There’s nothing like the thought of a gym or swimming pool running women-only sessions (at the request of Muslim women) to get some men all worked up. Take the recent ‘controversy’ surrounding one of Harvard University’s gymnasiums. Andrew Sullivan rushes to denounce it as “shariah at Harvard’; Jihadwatch says they have submitted to Islam; and on and on it goes.
It’s hard to see what all the fuss is about.
Firstly, isn’t Harvard University a private university? The gymnasium is therefore its property. If one really believes in private property (and many people don’t) then one must also believe in the right of an owner to exercise absolute control over that property based on whatever criteria he or she may decide. If Harvard University, or the owner of any other gym or swimming pool, decides to ‘discriminate’ against men by disallowing them access during certain times of the day, then they should have every right to do so; and, likewise, if they wanted to ‘discriminate’ against people whose first names start the letter ‘P’, they should have every right to do that too. All property owners — whether home owners or the owners of businesses — should have absolute sovereignty over their property and how it is used. This is on the proviso, of course, that they must accept the social and economic consequences of their decision (and in the case of some of the examples that might be extreme embarrassment, public humiliation and/or boycotting).
Secondly, the decision to provide women-only sessions at a gymnasium could be viewed as a commercial decision. The gymnasium has obviously identified a market: people who have an interest in using the gymnasium but can’t because they don’t feel comfortable doing so when men are around. By creating women-only sessions a few hours a week, the gymnasium is attempting to win new customers and expand its market share. Some Muslims may benefit, but ultimately the gym is hoping that it will benefit too. In Harvard’s case, they advised the Muslim students that they would only continue to provide women only sessions if attendance was adequate. Hence, the email sent around by one of the Muslim women at Harvard that reads, in part (emphasis added):
These women’s-only hours will be in place indefinitely insha’Allah, but the coordinators will check to how usage has been to see if they can continue. I think the first check will be around Spring Break insha’Allah (3/22/08). If you can make some of these times and are interested in working out, by all means please go to the gym then! (Quad gym: 66 Garden Street)
It may also be beneficial to the university — from a marketing perspective — to be able to demonstrate it’s willingness to accommodate the needs of Muslim students. Australian universities, for example, have in recent years benefited from a rise in international student numbers from the Middle East and being able to represent their university as a “Muslim-friendly place” may be useful from a marketing and sales perspective.
So if people are just so outraged at the thought of a gymnasium setting aside a time for women, then they can opt to vote with their feet and not renew their memberships or stop attending the facility. Maybe, if there is enough of them, someone will be smart enough to open a gym that caters to that market as well.
6 comments ↓
Don’t you see Amir.
They are submitting to Izlam by proxy. Making the lives of Muzlims easier is submission and the government should not allow it to happen. Exercising your private property rights to exploit a niche market is submission, and the government should not allow it to happen. Any manner of positive interaction with Muzlims is submission and the government should not allow it to happen.
We must never forget that they are a fifth column, sent here by the terrorists with their smiles, their platitudes and their above average incomes in order foist their Satanic and barbaric Shariah law down our throats by the point of an aircraft, destroy our Judeo-Christian heritage and enslave us all.
We are to be ever suspicious of these duplitious Muzlims, and give over more and more of our liberties, which are based on our Judeo-Christian hertiage, to the pious and benevolent government run by people of a Judeo-Christian heritage for the protection of our Judeo-Christian hertiage.
Signed,
Flag Waving Patriot Opposed to an Izlamofascist takeover of Harvard University, and subsequently, the blessed country of Israel, and America.
Perhaps part of the reason the usual suspects are objecting to this so heartily, is because for women (Muslim and non-Muslim) to actually *desire* women-only spaces flies in the face of a modern dogma, i.e. that equality means treating men and women exactly the same.
Actually, we do have different needs, and catering to those needs says nothing about worth or value. There are many non-Muslim women who desire to exercise in women-only facilities for any number of reasons, and at the moment their needs are not being satisified, because of this modern dogma.
Umm Yasmin, do you think defiance of contemporary “feminist” (really androgynist) dogma is also one of the factors behind anti-hijab prejudice?
There clearly is a niche market out there for women only gyms, that is why in Australia there is Fernwood, you also have Curves.
But if all the women goto the women only gyms, who are the guys going to look at?
In Israel, some bus routes are segregated because some Ultra-Orthodox Jews do not feel comfortable sitting with women on the bus so the women have to sit at the back of the bus. The same exact logic is used to deny men entry to gyms during women-only hours and women-only workout rooms.
When women are excluded, it’s sexism.
When men are excluded, it’s defended.
Jon, if the bus is privately owned and is not contracted by the state to provide services to all citizens, then I don’t see why it would be a problem if they wanted to run a woman-only or male-only service. There may be perfectly good commercial or other reasons why they feel this is necessary. e.g. if there are lots of Orthodox Jewish men who want to a catch a bus but don’t like sitting next to women, then anyone who was able to deliver that service would have an immediate market.
Leave a Comment