Advice Goddess Blog
« Previous | Home | Next »

Islam Goes To College
We've seen too much of this in Europe, and I suspect we'll be seeing more and more of this in the U.S.A. -- attempts to make it nice and comfy in our free, secular, democratic society for the Muslims whose primitive religion commands them to convert, kill, or tax and humiliate the rest of us as dhimmis.

They can't do that yet, thanks to the size of our population. So, they'll just make a mockery of separation of church and state and other hard-won western values -- and, most obscenely, by using our laws and ideas about "tolerance" whenever possible.

Abbie Ruzicka writes in BU's Independent Free Press that Harvard is trying women-only gym hours to accomodate the Muslims -- which means men can't go to the gym during that time, and at an institution that gets Federal funds:

Men have not been allowed to enter the Quadrangle Recreational Athletic Center during certain times since Jan. 28, after members of the Harvard Islamic Society and the Harvard Women's Center petitioned the university for a more comfortable environment for women.

Harvard Islamic Society's Islamic Knowledge Committee officer Ola Aljawhary, a junior, said the women-only hours are being tested on a trial basis. The special gym hours will be analyzed over Spring Break to determine if they will continue, she said.

Aljawhary said that she does not believe that the women-only gym hours discriminate against men.

"These hours are necessary because there is a segment of the Harvard female population that is not found in gyms not because they don't want to work out, but because for them working out in a co-ed gym is uncomfortable, awkward or problematic in some way," she said.

Though the policy was in part initiated by the school's Islamic group, Aljawhary said women-only hours are not a case of "minority rights trumping majority preference" and said women of different faiths have showed interest in the hours.

"We live together in one community, it only makes sense for everyone to compromise slightly in order for everyone to live happily," she said. "This matter is simple: Can't we just display basic decency and show tolerance and inclusion for people not a part of the mainstream majority?"

Sorry, if you can't work out in the presence of people with penises, pay your money and join a ladies gym. Preferably one back in Saudi Arabia. Oh, sorry, are women lacking opportunity and rights there? Well, don't bring that sort of thing around these parts. We won our freedom from the British 200-plus years ago, and our forefathers did a pretty nice job writing up the Constitution and Bill of Rights. How about we not bend over for people who'd like to see them ripped up and replaced with Sharia law?

Or, as commenter Gregg said below Ruzicka's article:

There's nothing quite like conforming to the least common denominator to really torpedo the entire concept of Western civilization. If Muslim women are worried about their "modesty" then maybe they should step out of the 7th century.

Jen06 commented:

"We live together in one community, it only makes sense for everyone to compromise slightly in order for everyone to live happily," said Ola Aljawhary.

Yeah, and how much in the way of compromise are you agreeing to?

"Aljawhary said that she does not believe that the women-only gym hours discriminate against men."

Of course it does! It discriminates against men who need to use the facilities (due to schedule etc.) at those particular times!

What if I belong to Aryan Nations and 'working out' with black people makes me 'uncomfortable'. That doesn't discriminate does it?

I thought "separate but equal" was unconstitutional.

Paco commented:

Why stop with re-segregating the gym? Go all out and emulate everything they do in the apartheid Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. I read they arrested a woman because she illegally "mixed" with men other than her relatives at a Starbucks in Riyadh. So let's have special hours for women to go to Starbucks by themselves in Boston.

Whatever it takes to make Muslims feel comfortable. That's all that matters.

I'm especially disturbed, but not especially surprised, that the Harvard Women's Center is advocating FOR discrimination, which I guess they really don't have a problem with, provided somebody's discriminating against men.

Posted by aalkon at February 26, 2008 10:40 AM

Comments

I guess I should stop being stunned that when there is an actual patriarchy to be confronted, I don't see much in the way of women's marches, and outrage. You'd think there'd be burhka burning in the streets.

The only thing I can think of is that it's REALLY powerful magic, or powerfully selective reasoning...

