Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ha ha ha. The contract doesn't stipulate they can persecute men out of their usage at the managements discretion does it. Besides, this is a one page membership contract, not a lease agreement or a real estate deal. Again, if it's not in the contract, they can't ban usage. It's that simple, period.Show me a contract that says access is based on management's discretion. That's not how contracts work. If it's not there that means they can't deny access. Legal mind you're not.Ok, so show me the contract that states that every member has access to all facilities during all hours of operation.
Nonsense.
Contracts can be drawn up with various provisions, stipulations, and requirements that the contracting parties deem appropriate, provided they comport with state laws.
If the Y wishes include a provision that the pool wont be available for a given period of time on a given day, the customer can either agree to that provision or elect to not sign the contract and seek out another facility.
Exactly, and nowhere on the schedule does it say men are banned, or the management reserves the right to exclude certain members from pool usage.Show me a contract that says access is based on management's discretion. That's not how contracts work. If it's not there that means they can't deny access. Legal mind you're not.Ok, so show me the contract that states that every member has access to all facilities during all hours of operation.
Neither are you.
The membership app you sign for the Y doesn't state what you will receive, so presumably it's the benefits listed under membership - for example, this: Full Service Member Benefits - Membership - YMCA Greater Providence
Under pools it states: Pools See schedules for adult and family swim times
Presumably this is a typical YMCA.
Ha ha ha. The contract doesn't stipulate they can persecute men out of their usage at the managements discretion does it. Besides, this is a one page membership contract, not a lease agreement or a real estate deal. Again, if it's not in the contract, they can't ban usage. It's that simple, period.Show me a contract that says access is based on management's discretion. That's not how contracts work. If it's not there that means they can't deny access. Legal mind you're not.
Nonsense.
Contracts can be drawn up with various provisions, stipulations, and requirements that the contracting parties deem appropriate, provided they comport with state laws.
If the Y wishes include a provision that the pool wont be available for a given period of time on a given day, the customer can either agree to that provision or elect to not sign the contract and seek out another facility.
Geez, you really put your foot in your mouth with that one, didn't you. I was talking about OTHER INSTANCES. And here you were bullshitting everybody that it's not about Muslims and Shariah, but rather about not having men <ha ha ha>. I REST MY CASE YOUR OWN. YOU JUST HUNG YOURSELF:You can't show me A SINGLE INSTANCE of the Y pool being closed off to men, because a bunch of fat Shariah Muslim women want to flap around in the water with their clothes on. Go ahead, google it, there's 2600 branches.
San Diego: YMCA Offers Women-Only Swim Hours For Muslim Women | Speak City Heights
Seattle: Real Change News | Testing the waters
Sault Ste. Marie: Women's-only swim resumes in the Sault - Sudbury - CBC News (though they were threatened for offering it)
YMCA Offers Women-Only Swim Hours For Muslim Women | Speak City Heights
Seattle: Real Change News | Testing the waters
...While the majority of attendees at the swim are Muslim...Behind the curtained windows, the women, now wearing baggy tops and long shorts, bob happily in the shallow end of the pool...Most prefer to [wear] boxers. Or just tights, a t-shirt and tank top is more comfortable attire for us, says Shukri Abdi. <Geez what was that you said before: "who said any about Muslims or the type of clothes?!" Ha ha ha, what a fucken phony liar you are.>
Sault Ste. Marie: Women's-only swim resumes in the Sault - Sudbury - CBC News
Sault Ste. Marie YMCA cancelled swim last week after receiving threats <Gee, why would they be getting threats if what they were doing was okay with the members?>
Thanks again for making my point.
You're DISMISSED. Shooooooo!
Exactly, and nowhere on the schedule does it say men are banned, or the management reserves the right to exclude certain members from pool usage.Show me a contract that says access is based on management's discretion. That's not how contracts work. If it's not there that means they can't deny access. Legal mind you're not.
Neither are you.
