As I said, she seems like a very nice woman and such and to me this is more a problem of misconceptions and presumptions. I've no doubt that's how many feel when they look through the windows at these people, but if they were to actually put aside their doubts and walk in there they'd almost certainly find a welcoming and supportive atmosphere.

This is a universal problem, as you'll see in the advertising for many gyms that they really emphasize you won't be working out alongside super athletic people or body builders, as there's something about gyms that bring you right back to all the stress and peer pressure of high school. I've experienced it myself but, as with most things, you'll find that the people in there had the same concerns when they started. If you actually walk through the door and commit to it, you'll find that those people tend to be very friendly, accepting, and helpful.

I'm sure there's some classes that are designed specifically for the "P-90x" type crowd, and that's fine; if you're not looking for that, you SHOULD feel as if it's not specifically catering to you. Otherwise, though, advertising has become exceedingly inclusive to the point that it often borders on insulting the more dedicated gym-goers as being assholes or meatheads. At some point you just need to bury those worries and doubts and just get in there.

"but the fact that people are actually defending Rol's joke as a rational, totally not-racist way of thinking is blowing my mind. "

example?

"the point is that the culture around these courses are dominated by a specific in-group"

like people that are fit and active or have being fit and active as their endgoal? wouldn't that be expected?

Like people who do not fit within that specific in-group, which does include those who are fit and extends beyond that. The article spells that out pretty clearly.

And would it be expected for an exercise program to cater primarily to people who are already fit? I don't think so. I mean, I don't know where you live, but around me, the gym advertisements I always hear emphasize how the environment isn't just for fitness buffs in order to create an environment where everybody feels comfortable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l324lEp9x-8

"Like people who do not fit within that specific in-group"

would you advertise a spin class to people with one leg? no? so are you not setting up an in-group as a result?

does it not occur to you that advertising for a particular activity no matter what has to be selective?

"And would it be expected for an exercise program to cater primarily to people who are already fit? I don't think so. "

"or have being fit and active as their endgoal?"

if the end goal of someone is to be fit and active what types of images do you imagine a company would use to portray their services that are supposed to achieve that?

Well, ideally the TC would explain themselves in the OP.

So do you believe that blackness impairs an individual in the same way a missing leg does? If the answer is "no" (which I assume it is), there is no reason to bring up missing legs here. That is deflection and moving the goal posts.

As for the "endgoal" statements, it seems that you sort of pulled that out of nowhere as a bit of a catchall. The whole point is that the "messaging" doesn't show people who aren't already fit. Again, unless you think the only people who have "being fit" as their endgoal are already fit, I think it is fair to say that, according to the article, a substantial portion of that demographic isn't adequately represented, and I don't think it is a coincidence that that portion is the "not currently fit" portion.

"So do you believe that blackness impairs an individual in the same way a missing leg does?"

its not about impairment, its about categorisation and marketing to a particular category

an example with race would be for example that i wouldn't market hair straightening products to white women but i would do so for black women

"As for the "endgoal" statements, it seems that you sort of pulled that out of nowhere as a bit of a catchall."

well if you don't understand that this is the end goal of marketing then we can't have much of a discussion

the purpose of marketing is to demonstrate how a product can put a person in a position where they have solved some problem they have

in this case i'm assuming its the need for exercise and recreation

"The whole point is that the "messaging" doesn't show people who aren't already fit."

yes which was my point

"Again, unless you think the only people who have "being fit" as their endgoal are already fit"

""or have being fit and active as their endgoal?""

"a substantial portion of that demographic isn't adequately represented"

so if i understand you correctly you expect them to use unfit people in marketing for fitness classes?

Unless your argument is that black people don't belong at a spin class like a no-footed person doesn't belong at a shoe store, there is no reason to go down this path. The argument was never that it is bad that out-groups exist, the argument is about the particulars of these in-groups. 

Also, if you think white women don't use hair straighteners, you are very wrong.

And yes, I do expect them to use unfit people in their marketing if they are trying to market to unfit people. Planet Fitness built a very successful business out of doing just that. Otherwise, you run the risk of creating a specific in-group of attractive, fit young people and making unfit people feel as if they aren't welcome, which (surprise) is what the article is about, so this line of thinking shouldn't come as a surprise.

CaptainExplosion said: Ka-pi96 said: Firstly, WTF is a "spin class"? Secondly, somebody totally got Rol'd It's not my fault he didn't properly convey the message.

Well, if he tried to be less subtle it'd ruin the whole point.

That's up to you to figure out.