I will let my post stand. This was a religious motivated concession made by a religious group for religious reasons.SenorToenails wrote:
I have said many times that the school did this because some students had concerns regarding their religion, but that the change made to the gym hours has nothing to do with religion. They are not setting the gym aside for only female muslims, but ALL women.lowing wrote:
You are disguising it as a gender issue becasue as a religious issue you have no argument. The problem is, it IS a religious issue. A specific group of people from a specific religion is asking for concessions for religious reasons. You are only kidding yourself be trying to maintain that this has nothing to do with religion or special interest.
I do love how you presume to know my motivations though.
The special interest involved is to make sure that paying customers are happy. Harvard isn't free.
There are religious motivations, yes, but it does not solely benefit muslims. The end result is women-only hours, not muslim women-only hours. That is what makes the difference for me.lowing wrote:
I will let my post stand. This was a religious motivated concession made by a religious group for religious reasons.
If this had ended in "Harvard makes Muslim-only gym hours", I would agree with you. But since they didn't, I don't.
So the decision NOT to appease a religious group could have just as easily been made, people could be unhappy and that would be life.SenorToenails wrote:
People like me? I didn't call anyone racist or bigoted, including you.lowing wrote:
I see, and who makes the decisions on when 19 is allowed and 20 is too much? how does this person not get labeled as racist or bigoted by people like you when his decision is not in your favor?
Decisions are made, people get unhappy. That's life.
In this case, school administrators were the ones to make the decision.
Yep. It could have been. But it wasn't, because there was some merit to making women-only hours.lowing wrote:
So the decision NOT to appease a religious group could have just as easily been made, people could be unhappy and that would be life.
As far as we know, nobody else had a problem, EXCEPT the Muslim women,SenorToenails wrote:
There are religious motivations, yes, but it does not solely benefit muslims. The end result is women-only hours, not muslim women-only hours. That is what makes the difference for me.lowing wrote:
I will let my post stand. This was a religious motivated concession made by a religious group for religious reasons.
If this had ended in "Harvard makes Muslim-only gym hours", I would agree with you. But since they didn't, I don't.
Which women IN GENERAL did not see the need for.SenorToenails wrote:
Yep. It could have been. But it wasn't, because there was some merit to making women-only hours.lowing wrote:
So the decision NOT to appease a religious group could have just as easily been made, people could be unhappy and that would be life.
lowing wrote:
As far as we know, nobody else had a problem, EXCEPT the Muslim women,
Read other news articles about this. Apparently women of other faiths had expressed an interest in these hours also.lowing wrote:
Which women IN GENERAL did not see the need for.
While I agree that I don't like that this was done at the behest of Muslim students, the fact that the end result does not explicitly favor muslims makes this an OK agreement in my book.
Not surprised. Rich liberals get hard-ons from doing stupid shit like this.
LOL, so others were turned down for this request and the fact they granted it for the Muslim complainants does not throw a flag for ya huh?? ok.......well, denial anyone?SenorToenails wrote:
lowing wrote:
As far as we know, nobody else had a problem, EXCEPT the Muslim women,Read other news articles about this. Apparently women of other faiths had expressed an interest in these hours also.lowing wrote:
Which women IN GENERAL did not see the need for.
While I agree that I don't like that this was done at the behest of Muslim students, the fact that the end result does not explicitly favor muslims makes this an OK agreement in my book.
Lowing, you jump to conclusions. But hey, if that works for ya, whatever buddy.lowing wrote:
LOL, so others were turned down for this request and the fact they granted it for the Muslim complainants does not throw a flag for ya huh?? ok.......well, denial anyone?
Did anyone jump through the hoops to accomadate these other religious beliefs? I am guessing not sins the hours were adjusted only after the muslims asked. Or is that not a safe assumption?SenorToenails wrote:
Lowing, you jump to conclusions. But hey, if that works for ya, whatever buddy.lowing wrote:
LOL, so others were turned down for this request and the fact they granted it for the Muslim complainants does not throw a flag for ya huh?? ok.......well, denial anyone?
Muslim's asked. A month passes. Who knows what other factors went into this decision? I don't, and I'm betting you don't. And I really don't think 6 hours a week is 'jumping through hoops'.lowing wrote:
Did anyone jump through the hoops to accomadate these other religious beliefs? I am guessing not sins the hours were adjusted only after the muslims asked. Or is that not a safe assumption?
I suppose that I have different expectations of an organization that takes $40,000+ a year from it's students. Like it should keep it's students happy.