The membership app you sign for the Y doesn't state what you will receive, so presumably it's the benefits listed under membership - for example, this: Full Service Member Benefits - Membership - YMCA Greater Providence
Under pools it states: Pools See schedules for adult and family swim times
Presumably this is a typical YMCA.
I rest my case once more, Coyote of the Foot In Mouth Disease.
Ha ha ha. The contract doesn't stipulate they can persecute men out of their usage at the managements discretion does it. Besides, this is a one page membership contract, not a lease agreement or a real estate deal. Again, if it's not in the contract, they can't ban usage. It's that simple, period.Show me a contract that says access is based on management's discretion. That's not how contracts work. If it's not there that means they can't deny access. Legal mind you're not.
Nonsense.
Contracts can be drawn up with various provisions, stipulations, and requirements that the contracting parties deem appropriate, provided they comport with state laws.
If the Y wishes include a provision that the pool wont be available for a given period of time on a given day, the customer can either agree to that provision or elect to not sign the contract and seek out another facility.
Hey dipshit, if it's not in the contract they can't arbitrarily ban men from using the pool just because a bunch of religious Muslims want to flap their fat asses in the pool. And as your partner Islam apologist Coyote just posted, there are many instances of other members threatening and getting upset over this. So clearly, the members are also on the same page as I am.Is a private entity allowed to screw people for a service it's supposed to provide. No it can't. And that's why the manager of that branch should get his ass fired. And there's a definite case for class action lawsuit if the members have the balls to sue the Y.
You can't show me A SINGLE INSTANCE of the Y pool being closed off to men, because a bunch of fat Shariah Muslim women want to flap around in the water with their clothes on. Go ahead, google it, there's 2600 branches.
They are only "screwing people over" if the contract a member signs - when they pay the Y - says explicitly that the member will be able to access the pool at all times during business hours, no exceptions. If the contract uses that sort of phrasing, then yes this women's only swim would be in violation and if members wanted to they could sue I suppose.
HOWEVER, the contract can very well state that the pool hours/access for members are X but are subject to change and be modified by the owner of the pool. I'm sure it says something along those lines because the YMCA has no incentive to push themselves into a legal corner by always having to provide pool access no matter what.
THIS IS PRECISELY why I asked you to show us the relevant line of the St. Paul's contract so that we can determine whether or not the facility violated the terms by setting aside 1 hour to women swimming a week.
YOU ARE CLAIMING that the Y is in violation of their terms, therefore YOU NEED TO PROVIDE legal evidence backing this claim. Otherwise you're just making shit up.
Do you understand my position?
And the only instances where this is happening is because of Muslim sensitivities, you can't show me any other instance where this persecution that you are justifying occurs at the Y, can you?
Any Y that allows women only swimming due to Muslim sensitivities is breaking it's contractual obligations. Now go sit in your corner when adults are talking, dunce.Ha ha ha. The contract doesn't stipulate they can persecute men out of their usage at the managements discretion does it. Besides, this is a one page membership contract, not a lease agreement or a real estate deal. Again, if it's not in the contract, they can't ban usage. It's that simple, period.Nonsense.
Contracts can be drawn up with various provisions, stipulations, and requirements that the contracting parties deem appropriate, provided they comport with state laws.
If the Y wishes include a provision that the pool wont be available for a given period of time on a given day, the customer can either agree to that provision or elect to not sign the contract and seek out another facility.
What law is the YMCA breaking by doing this?
No actually it has a pretty clear description of who is and isn't allowed in locker rooms. It even has a kids locker room to protect kids from pedos.Ha ha ha. The contract doesn't stipulate they can persecute men out of their usage at the managements discretion does it. Besides, this is a one page membership contract, not a lease agreement or a real estate deal. Again, if it's not in the contract, they can't ban usage. It's that simple, period.Nonsense.
Contracts can be drawn up with various provisions, stipulations, and requirements that the contracting parties deem appropriate, provided they comport with state laws.
