American Renaissance

To Accommodate Muslim Students, Harvard Tries Women-Only Gym Hours

AR Articles on Islam in America
Will America Learn the Lessons of Sept. 11? (Nov. 2001)
The Rise of Islam in America (Nov. 1993)
Feds Raid Nuwaub Nation (Jul. 2002)
Search AmRen.com for Islam in America
More news stories on Islam in America
Abbie Ruzicka, Daily Free Press (Harvard), February 25, 2008

Harvard University has moved to make Muslim women more comfortable in the gym by instituting women-only access times six hours a week to accommodate religious customs that make it difficult for some students to work out in the presence of men.

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.

{snip}

Harvard junior Nick Wells said he believes the women-only hours are inconvenient for the residents that live near the facility and discriminate against men.

“It is unfair to impose a stringent policy that inhibits [students] from using their own facility in order to further a useless policy that doesn’t have any real effect,” he said.

“I don’t mind that Harvard is trying to give space to women and religious minorities, it’s just that it seems that it’s not making a real effort,” Wells said. “Just one that is impractical and purely symbolic at the cost of people like myself.”

Wells lives near the Quad, and said the response to and use of the women-only gym hours so far has been underwhelming.

Harvard freshman Kyle Harasimowicz said women-only gyms have been successful and women-only gym hours fill the same need.

{snip}

Original article

(Posted on February 28, 2008)

     Previous story       Next Story       Post a Comment      Search

Comments

Funny how all the concessions made to integrate women are being undone by muslims and their apologists with nary a peep from feminists.

Posted by Eric at 6:53 PM on February 28


The British have already demonstrated their foolishness with regard to pandering and apeasement of Muslims.

Now is in the United States of all places.

These Muslims must be just rolling over laughing at the gullible Americans.

Actually it is laughable.

I look forward to the day when they close the doors to infadiles.

When will Americans realize there will be no limit to the Muslims demands.

A society so civilized that it accomodates its own demise.

Posted by at 8:46 PM on February 28


That’s great — except for males who pay tuition and would like to be able to use the gym without having to worry about six hours being blacked out each week.

Posted by at 9:29 PM on February 28


It is unbelievable how stupid and pandering the masses are.

I am ashamed of my race.

My race does not deserve to survive.

Has everyone except the Muslims had a labotomy?

Professors and adminstrators are really smart arn’t they!

Posted by at 9:47 PM on February 28


“but because for them working out in a co-ed gym is uncomfortable, awkward or problematic in some way”

Well, then don’t go to a co-ed school!!!

Posted by enoughalready at 10:02 PM on February 28


There is an irrestible force here, but no immovable object. Muzzies, aided by Feminists, against white men. No contest - white men lose.

Over here in SE Asia, our Muzzies have their own couple of islands and pretty much leave the rest of us alone. Yeah, End of Ramadan was a National Holiday, but that is a small price to appease the Muzzies.

Posted by Lost in Paradise at 10:06 PM on February 28


This is effectively a religious accommodation. But as long as that religion is Islam, it counts as “diversity”.

And yet Harvard would be the first to call for the “separation of church and state” (meaning the removal of all things Christian from campus).

Posted by at 10:08 PM on February 28


I personally don’t respect white people from Ivy League schools. They are girly, country-club, deceiving, and not trustworthy. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if there came a President who refused to put anyone from one of those institutions in his Cabinet?

Posted by Elrey Jones at 11:13 PM on February 28


“These Muslims must be just rolling over laughing at the gullible Americans.” anon@8:46.

They aren’t laughing, they are salivating. Predators can smell disease and weakness. And right now, their old nemesis Europe smells pretty ripe. Every display of weakness, every ‘appeasement’, like Harvard is doing here, gives off quite a stink. Accommodating the demands of islam is just ringing the dinner bell a little louder. Guaranteed that the beast is eying America as its next meal.

“When will Americans realize there will be no limit to the Muslims demands.”

Sure would help a lot to have a president that would stop referring to it as the ‘religion of peace’. Or saying, “We are not at war with islam.” Politicians who risk our nation thinking they can appease islam by limiting the fight only to their terrorists, are despicable. Worse, they are criminal.

Posted by Edward at 11:56 PM on February 28


Would Harvard accommodate white-male Christians who wanted to work out by themselves? HA!

Posted by at 12:35 AM on February 29


The most to be harmed substantially in an environment of sharia law would be secularists at Harvard and other similar problem areas.

