Pirate's Cove

In the Real World, as opposed to SJW World, most females would prefer that their locker rooms, showers, and bathrooms remain separate from men. It’s a safe space for them (as opposed to the Safe Spaces SJWs want. Capitalization matters). They would prefer not to be subjected to peeping and such. In fact, women have filed many lawsuits against men peeping at them. And then there’s this one (via Twitchy)

Hate wins: Court rules in favor of woman who went on transphobic rampage at Planet Fitness https://t.co/jNrOqvwx6W pic.twitter.com/35qJWh9gZv

— Queerty (@Queerty) July 31, 2018

From the loopy, unhinged article

It all started back in 2015, when Cormier saw a trans woman in the locker room. She went around warning other gym members about someone who “totally looked like a man” in the women’s locker room and telling them they were “unsafe.”

Planet Fitness responded by terminating membership on grounds of “inappropriate and disruptive” behavior, saying Cormier violated their “judgement-free zone” policy with her transphobic outburst.

As many point out, in response to the article, this isn’t about hate, it’s not gender deranged-phobic, er, transphobic, it’s about consent. And respect. Planet Fitness is a private company, and can make their own policy on allowing the gender confused to allow whichever side they want to use. But, they should have told the people who pay the bulk of the dues that members of the opposite sex would be allowed in to their locker rooms, showers, and bathrooms. As Twitter user Chad Felix Greene writes

No.
Consent wins.
The woman was not informed physical males could enter the women’s locker room.

There is no hate involved. Reducing women’s safety amd privacy to ‘hate’ in this one context is absurd and offensive.

The court ruled the company has a responsibility to inform.

And that’s what the court ruled

(Norwalk Reflector) A Michigan appeals court has ruled in favor of a former Planet Fitness customer who argued that her rights under Michigan’s consumer protection law were violated when the club did not disclose its unwritten policy and canceled her membership because she complained about a man in the women’s locker room. (snip)

The court’s opinion said, “The plaintiff was already a member of the gym when she learned of the unwritten policy and was thus subject to a financial penalty if she canceled her membership earlier than provided in the membership agreement. Plaintiff’s actions indicate that she strongly preferred a locker room and a restroom in which individuals who are assigned biologically male are not present, and it is thus reasonable to infer that defendants’ failure to inform plaintiff of the unwritten policy affected her decision to join the gym.”

Cormier alleged that Planet Fitness misrepresented the nature of its contract when it said that she would have access to a private women’s locker room while failing to disclose that includes “men who self-identity as women.” This unwritten policy would have affected her decision to purchase a membership, and Planet Fitness appears to have engaged in deceptive business practices.

Funny, liberals always support the right to “choice”, and that women should have control over their own bodies, and should not be harassed and shouldn’t feel unsafe (I think we can all agree on the last two, yet, it sure seems like this doesn’t happen in liberal areas like Hollywood), except where they put the rights of people with mental problems over those of real women

https://twitter.com/Melvin_Udall_/status/1024370814743977985