[quote]Gael wrote:
Upenn’s gym’s swimming pool does this, and there are no lawsuits to my knowledge. What’s the difference?[/quote]
Muslims are involved. We don’t want to miss a chance to demonize the religion, now do we?
[quote]lixy wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Borrowing some legal analysis here:
lixy wrote:
Do you think anyone would want to go down that road against Harvard?
Yeah. Any annoyed student. Particularly a rich one with an ax to grind.
Seriously? You don’t even know what type of documents they give their students to sign during enrollment.
Don’t confuse your wishes with reality.[/quote]
What are you talking about? He’s right. I’m taking a Law of Higher Education class. Univerisites get sued and embroiled in legal battles ALL the time. A lot of the suits and threats are frivolous so you don’t hear about them. They get dismissed or settled in the early stages.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
lixy wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Borrowing some legal analysis here:
lixy wrote:
Do you think anyone would want to go down that road against Harvard?
Yeah. Any annoyed student. Particularly a rich one with an ax to grind.
Seriously? You don’t even know what type of documents they give their students to sign during enrollment.
Don’t confuse your wishes with reality.
You are an idiot. Schools, including Harvard face regular legal action from students and others.
Hear, hear, If such a case goes to court, I’ll stop posting on this board for a month.[/quote]
Oh, really? I’m almost positive I could find such a case. Without much difficulty. I’ll check if I have time this weekend. Discrimination is taken quite seriously as a principle in this country even if that facts seem ridiculous. Seemingly ludicrous cases DO make their way to court.
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
What are you talking about? He’s right. I’m taking a Law of Higher Education class. Univerisites get sued and embroiled in legal battles ALL the time. A lot of the suits and threats are frivolous so you don’t hear about them. They get dismissed or settled in the early stages. [/quote]
We’re talking about Harvard here. I doubt anyone in their student body is crazy enough to take this to court.
But I’ll be happy to be proven wrong.
[quote]Gael wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Gael wrote:
…this being reported? Who cares?
If the gym had set aside male only hours as well as female only hours, no one would have cared. …
Are you joking? That would be lawsuit city.
Upenn’s gym’s swimming pool does this, and there are no lawsuits to my knowledge. What’s the difference?[/quote]
No difference. I personally don’t care. The times they chose aren’t even offensive. The only people who usually train at those times are the people I try to avoid in the gym anyway.
I really don’t see the problem if a private school decides to give some Muslim women their own time to train. I have more of a problem with entire gym franchises that cater to women. If you can have Curves and no one blinks an eye, why the hell is anyone upset about Harvard?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Gael wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Gael wrote:
…this being reported? Who cares?
If the gym had set aside male only hours as well as female only hours, no one would have cared. …
Are you joking? That would be lawsuit city.
Upenn’s gym’s swimming pool does this, and there are no lawsuits to my knowledge. What’s the difference?
No difference. I personally don’t care. The times they chose aren’t even offensive. The only people who usually train at those times are the people I try to avoid in the gym anyway.
I really don’t see the problem if a private school decides to give some Muslim women their own time to train. I have more of a problem with entire gym franchises that cater to women. If you can have Curves and no one blinks an eye, why the hell is anyone upset about Harvard?[/quote]
First, Harvard receives public funding. Curves will allow men to join, they just won’t really be accepted by the other members.
The problem isn’t the fact that they are giving Muslim women special treatment, the problem is in the double standard. If they made special hours for WASP’s, it would be lawsuit city.
I don’t have a problem with any gym giving special treatment to anybody they choose, so long as gyms are allowed to freely choose who they give the special treatment to. This is how a free market should work.
[quote]orion wrote:
So they are the most uncompromising people on earth and yet you want them to compromise first?
Their level of stubbornness helps you in no way justifying your own?
If those were nice Viennese ladies that wanted some private time I´d give it to them, were I the owner and had I several gyms, and so I´d give it to nice veiled creatures of unidentifiable sex too.
Plus, give Muslim women a legitimate place to meet and talk to each other and watch how them compromise pretty soon.
A little bit of , how shall I put it, common sense and good manners work wonders in such situations.
But nay, let us stir up shit whenever Muslim women want a little more room for themselves and get rid of their veils for a time and then expect them to lose them sooner than later.
Yeah, cause that will work.
Poopyheads.
[/quote]
I actually don’t give a shit if they are accommodating or compromising as long as they don’t expect anybody else to accommodate and compromise for them. That is not how it is, where ever they go they expect people to bow to their needs and accommodate their retarded “laws” but they in turn will accommodate or compromise with no one.
Fuck them. Buy your own gym if you don’t like the rules of the available ones.
[quote]tedro wrote:
I don’t have a problem with any gym giving special treatment to anybody they choose, so long as gyms are allowed to freely choose who they give the special treatment to. This is how a free market should work.[/quote]
Aren’t gyms like Planet Fitness and the “Q” gym that was bought out by 24 hour fitness already doing this? If they can discriminate against larger lifters by campaigning against all activity that got them that way, is that much different?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
tedro wrote:
I don’t have a problem with any gym giving special treatment to anybody they choose, so long as gyms are allowed to freely choose who they give the special treatment to. This is how a free market should work.
