"The manner in which this member expressed her concerns about the policy exhibited behavior that management at the Midland club deemed inappropriate and disruptive to other members, which is a violation of the membership agreement and as a result her membership was cancelled."
Do you have a problem with the Planet Fitness policy? If so, why? I've been avoiding talking about this particular controversy of the week. I'm writing about it now because Planet Fitness has put into words something very close to the way I was thinking about it.
First, I don't know how the woman who complained expressed herself (and that is something you need to know to understand what happened). But second, Planet Fitness has a particular brand, using slogans like "Judgment Free Zone" and "no critics." That's what it offers and that, it seems, is what it delivered. There are other gyms. If you want a gym with a strict no-penises-in-the-ladies-room policy, shop for one. If there is none, then the product you want isn't in the marketplace. You can exercise at home.
By the way, I think there are many people who use health clubs and avoid the locker rooms. Show up in your gym clothes, leave in them, and shower and change at home. There are plenty of people who prefer privacy when undressing and bathing, and the same-sexitude of even a traditional locker room is not privacy enough.
१० मार्च, २०१५
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
२०१ टिप्पण्या:
201 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»Yes, I do have a problem with this. An obvious reason would be this: what if a man was using this as a ruse to get into the women's locker room just to ogle?
Now for something less obvious: Planet Fitness is discriminating against this woman in the same fashion which they complain she is discriminating. What if it's her "sincere belief" that men do not belong in womens' locker rooms? Why is a "transsexual" given more power in this situation?
This policy strikes me as unfair to women. I think this problem is going to come almost exclusively in the women's locker rooms, not the men's.
"But second, Planet Fitness has a particular brand, using slogans like "Judgment Free Zone" and "no critics.""
A brand they protect by imposing their judgment and kicking out critics. Got it.
"If you want a gym with a strict no-penises-in-the-ladies-room policy, shop for one."
Once upon a time one would never even think of this to ask.
And if there ARE penises in the "ladies-room" is it correct to still call it a "Ladies-Room"?
I am Laslo.
If you want a gym with a strict no-penises-in-the-ladies-room policy, shop for one. If there is none, then the product you want isn't in the marketplace.
I don't use planet fitness (and I think their commercials and slogan are asinine) but I don't like this idea that we are going to separate by 'sincere identity' rather than sex. And that seems to be the trend. Women have penises? I'm sorry, but that is stupid. And society seems to be attempting to change the meaning of words to make them mean nothing, and I'm not happy with that.
If I set a policy, though, I would say post op, ok, otherwise no. Because that's a hell of a lot more commitment than 'sincere belief' requires.
"Now for something less obvious: Planet Fitness is discriminating against this woman in the same fashion which they complain she is discriminating."
I don't think that's less obvious. I think it's very obvious but reliant on a guess about how she expressed her objection to there being a man in the locker room.
Read the statement from PF. She was, they say, demonstrative in her disapproval. If that is the reason for revoking her membership, then your point is not relevant.
This is why I refrained from blogging the story until now.
I have a 15-year-old daughter, and would prefer the "no penises" policy for whatever women's locker room she might frequent.
No matter what the 'sincere gender identity', penises have a tendency to cause trouble.
" If you want a gym with a strict no-penises-in-the-ladies-room policy, shop for one."
Maybe if the penis clause was less strict: no ERECT penises in the Ladies Room. Say.
And calling it a 'stretching exercise' does not make it so.
I am Laslo.
I have a problem with the policy. I do not have a problem with Planet Fitness having that policy. I will just take a pass on Planet Fitness.
If men are allowed in the women's locker room, could women see this as a micro-aggression or something like that?
There are many reasons not to use the locker room, including sanitation and cleanliness.
The question in the future is whether an alternative will be allowed. The "no-penises-in-the-ladies-room" alternative will be eventually become illegal, or at least suffer legal challenges.
She was, they say, demonstrative in her disapproval. If that is the reason for revoking her membership, then your point is not relevant.
Oh, it most certainly is relevant. If they're policy is to "not be judgmental", then how can they be judgmental about this woman's "demonstrativeness"?
It's plain hypocrisy, and my point stands.
@Shanna
You said it yourself: You are not a PF client.
My point is: They are deciding what product to sell and the marketplace will either reward them or not.
It's an entirely different question if the govt gets involved and imposes the policy.
They can and should be able to operate their business as they like. If they want to let transvestites use the women's locker room, that is their call.
This woman understandably had a problem with it. I see nothing wrong with them giving her money back and saying thanks but no thanks to her business. It looks like a win for her since they are not going to change their policy and going there is clearly not a good option for her.
I would imagine a good number of women would not be keen on sharing a locker room with a transvestite. So, this doesn't seem like a very smart business decision on the gym's part. The market will sort it out.
The only issue here is that when a gym caters to this woman's preference not to share a locker room with a transvestite, I suspect they will be sued. So instead of this being an example of a company making a business decision, this will become the new norm, since objecting to transvestites is the new racism.
And I refuse to use the junk science term "transgendered". They are all transvestites. All of the other terms are nothing but attempts to put scientific garb on a sexual kink.
I don't have a problem with it.
This is a private gym, they knew who was in there and why.
The safety issue that may exist when you can't prohibit men from a public women's restroom doesn't exist here, and surely Planet Fitness has the right to set their own rules.
I don't understand why there is so much discussion about this??
They've always judged lunks.
Let them have their political choice and pay the economic and legal (if anyone is ever raped in the facility) costs.
The market place can decide
It's a private club. It should be allowed to do what it wants. If you don't like the policy, pick another club. It's idiotic that the idea of public accommodation has come to be applied to every butcher, baker, and candlestick maker.
I did read somewhere else (Instapundit comment section?) that she is one of the few people to get a gym membership cancelled.
I have never used the locker room or showers at my gym. To me, it's pointless.
I was laughing so hard at this story that Jill came in the room to see what was going on.
Once again, the libertarian solution makes the most sense--let the business make its policy and let customers decide which business to patronize.
I realize that's not the world we're living in though, so we'll see how this tangles up the courts over the next several years.
Businesses have the right to refuse patrons...except when they don't.
Think the Colorado Cake Decorator who refused to make a cake for the homosexual couple was wronged? Then you should agree with Planet Fitness's rights on principle. Doesn't mean you have to think the policy is smart or desirable...just that they are free to have it.
Think the legal action and result against the Cake decorator was all good? Then you can still agree with Planet Fitness, because you, or some other authorities, are the arbiter of when to protest such actions and on behalf of whom. It is no longer a discussion of principle, but of instance.
"She was, they say, demonstrative in her disapproval"
By warning other women. Can't have that.
There are no penises in the ladies room.
There is no crying in baseball.
And there is no fighting in the war room.
What about the responsibility of those "identifying as" to consider the views of others? They don't want to be offended for what they identify as and I'm sure they don't want other people to be offended.
Yeah, right. Narcissism is a virtue now.
The only issue here is that when a gym caters to this woman's preference not to share a locker room with a transvestite, I suspect they will be sued.
I have concerns about that as well, or that they will all cave in fear of being sued. Because I think if you took a membership poll you would find the majority of women at least probably don't want men in their locker room.
I think most people, rather than cancelling a membership, would roll the dice that they won't have an issue at their gym, because it is rare. I'm more concerned about the policy in general taking over everywhere, including public restrooms, than I am about PF in particular.
A "sincerely held gender identity" sounds a lot like a sincerely held faith. Presumably, another choice protected under the First Amendment. That said, this instance is a lesser violation of human dignity, rather than human life.
I have a problem with it.
Some "people" do not want to be exposed to those of the opposite sex while in various stages of undress.