Having to bend to the dictates of a religion whose tenents are in complete opposition to their lifestyles and everything they believe would drive them stark raving crazy, yet they naively carry on non-chalantly with their multicultural agenda as if they had good sense. It’s truly amazing.

Posted by at 2:35 AM on February 29


It is usually assumed — perhaps erroneously — that places like Harvard University are populated in terms of both faculty and students with individuals who are not only highly educated but highly intelligent — in the sense of the individual possessing finely tuned and honed neuronic structures that are constantly primed to reprogram themselves to meet any experienced contingency — individuals.

Now it would seem to me that any rational, intelligent individual who has an interest in going to the gym for physical-health purposes would find it utterly stupid and reflective of a child-like mentality that apartheid-like hours should be set aside for some persons — based on the pure and irrelevant contingency of physical body contour — i.e. gender.

So maybe the claim that at places like Harvard University high intelligence and mental acuity are the norms is just plain wrong.

Posted by OCCAM at 4:20 AM on February 29


As a female, I go to my gym when I think fewer men will be there. Not for religious reasons, but simply because I don’t like guys hovering over me at weight machines waiting for their turn and when there are fewer guys you have less chance of being ogled by the random pervert. However, that is my choice to go at certain times (and avoid it at other times). I would never demand that they offer a women-only day at my gym. It’s absurd.

If the Muslim women want a female-only gym for religious reasons, they should simply join a woman-only gym. Can you imagine if they offered a Men Only day? The women of Harvard would burn down the building in protest.

Posted by at 7:34 AM on February 29


“Now it would seem to me that any rational, intelligent individual who has an interest in going to the gym for physical-health purposes would find it utterly stupid and reflective of a child-like mentality that apartheid-like hours should be set aside for some persons — based on the pure and irrelevant contingency of physical body contour — i.e. gender.”

If it is your premise that gender is no more than a difference in physical body contour and it is irrelevant, when it isn’t, and obviously involves so much more a kindergarten child could see the difference, it’s plain that this view itself has no basis in intelligent logic. Nor is it based on factual information.

You criticize people for what you claim are preposterous ideas then furnish two of your own, which make no sense at all.

Posted by Robert Kelly at 2:39 PM on February 29


Well of course it’s not discrimination, we all know that it’s only dastardly white heterosexual males who are capable of “discrimination”. I wonder when the muslims-under the guise of “diversity” of course-will ask for seperate drinking fountains and restrooms?

Posted by Proudinfidel at 3:38 PM on February 29


This is the school that refused to allow George Wallace to speak in the 60’s, but allowed The Black Panthers to speak…

Posted by at 3:41 PM on February 29


Separate but equal?

Posted by Frank at 4:05 PM on February 29


Mr.Kelly,
It’s just unfortunate that some people know how to type on a computer, because it allows them to give vent to nonsensical thinking purely for the sake of such.

I will say it again: for any intelligent, sane and rational being — the assumption is that Harvard University with its stringent faculty and student admissions criteria would have admitted such — going to gym would be embarked on only for the rational reason of physical fitness and health improvement. Thus variations in body contour among the visitors to the Harvard gym should be of little moment to the supposedly rational, intellectually mature and morally discriminating who frequent that venue.

In fact, I have noticed that highly intelligent and creative people when in public doing public chores hardly notice other people around them. Such individuals are, for the most part, deeply engrossed in their own private thoughts being casually dismissive of what’s taking place around them.

Given its self-profile, one would imagine that Harvard gym goers would be of that nature. But this puzzling gym ruling — again for an environment of supposedly highly intelligent persons — must lead one to question Harvard’s self-profile.

Posted by OCCAM at 4:34 AM on March 1


“Mr.Kelly,
“It’s just unfortunate that some people know how to type on a computer, because it allows them to give vent to nonsensical thinking purely for the sake of such.” Occam

Yes, like the above statement for one, which is typical of the nonsense that comes from every black that posts on this forum.

And, your orginal post is burdened with nonsensical, wordy contortions that are unclear, ambiguous, using words that are inappropriate, and do not fit what you are trying to describe.

You might have meant to say something different when you made reference to body contour, etc., probably referring to body tone and muscular development, but the construction is so clumsy it appears you are talking about “contour” of the sexes.

Surely you can do better that. Or do you not want to try? What was most apparent to me when I first read your post was that you were trying to sound intelligent, and as a result the entire post was close to gibberish.

