A Jewish woman in North Hollywood, CA., lodged a complaint Tuesday against Fitness USA for an alleged civil rights violation involving a fellow gym patron. According to Jodi Berry, executive director of Fitness USA, Chana [redacted] was praying in front of another member’s locker when the member wanted access to her belongings inside the locker. The inconvenienced patron tried to interrupt Ms. [redacted], but she remained standing in front of the locker and an altercation ensued. A manager was called into the locker room to intervene.I personally think that the patron is right here - you can't block someone's locker and expect them not to be upset. It's hard to know exactly what the altercation consisted of, but the original fault goes to the person praying. What do you think?
Ms. [redacted] later complained that the Fitness USA management was unconcerned about the humiliation she suffered when her prayers were interrupted. She stated that the gym personnel were insensitive, rejected her complaints and did not satisfactorily intervene on her behalf. Ms. [redacted] further reported that the manager told her, “You have to respect her (the other patron), but she does not have to respect your god.”
(After you've commented, read the rest of the piece here.)
It's assur to daven in a locker room, isn;t it?
ReplyDeleteI think that this is related to the type of behavior that I was talking about in my most recent post (thanks for the nod, by the way!). She should NOT have been davening in front of someone else's locker. I don't care if that person's locker was on top of/below her own locker, or next to it--she shouldn't have been blocking someone else's access to their storage space. She has NO right to complain about "humiliation" or any of that.
ReplyDeleteHa, that answers my question.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you expect? You set up camp in front of someone else's locker, showing no respect for their space and then expect them to respect you and your space? If I begin to daven in a door way, can I justifiably expect no one else to enter or exit that room until I'm done? If I daven in front of someone's car, can I trap them and prevent them from leaving?
ReplyDeleteNot only do I think the fault goes to the person who was praying, I think this whole incident is a chillul hashem. The club is correct. And I hope this doesn't create or contribute to a stereotype of observant Jews as inconsiderate.
I'm all for civil rights, but since when do rights include the right to have other people be sensitive and concerned? It's not like they forbade her from praying on the premises -- they didn't even forbid her from praying in front of the locker! They simply didn't appear upset enough for Chana's liking.
ReplyDeletePloney - Probably. And ;)
ReplyDeleteScraps - Exactly.
LT - I would have to agree...
JA - Another interesting point. I have to agree with you, though we've seen many cases where people claim that their sensitivities are offended (last year's Ten Commandments in the courtroom case comes to mind). OTOH, the Circuit Court there laughed at the ACLU and said that a reasonable person would not have a problem, and agreed with your statement.
ReplyDeleteI totally think the woman davening was wrong here. If I have to daven in public, I pick a place where I'm not likely to be in anyone's way - that just makes common sense if I don't want to be interrupted. And I'm not really sure what she expected the gym to do about it - kick the other member out for trying to get into her own locker? Come on, it's important for us to be respectful of others as well, especially if we expect the same in return.
ReplyDeleteEzzie:
ReplyDeleteThe problem with the Ten Commandments in the courtroom is not that it offends people. It's a First Amendment issue.
JA - No, it isn't. But I think we've had this debate before. (And the Court agrees with me! :) )
ReplyDeleteezzie:
ReplyDeleteWhether you agree or not, it's a First Amendment claim, not a not-being-sensitive claim.
Aha, now we are talking about my neighborhood. She should have moved from her locker.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a problem with people praying in public, but they need to be sensitive to those around them too.
JA - I see what you mean. Okay, it's a 1st Amendment claim which would get chucked quickly. :)
ReplyDeleteI think she should talk with her Rabbi about proper places to daven. Perhaps she was trying to cause a stink for her own reasons?
ReplyDeleteChilul Hashem. Some people forget that we live in America, we should be thankful that we have freedom of religion. However, that does NOT mean we should force other people to inconvenience themselves for our relgion. That lawsuit is obsurd and I think a Frum lawyer should defend the gym. Obviously the the Gym will be granted a motion to dismiss based on the stupidity.
ReplyDeleteSociety has become a bunch of pansies. Getting their feelings hurt right and left, which I think is BS, its all just a way for them to get some money out of the owners. It has turned into a sort of instinct in man today. People automattically get offended a lodge a complaint and sue, thinking that monetary compensation will make everything better. Sounds like another Michael Richards case to me.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, Ezzie. :)
ReplyDeleteThis Chana [Redacted] made a MAJOR chillul Hashem and owes all of us an apology. It's people like her that make it harder for people like me to wear a yarmulke to work.
ReplyDeletePraying in a locker room? Sounds like a nut job to begin with. Unfortunately she's portraying herself as representative of Orthodox Judaism. Now we're all nut jobs.
Well I hope you all realize that this story is just a rehashed version of the real incident that actually happened with a muslim woman
ReplyDeleteHH, I would have the very same reaction no matter whose religiosity it is. The locker room is not her house of prayer and nobody has to wait for her to finish anything to get to their locker. This woman sounds like a total nut to me. I have a hard time believing that any sane person would seriously block a person's locker to daven much less "lodge a complaint" in this case.
ReplyDeleteMr. [redacted] was probably on an elal flight at that same moment, swaying piously in the aisle as a stewardess tries to get by with a meal cart.
ReplyDeleteI like it. The [redacted] family. Life with the [Redacted]'s. This can go places. ;-)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletelike other commenters have said: why would you daven in a locker room in the first place, nevermind blocking a locker?! that just seems like a completely innapropriate place for tefila.
ReplyDeleteEzzie,
ReplyDeleteInteresting how few people actually read the article. I think the author of the article is way out of line:
"how far will the requests go before non-Jewish (redacted) women are subservient to the whims and demands of Orthodox Jews (redacted)?....Jewish (redacted) charges of victimization and discrimination have already paved the way for a variety of special treatment and dispensations."
Charlie Hall:
ReplyDeleteIf Jewish women demanded a change in the gym's dress code, or a wall between the men's and women's areas, I think they'd be told to go start their own gym. (Except maybe in NYC, where Jews are a significant market and financially worth catering to.) But judging from the article, these Muslim women aren't satisfied with saying, "Change the policy or we'll go elsewhere." They insist "Change the policy or else!"