Aren’t gyms like Planet Fitness and the “Q” gym that was bought out by 24 hour fitness already doing this? If they can discriminate against larger lifters by campaigning against all activity that got them that way, is that much different?[/quote]
I’m not completely sure what you are asking, but I will address what I think you meant.
Planet Fitness and 24 hour fitness are different because they aren’t outright banning anybody, whereas Harvard has completely banned anybody but Muslim women during specific hours. Planet fitness and 24 would be better compared to curves, they are banning certain activities and discouraging certain members to attract a certain clientelle. Again, I don’t have a problem with this, as long as the tables can be turned without any of the yuppies getting their panties all ruffled up. These are also private businesses, compared to a university that accepts public funds.
When we are talking about a publically funded organization, nobody should be getting preferential treatment.
[quote]tedro wrote:
Planet fitness and 24 would be better compared to curves, they are banning certain activities and discouraging certain members to attract a certain clientelle. Again, I don’t have a problem with this, as long as the tables can be turned without any of the yuppies getting their panties all ruffled up. [/quote]
But the tables can’t be turned. Sure, they aren’t out-right telling big bodybuilders to stop training there, but the huge sign with a picture of a bodybuilder with a slash going through it tend to be huge indicators that we are not welcome. The extreme attention to anyone who grunts or lets out any noise if they try to go heavy gets the same job done as simply not allowng them to work out there to begin with. They may not specifically stop you at the door, but it would be all of one week before we got banned or simply felt so unwelcome that we are compelled to leave. It seems you are ok with discrimination as long as they don’t specifically call it discrimination.
Wait a second. Many colleges ban other students for certain hours due to the football team needing to workout. You simply can not use the gym during those periods. Why none of the same outrage?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Wait a second. Many colleges ban other students for certain hours due to the football team needing to workout. You simply can not use the gym during those periods. Why none of the same outrage? [/quote]
That is a different situation. You are talking about a school sponsored team that is an interstate representative of the school. School business gets the biggest piece of pie.
We are talking about muslim women who want preferential treatment based soley on religious reasons.
More closely related to the subject at hand would be: A bible study group wanting exclusive use of the SUB for religious reasons during open hours would never be allowed. The ACLU would be on them like stink on shit, and rightly so.
[quote]tedro wrote:
Planet Fitness and 24 hour fitness are different because they aren’t outright banning anybody, whereas Harvard has completely banned anybody but Muslim women during specific hours. [/quote]
No. They ban anybody but women. It’s awfully different from "Muslim women.
Errr…it is the government that funds the university. Let’s not twist things, shall we?
Harvard is a private institution.
If I know people in prominent positions who hand out state money to my business, doesn’t mean I forfeit my right to run it as I please.
If you don’t like Harvard discriminating against males (for 2 hours three times a week in the campus’ least frequented gym), take it up with the authorities who are giving them public money. You might learn something about Harvard’s affluence in the process…
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Wait a second. Many colleges ban other students for certain hours due to the football team needing to workout. You simply can not use the gym during those periods. Why none of the same outrage?
That is a different situation. You are talking about a school sponsored team that is an interstate representative of the school. School business gets the biggest piece of pie.
We are talking about muslim women who want preferential treatment based soley on religious reasons.
More closely related to the subject at hand would be: A bible study group wanting exclusive use of the SUB for religious reasons during open hours would never be allowed. The ACLU would be on them like stink on shit, and rightly so.
[/quote]
Tedro wrote:
If no body should be getting preferential treatment, then NO BODY should be getting preferential treatment. If you can pick and choose who gets preferential treatment based on how popular they are, then obviously no one really cares that much about preferential treatment. They just care WHO gets it.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Tedro wrote:
When we are talking about a publically funded organization, nobody should be getting preferential treatment.
If no body should be getting preferential treatment, then NO BODY should be getting preferential treatment. If you can pick and choose who gets preferential treatment based on how popular they are, then obviously no one really cares that much about preferential treatment. They just care WHO gets it.[/quote]
I think Tedro made too broad of a generalization. However, popularity is not the issue either. The university has a vested interest in their marketing, and the football team’s preparedness is part of their marketing.
Is it fair? Probably not to some idiot like me forking over 40K+ a year to go to some over-rated college. But I don’t think it is illegal.
If you want to take your example out to the absurd limits - football teams have their own dining facilities in most D-1 schools. Is it a matter of popularity? I doubt it.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Tedro wrote:
When we are talking about a publically funded organization, nobody should be getting preferential treatment.
If no body should be getting preferential treatment, then NO BODY should be getting preferential treatment. If you can pick and choose who gets preferential treatment based on how popular they are, then obviously no one really cares that much about preferential treatment. They just care WHO gets it.
I think Tedro made too broad of a generalization. However, popularity is not the issue either. The university has a vested interest in their marketing, and the football team’s preparedness is part of their marketing.
Is it fair? Probably not to some idiot like me forking over 40K+ a year to go to some over-rated college. But I don’t think it is illegal.