Women in gyms (especially the clientele of Plant Fitness) may already be overly self conscious of their appearance. Appearing naked or mostly naked in front of other women can be problematic. Add to that appearing in front of man and/or seeing women with testicles and I can see them viewing that as maybe a bit too "inclusive".
What is the criteria? I "feel like" a woman today so into the woman's locker room I go?
I can also see this from the other side. A lot of men would not want a woman coming into the men's locker room because the person "feels"
they are a man.
I can also understand that a man that has started the process of gender re-assignment, has been taking hormones and looks like a women (breasts) would feel uncomfortable going into the men's locker room and can see allowances being made BUT what then becomes the rule and how do you enforce it? By what bar do you qualify entry or do you set up a "uni-sexed" locker room that is open to all?
Crap, it is just easier to get a NordicTrack and stay home.
The foreseeability of future sexual assaults will not be argued at trial.
Bob Boyd said, "I think this problem is going to come almost exclusively in the women's locker rooms, not the men's."
I think you've got a good point there Bob. Who wants to be exposed to mass quantities of strange penises? I don't care if you're hetero, homosexual, or transgender.
Penises are scary.
I don't think women realize the amount of effort put into keeping the eyes focused above chest level in a men's locker room. Most dudes are annoyed at the guy who shaves free-balling rather than wrapping a towel around his waist.
At places like Lifetime Fitness, there are Dad's in the locker room with kids all the time.
Gusty Winds said...
No matter what the 'sincere gender identity', penises have a tendency to cause trouble.
3/10/15, 9:54 AM
Don't be a h8ter! Penises rise up and claim your place!
She was, they say, demonstrative in her disapproval"
By warning other women. Can't have that.
Indeed. But then, we don't know how obnoxious she was or wasn't about it. She probably hoped to change the policy by alerting others and then got kicked out for her troubles.
It's all part of the effort to deny people rights when they organize together in a business. The market would say, let all businesses declare their policies and let customers decide which businesses to patronize. If there is market demand for health clubs that allow what ever goes, then fine. If there is a market demand for health clubs that adhere to more traditional views, then fine.
Of course, we can't have that. Everyone must be equal in outcome.
Heh. So it's all fun and games and 'gender is a social construct' and 'transgender is real, yo'... up until there's a penis in a locker room.
So what if the guy is in there to ogle - couldn't the same thing be said about an overly lusty lesbian?
This is the absolutely predictable consequence of liberal bullshit denying the reality of human biology. Now that they've fucked over societal norms and legal systems and surprise! now some of it is biting them in the ass they want more laws and exceptions.
I expect at some point in the near future liberals are going to moan that gay marriages are being used to get around corporate or inheritance taxes. If homosexuality is provably caused by specific genetic code, I expect to see a clamor to ban abortions on that basis... as I expect to see bans on abortion for girls.
In short, it is an absolute guarantee that the left's call for 'equality' is always a call for superiority, and when the new 'equality' laws don't pan out the way they are supposed to, much more obvious additions will be grafted onto them to achieve what was the intended result all along.
So, conservatives, we must not fight this locker room 'lady'. Only by rubbing the left's nose in the pile of shit they've created can we actually hope to get it off the books entirely. Letting the assholes off the hook now by demanding a 'women's bathroom exception' will just ensure that this nonsense continues, as the underlying rot spreads while conservative shield liberals from the more odious of the symptoms.
"She was, they say, demonstrative in her disapproval."
I think she had a right to be demonstrative in her disapproval.
Maybe she was afraid because she knows that 1 in 5 women in gym locker rooms are raped.
Last time I checked, women didn't have penises.
It's an entirely different question if the govt gets involved and imposes the policy
Perhaps Scott Walker can intervene and force PF to make the right business decision. And, allow everyone a membership for free! Cuz it's like slavery to have to pay membership dues.
We need a Right to Workout Law. Stat.
LOL @ MayBee.
I read something yesterday that the guy/girl in the locker room wasn't even a member. So they kicked out a member to accomodate a visitor, basically.
The question in the future is whether an alternative will be allowed. The "no-penises-in-the-ladies-room" alternative will be eventually become illegal, or at least suffer legal challenges.
I think this is why it's become a big deal. Our neighborhood has a Rec Center that comes with HOA dues. There are naked women and children all over our locker room (the old ladies love to flaunt it especially). I have to say if someone with a penis showed up when I was in the locker room with my kids, I'd probably think twice before using the locker room.
I don't care about Planet Fitness' locker room policy. The market will sort itself out on this, but I am surprised that they took this tactic. Planet Fitness seems to cater to the Overweight Soccer Mom/Dad crowd --- to me it seems like another version of Curves. Thus, I see their policy offending a lot more potential or current customers, rather than giving them a new population to cater to.
In a decent health club locker room, people are not looking at each other at all. I think! I haven't gone to a health club in years. Maybe in some places people parade about and it's a see-and-be-seen kind of atmosphere. I think that would make a difference.
And keep in mind that there are gay people too. If your concern is that you don't want anyone looking at you who could be sexually interested in you, you've just got to stay out of locker rooms. There's no other choice possible.
My point is: They are deciding what product to sell and the marketplace will either reward them or not.
It's an entirely different question if the govt gets involved and imposes the policy.
Such as telling a baker who to bake a wedding cake for?
"But second, Planet Fitness has a particular brand, using slogans like "Judgment Free Zone" and "no critics.""
I'd read that in pari materia with their "lunk alarm" rather than taking it as permission to dry hump anybody benighted enough to use the leg curl machine in my presence.
But hey, that's just me.
There is no logical reason why there would be a market place for the tiny minority of people who are biologically ambiguous in their gender. The only reason that a market has developed for this sort of thing is that the aggressive LGBT lobby has successfully introduced the idea that Tolerance trumps everything, including the common sense needs and concerns related to gender.
This is an open invitation to any women at my gym to feel free and use the men's locker room. I won't judge!
You have to wonder why she fears her nakedness being hit on by a man in woman's disguise. She will probably have to fend off more locker room hits from real women than one fake woman.
"It's an entirely different question if the govt gets involved and imposes the policy."
Once they get their foot in the door, we know what happens. I'd say this is more than a foot.
Putting a label 'ladies-room' on a general purpose locker room is false advertising. Nobody stops planet fitness from having general-purpose-locker-rooms only. They should stop dicking around.
Only hetero penises cause trouble. Trans penises are oppressed victims.
And keep in mind that there are gay people too. If your concern is that you don't want anyone looking at you who could be sexually interested in you, you've just got to stay out of locker rooms.
There seems to be this assumption that that follows but I don't think most people actually care about that at this point. I think it's ultimately a safety issue.
Putting a label 'ladies-room' on a general purpose locker room is false advertising.
Exactly.
Words have meanings.
In judgment-free zones, progressive judgments prevail.
Whatever they happen to be at any moment.
This lady wasn't dissing transvestites, she was making sure club rules were publicized. Do the club rules specify that you can't talk about club policy?
garage: "Perhaps Scott Walker can intervene and force PF to make the right business decision. And, allow everyone a membership for free! Cuz it's like slavery to have to pay membership dues.
We need a Right to Workout Law. Stat."
New Day?
Check.
Reset?
Check.
Since there is no need to separate male, female, and trans, they can save costs by knocking down the walls and creating an open floor plan. I wonder if they judge bathroom behaviors. They may need to keep that wall.
If you want a gym with a strict no-penises-in-the-ladies-room policy, shop for one.
Do you ever listen to yourself?
Let's see how this sounds:
If you want a gym with a strict no-vaginas-in-the-men's-room policy, shop for one.
Planet Fitness will revoke your membership if you grunt. Also, no deadlifts are allowed and there is no squat rack.