If the Y wishes include a provision that the pool won’t be available for a given period of time on a given day, the customer can either agree to that provision or elect to not sign the contract and seek out another facility.
Roudy, do you realize how really dumb that is?
"If it's not in the contract they can't ban usage" - well Roudy, nowhere in the contract does it say men can't use women's locker rooms or vice versa. In fact, there's a shitload of stuff not in the contract. Is the Y persecuting men then because they are banned from women's locker rooms?
Any Y that allows women only swimming due to Muslim sensitivities is breaking it's contractual obligations. Now go sit in your corner when adults are talking, dunce.Ha ha ha. The contract doesn't stipulate they can persecute men out of their usage at the managements discretion does it. Besides, this is a one page membership contract, not a lease agreement or a real estate deal. Again, if it's not in the contract, they can't ban usage. It's that simple, period.
What law is the YMCA breaking by doing this?
So all the instances of "women only" had to do with Muslim sensitivity issues. You can't find any other other instances that men or women are being discrimination from using the pool. Put up or shut up.Hey dipshit, if it's not in the contract they can't arbitrarily ban men from using the pool just because a bunch of religious Muslims want to flap their fat asses in the pool. And as your partner Islam apologist Coyote just posted, there are many instances of other members threatening and getting upset over this. So clearly, the members are also on the same page as I am.They are only "screwing people over" if the contract a member signs - when they pay the Y - says explicitly that the member will be able to access the pool at all times during business hours, no exceptions. If the contract uses that sort of phrasing, then yes this women's only swim would be in violation and if members wanted to they could sue I suppose.
HOWEVER, the contract can very well state that the pool hours/access for members are X but are subject to change and be modified by the owner of the pool. I'm sure it says something along those lines because the YMCA has no incentive to push themselves into a legal corner by always having to provide pool access no matter what.
THIS IS PRECISELY why I asked you to show us the relevant line of the St. Paul's contract so that we can determine whether or not the facility violated the terms by setting aside 1 hour to women swimming a week.
YOU ARE CLAIMING that the Y is in violation of their terms, therefore YOU NEED TO PROVIDE legal evidence backing this claim. Otherwise you're just making shit up.
Do you understand my position?
And the only instances where this is happening is because of Muslim sensitivities, you can't show me any other instance where this persecution that you are justifying occurs at the Y, can you?
No. Roudy.
As I posted there are not "many instances of other members threatening and getting upset over this" - geez, don't you even read before making stuff up?
In what I posted, there was one instance - one facility - where threats were issued. It did not state the threats came from members. In fact, this is what it stated:
The swim, designed for any woman who doesn't want her bare skin to be seen by men — either for personal or cultural reasons — was cancelled last week after anonymous threats were made saying it would be disrupted.
Go back and read the previous posts. You're a little late to the party Gomer.Any Y that allows women only swimming due to Muslim sensitivities is breaking it's contractual obligations. Now go sit in your corner when adults are talking, dunce.What law is the YMCA breaking by doing this?
What contract are they breaking specifically? What part of said contract are they breaking?
Can you show me where it says there is restricted access to the pool area due to gender, at the YMCA aka Young MEN'S Christian Association? Come on DUFUS, let's see it.Exactly, and nowhere on the schedule does it say men are banned, or the management reserves the right to exclude certain members from pool usage.Neither are you.
The membership app you sign for the Y doesn't state what you will receive, so presumably it's the benefits listed under membership - for example, this: Full Service Member Benefits - Membership - YMCA Greater Providence
Under pools it states: Pools See schedules for adult and family swim times
Presumably this is a typical YMCA.
I rest my case once more, Coyote of the Foot In Mouth Disease.
Ahh, another dodge. You would do well to rest your case as you really haven't a case.
The point made (and I thought it was pretty clear) - is that the Y membership benefits do NOT guarantee unrestricted access. The example with the pool indicates that members should check the schedule for the open times.
