Muslim student requests no contact with females at martial arts class

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Disagree completely. As the "I am Canadian" beer ad says, "We believe in diversity, NOT assimilation". I agree with "come here and adhere to our laws", but what are these "social norms" that they have to adhere to? Last time I pushed this point I was told that immigrants don't shovel their driveway in winter. Is that what it comes down to? You can come to Canada so long as you shovel your driveway?

I don't expect Muslims that come here to stop watching soccer and start watching hockey. I don't expect them to stop eating their traditional cuisine in favour of burgers and donuts. I don't even expect them to change the way they dress. If a Sikh desires to wear a turban, so be it.

As for keeping your religion in the home or in the place of worship, I don't think that is possible or fair. Why can Christians celebrate their religion outside the home, but Muslims cannot? And religion is what gives people their value systems... how can you ask people to follow their value systems only in their homes and in their place of worship?

In everything, I go back to the Star Trek "Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one. Sometimes the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many." If the values of a community clash with the laws of Canada, then of course the needs of the majority outweigh the needs of the minority. But if my work team, which includes a Muslim member, wants to go out for a celebratory lunch and I can put the lunch either the day before or the day after Ramadahn starts, I'll put it the day before.

In the case of the guy that doesn't want to take the martial arts class, his needs to not be in a class with women are outweighed by the needs of the women in the class to be treated as equals.

If we can accomodate people with different behaviours and values without infringing on our own rights then we should. Diversity of opinions, ideas, behaviours... they are not things to be curtailed, but rather embraced.

Meh. IMO I don't care if it's religious based or not it's sexist. If this was a white supremacist telling the black guy to stand on the other side of the room we would be all over him calling him out for being scum. The truth is that there's really no different here as like it or not it's still a man following his beliefs whether we agree with them or not.

Human rights come first, then law and religion trailing. End of story.

[Devils'Advocate]

Why quote me on that? I stated that the needs of the women to have equality and respect outweighed his need to follow his religion. I'm saying that people should have the right to follow their religion and not assimilate to our way of life, so long as it does not impose on our laws (which include protection of human rights).

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Why quote me on that? I stated that the needs of the women to have equality and respect outweighed his need to follow his religion. I'm saying that people should have the right to follow their religion and not assimilate to our way of life, so long as it does not impose on our laws (which include protection of human rights).

Is this not an example of diversity going bad? Some assimilation is required like it or not.

[Devils'Advocate]

Me: "Grass is green"
EE: "I'm sorry, but like it or not, and I hate to have to say this, but grass is actually GREEN."

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Surely you can see the difference between a gym that is - from the start - a "Women Only" or "Men Only" gym, and me waltzing into a co-ed establishment and demanding them to segregate the genders to appease my religious delusions.

How did the "Women only" gyms start up? I would have to think there was a demand from women to have a gym where men are not allowed.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Meh. IMO I don't care if it's religious based or not it's sexist. If this was a white supremacist telling the black guy to stand on the other side of the room we would be all over him calling him out for being scum. The truth is that there's really no different here as like it or not it's still a man following his beliefs whether we agree with them or not.

Human rights come first, then law and religion trailing. End of story.

I disagree.

There is the added element of sex between genders. He's not discriminating against a woman, because she's a woman; he's choosing not to be put in a situation that might lead to sex outside of marriage.

You might not agree with his ultra-conservative views, but I think you're misrepresenting them.

Honestly, people are making too big of an issue out of this story. He asked a teacher if his religious views could be accommodated. The correct approach would be to see if their was a practical solution. If not, tell him no. It's then up to the student if he wants to stay in the class/university of GTFO.

Instead, this is being turned into some kind of witch hunt.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by ken0042

How did the "Women only" gyms start up? I would have to think there was a demand from women to have a gym where men are not allowed.

What difference does it make? We could get into a discussion about whether or not gender-specific gyms make sense and are - in this day and age - acceptable that could go forever, it's not relevant to the discussion. Someone is not walking into a gender-specific club and demanding equality/inclusion. Just the opposite, they are walking into a co-ed facility and demanding segregation. This is going backwards.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by blankall

I disagree.