In a decent health club locker room, people are not looking at each other at all. I think! I haven't gone to a health club in years. Maybe in some places people parade about and it's a see-and-be-seen kind of atmosphere. I think that would make a difference.
Come check out my rec center. Our Women's Locker room is like Geriatric porn. I try to avert my eyes, but there it is. And then my kids might ask, "Why are those boobs to her knees?" or "Why is she so wrinkly?" I'd rather not deal with "Why does he have a penis?" questions too.
Once they get their foot in the door, we know what happens. I'd say this is more than a foot.
They've got their penis in the door.
Or it's the penis under the tent.
Hopefully it's not actually "more than a foot" though, that would be really freaky.
It's all about conservatives and their feelings. Boo-hoo. You don't like a union? Don't join one. Don't like a certain fitness club? Don't join it. Better yet, pull yourself up by the goddam bootstraps and build your own fitness club with your own rules. Why must we constantly cater to conservatives and their delicate feelings? Where does it all end?
If I "sincerely" believe I am Jesus Christ, must I be allowed a seat of honor at the Vatican?
And keep in mind that there are gay people too. If your concern is that you don't want anyone looking at you who could be sexually interested in you, you've just got to stay out of locker rooms.
Is this the whole, "don't flatter yourself" thing? As if anybody gay would be interested in you? You have a hard enough time getting chicks.
I'm sure there are gay men and women in fitness locker rooms all over the country, with complaints few and far between.
But this woman comes off as intolerant. Doesn't seem fair.
There was a report, a while ago now, about a "self-identified" "woman" in a locker room with pre-teen girls, who seemed to really be getting a rise out of changing in the open area and very distinctly man-spreading, and from all appearances enjoyed the power of being able, by claiming to "be" a woman, to use the women's locker room.
There isn't enough detail in any of the articles I've read about this, but this seems to be a similar situation. The statement is that there is an open locker room but with smaller changing stalls. Did the woman/man in question simply walk into the locker room in drag but then proceed on to the changing stall, and the complainer flipped out about a no-harm situation? Or did he/she change right in the main, open area, and, in general, people do so because the changing stalls are generally occupied?
This person may have won the battle and lost the war if this facility sees memberships cancelled as a result.
Of course, the cheap fitness center I belong to has two individual changing rooms, no showers, very no-frills, so it's a non-issue.
come to think of it, the pic I saw (if it's correct) is of a very large man in drag; it's hard to imagine him even looking like he was trying to look female, when in workout clothes.
In a decent health club locker room, people are not looking at each other at all. I think! I haven't gone to a health club in years. Maybe in some places people parade about and it's a see-and-be-seen kind of atmosphere. I think that would make a difference.
There is a large space between those two scenarios, and that's where the health club locker room is.
Some women are very comfortable being naked and holding conversations with other naked/not naked women.
It isn't parading about. It's just an "I'm naked and I'm in a place where it's ok to be naked" attitude. Like you'd have at home.
I've never been that comfortable, but that's just me.
I don' really care if a woman who is attracted to me sees me.
But I don't want to feel like someone is leering, you know?
Being uncomfortable with someone seeing you naked isn't always logical, but then your flight-or-fight instincts aren't logical either. They are created by hundreds of thousands of years of human experience.
Unknown:
The first rule of Planet Fitness is that you don't talk about Planet Fitness. Planet Fitness reminds me of Planned Parenthood, but with a less conflicted charter. I wonder if the expelled patron is pro-choice.
What if instead of gender-based locker rooms, they called them parts-based locker rooms.
One room for penises. The other room for vag.
Whatever you call yourself, you go into the room for the part you physically have.
No judgement.
People can choose to join whatever club they want to Join or attend. In fact they should have Clubs with just one big Locker room where men and women alike can parade around in the nude to their hearts content. (like Starship Troopers).
I've seen women twice walk into the men's showers at the University's pool that I used to swim at. In both cases, they realized where they were, turned around, and walked out. This usually happened after the pool configuration was changed from short course to long course or vice versa. In one of the cases, someone else showering said "You're in the wrong shower" (I think this woman was REALLY near-sighted).
It was no big deal. But each time, I couldn't help but think: What would happen if a man accidentally walked in to the women's shower?
Planet Fitness will revoke your membership if you grunt. Also, no deadlifts are allowed and there is no squat rack.
True, but they'll let you chalk the living hell out of their treadmills. ;-)
"Because I think if you took a membership poll you would find the majority of women at least probably don't want men in their locker room. "
That may depend on the location. I can see this as a positive in Santa Monica and maybe Madison WI.
Very tolerant, you know.
Isn't advertising oneself as a "judgement free" business a perilous temptation to widespread lampooning, if not actual legal judgement?
I can see any number of ads contrasting leering, hairy bikers in short chemises barely covering gaping jockstrap bulges being courteously "not judged" in Brand X screen one while in competing screen two, clean, polite, business as usual is portrayed.
Of course, Brand X would always win the market for those curious about some hot tranny locker room action.
I don't give this Planet Fitness policy much life beyond San Francisco or New York.
There seems to be this assumption that that follows but I don't think most people actually care about that at this point. I think it's ultimately a safety issue.
Well, yes. You can't condition women to be on the lookout for sexual predators everywhere and then complain when someone actually fears a penis being in a "safe" place.
Midland resident Carlotta Sklodowska has come forward saying she
... is really a (rather ugly) man dressed as a woman.
They should promote an all-inclusive locker room without any American flags.
This kind of thing is pretty much an invitation to peeping toms to put on a dress and come right in. And at the gym, you wouldn't even have to put on a dress.
If you have no issue with men in the ladies locker room, I'd suggest your mind is so open your brain has fallen out.
I was on her side,until she complained to other members. At that point it became gossip. That's where she violated the policy.
We totally understand she believed she had a man in the ladies locker room, which prompt her to go to management. Her membership wasn't canceled for that.
In a decent health club locker room, people are not looking at each other at all. I think!
No, some of them walk around naked and try to talk to you.
I have a home gym.
This is an open invitation to any women at my gym to feel free and use the men's locker room. I won't judge!
And when that happens, you'll be asked to leave your own dressing room while he/she is getting dressed.
So be careful what you wish for.
"If you want a gym with a strict no-penises-in-the-ladies-room policy, shop for one. If there is none, then the product you want isn't in the marketplace. You can exercise at home."
Seems fair, so I am fairly certain that the Lynch Justice Department won't let that stand. Because Civil Rights you guys. And also the Crusades.
Hmmm . . . there seem to be two different stories. Here's the Daily Mail, which presents here as saying she just wanted to hang up her coat and purse. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2985579/Transgender-woman-believes-s-center-Planet-Fitness-policy-controversy-says-used-women-s-locker-room-twice-hang-coat-purse.html
Has a business with "Planet" in its name ever succeeded?
until she complained to other members.
Which she had every right to do. I'm not sure why you'd have a problem with that.
"Judgment" is a very interesting word.
PF uses it (or denies its use) in the "don't judge me" sense. The bad kind of judgment, I suppose.
But there's another use too - the good kind. "She showed excellent judgment in not inserting her penis into the garborator" or "a duty to exercise commercially reasonable judgment".
I get the feeling that PF doesn't recognize the two definitions, and thus are really "judgment free".
Is it OK to have a men only gym?
Because its a "no judgement zone"
That's why.
"until she complained to other members"
"members". Heh.
My only issue with this is it is a double standard.
I'd prefer private business can discriminate any way it pleases. If you want to have one bathroom for everyone to use, a co-ed bathroom, hey, that's your choice as a private business. If people accept that, then you'll make some money. And if they don't, you'll end up being shut down.
Let the free market decide.
But then, if you want to exclude gays, or whites, or men, or whatever you choose to exclude, you ought to be able to. If you want to have a black men only gym, you ought to be able to have a black men only gym.