I suppose you do.SenorToenails wrote:
Muslim's asked. A month passes. Who knows what other factors went into this decision? I don't, and I'm betting you don't. And I really don't think 6 hours a week is 'jumping through hoops'.lowing wrote:
Did anyone jump through the hoops to accomadate these other religious beliefs? I am guessing not sins the hours were adjusted only after the muslims asked. Or is that not a safe assumption?
I suppose that I have different expectations of an organization that takes $40,000+ a year from it's students. Like it should keep it's students happy.
Those Muslim chicks are hot, that is why they have to have their own gym time cuz if they didn't it would drive the white boys crazy and make the girls jealous. They have that cool accent and dancing gets them horny as hell and they put out big time if you let them know you are a player.
Oh wait. Nevermind, I am thinking of latino girls. I guess the Muslim chicks are just wanting to have women only hour like many NON MUSLIM women like. There is no story here, this is just the Media making news.
Oh wait. Nevermind, I am thinking of latino girls. I guess the Muslim chicks are just wanting to have women only hour like many NON MUSLIM women like. There is no story here, this is just the Media making news.
Are you suggesting they gave in because if you piss off a Muslim they might strap a bomb to themselves and blow people up? That shit only happens on T.V., this is a peaceful religion.lowing wrote:
LOL, so others were turned down for this request and the fact they granted it for the Muslim complainants does not throw a flag for ya huh?? ok.......well, denial anyone?
Last edited by Lotta_Drool (2008-03-08 15:25:50)
Of course I'm correct.lowing wrote:
You must be correct because I can not see how NOT reacting to special interest groups demands, is an OVER-reaction.Bertster7 wrote:
lol@ lowing
Overreaction to this sort of article is a great example of what I outlined in my post in the "IT's the MEDIA!!! Of Course, how silly of me." thread. It's hilarious that you seem complete incapable of seeing that.
Special interest groups? What like women, men, gays, the disabled, the elderly etc. ?
Demands? Where were the demands? There were only requests.
This is in no way different from a group of people in wheelchairs asking for a ramp to be put in and for a few hours a week for the disabled to use the gym without any able bodied people around, because it makes them feel uncomfortable exercising alongside them. Would you oppose that? Is that the disabled stealing away the rights and freedoms of able bodied people?
Your entire argument is utterly retarded. Caving to demands of special interest groups, what a fucking joke.
If it were Christian wheel chair riders, or White Supremist wheel chair riders I would maintain the same argument.Bertster7 wrote:
Of course I'm correct.lowing wrote:
You must be correct because I can not see how NOT reacting to special interest groups demands, is an OVER-reaction.Bertster7 wrote:
lol@ lowing
Overreaction to this sort of article is a great example of what I outlined in my post in the "IT's the MEDIA!!! Of Course, how silly of me." thread. It's hilarious that you seem complete incapable of seeing that.
Special interest groups? What like women, men, gays, the disabled, the elderly etc. ?
Demands? Where were the demands? There were only requests.
This is in no way different from a group of people in wheelchairs asking for a ramp to be put in and for a few hours a week for the disabled to use the gym without any able bodied people around, because it makes them feel uncomfortable exercising alongside them. Would you oppose that? Is that the disabled stealing away the rights and freedoms of able bodied people?
Your entire argument is utterly retarded. Caving to demands of special interest groups, what a fucking joke.
These were not women, they were Muslim women. Not all women felt the need for this, only Muslim women, and as SenorToeNails likes to point out, when JUST women made the request, they didn't get shit.
That would only make any sense whatsoever if what they were asking for was Muslim women only time at the gym. It's not.lowing wrote:
If it were Christian wheel chair riders, or White Supremist wheel chair riders I would maintain the same argument.Bertster7 wrote:
Of course I'm correct.lowing wrote:
You must be correct because I can not see how NOT reacting to special interest groups demands, is an OVER-reaction.
Special interest groups? What like women, men, gays, the disabled, the elderly etc. ?
Demands? Where were the demands? There were only requests.
This is in no way different from a group of people in wheelchairs asking for a ramp to be put in and for a few hours a week for the disabled to use the gym without any able bodied people around, because it makes them feel uncomfortable exercising alongside them. Would you oppose that? Is that the disabled stealing away the rights and freedoms of able bodied people?
Your entire argument is utterly retarded. Caving to demands of special interest groups, what a fucking joke.
So, you don't like it when anyone asks for change to benefit them? That's even stupider than what I thought you were saying.lowing wrote:
I make no bones about it, I do not like that Muslim women are asking for concessions, I do not like it when gays ask for concessions, I do not like it when white people ask for concessions, I do not like it when black people ask for concessions.