There is the added element of sex between genders. He's not discriminating against a woman, because she's a woman; he's choosing not to be put in a situation that might lead to sex outside of marriage.

You might not agree with his ultra-conservative views, but I think you're misrepresenting them.

Honestly, people are making too big of an issue out of this story. He asked a teacher if his religious views could be accommodated. The correct approach would be to see if their was a practical solution. If not, tell him no. It's then up to the student if he wants to stay in the class/university of GTFO.

Instead, this is being turned into some kind of witch hunt.

Yeah no, he did.

This is where this story begins and ends with me.

As one of the liberal posters on the board I get this. But it disobeys other rights.

This is anti-feminist and cannot stand. This example of justice is wrong.

I am heartened ('emboldened' another word used incorrectly) that this is largely gotten right in Canada. We are still known as a culture accepting others even over our brothers. But in all cultural differences that put religion over female, I will not only side, but defend violently, the rights of women.

[Clarkey]

I work with one of these turkey's, I intentionally won't shake his hand and disregard him in meetings. I can not stand this bs.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

What difference does it make? We could get into a discussion about whether or not gender-specific gyms make sense and are - in this day and age - acceptable that could go forever, it's not relevant to the discussion. Someone is not walking into a gender-specific club and demanding equality/inclusion. Just the opposite, they are walking into a co-ed facility and demanding segregation. This is going backwards.

I would say it might not be relevant if there were male only gyms available. I don't believe there are any; or at least not that I can think of. However there are women-only facilities available. In the absence of gender equality, he was asking for some consideration.

Would I be asking for that- nope. However some people might.

[Titan]

I think an apt description of how Canada handles rights is that the right of your fist stops and the end of my nose. In other words, you have your rights and are entitled to enforce them up until the exercise of your rights infringes on the rights of another person. He has every right to "want" to take a class without women but the accommodation stops if it means preventing others from exercising their rights.

[TorqueDog]

^This.

Originally Posted by ken0042

I would say it might not be relevant if there were male only gyms available. I don't believe there are any; or at least not that I can think of. However there are women-only facilities available. In the absence of gender equality, he was asking for some consideration.

Would I be asking for that- nope. However some people might.

Bow Valley Club has separate men's and women's areas.

He was asking for a co-ed facility to segregate their class on the basis of his religious delusions, which offends decency and reason right off the hop, and likely violates the rights of the other members.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Titan

I think an apt description of how Canada handles rights is that the right of your fist stops and the end of my nose. In other words, you have your rights and are entitled to enforce them up until the exercise of your rights infringes on the rights of another person. He has every right to "want" to take a class without women but the accommodation stops if it means preventing others from exercising their rights.

I agree. I guess I don't see how the women's rights were violated at all. It's not like they have a right to spar against whoever they choose. And with the physical fitness industry, there are many examples of segregated classes. I would even say that the women have an advantage in the number of places that offer women-only over places that have men only.

If this man said "I refuse to spar against the fithly whores- get them out of my sight!"- then I would say the women have a right to not be disrespected like that. But it sounds like he approached his instructor, mentioned that he prefered not to spar against the women. The instructor tried to accomidate his wishes by making him stay on one side of the room, and asking the women to not approach him.

He didn't ask for the women to be kicked out of the class. He didn't ask for them men to have their own room. He asked for some space; and to not be forced to fight against and hit a woman.

[Wormius]

^^^ I think it is against the spirit of the class, though.

[Nage Waza]

The whole story is stupid. The guy is an idiot, period. This is against our core values. What if he got a job somewhere, now the employer has to segregate women from him? What if he was on a bus? What about a cashier touching his groceries? We shouldn't go down this path, we should be breaking down barriers.

[Goodlad]

Originally Posted by ken0042

I agree. I guess I don't see how the women's rights were violated at all. It's not like they have a right to spar against whoever they choose. And with the physical fitness industry, there are many examples of segregated classes. I would even say that the women have an advantage in the number of places that offer women-only over places that have men only.