This is the double standard that we have in our society.
I'm not a big fan of PF's business model, which (when I went there) seemed to be to give out as many low priced memberships as possible, and good luck finding a free machine, and making it nearly impossible to quit. They practically require a notarized affidavit with witness signatures and three comely lasses of virtue true.
Althouse wrote;
My point is: They are deciding what product to sell and the marketplace will either reward them or not.
This is exactly right.
Mozilla Firefox decided to fire it's CEO, Brendan Eich for supporting a California law that approved traditional marriage as the only form of marriage recognized by the state.
Now Firefox as a company is about to go under.
I think Firefox ought to be able to fire it's CEO.
And I ought to be able to say, no more Firefox in my house. And if enough people agree with me, then it's goodbye Mozilla.
I Callahan:
Planet Fitness restricts free speech, but respects sincerely held gender identities. No judgment.
It reminds me of song lyrics, where a trans speaks with his penis. Planet Fitness has not reconciled this discrepancy.
eric:
The rule of thumb is that discrimination is exclusive. That's why pro-choice policy is a source of perpetual cognitive dissonance, unless you believe in the stork or deal in human commodities.
"and three comely lasses of virtue true (with our without penises)."
What? A comely lass can't have a penis?
Perhaps PF should address the matter on their application forms.
Do you have a penis?
If "No" do you feel relieved or disappointed?
If "Relieved" please use the Ladies Locker Room.
If Disappointed you may use either locker room.
If "Yes" do you feel blessed or cursed?
If "Blessed" please use the Men's Locker Room.
If "Cursed" you may use either locker room.
"complain when someone actually fears a penis being in a "safe" place."
You got me laughing again. When I was a resident, we had a student nurse come out of the women's ward in high dudgeon. "There's man in there, doctor !" We went into the ward and found a poor women with prolapse of the uterus in bed.
is really a (rather ugly) man dressed as a woman.
Wow. I expected the person involved in this incident would have at least tried a little harder to look like a woman.
I used to work in a department store. I quit using the changing rooms, when the security guards would laugh about watching the pretty girls go into the changing rooms, and they would go to their security perches and watch them. This was over 20 years ago, so I do not know if this has changed, but I would rather try things on at home.
Yikes, Michael K. I can't unsee that. Perhaps I should be happy the Geriatric Porn stars of my women's locker room don't Sharon Stone us too.
First, I don't know how the woman who complained expressed herself
I'm assuming it was something like "Hey, what's that person with a dick, doing in the ladies locker room?"
She has a point.
"No, some of them walk around naked and try to talk to you."
I said "decent." So... that's not a good health club in my book.
I don't see why it should or would be unlawful for them to have that policy, at least for adults.
BUT it's an asinine policy, and they'll change it if they lose too many female customers.
Is it really that hard to distinguish between gender and sex, and just make the locker rooms sex-specific? (And if you insist you're not what you appear to be, to permit your only recourse to be a DNA sex-determination test (at your expense)?
The complaining woman had a reasonable expectation, based on prevailing social norms, that she wouldn't find humans with penises in a female locker room.
I think Planet Fitness owes her a full refund of her membership dues from her first day, to compensate her for the distress and inconvenience of having to change gyms because of their exotic locker room policies.
What's more, Planet Fitness has a moral responsibility to warn in their contracts, as well as to post at their entrances, a warning placard:
"Planet Fitness permits male-to-female transgendered persons to access the women's locker rooms, and female-to-male transgendered persons to use the men's locker room, regardless of the post-identity-realignment surgical configuration of their genitalia. Anyone who engages in microagressions against these people or this policy will have their memberships revoked. We are a judgment free zone. Have a nice workout."
The consequences of Androgynous Global Cultural Change (AGCC) are being studied by the Intergovernmental Panel on Cultural Change (IPCC). The IPCC, established to study the effects of Anthropogenic Global Wiling (AGW), claims that wiling will create serious moral hazards within the next decade to century. The consensus recommends that anthropogenic sources of confusion should be severely limited and replaced with gender natural alternatives. The IPCC is also studying the consequences of other pro-choice or selective policies.
On a related note, Planet Fitness is suing to be excluded from Zero Confusion reform.
(Damn, that was poorly written. Oh well.)
"your only recourse to be a DNA sex-determination test (at your expense)?"
Or you could check their genes. Like the bald guy who said, "I've got plenty of hair in my jeans !"
I'm still chuckling. I just can't (seriously) see how this works for Planet Fitness (I almost typed Hollywood) except in a few left wing enclaves.
The Savage Noble said...
Businesses have the right to refuse patrons...except when they don't.
That's it in a nutshell. It's a very one-sided, "Heads I win, tails you lose" kind of game. They can do whatever they want no matter how much it may offend you but God help you if you offend them!
There is a solution, though. It'd be more expensive and take up more room, so many businesses will have a hard time implementing this solution, but it is an alternative. Instead of having large locker rooms segregated by sex, have much smaller, individual changing and shower rooms with locks on the doors. Think of small bathrooms instead of large locker rooms and you'll get the idea. Male, female, other, it doesn't matter - everyone gets their own room.
Ann Althouse said...My point is: They are deciding what product to sell and the marketplace will either reward them or not.
It's an entirely different question if the govt gets involved and imposes the policy.
I entirely agree, Professor. Wasn't that position, though, one you disagreed when when the subject was the private business' possible racial discrimiation, though? If a baker's product is "cakes supporting opposite sex marriage only" why isn't that something the market should sort out (instead of the gov)?
Bitchtits, why are you commenting on this thread?
Obviously you have never seen the inside of a gym.
Have a super day, tubby.
Michael K:
If LA is any indication, then even in left-wing enclaves there is, ironically, a judgment for that.
Vive la transients! With the normalization of womb banks and sperm depositors, there really is no justification for anything less than gender fluidity. Even trans is a semantic construct in politically correct terms.
If you want a gym with a strict no-penises-in-the-ladies-room policy, shop for one. If there is none, then the product you want isn't in the marketplace. You can exercise at home.
Wow. Just wow.
When two parties are both made uncomfortable by each other, who prevails?
We have a bigoted fraternity booted off campus, but a bigoted student govt that voted not to accept a Jewish applicant suffers no repercussions.
This message in the gym says no one can judge. But a university campus student govt judged the American flag offensive.
So who get to judge whom and why?
My question is how the woman in a locker room described as having changing rooms and doors on the toilets became aware that another person there had a penis. A discreet transsexual person would not have exposed herself. If the person was deliberately exposing herself, I would side with the demonstrative women. There are laws about that sort of thing.
The local Des Moines PM drive radio host called the local planet fitness and asked if they had signage stating the policy. The refused to answer.??
The conclusion is the policy is a secret, so as not to offend paying customers. So much for the illusion of brave principled defense of their position.
My question is how the woman in a locker room described as having changing rooms and doors on the toilets became aware that another person there had a penis.
Did you see the picture? It was pretty obvious.
The conclusion is the policy is a secret, so as not to offend paying customers.
And if you find out about it and try to warn others you get kicked out. But it's totally just the marketplace at work, catering to what the public wants.
I said "decent." So... that's not a good health club in my book.
I misinterpreted your "decent." The nice one frequented by professionals is the one like that.
"Judgment Fee Zone" and "No Critics" doesn't get the job done. They need to actually say, "there will be penises in the women's locker room and you have to be ok with that."
"Sincere" identity my ass! Meaningless claptrap.
It would be fun to see a group of people opposed to this kind of stuff engage in a little protest by having 20 or so "men" show up at PF, sign up for a membership (when in most places you can cancel within first few days) and then claim to be MtFs and stand around nude in the women's locker room.
