is called the “PGA” Professional Golf Association…not the “MPGA” Men’s Professional Golf Association.
The PGA should include both sexes…if you want a boys club…start one.
It is tiring to hear bitching from women about mens clubs though, because women have their fair share of them too.
my point wasnt really about golf.
that was just what came to mind.
I just think it’s bullshit, that men cant have a mens only “club”
because some bitch will sue to get in.
I feel the same about this situation, but i feel it’s like payback, so i’m supporting the man in this situation.
If no women did that shit, then this guy could go jump in the river…
and i dont know why someone tried to turn this into a race thing…
it’s not about excluding woman from the sport.
there is LPGA,WPGA,etc etc. it’s not about exclusion from said activity.
women can have a women’s gym… NO PROBLEM… just dont come bitching because you cant get into a guys gym,golf, whatever…
i cant stand listening to the radio and hearing the comercial for some random club and it say “ladies get in free before mid-night” why should they be in for free. that pisses me off although i dont go clubbing.
[quote]blitzkrg wrote:
my point wasnt really about golf.
that was just what came to mind.
I just think it’s bullshit, that men cant have a mens only “club”
because some bitch will sue to get in.
I feel the same about this situation, but i feel it’s like payback, so i’m supporting the man in this situation.
If no women did that shit, then this guy could go jump in the river…
and i dont know why someone tried to turn this into a race thing…
it’s not about excluding woman from the sport.
there is LPGA,WPGA,etc etc. it’s not about exclusion from said activity.
women can have a women’s gym… NO PROBLEM… just dont come bitching because you cant get into a guys gym,golf, whatever…
[/quote]
It’s a little different. Annika Sorenstam was leagues above the other women at least until Michele Wie came along. There was no competition for her if she was precluded from the supposedly ‘mens only’ PGA.
And I believe the prize money is higher on the mens as well. She deserves a right to compete. If a women ever exists that can hold her own at the professional level in football she should be able to play in the NFL too. But somehow I doubt that’s going to happen.
And there are plenty of mens only clubs that are not measured by ability to play a sport or perform and activity. And no one’s bitching that women can’t join. If they are, no one’s taking them seriously.
[quote]BrwnbellyYankee wrote:
i cant stand listening to the radio and hearing the comercial for some random club and it say “ladies get in free before mid-night” why should they be in for free. that pisses me off although i dont go clubbing.[/quote]
Seriously…
Women are the only people I know that can go out broke and come home drunk as fuck…
The fact that any group can exclude others but that it’s not cool for everyone to do is lame as hell.
That goes for anything, there can be all black organizations but it’s terribly racist if I decided I wanted to start an all white organization.
It’s okay for women to have women’s only gyms, but it’s sexist when I want a gym without women.
It’s wrong that men that have lots of sex get a pat on the back and women get labeled sluts.
Double standards just plain suck but that won’t stop them from existing, so deal with it.
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
It’s a little different. Annika Sorenstam was leagues above the other women at least until Michele Wie came along. There was no competition for her if she was precluded from the supposedly ‘mens only’ PGA.
And I believe the prize money is higher on the mens as well. She deserves a right to compete. If a women ever exists that can hold her own at the professional level in football she should be able to play in the NFL too. But somehow I doubt that’s going to happen.
And there are plenty of mens only clubs that are not measured by ability to play a sport or perform and activity. And no one’s bitching that women can’t join. If they are, no one’s taking them seriously.
[/quote]
I agree.
As for the NFL - Kicker possibly (debatable if that qualifies as a football player).
The NHL does allow women. A few years ago a female goalie played in a preseason game for the Tampa Bay Lightning. Then she posed in Playboy…she was hot!!!
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
It’s a little different. Annika Sorenstam was leagues above the other women at least until Michele Wie came along. There was no competition for her if she was precluded from the supposedly ‘mens only’ PGA.
And I believe the prize money is higher on the mens as well. She deserves a right to compete. If a women ever exists that can hold her own at the professional level in football she should be able to play in the NFL too. But somehow I doubt that’s going to happen.
And there are plenty of mens only clubs that are not measured by ability to play a sport or perform and activity. And no one’s bitching that women can’t join. If they are, no one’s taking them seriously.
[/quote]
so can a semi-skilled male golfer go play in the LPGA or 5 foot white guy go play in the WNBA?
probably not…
i call bullshit on the double standards.
