Do we need a women-only bit in the gym or women only evenings?

[Lehman]

My brother has been complaining because he went to his local gym and found that he couldn't use it on Tuesday evening as it was women only. My brother is quite over weight but has been doing really well with diet and exercise. The response he got when he complained about the women only thing was that women don't like all the men ogling them in the gym and so must have seperate times / areas. is this true? I confess I am not in the gym much but do we really need special women only times? Are women such delicate flowers?

Sadly the only women's only gym in my area is the most expensive and also has limited equipment, so I don't go.

There's also a few men's only gyms, it's not just something exclusive to women

Your poor friend must have been terrified PinkyofPie.

The women's gym I use has less equipment than the mixed one and is smaller. I'd still rather use it though.

I have no problem with gyms organising segregated sessions, by age, sex, ability etc., as long as it is made clear when people join. The more people who participate, the fitter and happier we will all be.

I was also in favour of women-only carriages on public transport when it was discussed a while back. It didn't seem to popular then, and the consensus was that men should alter their behaviour rather than shunting women into confined spaces. Is there an inconsistency here?

No there is no inconsistency from me. No segregation in public spaces.

The issue I have with segregation is that it legitimates negative stereotypes. Excluding men in case they "ogle" you is no different to excluding women because their chitter chatter is off-putting, or excluding muslims in case they blow you up. It's just not ok to do that imo. The only people who should be treated less favorably are those who deserve it because of an actual transgression, not because of the demographic they belong to and the negative traits associated with it.

I think the issue here, Slarti, is that when you use class analysis, men as a class are seen as a legitimate threat to women. Ergo, you can take steps to remove them and hence lessen the threat. Not saying this is correct, just how I understand the viewpoint.

To me this is still inconsistent. There are apparently some instances where separation of the sexes is logical - bathrooms, changing facilities etc - and they are usually in public spaces. Same with gyms, public swimming pools etc. But trains are a no-no. That is the logic that I can't follow. Either segregation is acceptable because of men's threat to women's safety or it isn't. NB - I am NOT telling women what is right or wrong here. I am just trying to follow the thinking.

I think it's important - in fact fundamentally so - to make a distinction between innocence and guilt. Innocence should guarantee freedom from punishment (I use this term in the broadest sense). Treating people less favorably as a class flies in the face of that.

I think the thought process is that the threat of men towards women is too great to take a 'wait and see who the baddies are' approach. There are too many dangerous men in society, and even when they harm women, society doesn't care enough about women to adequately punish them.

I think that the problem with mixed gyms is not so much that women are afraid they will be attacked in the weight room, more that it can be very difficult for women to, for example, use the free weights when men are there. It can be very intimidating and requires a massive amount of self-confidence (imo) for a woman to use the parts of the gun that tend to be dominated by men. So if the men aren't there, women feel more at ease using all the equipment. And obviously ogling can be a problem too, as unfortunately some men do believe that women exist merely to be decorative.

Runner, I agree with you - some gyms are like that. The truth is though, they are bad gyms. I wouldn't join one like that myself. I am sure you would not spend money in a shop where the staff are rude and disinterested. Similarly, none of us should join a gym where the staff are not monitoring customer behaviour and making sure that you are happy. I don't want to sound blasé about this - I know it can be a problem. But if customers don't force gym owners to change, it won't get any better.

grimarse I understand the rationale but I can't agree with it. It's the same argument that's been used to justify many other instances of treating (or wanting to treat) people less favorably as a class. "The consequences of allowing women to be firefighters/muslims to fly/gays to be in the army are just too great that we have to accept some innocent people will be sacrificed for the greater good."

runner I'd love to see more done to prevent these behaviors rather than shuffling potential victims away and putting the onus on them to stay out of harm's reach. It's also worth noting that these gym nobheads will make other men feel uncomfortable as well by offering unwanted advice or disparaging remarks from their self appointed position of personal trainer. What we need are nobhead free gyms.

Bathrooms and private spaces where women would be vulnerable to predatory men (like refuges) - segregation. (There's no way a bathroom is a public space grimarse)

Everywhere else not segregated.

I don't get the problem.

Badly phrased on my part. Bathrooms were supposed to be in a list where segregation is logical and necessary, as with changing rooms.

I've not read the whole thread (sorry) but my tuppence worth.

I used to swim every night in a local pool in London that had women only sessions one evening a week, and for an hour on a Sunday. The pool was absolutely packed with local Somali women on those days, swimming in leggings, long sleeved tunics and swimming caps. One night I was a bit late for the session and as I was walking to the pool a staff member was putting a sign up saying "due to illness etc, there will be a male lifeguard etc." All of the women in the pool had got in before the sign went up and before the male lifeguard arrived.

(I realise now I should have said something!)

A few laps in, the lifeguard arrived (there was a female lifeguard already present) and the change in mood in the pool was instant. Everyone lingered in the shallow end, until he popped into the giant cupboard every pool has with his clipboard. In the time he took to write whatever it was down, come out and shut the door, I was the only woman left in the pool.

So yes, I think female only gym/pool evenings are important.

I don't think a gym should be closed to members of one sex at random points..

However, a good compromise (and one that happens round here) is having women-only gyms. I don't feel comfortable using certain equipment with guys staring at my chest, so I use the womens gym (not often enough, sadly).

If there are women who only go to women only sessions, then they are paying disproportionately highly for their membership, subsidising those who go at all other times bar one two hour slot

No they are not subsidising other users. It's their choice to pay a subscription and not use the facilities.

Wanking monkey: then the men who stare at your chest should be told not to. You should not be ghettoised by men.

We should not normalise the culture that demands women must cover up in front of men. This should not be normalised.

The ladies section at my gym is very popular, mostly with some Muslim ladies but also some women who have just joined and are building up the confidence to workout in the main gym.

I myself have never felt the need to use it, but if it helps some women be active who otherwise wouldn't, then it's a good thing.

My only gripe with the ladies area is that it only has cardio equipment in it, and a few tiny dumbbells, no barbell or heavy weights.

We should not normalise the culture that demands women must cover up in front of men. This should not be normalised

I agree. I'm actually shocked at the idea that a male life guard is deemed so unacceptable by women already fully covered up that they leave a swimming pool.

Wanking monkey: then the men who stare at your chest should be told not to. You should not be ghettoised by men.

Of course this would be the best solution. Its not really that easy though in reality..so until such a time (if it ever happens) that men will stop ogling large breasts when they move, I will be sticking to women only gyms

I completely agree about not normalising the culture which demands women cover up in front of men, and not segregating public spaces. The way to prevent women being groped on trains is for men to stop groping them. I'm conflicted about the gym though. Although I work in a male dominated environment and have become confident at work and adept at calling out everyday sexism, I'm not confident in the gym. I'm not confident at pushing myself forwards and taking up my share of the space in the way I have become accustomed to in my professional life, so I take the easy way out and choose female only. I think I shouldn't need to, but I take the less challenging option.

I can understand why some people might be put out because they cannot use the gym when it is convenient for them but for women like myself who have experienced serious sexual abuse over many years, it is very important that the woman only space exists.
I can't use a gym or pool when there are men present. I just don't feel safe around men when I am only wearing light clothing or a swimsuit: it triggers panic attacks and causes me to hyperventilate.

Anyone seen the German advert encouraging German women to wear hijab?

No! Where?