"individual changing and shower rooms with locks on the doors."
Truck stops do this routinely and have sleeping rooms the same way. Lots of women truck drivers.
I don't know how many have penises. Probably a few.
No one takes a shower in the gym anymore.
I do agree that companies should be free to do whatever they want here, as long as they are up front about it. If they are going to allow male sex organs in the women's locker room, then make it clear, up front, that the "women's locker room" is more aspirational than reality. And, a lot of women are probably not going to join for that reason. Kinda like the Fox News marketing strategy of appealing to the half the underserved half the market, and let the rest of the news shows fight over the other (left leaning) half. These guys can fight over the <1% trannie population, or even the 2-3% gay population, and let other gyms fight over the other 97%. I do wonder though if they should probably have to disclose that policy on their SEC disclosures.
I do think that it is a bad marketing decision. It seems like some, maybe a lot, of women like undress in a penis-free environment. And, as a guy, I probably don't mind changing in a vagina-free environment (most of the gyms I have belonged to have not had individual changing areas in the Men's locker room). Part of it is that control of a male's penis is only partially under conscious control, and for most of us, there is (or was at a younger age) a chance of an erection at the sight of a particularly delectable young woman. Worse - if she were naked. Maybe not so much the older women with their tits down to their knees.
But, it shouldn't be forgotten that male penises are more sexually aggressive than vaginas, esp. when they are erect. Which brings me to that one scene in Team America where different body parts are discussed, esp. as to why dicks are important to pussies.
There is a solution, though. It'd be more expensive and take up more room, so many businesses will have a hard time implementing this solution, but it is an alternative. Instead of having large locker rooms segregated by sex, have much smaller, individual changing and shower rooms with locks on the doors. Think of small bathrooms instead of large locker rooms and you'll get the idea. Male, female, other, it doesn't matter - everyone gets their own room.
Our YMCA has these, for the purpose of changing your kids. The only drawback is there are no lockers in them so you have to either stow your stuff in a tote while you swim or work out, or lug it over to the actual locker rooms after you change. Still, I'm glad they have them to avoid these other issues and I don't see why it couldn't work for a gym that wanted to be "inclusive". It would be interesting to see how many male transvestites actually took them up on the offer if this was what Planet Fitness offered.
And on further thinking....what is the legitimate rationale for a transgender person needing to be in the locker room other than the one that corresponds with his or her genitalia? Presumably a male to female person has seen "her" own penis so would not be scandalized in any way by seeing other ones, and the "no judgement" policy could just as easily mean that male members are not allowed to demean a person with a penis who wears female clothing but walks into the men's locker room. To go the additional step of letting such people use the women's seems to be about positively affirming their delusional sense of their own gender, which goes far beyond what tolerance requires IMO.
This whole situation depends on whether the Interstate Commerce Clause covers sweaty work-out clothes that never cross state lines.
This is stupid on stilts. It's an open invitation to niche porn sites to send wigged bros into women's locker rooms with mini cams to generate content for a subscription site for voyeurs.
Your move Laslo. I expect 10 percent of revenues for the idea.
In Afghanistan, the Mazar-e-Sharif PRT was Swedish-led, and composed primarily of northern European troops and diplomats (IIRC, Finland, Norway, Estonia and maybe Latvia?). One of the few Americans posted there told me that- in keeping with Scandinavian traditions and views on nudity that are quite different than our own- their bathroom and shower facilities were not gender integrated. At all. He felt so uncomfortable that he would use the local national facilities, which were gender segregated, and basically showered with the Afghan interpreters.
I guess it's all relative.
"Planet Fitness permits male-to-female transgendered persons to access the women's locker rooms, and female-to-male transgendered persons to use the men's locker room, regardless of the post-identity-realignment surgical configuration of their genitalia. Anyone who engages in microagressions against these people or this policy will have their memberships revoked. We are a judgment free zone. Have a nice workout."
Which means that they are the furthest thing from "judgment free". They have made the judgment that heteronormality is bad, and most everything else is superior. I think that, in the end, it is a bad marketing decision, but it is theirs to make. Many more of us heteronormals out there than LGBTxyz'ers.
garage the forgetful: "Better yet, pull yourself up by the goddam bootstraps and build your own fitness club with your own rules."
Not possible.
obambi: You didn't build that.
The security problems are obvious. But the libtards won't let rational and normal people deal with them honestly and forthrightly.
Therefore, the best remaining option id to deal with these degenerate flashers is with a scream and a can of mace in the face.
gerry to AA: "If you want a gym with a strict no-penises-in-the-ladies-room policy, shop for one."
Do you ever listen to yourself?
Self-reflection isn't likely to be a salient characteristic of adults who've gotten to the point of treating any daft demand from disturbed marginals as a matter of the deepest social importance, because discrimination! - in this case dudes who want to flash their cocks around women's locker rooms.
AA: By the way, I think there are many people who use health clubs and avoid the locker rooms. Show up in your gym clothes, leave in them, and shower and change at home.
You're offering this as an option to the woman who doesn't like men in her locker room? So why isn't this an option for the guy who's alleges to be uncomfortable in the men's room? After all, there are a hell of lot more individuals who are going to be "uncomfortable" with what he wants than there are guys like him who are "uncomfortable" with the presence of men in his locker room. Seems like a pretty simple solution, to acknowledge the perfectly reasonable discomfort felt by the women and defer to it, if, of course, his real reasons for wanting to use that locker room have nothing to do with anything but showering and dressing.
And lol to all the earnest libertarian arguments here for "letting the market sort it". What kind of world do you think we're living in? Since when has the market been allowed to sort anything out that when "discrimination" can be invoked?
Do have the popcorn out for the inevitable clashing lawsuits, though.
Our YMCA has these, for the purpose of changing your kids. The only drawback is there are no lockers in them so you have to either stow your stuff in a tote while you swim or work out, or lug it over to the actual locker rooms after you change. Still, I'm glad they have them to avoid these other issues and I don't see why it couldn't work for a gym that wanted to be "inclusive". It would be interesting to see how many male transvestites actually took them up on the offer if this was what Planet Fitness offered.
There was a little boy in CO who was identifying as a girl. He was told to use the unisex bathroom in the office. Parents sued. He can now use the girls' bathroom.
My real objection is to those creatures with penises hanging out by the cardio equipment who NEVER touch the free weights, and NEVER do dead lifts or squats, masquerading as men.
My "sincere self-reported gender identity" is a guy who likes to look at sweaty naked women.
So they wouldn't have a problem with me using whichever locker room had the most sweaty naked women. Right?
But it's moot because I wouldn't voluntarily patronize a place which used that phrase.
@Virgil, that is so-o-o Alinsky. I mean that in a good way, of course.
I think garage is on to something guys!
If you don't like private ownership of guns, don't buy a gun!
If you don't like fraternities singing racist chants, don't join the fraternity!
If you don't like the fact that a baker doesn't want to make a gay wedding cake, go to a different baker!
If you don't want a union representing you, you shouldn't have to be a part of the union!
I applaud garage for his unexpected but rigorous defense of freedom of association. I completely agree with him that an individual ought to be able to discriminate on the use of its private facilities or services for any damn reason it pleases, including race, sexual orientation, political beliefs, immigrant status, or having a penis in the wrong locker room, and it is on the onus of the other party to find a different provider of the good or service in question.
Regarding my earlier comment, perhaps I was a little too hasty and superficial.
This is some background info on the "transwoman" that started this ruckus:
http://genderidentitywatch.com/2015/03/09/carlotta-sklodowska-sklodowska1982-csklodowska-planetfitness-hrc-aclulgbt-usa/
If I were a guy I wouldn't want him my lockerroom either, but he looks pretty large and I can see why a woamn would be intimidated. I don't know what to think now.
