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??

But then you wouldn’t want 24 year olds filming themselves with children as young as 12 in the background.

24 as a cut off is insane but also 12 as a starting point is odd- are the 12 year olds allowed on all the equipment? In my gym, children can go from 11 but only on the cardio machines, no weights till 16. If that’s the case in this gym then the 16-24 year olds are having 3 hours with hardly any people and loads of equipment freed up. Totally unfair that they then pay the same as the over 24s who don’t have as much time

Come on: all those examples would fall under the fair and proportionate guidelines: the Brownies could argue the importance of their limited age range on the grounds of child development/ age appropriate activities and safeguarding. Saga Holiday's USP is holidays for perks over 50 but younger family members or partners are allowed. The age at which you can take your pension is set by government/ law.

But none of those started offering access to all women between certain times and then changed the contract to make it impossibly for a woman over 25 to attend the gym if she works standard working hours and can't get there in her lunch hour. It's a denial of service on the grounds of ageism.

@SalfordQuays well they certainly cannot have their mum accompanying them because she is still at work!

How odd. Would be really weird to turn 25 and have to stop going. Most people I know want to go to the gym after work. I wouldn't bother if I couldn't get in until 7.

4-7 includes two of the peak hours from 5-8. How exactly is that entirely avoiding peak hours? 🤦🏼‍♀️
It is a terrible business decision as they are making the gym unaccessible to working women over the age of 24 during the week. I don't know the demographics of this particular gym but people aged 25-34 make up the largest percentage of gym goers nationally. So yeah, terrible business decision.

This.

OP, I would not be happy at all and I'm sure you won't be alone!

Overlapping 2hrs isn’t ’significantly’. It’s 3hrs of the very long gym day. Again, you have no idea of their demographic or business needs or programmes.

What is the issue currently do you think? People having to wait at peak hours (4-7pm)?

They are definitely U!

How utterly bizarre of a business to discriminate against the demographic with spending power, and the ones old enough to be mothering those 12+ year olds and paying for their memberships.

Have you called and asked @Whenlifegivesyouoranges ?

Maybe they’re tying themselves in knots bc they have some transwomen members aged 25+ and they’re trying to square that circle

Yes and too old!

But it discriminates against anyone woman over the age or 24 who is in work from, say, 9-5. The gym is open to women from 9am to 7pm. After that it's men-only.

Many women will simply not be able to go at all during the week. It's basically saying to women of 25+ that if they can't get to the gym between 9 and 4, they can't attend at all during the week. The retirement age is 66. Existing members. will have a contract with the gym and may be paying a month in advance. The gym can't just exclude them like this.

So you can't go before work, can't go straight after work, can't go in the evening, presumably can't go during work so yeah, sounds good 👍🏻

I'd say I identity as a 21yo and just go at 5pm.

I thought this also.

I’ve never actually seen anyone who looks as young as 12 there; I’d hazard a guess that the youngest I’ve seen there is over 18.

@saltinesandcoffeecups i haven’t, no. Tbh i wasn’t really planning on it, i was just going to cancel.

Since the Supreme Court ruling in April this is no longer an issue. The Supreme Court confirmed what has always been the case. Sex is biological and trainwomen are men. Men are not allowed to attend a woman-only event.

If they are trying to sneak transwomen in this way, they will open themselves to sec discrimination accusations. JK Rowling has a legal fund to protect women's single-sex rights and would, I'm sure, love to send a strong message to the fitness sector that when they say women, they have to mean women.

It's utterly ridiculous.

And besides all the other reasons mentioned, it could also prevent friends going together. Say, a 22, 24 and 26 year old. All friends. Go for a regular session together after work. Now one can't go!

Mental.

I'm 29 and have a few friends in my circle who are under 24. (Met through uni. I was a mature student) would prevent us from going together. Not that I go to the gym but that's besides the point.

I'd say the biggest issue, though, is that anyone over 24 can't go for a gym session after work. That's madness.

Well they can, they just have to have clear justification for it. How would you know whether they do or not?

Who know why they are doing this and I think those suggesting it's trans related are really reaching - the point is this is straightforward age discrimination and is probably illegal. It's also stupid.

That's really bizarre. Surely people in the 12-22 age bracket have the most flexibility about when to use the gym, because:

• school finishes around 3:30pm for the U18 cohort
• university students rarely have a full 9-5 schedule, so there are lots of slots available for the 18-22yo group.

Why would you restrict to working hours only for the very cohort that is most likely to be working at that time?

I could understand having a special U18 session from say 3-5pm a couple of times a week, but every weekday is excessive.

I would also be wondering about safeguarding concerns in their current setup - The 12-24yo is potentially mixing unaccompanied and unsupervised children with unknown adults.

I was thinking this too

That is ridiculous! I would be handing in my membership immediately and telling them why.

Middle aged at 25???

So what about women older than 24, they aren’t all likely to start hitting on teenage girls are they?