If you want to take your example out to the absurd limits - football teams have their own dining facilities in most D-1 schools. Is it a matter of popularity? I doubt it.
[/quote]
I used to play ball. I don’t disagree with you overall. But I think some of you are simply guilty of bias and take it out an entire religion filled with people. I see no problem with some Muslim women getting some time to train considering their religion is unlike most here in this country. We don’t agree (as christians, atheists or whatever) that women should be in a situation to begin with that causes them to cover themselves from head to toe all day long. Fine. That doesn’t change the fact that there are people who have been raised with those beliefs and feel it is necessary.
Considering we have nothing already esteblished in this country for an ever growing population of Muslims, I don’t get how someone can just blow their needs or desires off like they don’t matter.
If you are going to hold that position, then we should also make English a required language in this country. Instead, I spend half of my day everyday at work speaking in Spanish.
I don’t even know Spanish that well.
Do you get what I’m saying?
Either you are for making certain aspects of our society (like language and even religion) conform to the majority, or you are accepting of different cultures.
Which is it?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I used to play ball. I don’t disagree with you overall. But I think some of you are simply guilty of bias and take it out an entire religion filled with people. I see no problem with some Muslim women getting some time to train considering their religion is unlike most here in this country. We don’t agree (as christians, atheists or whatever) that women should be in a situation to begin with that causes them to cover themselves from head to toe all day long. Fine. That doesn’t change the fact that there are people who have been raised with those beliefs and feel it is necessary. [/quote]
Then let them do it - just not at an institution taking public money. If other religions are not allowed the exact same preferential treatment - then neither should one specific religion. Let them go talk to the Curves gym up the street.
I admit my bias against their religion, but no one is blowing off desires - or perceived needs.
[quote]If you are going to hold that position, then we should also make English a required language in this country. Instead, I spend half of my day everyday at work speaking in Spanish.
I don’t even know Spanish that well.[/quote]
I agree, and join the club.
[quote]Do you get what I’m saying?
Either you are for making certain aspects of our society (like language and even religion) conform to the majority, or you are accepting of different cultures.
Which is it?[/quote]
Seeing as I had no say in making every fucking thing we buy come with bi-lingual labels, I can’t comment on that aspect except to say that I want my shit printed in English. When I buy a new cell phone - I don’t want the entirety of the UN’s languages included in the damned instructions.
This is just another round of PC bullshit gone too far. Committing 2 wrongs does not make a right.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
But the tables can’t be turned.
[/quote]
By that I mean somebody should be able to hypothetically open a hard core gym that banned people under 150 lbs.
I AM ok with discrimination in this case. If that is how a gym chooses to run their business, that is their choice. My problem is when some gyms are allowed to operate this way, but when the tables are turned and said hardcore gym wants to discrimate against your average gym goer there is public outcry.
[quote]
Wait a second. Many colleges ban other students for certain hours due to the football team needing to workout. You simply can not use the gym during those periods. Why none of the same outrage? [/quote]
In this case they are not catering to a specific demographic. Actually, if you ask the college, they will likely say the gym was created for the athletic teams, and they are giving the other students the priviledge of using it during the other hours. The difference is in one case they are taking hours away, the other they are being given hours. This case is no more of an issue than having a separate facility altogether that only the athletes can train in.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
This is just another round of PC bullshit gone too far. Committing 2 wrongs does not make a right.
[/quote]
If this were done at the largest and most used gym on campus, I might just agree with you. But that isn’t what happened. They chose off the wall times to train that most people don’t even use (especially those who are serious) and they did this at apparently one of the least used gyms on campus. I just don’t see the problem here.
This is Harvard. Most of those people are over-privileged in the first place. They don’t need anyone to fight for their “freedom”. They never lost it.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
This is Harvard. Most of those people are over-privileged in the first place. They don’t need anyone to fight for their “freedom”. They never lost it. [/quote]
No argument on that at all.
If this goes to court, I think the precedent will be more of an issue than 15 towel-headed chicks looking to do Swiss ball crunches.
But honestly, you have to ask yourself why women sworn to a religion that castigates their gender to rank just above a dog, and below a good camel would even want to lift - unless their husbands lost their camels in the war.
[quote]lixy wrote:
No. They ban anybody but women. It’s awfully different from "Muslim women.
[/quote]
Doesn’t change the premise of my argument.
And who funds the government?
[quote]
Harvard is a private institution.
If I know people in prominent positions who hand out state money to my business, doesn’t mean I forfeit my right to run it as I please.
If you don’t like Harvard discriminating against males (for 2 hours three times a week in the campus’ least frequented gym), take it up with the authorities who are giving them public money. You might learn something about Harvard’s affluence in the process…[/quote]
There are two problems with them discriminating against males in this case. First, if it was women being barred from the gym, there would undoubtedly be a lawsuit following, not to mention the ACLU all over the media. Second, why do we need to cater to anybody for religiuos reasons? If they want their own place to work out, go find one, but nobody else deserves to be punished so that these women can have there way, not when public funds are involved anyways.