Hi all, I have never posted any of my views on these types of discussions before and I believe that any argument will always have holes poked in it, which is why this issue is being debated very fiercely at the moment, but here are my two cents because I have felt compelled to finally put my views into writing to address some of the things discussed in this thread.
To answer the OP, the gym is trying to make a decision that will increase its financial profit. This much is clear. The reason that this was put in place may be due to women not going to the gym due to harassment/staring from men, the gym sees that it is losing customers whilst not gaining any, and attempts to rectify this. For the gym, separation is the perfect way to combat the issue. The broader social issue of preventing harassment is not the gym’s responsibility to solve, they have decided to solve the issue at the gym because they were either losing money/not earning enough. Simple as that. I disagree that there is some sort of ‘deflection’ of the issue, because as far as I can see the gym has solved the issue within its premises, and isn’t able to do anything beyond that.
Personally, I have never been exposed to any of these issues. Call it a sheltered life or whatever, but I have never experienced any domestic violence, harassment, rape etc. and neither have my friends or family or for that matter anyone I know. I have grown up believing and assuming that men and women were equal and that everyone treats others how they would like to be treated. I have never discriminated against anyone based on their gender, race, disability, sexual orientation and I never will. Consequently, when these statistics about rape and the gender gap are discussed I’m always slightly puzzled as to why things aren’t equal. Everyone on both sides seem to be shouting constantly and are not sympathetic or understanding of the other side’s views. So, seeing as I’m sort of in my own little bubble of fairy-tale bliss and happiness where everything is equal, there is no way that I would be able to approach such a topic with the perspective of someone who has had to endure these types of things.
From my (male) perspective, it seems weird to see things like "teach men not to rape". Firstly, I think why would anyone do it in the first place? But obviously there is an issue, so I can understand that we need to stop this from happening, and one of the best ways is to go to the source of a problem. In this case though, a phrase like this appears to be painting all men as rapists, and that we need to be taught how to stop doing it. I do however understand that the intention isn’t to blame all men. It feels to me like when the couple of idiots who disrupt the classroom force the teacher to decide to give the whole class a detention. Was I doing anything wrong? No. Have I been penalised for doing nothing wrong? Yes. Has it made me feel angry at the teacher? You bet. Will it stop the actual idiots from doing it again? No. Hence, what seems to be a blanket statement appears to me to be counterproductive in the fight to reduce things like rape. I don’t need to be taught not to rape, because I’ve already had it drilled into me as a child that we treat others with respect and not to do drugs, alcohol, have underage sex, rape etc. All you are doing is creating enemies out of allies. This may also have something to do with the misconstrued societal notions of what feminism actually is when I hear "those feminists" being blamed – let me tell you that as a kid it’s a bit of a misleading term that you can’t fully understand anyway. Why can’t we all just get along with each other?
I like to look at all of this from a biological perspective. A species survives because it reproduces. It passes its DNA through generations, and mutations of genes can cause favourable or undesirable outcomes that affect a species ability to survive and reproduce. Our species, homo sapiens, has evolved to have a structure in which the strongest males compete for the most attractive (and fertile, the two are linked) females to pass on the best genes to ensure the survival of the species. Species in which the weak were passing on their genes would diminish their survival rates. Of course, biology isn’t just about strength. We also see size, appendages such as wings, night vision and other awesome features enhance survival rates, and thus these traits were passed on. Back to us. Males and females display sexual dimorphism, a result of differing selection pressures being applied to males and females. Think things like waist-to-hip ratio in females. And so, I would imagine that males have been in positions of power, as we would identify them as, merely due to superior height and strength. This has simply translated into a more structured society, and why we have problems that weren’t previously there.
Having explained that humans have sexual dimorphism, it isn’t a stretch to say that males and females are likely to have different approaches to our modern lifestyle. They are likely to think differently and not have identical goals in life. Does this explain the pay gap? I have no true understanding of how these statistics are determined, so I can’t comment. However, I would argue that it probably feels natural for some couples where the male provides for the female. Does this necessarily mean that these women are being systematically oppressed by a patriarchal society? I don’t think so, it might just be a bit of biology.
My other point I would make about biology is about altruistic behaviour. Our species has evolved this altruistic behaviour because it has increased our survival rate. A male will seek to protect females and children from harm in order to save future generations. If a male sacrifices his own life, he may have just produced many more lives that would otherwise not have existed due to those saved reproducing. The same instincts can be seen in females. Males are biologically programmed to feel the need to do this. In Titanic, they didn’t just jump in the water because they decided they were going to oppress women and not give them the choice of jumping in the water – therefore treating them on par with children. I feel that is a ridiculous statement to make. They do it because they feel an obligation to aid and protect them. How would you feel if we started telling children to jump into the water to save our own lives? That just doesn’t feel right.
Please take all that I have said with a grain of salt, and if you do feel the need to critique what I have said, by all means do. I have probably gone around in circles and been hypocritical. I’m happy to discuss in a polite manner what you may feel is wrong with my arguments. Remember that these are just my thoughts please. I didn’t set out to write an essay but I did.