[quote]Bittabit wrote:
The PGA should include both sexes…if you want a boys club…start one.
It is tiring to hear bitching from women about mens clubs though, because women have their fair share of them too.
[/quote]
Your arguing over semantics here. It was a boy’s club, just because it wasn’t in the name doesn’t mean it wasn’t one.
[quote]BrwnbellyYankee wrote:
i cant stand listening to the radio and hearing the comercial for some random club and it say “ladies get in free before mid-night” why should they be in for free. that pisses me off although i dont go clubbing.[/quote]
That’s a business decision, not sexism. Think about it for a second, the reason should come to you.
It is a little stupid. Where i live i have to drive for 35-40 mins before i can find a gym that allows males. Meanwhile there is 6 women only gyms. I dont wish to attend them, i would probably just be uncomfortable. But i need a gym.
Im all for a certain amount of sexual split in some areas and for inclusion in others such as sport (providing it doesnt change the game). But it is getting a stupid.
[quote]Ghost22 wrote:
That goes for anything, there can be all black organizations but it’s terribly racist if I decided I wanted to start an all white organization.
[/quote]
My gut feeling is that in most cases, a private club that allows only those with German ethnic ancestry or only those with Italian ethnic ancestry while excluding other whites as well as non-whites would be “ok”, while a private club that allows any whites while excluding non-whites would not be “ok” (in a region where neither Germans nor Italians are a majority, but whites overall are a large majority).
I think there is a difference between a club that allows 15% but excludes 85% of the population based on ancestry vs. a club that excludes 15% but allows 85% of the population based on ancestry. I think the latter is more harsh for those who are excluded.
A rough analogy using kids:
A) First-grade class with 20 pupils; 3 of them get together for a party that excludes the other 17.
B) First-grade class with 20 pupils; 17 of them get together for a party that excludes the other 3.
“A” seems like no big deal; “B” seems unreasonably unkind (barring exceptional circumstances).
I agree with your other examples; but I think the black club vs. white club thing is different, for the reason explained above.
Another reason the Black club vs. White club is different is that there aren’t a bunch of Black supremacist groups runing around promoting hatred, vandalizing White churches, or burning giant wooden afro picks in white people’s yards. Also, I don’t remember any masses of white folks getting blasted with firehoses, beaten, and lynched for no damn reason.
It’s going to take a long time for that connotation to fade. Hell, there was a lynching around this area as late as the goddamn 70’s, and let’s not forget that little incident in Jasper.
As long as the KKK is around, “White Power,” or “Whites Only” is always going to carry that stigma. If there was a Black equivalent to the KKK, things might be different. It’s not exactly right, but that’s kind of the price you pay for 100+ years of segregation and subjugation.
[quote]Kratos wrote:
Another reason the Black club vs. White club is different is that there aren’t a bunch of Black supremacist groups runing around promoting hatred, vandalizing White churches, or burning giant wooden afro picks in white people’s yards. Also, I don’t remember any masses of white folks getting blasted with firehoses, beaten, and lynched for no damn reason.
[quote]
I don’t know about you but I have been persecuted for being white, and I live in the capitol of the US. Don’t tell me there are not white people getting persecuted or being discriminated against for no reason in the US.
As far as the topic, I believe if we are all to be equal, there should be no segregation of ANY kind. We will never all be equal, and believe that we are equal, until there are no walls left. If womens only clubs are a wall preventing equality between men and women, then that wall should come down.
[quote]Kratos wrote:
As long as the KKK is around, “White Power,” or “Whites Only” is always going to carry that stigma. If there was a Black equivalent to the KKK, things might be different. It’s not exactly right, but that’s kind of the price you pay for 100+ years of segregation and subjugation.[/quote]
I don’t know much about the black panthers, so w/e, but apparently they showed up at duke after the “raping” of the black woman. I really don’t think the panthers had any buisness there.
I hate how the law favors women so much more, yet they always claim about how they’re “oppressed” and “pressured.” They can kiss my manly, muscular ass.
[quote]AgentOrange wrote:
Certain people were pissed when a young, black guy won the Master’s. Anyway, that’s besides the point of the original post.[/quote]
A young, black guy won the Master’s? When?
Ohhhhh…you mean Tiger? Tiger Woods?
The young, Asian man?
C’mon, we gotta give half credit where half credit is due.