Why must we constantly cater to [X] and their delicate feelings? Where does it all end?
Another gem that I find myself in accord with. "Feelings" are not a valid basis for legal action. Any advocate for a law who starts with "I feel" or "It's offensive" should be ignored and any legislation they propose to deal with these hurt 'feelings' tabled indefinitely. Because as garage astutely points out, it won't end. Once you accept the legitimacy of rule of feelings, justice becomes arbitrary and ever-encroaching.
Anyway I guess I'll stick with my present gym, heteronormative though it may be.
I'm too much the gentleman to change in the women's locker room, and I think it's unlikely that any woman I'd want to look at in the nude would come into men's locker room.
Unless ... wait a minute! ... could I go into the women's locker room if my "sincere self-reported gender identity" is lesbian?
I've been a gym rat since I was 14, in my experience flaunting nakedness is vastly different from casual indifferent nakedness. Environments differ, of course, but walking around tightly wrapped in a towel usually draws more attention than just draping a towel over the arm strategically.
I once had a fit over kids in the locker room; you can bet I'd throw one over a penis. (No kids allowed to use facilities, kid care provided, and family changing rooms for parents who wanted to keep their kids with them. I thought I was entirely reasonable.)
garage mahal said...
It's all about conservatives and their feelings. Boo-hoo. You don't like a union? Don't join one. Don't like a certain fitness club? Don't join it. Better yet, pull yourself up by the goddam bootstraps and build your own fitness club with your own rules. Why must we constantly cater to conservatives and their delicate feelings? Where does it all end?
3/10/15, 10:22 AM
Boy GM is on a comedy roll today!
There actually was what you suggest until a bunch of ACLU lawyers got involved and sued for discrimination. Now there are gender neutral rest rooms and changing rooms.
It is a little amusing watching the LGBTxyz coalition try to out absurd each other.
So on which side of this fight does NOW come down on? Are they for the "all natural" vaja or for the "wanta" vaja? Is it going to be like where Sprint gives new customers a better deal than existing customers?
Yes I have a problem with PF judgmental policy. They did not consider their members discomfort only the possible discomfort of the guest
The only item I could find out was the member that advised other woman of the fact a cross dresser was using the locker room. Those actions are not judgemental but present facts to other members so they can make their own decsions
It's amazing to see Professor Althouse just gloss over the obvious security issues of men in a women's locker room. Sure, there are lesbians in gyms too, but the average lesbian doesn't have 100 pounds and can't overpower her victim in a heartbeat and drag her to a vacant sauna or shower stall or changing area with a knife to her throat to keep her quiet. (don't get any ideas, Laslo!)
But Professor Althouse just glosses over the issue like it doesn't exist and it has never happened before.
I've observed the phenomenon before: Our host is brilliant as all get out but that just makes it all the more obvious that she drops 30 IQ points when it comes to anything involving gays.
When some perv with a "sincerely held belief" that he can attack women in their locker room acts out his perviness at PF, you can bet PF will change their policy PDQ, especially after they are sued silly.
One of the few Americans posted there told me that- in keeping with Scandinavian traditions and views on nudity that are quite different than our own- their bathroom and shower facilities were not gender integrated.
The wife and I went to a spa once in Finland, and steam room ("Turkish Bath") was full of naked people of both sexes -- with very dim lights. So were the saunas. Some had towels, some didn't. You get used to it.
IMO the worst part of being in Scandinavia in the summer is watching Americans -- usually old white men -- with binoculars perving over sunbathers. (That and being there if it's warmer than 30 C -- those buildings are designed to keep the heat in!)
A "woman" at my last gym was a pretty heavy juicer, and it showed. Seeing her in the ladies' room was always a little disorienting. And, no, I didn't look to see if she had a penis. Now I wonder. . . .
So she's kicked out for voicing her opinion, however vociferously? Or was it (as someone pointed out) that she voiced that opinion to other gym members?
Either way, I'm seeing a woman who is offended by the policy and the actions of another, she protested to management, and getting nowhere with management she attempted some community organizing to generate a larger protest.
This kind of stuff happens all the time and is lauded by the left. Private club or not.
I think she needs to come back with all her fellow members who agree with her and stage a sit in, on the exercise equipment, until the policy is changed back. I'm sure PF will change its tune pretty quickly when members can't use the equipment. That kind of disruption is allowed (even applauded) I'm told.
I'd also ask for her membership to be reinstated, but who would want to be a member there after that kind of treatment.
Definite double standard.
Show up in your gym clothes, leave in them, and shower and change at home.
My gym has a pool and a sauna. That is the main reason I use the locker rooms. (also the bathrooms are there).
Did anyone else look at that perv's Facebook page ?
There is one sick dude and the gym is asking for trouble. OK by me. I suspect they will not prosper with this crap in Michigan.
Because, God knows there are no external indicia of gender. It's all a matter of preference.
"... male and female [and whatever] He created them....
Gen. 1:27.
Gender is just a male fascist construct anyway: "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."
Here's the irony: the reason why "women with penises" say they want to use women's changing rooms is that they fear that men with penises in the men's changing rooms will harass them, so they're "safer" in a women's locker room. But if Planet Fitness is so nonjudgemental, they ought to shunt her to the men's locker room, and kick out any man that complains "there's a dude in a dress in this locker room!"
The same should hold true for women identifying as men; use the women's locker room and tattle on anyone who gives you a hard time for looking like a lumberjack.
eh?
We might need a big/small government conservative like Scott Walker to come in and tell these fitness clubs how to run their showers and locker rooms.
Freedom to Shower. Shpwer to Freedom!
If the policy really is "no judgements" (note the misspelling), is it also okay to exercise in the nude at Planet Fitness?
And the dude isn't even a member of PF. So they kick out a paying member because of her expressed discomfort with a man in the locker room who just showed up there (wonder if the member whose "guest" he was ever identified). My guess is, the guy was looking for exactly this reaction and is glorying in his victimhood and her humiliation. Of course this is just the first step: soon, every high school girls sport will be subject to this gender optional treatment: you lose your starting position to a guy and then have to shower with him.
Anyone on this thread arguing in favor of this "woman" should be ashamed of themselves. One look at the link posted earlier that contains screencaps from this "woman's" FB page and other online stuff is enough to tell that "she" is up to no good, or at the very least, simply agitating.
But, then, this is what happens when we refuse to diagnose someone with a mental illness because we worry about a "stigma".
Transgenderism is a mental illness. Nothing more, nothing less. This does not mean that perfectly nice people can't be trannies. Far from it. Just like there are perfectly nice people who are bipolar, or afflicted with OCD, or schizo.
But it is what it is.
At least our hostess continues her logic-free support of the whacko community. Consistency is appreciated.
If you want a gym with a strict no-penises-in-the-ladies-room policy, shop for one.
wouldn't you shop for one with a ladies room? If you have a penis, then you aren't a lady. There is a room for you. It's called the boys room.
"Our gender identity non-discrimination policy states that members and guests may use all gym facilities based on their sincere self-reported gender identity."
How are they determining the sincerity of self reported gender identities? Simply by say so? So, if you want to ogle naked women just say you are transgendered, and that you are sincere in your transgenderism. Really.
And then you get access to the ladies room. Can even take showers with naked ladies.
"Ladies ignore my erect penis. I'm a woman who happens to have a penis. Oh, and I'm a lesbian trapped in a mans body. How YOU doin?"
Hombre wrote:
Gender is just a male fascist construct anyway: "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle."
The way things are going, a woman needs a vagina like a fish needs a bicycle. Vaginas, apparently are optional.
I wonder how this will play out at Lucille Roberts. They don't want men there because the ladies are uncomfortable working out with men.