Posted by: SwissArmyD at February 26, 2008 2:52 AM

SwissArmyD - The feminazis realize that American men aren't likely to cut their heads off for talking smack. It's survival, really.

And this whole trend of women's gyms has pissed me off for a while anyhow. Women sued to get access to men-only health clubs, and after finding out they don't like being hit on, they create a line of women-only gyms that don't allow men. And this is somehow legal.

Although the difference there is I don't think Curves is getting federal finding.

Posted by: brian Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 3:56 AM

Brian - you don't want to go to Curves anyway, trust. I checked it out one time after believing the commercials that it was somehow a revolutionary way to work out. I cursed myself; I should have known better. I work out on the "boys side" at a local gym. You know, the side that isn't 100% Cybex and Nautilus machines and there's occasional grunting, sweating and bulging muscles. Why would a woman NOT want to be there ;-}

Back to the topic: how the hell do you work out wearing a head scarf or burqa? Or am I just being "ignant"?

Religion is not a special need like severe cerebral palsy or blindness. It is not a condition of genetics like sex or race. It is a subjective, artificial thing created by men. No one outside the group should have to suffer due to the demands of people within the group. People outside the group should not have to bend to the will of those w/in it. By not making special accommodations to those in the group which are not necessitated by those outside it's putting a burden on those outside the group. That's infringement 101. Kind of like when their 5-time-daily prayer session is blasted on loudspeakers through out an entire town (Ohio, was it?).

When I'm at the gym I don't want guys hitting on me, either. Fortunately most guys just want to pump some iron and socialize w/ other dudes. Not all guys want to fuck you. If a guy stares and makes me uncomfortable I make eye contact and he'll usually stop. It's called living in a society. Normal guys look at chicks. Creepos stare and whistle - you give him a disgusted eye roll and get on w/ it. If their behavior is truly abominable go talk to the front desk.

Posted by: Gretchen Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 4:42 AM

Ah, this is a great opportunity for someone looking to make waves. Gather all the legal precedents by which women forced their way into men's clubs, and demand the reverse.

But, truthfully, I'm on the other side of the argument. There is every reason to allow men-only and women-only organizations, or timeslots within an organization. Gender is a very fundamental attribute in people. Interactions in all-male or all-female groups can be very different from mix-gender groups. Not better, not worse, just different, and the difference is enjoyable.

As long as we're talking about private clubs (even commercial ones, like fitness centers, golf clubs, or whatever), why not? Let people choose who they want to associate with, and when.

In this specific case, the important point is to have clear guidelines: under which circumstances will women's hours be offered? It should then be just as possible to reserve certain times for men-only. The point is, in the end, for the Harvard gymnasium to serve the needs of its customers.

Posted by: bradley13 at February 26, 2008 4:48 AM

So while America's college campuses are transitioning to unisex bathrooms and dormatories, it's somehow time to begin segregating the gyms?

Apparently taking a dump next to a man isn't stressful, but working out next to a man is.

Posted by: Snoop-Diggity-DANG-Dawg at February 26, 2008 5:08 AM

Religion is not a special need like severe cerebral palsy or blindness. It is not a condition of genetics like sex or race. It is a subjective, artificial thing created by men. No one outside the group should have to suffer due to the demands of people within the group. People outside the group should not have to bend to the will of those w/in it. By not making special accommodations to those in the group which are not necessitated by those outside it's putting a burden on those outside the group. That's infringement 101. Kind of like when their 5-time-daily prayer session is blasted on loudspeakers through out an entire town (Ohio, was it?).

Exactly, Gretchen. But, Bradley, if I'm a single girl at Harvard, one who does not follow the religion of a guy who was actually a child molester...

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha.htm

...If, I'm a single girl at Harvard, and not a pup-tent wearer and Islam follower, I want to have workout hours where I can meet men.

Posted by: Amy Alkon Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 5:26 AM

Apparently taking a dump next to a man isn't stressful, but working out next to a man is.

