To think this is unfair?

[Whenlifegivesyouoranges]

I joined a gym a few months ago and one of the main points for me was that it’s female only from 9-7 weekdays. I’ve just had this email from them and I’ll be cancelling as it no longer fits in with the times I can go, but this is ridiculous, right??

Also in the New York post (with 594 comments!)

Gym bans women over the age of 24 from working out during peak hours

So woman of predominantly child bearing age can only access the gym during times their children are likely to be going to or in bed.

The times you are preparing for the next day.

Seems extremely odd that the after school timeslot when you can use childcare or a partner can be home is the time they choose to limit access.

I love the idea of woman only - but the age thing makes no sense

Me too. I prefer to get my workout in in the morning, but I’m often only able to get there after 5pm because, you know, work!

Maybe this gym thinks that none of its women members over 24 works?

And I wish someone would name and shame this gym. On the face of it, it’s breaking Equality law on the grounds of age discrimination.

@Whenlifegivesyouoranges

Just a heads up OP, the Metro news site is claiming that it’s tracked down your gym.

https://metro.co.uk/2025/07/18/tracked-dreadful-uk-gym-banned-women-25

because that generation can’t handle anything outside their own bubble. My nieces are the same. I don’t know how they’ll survive

That article ! They say they couldn't get hold of management at the gym in Pendle, but that:

"One employee said the new policy is ‘only for really old women above 50’, but didn’t know the manager’s motives."

Well, this "really old women above 50" can outlift and outrun most 20 year olds. It's outrageous. Sad for anyone who thought they'd found a good gym in Pendle.

If it is the place mentioned in the Metro (the male female hours certainly fit) then it is a charity! Not sure how age discrimination fits into its charitable aims.

The metro article is good, they got an employee to say that they weren’t age checking but it was really to discourage people who were ‘really old’ over 50s.

Context is king, or queen!

The gym appears to be Bodies in Motion, which is a charity for young people. Their entire purpose is to support young people’s health.

They are also in financial difficulty, as so many small charities are right now. I should imagine they opened up gym membership to the public to try and bring in some revenue for their core activities of supporting young people. They likely didn’t realise that their cheap membership fees would bring a flood of new members which has meant the gym is now too busy for the young people they support. At worst, they’ve been a bit clumsy in how they managed it all but it’s a small charity so give them a break.

Membership fee is low at £12.99 a month. Go and join a commercial gym if you don’t like this one. Unfortunately this post has been jumped on by the clickbait media and is now causing problems for a small, local charity. Unscrupulous media are using it to get advertising revenue through faux outrage over the genuinely serious issue of discrimination against older women. This is not discrimination, it’s a charity trying to fulfill its mission. YTA.

It is discrimination. They would be better just to say it’s a gym for young people as part of a charity for people up to 25
you can’t charge someone the same price and tell them they can’t attend

We don’t know what they charge young people, they do have different prices for male and female members. We also don’t know what the OP was told or how they present the membership. Young people need spaces like youth hubs for very good reasons and I don’t believe this would be discrimination any more than having women or man only spaces, or spaces for specific faiths or cultures. Have a read of this: www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9vnenne9y0o.amp

Ridiculous

Then make it young people only, don’t tell older people they can’t come in after taking their money

How weird and decidedly ageist. Bizarre, I can't see this working out for them well at all.

The gym appears to be Bodies in Motion, which is a charity for young people. Their entire purpose is to support young people’s health.

Then why aren’t they putting similar age restrictions on the men’s sessions?

And why didn't they start exclusively for young people and then open up to old (over 50 🤣) people in less used sessions?
Not all charities are run well.

We also don’t know what the OP was told

But we do know what @Whenlifegivesyouoranges was told - she posted a screenshot of the message she was sent. If it's a charity-run gym for young people, why did they let the older and "really old" women in in the first place?

Stupidity & discrimination - happy to take "really old" women's money, but not happy to have them actually in the gym. They wanted the money but not the "really old" bodies.

Interesting to know if they're limiting old and "really old" men as well - men over 25 and those really old men over 50!

This.

Plus also, according to their charity’s Memorandum & Articles of Association as filed with Companies House and the Charity Commission, they are NOT just a charity for young people. There are two charitable objects listed - one is about the community in Pendle more generally (no age restriction mentioned) and only the second refers to young people. And their “who we help” entry on the charities commission states that “older people” are among those they help.

I would have thought a lot of women around 50 join gyms, we are often being told weights are the answer to menopausal symptoms or loss of core strength.
Way to lose money?

You might want to remove this. It tells me who shared it

I think you’ve taken this out of context , the business seems like it wants to dedicate 3 hours out of the 10 hours the female session has only because young women like too use the gym with their friends after school and want to use the equipment more, it has nothing to do with age discrimination or anything of that sort rather it’s motivating young girls and helping them in their fitness journey honestly for me this is a really good opportunity for young girls to explore with girls their own age and 3 hours in my eyes seems less I wish young girls had more time than that. It’s hard for young girls in this day and age to find a gym that accommodates for them and their safety and comfort. I think you have totally blown this out of proportion.

young women like too use the gym with their friends after school and want to use the equipment more

And "old" women would like to use the gym after work. Most women work and with standard working hours, would therefore not be able to use the gym between 9-4.

Safety and comfort? Women over 25 are not a danger to younger women. Or do you mean that a younger woman will be unfomfortable seeing a 'very old 50yo', as the gym put it, still exercising?

It looks like they’ve changed their minds about this now, on their Facebook it says that following «useful feedback » they are putting the hours back to how they were.