So they were women.lowing wrote:
These were not women, they were Muslim women.
In fact it wasn't a Muslim body backing the request at all:
Who were asked by 6, yes 6 (better be scared they're about to take over the whole of America ), Muslim students if this would be possible. The university said they would give it a trial period.The change was prompted by a request from the Harvard College Women's Center
In that case why are Women only gyms so popular and amongst the most profitable ones around?lowing wrote:
Not all women felt the need for this, only Muslim women
I don't know of any gyms that do not have some women only time set aside. The gyms at the university I went to certainly did.
When did he point that out? I think you are making stuff up....lowing wrote:
and as SenorToeNails likes to point out, when JUST women made the request, they didn't get shit.
It was religious reason stipulate for the request, and when others asked it was apparently not rewponded to.......SenorToeNails wrote: "Read other news articles about this. Apparently women of other faiths had expressed an interest in these hours also.Bertster7 wrote:
That would only make any sense whatsoever if what they were asking for was Muslim women only time at the gym. It's not.lowing wrote:
If it were Christian wheel chair riders, or White Supremist wheel chair riders I would maintain the same argument.Bertster7 wrote:
Of course I'm correct.
Special interest groups? What like women, men, gays, the disabled, the elderly etc. ?
Demands? Where were the demands? There were only requests.
This is in no way different from a group of people in wheelchairs asking for a ramp to be put in and for a few hours a week for the disabled to use the gym without any able bodied people around, because it makes them feel uncomfortable exercising alongside them. Would you oppose that? Is that the disabled stealing away the rights and freedoms of able bodied people?
Your entire argument is utterly retarded. Caving to demands of special interest groups, what a fucking joke.So, you don't like it when anyone asks for change to benefit them? That's even stupider than what I thought you were saying.lowing wrote:
I make no bones about it, I do not like that Muslim women are asking for concessions, I do not like it when gays ask for concessions, I do not like it when white people ask for concessions, I do not like it when black people ask for concessions.So they were women.lowing wrote:
These were not women, they were Muslim women.
In fact it wasn't a Muslim body backing the request at all:Who were asked by 6, yes 6 (better be scared they're about to take over the whole of America ), Muslim students if this would be possible. The university said they would give it a trial period.The change was prompted by a request from the Harvard College Women's CenterIn that case why are Women only gyms so popular and amongst the most profitable ones around?lowing wrote:
Not all women felt the need for this, only Muslim women
I don't know of any gyms that do not have some women only time set aside. The gyms at the university I went to certainly did.When did he point that out? I think you are making stuff up....lowing wrote:
and as SenorToeNails likes to point out, when JUST women made the request, they didn't get shit.
While I agree that I don't like that this was done at the behest of Muslim students, the fact that the end result does not explicitly favor muslims makes this an OK agreement in my book."
2. Is it accepted when white people ask for change to benefit them?? Nope, Ok well then to be fair and equal, nobody has the right to ask for change that benefits them.....We are all equal....
3. In fact it was a group of Muslims asking for the change based on religious beliefs, when others were turned down for the same request.
4. Never sais this was gunna lead to world domination, I say it is unfair and inconsistent with established rules.
5. If womens only gyms ae so popular, there must be plenty of them around for these Muslim women to join.
6. Read up, it is there....... "Read other news articles about this. Apparently women of other faiths had expressed an interest in these hours also.
While I agree that I don't like that this was done at the behest of Muslim students, the fact that the end result does not explicitly favor muslims makes this an OK agreement in my book."
are blind men allowed to use the gym during the women only hours?
For the Muslims womens safety I would say not, they risk stoning if the blind man all of a sudden, by the grace of Allah, regained their sight and looked at one of the women.twiistaaa wrote:
are blind men allowed to use the gym during the women only hours?
1. Why did you start at 2?lowing wrote:
It was religious reason stipulate for the request, and when others asked it was apparently not rewponded to.......SenorToeNails wrote: "Read other news articles about this. Apparently women of other faiths had expressed an interest in these hours also.Bertster7 wrote:
That would only make any sense whatsoever if what they were asking for was Muslim women only time at the gym. It's not.lowing wrote:
If it were Christian wheel chair riders, or White Supremist wheel chair riders I would maintain the same argument.So, you don't like it when anyone asks for change to benefit them? That's even stupider than what I thought you were saying.lowing wrote:
I make no bones about it, I do not like that Muslim women are asking for concessions, I do not like it when gays ask for concessions, I do not like it when white people ask for concessions, I do not like it when black people ask for concessions.So they were women.lowing wrote:
These were not women, they were Muslim women.