Ah, but I'm a lady see. Yes I have a penis, and yes I like the ladies, but I'm a lesbian trapped in a mans body.
In fact any perv getting caught perving should use this excuse. Since you arent' supposed to judge the transgendered.
I'm waiting for title 9 to include transgendered men allowed to play on womens sports teams. And having all the awards won by the men/women while the best women get to be second stringers on their own teams.
It strikes me that the term "sincere self-reported gender identity" is just corporate codephrase for:
"You know what, we don't even care anymore. How can we tell? We can't, but we wanna be inclusive and avoid ACLU scrutiny, so we'll just let the place run amok and anyone who complains too loudly will be called a bigot and booted from the property."
I feel that business model has a few flaws. But whatever. It's just Planet Fitness. I can't drive by those places without wondering if anyone in there has ever lost a pound due to exercise that they didn't put right back on "rewarding" themselves with a sundae for their "effort".
The woman kicked out is cute. The transgender guy is not. Not even in the drag-queen sort of way. I vote for the real her.
I have a membership at Planet fitness. I haven't gone one time yet.
"I have a membership at Planet fitness. I haven't gone one time yet."
That's their business plan! Keep membership dues low enough that people will keep paying them (usually by automatic credit card billings each month) and make cancelling very difficult.
Sort of ingenious.
Forgot to add - maybe I should go there as a male transgendered woman who hasn't yet had a sex change but thinks I'm a woman. And then demand to use the ladies locker and shower room.
Forgot to add - maybe I should go there as a male transgendered woman who hasn't yet had a sex change but thinks I'm a woman. And then demand to use the ladies locker and shower room.
A Modern Day Rosa Parks.
Jane the Actuary:
It's not Planet Fitness's (PF) choice. Pro-choice or selective judgment is a deference to an individual's sincerely held religion (i.e. morality), fantasy (e.g. spontaneous conception), orientation, whatever. Under this amoral tenet PF cannot order the direction of transference. They are "pro-choice", not "one-child". The semantics matter.
"tell these fitness clubs how to run their showers and locker rooms. "
Lefties still don't understand about markets and choice.
Comrade Lysenko would be proud of you.
"transgendered men allowed to play on womens sports teams."
Don't you remember Renee Richards ?
She was denied entry into the 1976 US Open by the United States Tennis Association, citing an unprecedented women-born-women policy. She disputed the ban, and the New York Supreme Court ruled in her favor in 1977. This was a landmark decision in favor of transsexual rights.[2] Through her fight to play tennis as a woman, she challenged gender roles and became a role model and spokesperson for the transgender community
And there's more:
Renée now lives in a small town north of New York City with her companion Arleen Larzelere
I wonder if a penis ever comes between them.
Laslo ?
Yes, I do have a problem with this, and I want to spread the news far and wide, hopefully to drive "Planet Fitness" out of business.
If you were born with a penis, you are male. Anyone who pretends otherwise is insane. Anyone who acts as an enabler for those who pretend otherwise is at least as insane.
If Planet Fitness were to post on the door of the Women's Locker room "Those who identify as Women", than at least they would have the defense of honesty. But their actions forfeit that defense.
Esp. since they kicked the woman out because she was attempting to force honesty and full disclosure. I hope she sues, I hope she wins, and I hope the lawsuit results in massive publicity the destroys Planet Fitness.
Don't like your sex? Don't want to be "forced" to use the locker room of your sex? Fine. YOU change at home, and don't use any locker room.
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
My point is: They are deciding what product to sell and the marketplace will either reward them or not.
No, Ann, they are lying about what product they sell. Because otherwise that woman would have known when she bought her membership that Planet fitness has a "adult male penises are allowed in the 'women's' locker room" policy, and she didn't.
If a business is going to have "uni 'gender' multi-sex" locker rooms / bathrooms, then it's incumbent upon the business to let everyone know it, not hide it in the fine print, and kick out anyone who brings publicity to the policy.
As for "no judgement"? Bull.
What would happen to someone who wears their Google Glass into the locker room? Will they be "judged"? Will the people object to the Glasshole be kicked out for being "judging"?
Anyone who claims to have a blanket policy of "not judging" is a liar. What Planet Fitness is saying is that "we have decided that no one is allowed to judge these specific things". As their judgement on things is execrable, they deserve to be judged, attacked, and destroyed over it.
gregq:
There are three classification for behavior or expression, not merely orientation: normalization (i.e. promotion), tolerance, and rejection. The so-called "equality" advocates have elected selective normalization, rather than principled tolerance. They have, once again, created an unreconciled moral hazard. Presumably left for our Progeny to cope with.
Not only have they chosen a pro-choice or selective policy, but they are promoting a behavior which has no redeeming value to either society or humanity. Actually, selective exclusion is a less aggressive pro-choice policy that is typified by elective abortion, which actually is counterproductive to both societal and human fitness.
gregq:
Judgment-agnostic policy: no vagina, no penis, no conscience. Welcome.
Here's a legal question. Would Planet Fitness be liable if a man, pretending to be a transsexual to gain access to the women's locker room, rapes a women who is showering?
The argument would be that it was entirely foreseeable that the policy adopted by Planet Fitness would likely result in a clever rapist gaining access to the women's looker room. And if Planet Fitness had not adopted such a zany policy, it is highly probable that the rape would never have occurred.
Hillary has no case on the Senate Republican's getting involved with the Iran negotiations. They were doing what they should have been doing for the last few years. Here's the Senate's take on it: The Constitution provides that the president "shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur" (Article II, section 2). The Constitution's framers gave the Senate a share of the treaty power in order to give the president the benefit of the Senate's advice and counsel, check presidential power, and safeguard the sovereignty of the states by giving each state an equal vote in the treatymaking process. As Alexander Hamilton explained in Federalist no. 75, “the operation of treaties as laws, plead strongly for the participation of the whole or a portion of the legislative body in the office of making them.”
See http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Treaties.htm.
"My point is: They are deciding what product to sell and the marketplace will either reward them or not."
So you agree is it is OK to decide to only sell wedding cakes for Heterosexual weddings and the marketplace will either reward them or not?
the question no one is asking: Why did she see his penis? Does one remove one's pants in the dressing room, or was there a toilet stall available for this? Did the man run around naked in the room (something done in men's dressing rooms but not women's) or just quickly change clothing in a modest way facing the locker, and the woman peeked?
When I was a young medical student, we had few women in medicine: for safety reasons (long story), we changed in the toilet stalls of the "Doctor's" changing room. No problem. I usually shouted "coming out" before entering the main room,and the guys would cover up when I came through. Only once did I embarass one of the guys: A semi deaf elderly doc there to assist in surgery who took his hearing aid out and was quite startled when I bounced through the room.
Planet Fitness doubtless has insurance to cover them against claims arising from crimes that occur on their premises. This is pretty standard.
But an insurer might be able to point to the policy language and say "hey, wait a minute, we sold them a standard policy based on plain-vanilla underwriting that assumes they would take the due care normally expected of ordinary business owners and managers in a similar situated. We did not write this policy for a gym that actively positions itself as a place were male degenerates have no restrictions on placing themselves where women and girls are potentially at their most vulnerable. We deny this claim."
Then it goes to court and a judge and jury has to figure it out.
" Does one remove one's pants in the dressing room, or was there a toilet stall available for this? "
Read the perv's Facebook posts. He brags about jerking off in public. And a "circle jerk." Maybe he was propositioning her.
Hey, tell me this, Planet Fitness: what happens if some male cross dresser enters the women’s facility and terrifies a 13-year-old girl? If she comes out in tears crying that a man just sat down beside her and began to take off his clothes, will you kick her out, also? Whose side do you take in that confrontation?