Occam: “In fact, I have noticed that highly intelligent and creative people when in public doing public chores hardly notice other people around them. Such individuals are, for the most part, deeply engrossed in their own private thoughts being casually dismissive of what’s taking place around them.”

RK: Don’t you think it’s just plain nonsense to claim that you think because Harvard is supposed to be comprised of highly intelligent people they’re not going to notice people of the opposite sex working out in the same room with them, especially the men? How utterly preposterous and naive.

“Mr.Kelly,
“It’s just unfortunate that some people know how to type on a computer, because it allows them to give vent to nonsensical thinking purely for the sake of such.” Occam

RK: How ridiculous is it to claim that someone wants to write nonsense because he likes it, or does so because that is his purpose or intent? Whether you understand it or not, that’s what you’re saying. Can’t you see how silly and unintelligent that sounds?

Even the above attempt at insult comes across as absurd.

When desiring to get across a point of view or a concept, it is an absolute must to write for your readers and not yourself.

Trying to come across as intellectually aloof and erudite, rather than concentrating on conciseness and clarity, oftentimes makes the writer appear to be a pretender of something he really isn’t. And, if his premises are invalid, in all likelihood the reader might well believe he is without the intellectual ability to think in logical, coherent terms.


Posted by Robert Kelly at 8:45 PM on March 1


Golly gee whiz, when are they going to have six hours of male-only gym access, you know, in the interests of fairness and choice?

Is it just me, or does the push towards “diversity” and “respect for all people” never benefit white males?

Posted by AK at 1:59 PM on March 2


“I will say it again: for any intelligent, sane and rational being (snip) going to gym would be embarked on only for the rational reason of physical fitness and health improvement.

“Thus variations in body contour among the visitors to the Harvard gym should be of little moment to the supposedly rational, intellectually mature and morally discriminating who frequent that venue.”

Because they go to the gym for the “rational reason of physical fitness and health improvement,” and they are “rational, intellectually mature and morally discriminating,” doesn’t even come close to offering any logical evidence that seeing people of the opposite sex there would not be a distraction. Obviously most everybody visits the gym to work out for whatever reason, except those frat boys who go to ogle the girls.

And to assert that those who claim to be learned and intelligent are expected to be unmoved by those around them is quite amusing. And by describing these same people as “morally discriminating,” aren’t you admitting that they’re indeed observant of those around them and not lost in deep intellectual thought as you claim you would expect of them?

Let me help you out, my friend. You have taken a very long route around the crux of the issue. Here’s what you want to say:

“Since Harvard has such high intellectual standards, and such allegedly intelligent students and faculty, any intelligent, normal person would conclude that those comprising Harvard’s gym enthusiasts wouldn’t notice anyone of the opposite sex working out among them, nor would they care, because it would rightly be assumed that they would be too engrossed mentally with other matters.”

There’s what you wanted to say. However, after having put it in a clearer mode, the logic behind it still amounts to none at all. It’s foolish.

Posted by Robert Kelly at 5:08 PM on March 2


I suppose “whites-only” library hours would still be bad.

Posted by Michael C. Scott at 12:56 PM on March 3


Who knows how much money the soily saudis have given to this elitist, pansy school. God help us if we have to rely on these people to be leaders.

Posted by Lars at 4:34 PM on March 3


When Christians ever ask for single-sex dorms or such they are told to GET LOST. But if the Muslims ask for it, the leftwing university BENDS OVER BACKWARDS to accomadate and to be “sensitive” to this “other” culture.

Posted by at 10:39 PM on March 3


Hey Robert Kelly:
It occurs to me that “OCCAM” may be or has been, a student of Harvard.
That old liberal alma mater loyalty, you know?

Posted by Tidey-Whitey at 10:15 AM on March 4


“When Christians ever ask for single-sex dorms or such they are told to GET LOST. But if the Muslims ask for it, the leftwing university BENDS OVER BACKWARDS to accomadate and to be “sensitive” to this “other” culture.”

Coming soon to a campus near you!:

SPECIAL DORMS FOR BIGAMIST MOSLEMS!

Posted by Superman at 10:18 AM on March 4



Home      Top      Previous story       Next Story      Search

Post a Comment

Commenting guidelines: We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. Statements of fact and well-considered opinion are welcome, but we will not post comments that include obscenities or insults, whether of groups or individuals. We reserve the right to hold our critics to lower standards.




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)