If this man said "I refuse to spar against the fithly whores- get them out of my sight!"- then I would say the women have a right to not be disrespected like that. But it sounds like he approached his instructor, mentioned that he prefered not to spar against the women. The instructor tried to accomidate his wishes by making him stay on one side of the room, and asking the women to not approach him.

He didn't ask for the women to be kicked out of the class. He didn't ask for them men to have their own room. He asked for some space; and to not be forced to fight against and hit a woman.

As far as the bolded goes I think that's mostly a matter of supply and demand. Most of the guys I know who work out at a gym consider checking out "hot babes" an essential part of their regimen. Coincidentally this is also why more women are interested in having a women-only facility to workout at.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Goodlad

As far as the bolded goes I think that's mostly a matter of supply and demand. Most of the guys I know who work out at a gym consider checking out "hot babes" an essential part of their regimen. Coincidentally this is also why more women are interested in having a women-only facility to workout at.

But does demand matter? Its okay to be sexist if its in demand?

As a North American Society we seem to accept accommodation for Women's only things and want to break down barriers into mens only things. (clubs, Golf Courses etc.) This makes sense as Women in the past as well as in some circumstances now were/aren;t treated equally. So breaking down these barriers helps to promote equality.

For me this comes down to the reason for the request. If it is because he thinks less of women and they are inferior then his request his not okay. But if this request is a genuine I don't want to touch women because I believe that Karate is too intimate of behaviour to be shared between sexes then I think I am okay with that. I mean in Judo with grabbing the outfits there is bound to be accidental boob touching. If someone is uncomfortable with that be it because of a Jealous wife or being very conservative we should be willing to accommodate that.

So for me it depends on intent. The intent of Women's gyms is to avoid objectification of women by men in the gym. Therefore its okay. If the intent of this is to avoid contact in what he believes is a inappropriate way to touch a women he is not married to I see it falling under the same umbrella. And provided there isn't a mens class he should be accommodated by not having to spar with women. I don't see segregating them to the other side of the class as appropriate but just having women not spar with men who are not comfortable with it seems like a reasonable accommodation.

[WhiteTiger]

This has made me wonder...aside from this religous non-issue...is there any demand FOR male-only gyms? You'd think that if there was anything close to a market, something would have shown up to fill the need, as it were. I don't think that I've ever heard a guy say "Man, I wish there were no women in this gym."

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

This has made me wonder...aside from this religous non-issue...is there any demand FOR male-only gyms? You'd think that if there was anything close to a market, something would have shown up to fill the need, as it were. I don't think that I've ever heard a guy say "Man, I wish there were no women in this gym."

Sorry, I don't mean this post entirely based on your quote:

There are male only teams in every school pretty much, female hockey teams, man vs man sports and women vs women sports. These things exist, in fact, all over the place. Walk into a church and insist on hebrew would be stupid, as would pretty much anything like this. There are cultural centres and all kinds of ethnically divided clubs.

There is no male only gym probably because they wouldn't get any clients. I like my gym because there is a mix there, and other obvious reasons. Had a women walked into my gym insisting on working out without males watching, we would all tell her to GTFO.

The story is about walking into a place and refusing to purchase what they were selling. If I walk into a restaurant and want a coke and they only sell pepsi, is this a reasonable complaint?

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

The story is about walking into a place and refusing to purchase what they were selling. If I walk into a restaurant and want a coke and they only sell pepsi, is this a reasonable complaint?

I wonder if that is how it went down. Maybe the guy signed up for the class and didn't realize it was co-ed. After the first class he went to withdraw; and he was asked why. It's entirely possible the club decided that it wasn't going to be an issue to have him stay on just one side of the class; and ask the women to give him some space. So with your restaurant analogy; it's like customers looking at the menu and deciding to eat elsewhere. When the manager asks why and you say it's a Coke/Pepsi issue, he sends the bus boy to the corner store to get different drinks.

The one thing that is quite telling for me here; it says in the article that one of the women "contacted every level of government but was ignored." If she has gone all the way to the federal government and they didn't think it was an issue; I am thinking there's likely more factors that we aren't hearing about.