Having grown up with 3 brothers and many male cousins, I've done both. Neither one is any big damn deal unless you make it one. I get so sick of this crap. o_O

Posted by: Flynne at February 26, 2008 5:34 AM

Bradley: As expensive as schools may be funds aren't endless and schools can't erect a man-only, woman-only and co-ed gyms. Most schools have athlete-only and everyone-else gyms. But to demand separate facilities of a university is unreasonable. Barring certain groups from the free school gym isn't fair.

The solution: if you have a problem w/ it go join a privately owned woman's only gym. No one gets to discriminate on someone else's dime and time.

Posted by: Gretchen Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 5:35 AM

Also, I'm rather like a college student now in my deadline lifestyle. There are a few times in the day or week that I can work out, and if I have to go to a public facility to do it, instead of doing it at home, I don't want my hours of access cut down because a bunch of people believe, without evidence, in a bunch of ridiculous crap -- especially in the ridiculous, infidel-bashing (and murder-of-infidel advocating) religion of Islam.

Posted by: Amy Alkon Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 5:43 AM

Gretchen: fair enough: if the facilities can't support single-sex time-slots, then they can't. If they can, and the demand is there, I don't have anything against it.

Amy, I agree with you. I also prefer working out in co-ed environment. But I know both guys and girls who don't. If the facilities can support it, there's no reason not to offer the choice. If they can't offer the choice, then they obviously have to be open to everyone.

Posted by: bradley13 at February 26, 2008 5:43 AM

Oh, and a suggestion for any modern, western freedoms-loving woman at Harvard: If I were you, I'd gather my like-minded girlfriends and show up at those discriminatory gym hours wearing paste-on chest hair and big strap-ons.

I suggest men, too, try to get in during those hours, and when they're denied, bring a case against Harvard. I'm generally not one who likes litigiousness as a solution to everything, but what's good for the goose...

Posted by: Amy Alkon Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 6:10 AM

Back to the topic: how the hell do you work out wearing a head scarf or burqa? Or am I just being "ignant"?

They don't have to wear the body-condom if men aren't present.

But if you can ban people and things that make you uncomfortable then I'm wondering why

- the college Republicans don't ban the college Democrats
- the college Democrats don't ban the college Republican
- the college Christians don't require all facilities to close on Sunday
- the college Jews don't require all facilities to close on Saturday
- the college KKK members don't require all non-white students to be expelled
- the college NAACP members don't all non-black students to be expelled
- the college Aztlan members don't require all non-hispanics to be expelled
- the college fat people can't have the non-fat removed from campus
- the college thin people can't have the non-thin removed from campus

Yeah, it's a potentially infinite list that, somehow, gets reduced to one, and only one, group. Why would that be? I just can't figure it out. From "the chop off of my head" I can't think of an answer. Bueller? Bueller?

Posted by: Curly Smith at February 26, 2008 6:11 AM

Back to the topic: how the hell do you work out wearing a head scarf or burqa?

I think the idea behind the women-only gym hours is that Muslim women can work out without wearing a head scarf, because no men will be around.

Posted by: marion at February 26, 2008 6:15 AM

Sorry, I must have saved the wrong screen last night. Left this bit off the end of the blog entry, which I just replaced (above):

I'm especially disturbed, but not especially surprised, that the Harvard Women's Center is advocating FOR discrimination, which I guess they really don't have a problem with, provided somebody's discriminating against men.

Posted by: Amy Alkon Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 6:24 AM

College Democrats might be too socialist for my taste, but at least they don't seek to chop off college Republicans' heads, or wear bomb vests to Libertarian chili cookoffs, if there are such things.

Posted by: Amy Alkon Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 6:25 AM

Ok - got it. I thought they had to wear head scarves outside of their home, period.

But again, wearing a headscarf is a religious choice and not being around men is a religious choice (or demand...). Actually, choice should be "choice." They need to be more tolerant of our generally practiced lifestyle and understand that we can't make special arrangements b/c said lifestyle doesn't jibe with their religious leanings. Too bad.