--Matt Walsh
Clearly, the 75 pound 13 year old girl with no hope whatsoever of defending herself against an assault by a 200 pound "woman" with the upper body strength of a man and a penis with which to penetrate her is a paranoid hater.
This is where the libtards have driven us.
"Carlotta's" Facebook page has apparently been scrubbed. But you can find this degenerate's posting preserved here:
http://genderidentitywatch.com/2015/03/09/carlotta-sklodowska-sklodowska1982-csklodowska-planetfitness-hrc-aclulgbt-usa/
References to public masturbation, prostituting himself out for public masturbation, exhibitionism, being led around on a leash. Something about "when she thinks I'm thirsty, she will use a turkey baster to squirt a vile, yellowish liquid into wherever she thinks my mouth is behind the mask," etc.
Who goes to Planet Fitness anyway? You can't sweat, can't breath hard, probably can't get too buff or you'll make the budgies feel bad, and now you can't complain about a man being in the women's locker room.
Well, they have some funny commercials anyway. Someone needs to make a new version for this one though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQfmpXsLV_4
Jason:
An insurer cannot discriminate based on preexisting conditions and orientations. It would be like Obamacare turning away people who knowingly engage in behaviors and choose orientations that increase risks to their health. No, the insurer, and subsequently their subscribers, will have to swallow the progressive costs of reform, and the rest of society will be forced to cope with the unreconciled moral hazards.
n.n.
I can't tell if you're legitimately confused or not. This is the P&C world, not major medical.
Different world.
No penises in the women's locker room seems a very basic standard. Someday people with better sense - maybe even people who can actually assign gender or even change it at will and not just cosmetically - will look back in wonder and laugh at those of us who decided there was no difference between your fantasy gender and your genetically determined one.
If a gym even has separate "men" and "women" dressing rooms, then it is strongly advertising by its actions that it has a "no penises in the ladie's room" policy, regardless of what it says in the fine print of the club contract, or in their PR releases.
In short, this just a bait-and-switch deceptive advertising problem. Very few people see separate "men" and "women" dressing rooms and stop to ask (or inquire of the contract) Wait a minute, just what do you mean by "women?" Could a man who thinks he's a woman use that room, too? And anyone of good sense and integrity understands this.
The former member isn't pissed at the club for their policy: she's pissed at them for deceiving her about their policy when she signed up. And quite reasonably so. Expectations of privacy are very important to people when they take off their clothes, and they have long-held and clear ideas about what to expect when they see a certain type of facility. That's why there's a dressing room at all, and why there are two of them, with traditional labels. If you're going to shock the expectations people normally have, you should be crystal clear about it -- special labels, warning signs, unusual design, 32 point type in your contract, whatever -- or people are going to be very reasonably angered.
Planet Fitness might as well have put some fine print in their club contract saying they reserve the right to put tiny little video cameras in the dressing rooms and sell the footage as they see fit. Then been all outraged when a customer got upset. Well, it says right there in our policy that we don't guarantee you'll not be filmed in the dressing room. Can't you read? And how dare you go around letting all our other customers know in loud and obnoxious terms that you've seen clips of their naked wrinkly asses on the Internet!
I see The Drill SGT got there before I did:
"My point is: They are deciding what product to sell and the marketplace will either reward them or not.
It's an entirely different question if the govt gets involved and imposes the policy.
Such as telling a baker who to bake a wedding cake for?"
The transgendered have been watching the SSM movement closely, and have decided to adopt the same tactics:
1) We were "born that way";
2) We demand to have society change its rules to fit our standards of what those rules should be;
3) Anyone who disagrees with us is a (Fill-In-The-Blank)Phobe and a H8T3R;
And next in the playbook:
4) We will use the courts to enforce our new rules, and destroy the businesses of those who dare oppose us.
As a Libertarian, I'm all in favor of PF setting their own rules. All businesses need to find some kind of "competitive advantage", especially in markets like this. Maybe PF can focus on their inclusiveness, and have success with it. More power to them.
But that doesn't change the fact that Gender Dysphoria is a real psychological condition, and needs to be treated as one.
By the way, the voyeur at the center of this controversy is clearly not a trannie. But when you let people "self-identify", it's only a matter of time before idiots like this come along and poison the well for everyone.
Why is a "transsexual" given more power in this situation?
Because they are like the mentally slow in a James Fenimore Cooper novel. God's precious little angels.
So if I sign a deposition that I "sincerely identify as a woman" the courts should let me play on the LPGA right? From the same tees? Cash the same checks?
It may be a policy and maybe going to another gym is better for everyone, but have you ever TRIED to get out of a gym membership?
I will say this is really awful publicity for planet fitness. They will attract some weirdos, and lose customers who are probably just now entering that phase of their new years resolutions where they want an excuse to quit.
Althouse is (a bit surprisingly) on target this time to note we have no idea how the woman in question actually behaved. Probably more to the story, given nothing is ever really reported accurately. OF course the gym has every right to kick people out and let the wrong sex use each bathroom. And liability if their possible recklessness gets someone harmed.
A man who wants to expose himself in a woman's locker room, no matter his gender identity, is behaving very selfishly. I would be extremely uncomfortable making strangers even 1% as upset as his behavior would obviously make others. Common sense would say he should know better, and Althouse's good point is tempered a lot by that. Of course the woman was probably furious.
I got curious based on a commend upthread and found the facebook comments from this Carlotta Sklodowska person.
Apparently he wasn't even an actual paying member of Planet Fitness, and if these comments are authentic, he is obviously mentally disturbed, not genuine in identifying as a female, and a complete pervert who describes women in the most crass and prurient manner. There's no question as to why he wanted to be in the women's locker room.
Naturally, the he's just the kind of degenerate that liberals love!
Now, why have the major media outlets not bothered to pick up on who this cretin really is?
Are the gays in the media covering for him?
Why can't we get any decent coverage of this story?
Someone above mentioned Renee Richards. She had this to say about her career: "Richards has since expressed ambivalence about her legacy, and came to believe her past as a man provided her with advantages over her competitors, saying “Having lived for the past 30 years, I know if I’d had surgery at the age of 22, and then at 24 went on the tour, no genetic woman in the world would have been able to come close to me. And so I’ve reconsidered my opinion.”
no shir. It's called cheating. She's no better than Lance Armstrong juicing before a race. As would any transgender make playing in women's sports. Her wins should have an asterisk next to them. Because she was a he.
s/he reconsidered her opinion, but sued to be allowed to play where it advantaged her over other real women. What a bitch.
"No, some of them walk around naked and try to talk to you."
I said "decent." So... that's not a good health club in my book.
So you are self-defining "decent" as a health club where people don't walk around naked in the locker room.
That health club doesn't exist. But I disagree with your definition of what makes a "decent" health club.
If those traditional enough to believe locker rooms marked women should be penis free acted like SJW's the solution would be simple. Have teams of drooling men invade the women's locker room at every PF and stare at the patrons. Now don't be judgmental, they may be sincere in their (temporary) gender assignment. Make it large numbers of PF franchises and make it last for a long period. How long until PF would close their doors? Not long I'd wager. There are ways, as I have regretfully learned, the so-called free market can be bent to the will of the most obnoxious among us.
But traditionalists/conservatives don't seem to think or act that way. Yet.
Back in the '90s, a song titled O.P.P. was a big hit (and Naughty by Nature--N.B.N.?--eventually snagged a Grammy).
Almost 25 years later, being D.I.D.--Demonstrative in Disapproval--gets you kicked out of P.[F.]F. (Planet [Freakin'] Fitness).
Jeez. Times have changed.
That kicked-out broad oughta start a group and run with it:
D.I.D.!
Jason:
Through the virtue of equal protection, the same principle applies in both "worlds".
Uhhhh, no.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा