Another bogus lawsuit for disney!!!!!

[Sarangel]

These are two entirely different situations. One requires people to wear a specific set of clothing and nothing extra in order to be employed doing a certain role. The other, reportedly, denied a woman entrance to a public area based on her clothing (and by implication her religious beliefs) while allowing others with similar clothing into the same area. If the pool enforced its "no street clothes" rule to *everyone* in the pool area, the woman has no case.

Sarangel

 

[johare]

Originally posted by Sarangel
These are two entirely different situations. One requires people to wear a specific set of clothing and nothing extra in order to be employed doing a certain role. The other, reportedly, denied a woman entrance to a public area based on her clothing (and by implication her religious beliefs) while allowing others with similar clothing into the same area. If the pool enforced its "no street clothes" rule to *everyone* in the pool area, the woman has no case.

Sarangel

I doubt that others in the area were wearing similar clothing. If people were using the pool, it must have been reasonably warm which means that normal "street clothes" would have likely been shorts and a tshirt...ie, something that wouldn't really restrict your ability to swim too much should you fall into the pool. It could be a safety issue. I would think that wearing something which covers you from head to toe would make it very difficult to swim and would also make it more difficult for a person to rescue you should you fall into the pool. I think it's a judgement call that the people in charge of the pool should be allowed to make.

The last sentence in that article which says she's seeking "unspecified damages for humiliation, embarrassment and suffering." says it all.

 

[katerkat]

Originally posted by johare
It could be a safety issue. I would think that wearing something which covers you from head to toe would make it very difficult to swim and would also make it more difficult for a person to rescue you should you fall into the pool.

I've worked at several different pools (public and private) before Disney, and all of them had a rule that a bathing suit must be worn - you couldn't even wear a t-shirt over your bathing suit. Clothing - especially WET clothing - would definitely be a hindrance in most of the rescue moves.

However, for the record, I think she should have been allowed in the pool area, just not in the pool.

And, Disney does allow women in full garb to use portions of the water parks. Obviously, not the speed slides, but I saw them in the creek.

 

[caseymaureen]

As Sarangel said, these are completely different cases. If the woman did not intend to swim, and other people were allowed to wear their "street clothes" into the pool area, then this is indeed discrimination. Whether it's religion based or just clothing based doesn't matter, it's still discrimination. This is a public pool, meaning that it is funded by the government and our taxes. This woman's taxes, no matter what religion she is or what religious beliefs she has, helped to fund this pool and she should not be turned away from letting her children swim. And I would guess that she and her family probably did feel pretty humiliated; imagine if you went to a public place for a family outting and were treated this way in front of your children and the general public.
To say that this is an issue of safety, that the dress would make it more difficult to rescue the woman, could be the only point the pool has going for it. However, this means that the pool should also bar all grossly overweight people, afterall, they're going to be hard to rescue, and they can bar all small children, because they're quite a risk around water. But that's not going to happen, imagine the uproar if these people were banned.

Muslim women in full dress come to the beach I work at all the time and not one has fallen into the water and drowned because of her clothing. From what I've seen, they don't come to swim, but to spend time with their families. They stay close to their children to keep an eye on them, which is more than I can say for most of the other women and families that come to our beach.

JoHare~ That's pretty harsh. To say you disagree is one thing, to say you hope someone drowns because of their religious beliefs? That's just sad.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Personally, I think the pool lawsuit has merit. However, all she would be entitled to (I'm not a lawyer--so forgive me if I don't get this right) would be a portion of the fines.

In florida--the state with the highest incident of drownings--the only clothing restrictions at swimming pools are for those who actually wish to physically be in the water--no dress codes for the pool area (except for that which may expose too much).

Very different case from the disney case.

p.s. the only way her garb would make her sink to the bottom would be if it was weighted--people only otherwise sink like rocks if they do not know how to swim--not b/c of their clothing (my 2 children, ages 4 and 19 months, can float fully clothed courtesy of their swim survival lessons--so there's your proof).

 

[grinningghost]

Originally posted by katerkat


And, Disney does allow women in full garb to use portions of the water parks. Obviously, not the speed slides, but I saw them in the creek.

We saw a woman in full garb jump into the Fantasia pool at ASMo. Her son told my DD that his mother was crazy.