College schedules tend to be incredibly random and I'd be hard pressed to believe that the special woman-only hours don't inconvenience many guys.

Posted by: Gretchen Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 6:36 AM

Gretchen - I'd consider Islam to be a mental disorder deserving of "special-needs" designation. I mean, look at the way some of them behave when they don't get their way.

Bradley - I was never in favor of women litigating their way into men's clubs. I'm in favor of free association in the private sector. What I am demanding from these sue-happy bitches-in-britches is intellectual consistency. Which is not likely forthcoming given that most of them aren't carrying any actual intellect anyhow.

So far as giving in to Islam - I say we let them have their segregated facilities after they start allowing Kufir to visit Mecca, and they start letting people with Israeli stamps in their passport in to Saudi Arabia.

Until then, fuck them to hell.

Posted by: brian Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 7:50 AM

Curly - Various liberal groups HAVE tried to ban several right-leaning groups from campuses by simply labeling them as "hate groups".

Posted by: brian Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 7:51 AM

I hate working out around men. If my college had had "girl only" gym hours, I would probably have used them.

But I really think that if the women want a man free gym they should raise money and put together a women only gym on campus. It is not unheard of for their to be multiple work out facilities at a university, and this would not restrict other people's access to the main gym. Women who didn't want to work out with men would not have to schedule around their hours. And neither would everyone else who couldn't give 2 shits.

It probably wouldn't be as nice, but my thought, if you want separate, you have to pay for equal.

Posted by: Shinobi at February 26, 2008 7:57 AM

I'm not a litigious person, but Harvard men need to sue. This issue needs to be clarified: Can an institution that accepts federal funding engage in religiously-motivated sexual discrimination? The answer will be telling, and I think the Roberts Court would get this one right. If not, we're in deep shit.

Posted by: justin case at February 26, 2008 8:29 AM

What about the men employed at the gym, assuming there are any? Are they now required to work other hours so they don't interfere with the women-only time?

Posted by: Tony Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 8:47 AM

Excellent question, Tony.

Posted by: Amy Alkon Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 8:59 AM

"Not all guys want to fuck you." Post a picture, I suspect you're wrong.

My wife and I have always worked out at separate gyms. She goes to these yoga type places where it is probably true that no guy in there wants to fuck a woman. There actually is a fairly large market for women who want to work out in a comfortable environment. I think that weakens the case for religious discrimination here.

When Spring Break arrives, let's see if other groups of women find these special hours enticing.

Posted by: smurfy at February 26, 2008 10:52 AM

Totally. This stuff gets me so angry that I am glad I am not a man. Men aren't allowed to bitch, they just have to suck it up, or else they are a "pussy". I am starting to have an inkling of what it is like to be a man in this regard, because, you see, I am part of the WASP, tax-paying, normal-vanilla majority, and we aren't allowed to say peep without being called a racist. Well, poor white men (which I believe are still in the majority in the US and Europe) have to deal with that and being called a sexist too!

Anyway, seeing as how Islam covers just about every aspect of life, down to how many rocks you use to wipe your ass, I suspect that we will continue to see arguments against "religious discrimination" infiltrating the very fiber of our society.

Posted by: liz at February 26, 2008 11:40 AM

on reflection, the thing that amuses me, is the lack of savvy... If the Isalmic club, had gone to the womens club, and said, how's about segregated workouts, then the womens club takes up the standard without the religious connotation, and then most people don't say 'boo.

The weird thing is that I attended several colleges, from 1000 to 35,000 at the UofArizona... and there were often gymns and weightrooms that were gender specific because they were attached to gender sports. Perhaps things have changed with the advent of ballys and 24hr fitness... But I would be willing to bet a little green that THERE ARE women only gyms at Harvard. Maybe there's an alum around who knows...

Posted by: SwissArmyD at February 26, 2008 12:19 PM

But I would be willing to bet a little green that THERE ARE women only gyms at Harvard.

You'd lose that bet. There are none, at least not ones operated by the school on campus. There may well be women-only gyms in the greater Cambridge area, though.

Posted by: marion at February 26, 2008 12:35 PM

Why don't they just go to Wellesley or Bryn Mawr if a coed campus is such a damn problem for them?

Posted by: SeanH at February 26, 2008 2:03 PM

Why don't they just go to Wellesley or Bryn Mawr if a coed campus is such a damn problem for them?

Because, while both of those are excellent schools, no one has ever referred to "the Wellesley of X" or "the Bryn Mawr of X." :)

Posted by: marion Author Profile Page at February 26, 2008 10:12 PM

I think the proper solution has been suggested by combining a couple of the comments.

1) Turn the men's locker room into a women's only gym room off the main, co-ed gym.
2) Turn the women's locker room unisex.

I think that solves the needs of everyone mentioned above.

Am I missing something?

Also, note to Amy, tonight I discovered something more annoying than a one-sided cell-phone call at a coffeehouse. Tonight at the coffeehouse folks were using the speakerphone feature of their cellphone to conduct their telephone business.

Posted by: jerry at February 26, 2008 11:40 PM

The proper solution is this:

If life in the modern world doesn't work for you, the answer isn't turning the modern world primitive but staying in the primitive world that suits your primitive needs.

Men are being discriminated against here, and it's no surprise that the Harvard Women's Center, which surely has some anti-discrimination mandate, is leading the charge to screw men out of gym time...bending over for the ladies whose religion commands them to lurch our society backward and make it their own. Why should a single dime be spent to do this?

As I wrote a few days ago, could we be more hospitable to those who seek to destroy us?

(You notice them putting the welcome mat out in Mecca or Saudi Backward Arabia for the Jews?)

People using the speakerphone feature of their cellphone will be recorded by me and put on the Internet, and I make this clear to them and bring out my tiny recorder. This shuts them up real fast, which is kind of unfortunate, because I'd love to put some asshat's recorded conversation on the Internet. Of course, an empty vessel makes the most noise.

Posted by: Amy Alkon Author Profile Page at February 27, 2008 12:04 AM

Speaking of asshats, in other college news (courtesy of News of the Weird):

WEEK OF FEBRUARY 24, 2008

LEAD STORY

Several Duke University campus organizations, including the Women's Center, the Student Health Center and the Women's Studies Department, sponsored a "Sex Workers Art Show" on Feb. 3, at which nearly nude "artists" danced for students and others while vulgarly criticizing America via acts such as a woman's pretending to eat excreted dollar bills and a man's kneeling with an American flag inserted in his rear end. Two years ago, Duke's men's lacrosse team was vilified by the Duke administration and faculty merely for hiring two female strippers for a party (from which emanated false charges of rape and the eventual disbarment of the local district attorney). A university spokesman explained to a National Journal reporter that the recent show was acceptable because it was "art" and "social commentary," rather than male-bonding entertainment. [National Journal, 2-11-08; Raleigh News & Observer, 2-6-08] o_O

Posted by: Flynne at February 27, 2008 9:42 AM

So then what about the disappearing "art" of the aforementioned male bonding?

I guess that should be confined to church or the golf course, huh? Sounds so much more interesting - and yet, strangely emasculating - than boobs and beer.

Good grief.

Posted by: Jessica at February 27, 2008 11:08 AM

So, when will they demand that all the Jewish people on campus be removed from their presence?

Why don't they just go to Smith?

Posted by: Kate at February 27, 2008 5:12 PM

"Harvard Islamic Society and the Harvard Women's Center petitioned the university for a more comfortable environment for women."

Further proof politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. As well, another convincing example that feminists are masochists in abject denial. Well that and its more of the cult of multiculturalism covering its head in burkas.

Honestly, I don't generally like to work out with/near women. Many view the gym as a purely social venue and don't take it seriously or just take up space on equipment. I don't care a hoot about Curves or women's only gyms. I just want equal facilities for men. Oh, wait I must be gay for wanting that...

Posted by: FP at February 28, 2008 1:39 PM

Leave a comment