You get free entrance and preferential treatment, but you wind up claiming it objectifies you. Maybe just reparations for all women is appropriate at this point. Just write a big fat check to all women, regardless.

Now, granted, I guess there are people who go to the gym to try to get dates, but even those people are probably not going there PRIMARILY to hook up. It is absolutely unfair to give women and men different rates. The ladies' night thing at bars was designed to 1) encourage women to come and buy the first drink for themselves, then 2) help out the men, who were expected to buy drinks for themselves as well as the "ladies" they were trying to pick up. It is a stupid cultural relic, but, as you say, not discriminatory in the same way as an "Irish need not apply" sign. If the gym feels it has a disproportionate number of male members, it needs to find some other way to attract female members besides giving them a different membership rate. Add services that attract women, advertise more in magazines women read, offer bring-a-friend promotions - whatever. But offering a cheaper rate for women is discriminatory.

Its so obnoxious when someone in some majority whines about a perk someone in a minority gets.

Besides, its not even discrimination against men, its market based pricing that favors women. Bar or club owner isn't getting enough women in their place, lower the price for their entry. Gym owner isn't getting enough business from women because they're not comfortable working out in front of leering hornballs like myself? Lower the price as an inducement, if that doesn't work, try a separate area where women might feel more comfortable.

You'd need to be a real tool to see this as discrimination.

Yeah there's nothing I want more than an alcoholic barfly who's broke. Should I just pay for her condoms too?

It's more about who we're trying to bring in, that's all

Is it much different than a bar? There certainly have been (and are) clubs that are simply pick up joints with smoothies and freeweights instead of cocktails and dancefloors. So, are the health club owners interested in expanding their membership (in which case, why the difference in treatment) or are they interested in bringing in more women for the male customers to hit on?

Now, the fact that the club in question has a women's only workout area says that they are aware of the need for a place for women to go to get away from men thinking this is just another pick up joint. That speaks well for them and may simply say they want to increase a female membership to take advantage of those kinds of amenities (like a Curves for example). On the face of it, the difference in price based on gender sounds off, but there may be any number of reasons. It sounds like those reasons are going to be brought out in court.

then I will gladly pay the same for a drink or a gym membership. Its so much more expensive to be a woman (and the pay disparity doesn't help either) that the random free drink doesn't come close to making up for it.

http://www.healthworksfitness.com/

What about this chain of gyms in the Boston area that is exclusively for women? Shouldn't this be considered discriminatory? Do you think anyone would let someone get away with an all male gym? Can anyone really say that in this country gender discrimination is considered to be on par with religious and racial discrimination? Clearly the boundaries of gender discrimination are much more fluid - is it constructive to make rigid laws to police this gray area of our culture, or is there a better way to prevent the worst cases while still taking into account that our beliefs on gender are more nuanced than we would like to think? Just playing a bit of devil's advocate here, but Healthworks it a good example of how tricky this issue can be when taken to extremes.

I'm female. I think Ladies Night is discriminatory and not worth defending. The defenses of Ladies Night also defend discriminatory pricing on haircuts and other things. Having had a hairdresser try to charge me double for "ethnic hair" (I walked out), I'm not about to give up the principle of equal treatment over something as trivial as a watered down drink.

In Wisconsin, men sue and win, and the businesses still do it. I think they are trying to see what they can get away with. Since I do the designated driver thing, I get free drinks anyway. I'd rather pay full price for drinks with a good live band than pay half-price at a meat market.

If men boycotted the meat markets with half price drinks, they'd stop.

As for the all female gyms, I hate them. I've never seen one where you could get a decent workout- they are much a marketing device as cheap pink color on cheap firearms or cheaply made musical instruments. I'd rather see every Curves close than give up my right to go to the free weight room in the Y. Ironically, some Muslim women in Detroit have been agitating for women only days or times at the Ys so they can work out without burquas. The Ys are rightfully refusing, arguing that the men have equal right to the equipment and that their religious interpretation/practice does not trump the men's 14th Amendment right to equal access to the gym equipment.

Those drink specials aren’t designed to attract only ladies – they’re designed to attract ladies who will in turn attract men looking for ladies. Guys looking to meet women at bars generally seek out places with drink specials for women because they can be assured the bar is going to have a fair amount of women in it.

The gym is a little sketchier – I’ll be interested to see how that’s decided.

FilthyHarry is right: it isn't against men; it favors women, though how you figure men are a majority is beyond me. Last census I saw, there are more women than men.

An issue like this is, as another LW pointed out, so nuanced as to be beyond the ability of a quick post to delineate. Bars typically try to attract women to attract men. The health club / gym business, in this specific case, does seem to be sensitive to the potential for discomfort among their female clientele.

Except that this is free enterprise and not government mandated, this situation is not much different (on the surface) from diversity programs in universities and colleges where there are systematized attempts to attract and accept more people of color. Official quotas may not exist, but certain perqs are set up to attract and retain students who add to the diversity of the institution.

As the club owner states, it's about who you are trying to include, not who you are trying to exclude. Still, this argument wouldn't fly in the reverse, the fact that you may not like the people who make that tired argument notwithstanding. It's a situation that points out the inability of law to account for the nuances of real life. It's always hard to read intention.