Thought that was pretty obvious dude
Go back and read the previous posts. You're a little late to the party Gomer.Any Y that allows women only swimming due to Muslim sensitivities is breaking it's contractual obligations. Now go sit in your corner when adults are talking, dunce.
What contract are they breaking specifically? What part of said contract are they breaking?
All of this blabber and you still can't show me a single instance of a Y being closed off to men OTHER THAN appeasing Muslim Shariah barbarism. Come on smarty pants, 2600 branches, Google Ha ha ha.Geez, you really put your foot in your mouth with that one, didn't you. I was talking about OTHER INSTANCES. And here you were bullshitting everybody that it's not about Muslims and Shariah, but rather about not having men <ha ha ha>. I REST MY CASE YOUR OWN. YOU JUST HUNG YOURSELF:San Diego: YMCA Offers Women-Only Swim Hours For Muslim Women | Speak City Heights
Seattle: Real Change News | Testing the waters
Sault Ste. Marie: Women's-only swim resumes in the Sault - Sudbury - CBC News (though they were threatened for offering it)
You kind of missed a few pertinant details in your rush here. It's not about "Shariah" - or to be more accurate, imposing Shariah on anyone nor is it for Muslims only.
If you read the article, you would also have read that they specifically asked for "women-only" swim - not "Muslim only", not "Shariah". You also missed something else: they are doing it as an after hours event which should put your mind at ease in regards to having your requisite access to a facility you neither support nor are a member of.
Roudy - aren't you missing something here? Are they being forced to wear Shariah-compliant clothing? Or, can they wear what they wish within the pool's rules regarding attire? Is anyone being forced to wear something unwillingly? Indeed, it states that the majority (though not all) of this particular swim session are Muslim - so what? They are the group, in this particular area, that most wants a women-only swim period.
So, to go back to your statement Roudy: where is anyone being forced to wear anything unwillingly and, even from what *you* quoted - they are certainly not wearing street clothes either.
Who said the threats came from the members Roudy? Are you saying it's ok to issue threats against innocent people? Is that kind of like saying it's ok to issue threats when blacks were being integrated into white schools because it's "not ok" with the members? Seriously Roudy?
Thanks again for making my point.
Well Roudy, let's review the points made, and you tell me if indeed these are your points:
Various Y's offer "women-only" swim periods that are open to all women.
There is no required dress code beyond what is called for in the pool rules.
It's ok to threaten Muslim women and little girls for wanting a women-only swim period.
You're DISMISSED. Shooooooo!
In case you haven't figured it out yet Roudy, the class clown is not the boss of me
Maybe you can clarify another point that seems to wind it's way through out the thread.
Do you have issues with women having a free choice? You seem to want to force them to wear what *you* want them to wear. You like to make fun of them if they want to be able to excercise without being watched (or cat called) by men. In fact, if they have reservations, you disparingly refer to them as "fatties".
Keep pressing the back arrow button it looks something like this: <Go back and read the previous posts. You're a little late to the party Gomer.What contract are they breaking specifically? What part of said contract are they breaking?
Which page is the contract on in this thread? And which part of the contract should I look at to see where the violation occurred? To have a point of reference.
Keep pressing the back arrow button it looks something like this: <Go back and read the previous posts. You're a little late to the party Gomer.
Which page is the contract on in this thread? And which part of the contract should I look at to see where the violation occurred? To have a point of reference.
Well apparently you didn't read it properly then. Because this specific point has been discussed for about 3 to four pages of this thread, at least.Keep pressing the back arrow button it looks something like this: <Which page is the contract on in this thread? And which part of the contract should I look at to see where the violation occurred? To have a point of reference.
I checked the pages, couldn't find a contract or a link to a contract posted.
You claim they are violating the contract, yet you have provided no evidence.
Well apparently you didn't read it properly then. Because this specific point has been discussed for about 3 to four pages of this thread, at least.Keep pressing the back arrow button it looks something like this: <
I checked the pages, couldn't find a contract or a link to a contract posted.
You claim they are violating the contract, yet you have provided no evidence.