In fact it wasn't a Muslim body backing the request at all:Who were asked by 6, yes 6 (better be scared they're about to take over the whole of America ), Muslim students if this would be possible. The university said they would give it a trial period.The change was prompted by a request from the Harvard College Women's CenterIn that case why are Women only gyms so popular and amongst the most profitable ones around?lowing wrote:
Not all women felt the need for this, only Muslim women
I don't know of any gyms that do not have some women only time set aside. The gyms at the university I went to certainly did.When did he point that out? I think you are making stuff up....lowing wrote:
and as SenorToeNails likes to point out, when JUST women made the request, they didn't get shit.
While I agree that I don't like that this was done at the behest of Muslim students, the fact that the end result does not explicitly favor muslims makes this an OK agreement in my book."
2. Is it accepted when white people ask for change to benefit them?? Nope, Ok well then to be fair and equal, nobody has the right to ask for change that benefits them.....We are all equal....
3. In fact it was a group of Muslims asking for the change based on religious beliefs, when others were turned down for the same request.
4. Never sais this was gunna lead to world domination, I say it is unfair and inconsistent with established rules.
5. If womens only gyms ae so popular, there must be plenty of them around for these Muslim women to join.
6. Read up, it is there....... "Read other news articles about this. Apparently women of other faiths had expressed an interest in these hours also.
While I agree that I don't like that this was done at the behest of Muslim students, the fact that the end result does not explicitly favor muslims makes this an OK agreement in my book."
2. Yes, it is. Provided that change is reasonable and sensible, although racial distinction is always putting you on dodgy ground. So womens rights, for example, are a bad idea? That's how positive change happens. Are you so blind you can't see that?
3. No one has said others were turned away with the same request, no one but you, that is.
4. No it isn't. It follows perfectly normal and established social trends.
5. There probably are. But they shouldn't have to. They are paying members of the university and have a right to the benefits of a subsidised gym, just like all the other paying students. Their views as students are very relevant. Do students in the US not have the right to vote to block or create new legislation within the university, that's exactly the sort of thing you do over here through the universities branch of the NUS.
6. That's not what he said at all.
Where does that say that other, non-Muslim, women had requested it and were turned down? It doesn't. It's just you leaping to conclusions not based on real evidence again.Read other news articles about this. Apparently women of other faiths had expressed an interest in these hours also.
Lowing, I don't think there is a definite line to draw that applies equally for all cases. You say no special rights or privileges for special interest groups. The reality is, though, that those are granted in a wide variety of areas, starting with religious groups, ethnic minorities, soldiers, pregnant women, peopple with a physical diability, etc.
And the reason behind that is not that we as society do not want to treat everyone equally. Of course we do. But we have come to realize that people are different, have different needs and requirements, and that we as a society must reckognize the right of these groups to lobby for their interests and have them at least adressed by authorities when it is feasible. I mean, you are not suddenly going to remove all those churchbells, wheelchair access ramps, and disabled parking slots either, are you ?
In this particular case, equality also means that those female muslims students had the same right to ask for special treatment as other special interest groups. And as long as there is no explicit university policy that all on campus gyms must be co-ed, it was totally within the rights of the authorities to follow the request, on a trial basis.
Let's imagine if a male student group had made the same request. Could it have been considered with the same sincerity ? Of course.
And as I said before, look at the time slots the students have been given. 4 of those 6 hours are on weekdays, 8 to 10 a.m.
I mean, who works out during those times anyway ?
From my point of view, The university has tried to avoid inconveniencing the other students as much as possible and still adress the needs of the female muslim students.
Finally, I 'll give you an example from my front door. At my local shopping mall, there is a certain amount of parking slots close to the elevators "reserved" for pregnant women / women with small children. Personally, I consider that sexist and unfair towards men. I mean, is it our fault that we can't give birth ?
But I can also see why shopping mall authorities would want to adress the concerns and needs of that very specific group of customers.
Also, I am a gentleman, so I accept that mild inconvenience as part of my daily reality, and move on.
And the reason behind that is not that we as society do not want to treat everyone equally. Of course we do. But we have come to realize that people are different, have different needs and requirements, and that we as a society must reckognize the right of these groups to lobby for their interests and have them at least adressed by authorities when it is feasible. I mean, you are not suddenly going to remove all those churchbells, wheelchair access ramps, and disabled parking slots either, are you ?
In this particular case, equality also means that those female muslims students had the same right to ask for special treatment as other special interest groups. And as long as there is no explicit university policy that all on campus gyms must be co-ed, it was totally within the rights of the authorities to follow the request, on a trial basis.
Let's imagine if a male student group had made the same request. Could it have been considered with the same sincerity ? Of course.
And as I said before, look at the time slots the students have been given. 4 of those 6 hours are on weekdays, 8 to 10 a.m.
I mean, who works out during those times anyway ?
From my point of view, The university has tried to avoid inconveniencing the other students as much as possible and still adress the needs of the female muslim students.
Finally, I 'll give you an example from my front door. At my local shopping mall, there is a certain amount of parking slots close to the elevators "reserved" for pregnant women / women with small children. Personally, I consider that sexist and unfair towards men. I mean, is it our fault that we can't give birth ?
But I can also see why shopping mall authorities would want to adress the concerns and needs of that very specific group of customers.
Also, I am a gentleman, so I accept that mild inconvenience as part of my daily reality, and move on.
I agree with everything you just said 100%. I do not see soldiers, handicapped pregnant women, etc as special interest groups however, because, they include ALL soldiers handicapped and pregnant women of all diversities.B.Schuss wrote:
Lowing, I don't think there is a definite line to draw that applies equally for all cases. You say no special rights or privileges for special interest groups. The reality is, though, that those are granted in a wide variety of areas, starting with religious groups, ethnic minorities, soldiers, pregnant women, peopple with a physical diability, etc.
And the reason behind that is not that we as society do not want to treat everyone equally. Of course we do. But we have come to realize that people are different, have different needs and requirements, and that we as a society must reckognize the right of these groups to lobby for their interests and have them at least adressed by authorities when it is feasible. I mean, you are not suddenly going to remove all those churchbells, wheelchair access ramps, and disabled parking slots either, are you ?
In this particular case, equality also means that those female muslims students had the same right to ask for special treatment as other special interest groups. And as long as there is no explicit university policy that all on campus gyms must be co-ed, it was totally within the rights of the authorities to follow the request, on a trial basis.
Let's imagine if a male student group had made the same request. Could it have been considered with the same sincerity ? Of course.
And as I said before, look at the time slots the students have been given. 4 of those 6 hours are on weekdays, 8 to 10 a.m.
I mean, who works out during those times anyway ?
From my point of view, The university has tried to avoid inconveniencing the other students as much as possible and still adress the needs of the female muslim students.
Finally, I 'll give you an example from my front door. At my local shopping mall, there is a certain amount of parking slots close to the elevators "reserved" for pregnant women / women with small children. Personally, I consider that sexist and unfair towards men. I mean, is it our fault that we can't give birth ?
But I can also see why shopping mall authorities would want to adress the concerns and needs of that very specific group of customers.
Also, I am a gentleman, so I accept that mild inconvenience as part of my daily reality, and move on.
This request was made not by women, but by Muslim women and not for privacy but for religious concerns. I am not addressing the fact that it is now open to ALL women, that is great. I am addressing the fact that a special interest group was granted special attention.
I would feel the same way if a group of gay men approached the university with a special request to have private "gay" hours at the gym. The fact that they decided to acknowledge the request but made the special hours for all men does little to change my mind.
The fact there is no definite :line in the sand when you say enough is enough is my problem as well, then there is no limit as to what a special interest group can lobby for and expect. IF special interest groups keep raising the bar 1 inch at a time you will not notice until, one day you all of a sudden can no longer reach it.
Don't think you grasp the very concept of what a special interest group is lowing or is it a problem when the wrong special interest group demands something ?lowing wrote:
I do not see soldiers, handicapped pregnant women, etc as special interest groups however, because, they include ALL soldiers handicapped and pregnant women of all diversities.
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
I Don't think you grasp the very concept of what a special interest group is in the context of this thread.Varegg wrote:
Don't think you grasp the very concept of what a special interest group is lowing or is it a problem when the wrong special interest group demands something ?lowing wrote:
I do not see soldiers, handicapped pregnant women, etc as special interest groups however, because, they include ALL soldiers handicapped and pregnant women of all diversities.
BLACK soldiers is a special interest group...........not a soldier.
WHITE handicapped people is a special interest group.....not handicapped people.
INDIAN pregnant women are a special interest group......not pregnant women.
MUSLIM women are a special interest group .........not women
You can get as general as you want to, hell if you want, you can call families special interest groups......but in the context of this thread we are a little more specific.....and I think you know that.