Imagine finishing a long day at work, eager to unwind at the gym — only to be told you’re too old to use it during peak hours.
That’s the situation many women are facing at a gym in Lancashire, where a controversial new policy is causing quite the stir.
A New Rule That’s Not Sitting Well
A local gym named Bodies in Motion, located in Pendle, recently rolled out a policy that has raised eyebrows and tempers alike.
The new rule bans women over the age of 24 from accessing the gym between 4pm and 7pm on weekdays — ironically, the very hours when most working women are free to work out.
These hours are already part of the gym’s women-only time slot, which runs from 9am to 7pm.
But now, if you’re 25 or older, you’ll have to squeeze your workouts in either before work or late at night, alongside male gymgoers.
Understandably, many see this as not just inconvenient but also discriminatory.
A Concerned Member Sparks Debate Online
One frustrated member took to the parenting platform Mumsnet to share her experience.
The 36-year-old posted a screenshot of a text from the gym, which explained that the facility would be “reserved exclusively for women aged 12 to 24” during those critical evening hours.
“This is ridiculous, right?” she asked fellow users.
Her post immediately attracted dozens of comments from others who agreed that the rule seemed unfair and even ageist.
Many were baffled that a gym claiming to be inclusive would implement such an exclusionary rule.
The Gym’s Justification: Comfort for Younger Girls
The gym’s message cited “feedback” from younger female members who wanted a more comfortable, dedicated space after school.
The goal, according to the message, was to create a more welcoming environment for teenage girls during the after-school rush.
However, for many, that reasoning just didn’t hold up.
Users questioned why a 12-year-old would feel more at ease around a 24-year-old but supposedly uncomfortable near someone in their 30s or 40s.
One commenter joked, “Girls and women under 24 need a safe space from… women over 24? Am I missing something?”
Confusion and Mixed Messages from Staff
While the gym hasn’t issued a formal public response, some information was shared by employees speaking anonymously.
One claimed the policy was only meant for “really old women above 50,” though no details were given about how this would be enforced.
Others confirmed that despite the official policy, women over 24 might still get access if their key cards worked.
The inconsistency has only added to the confusion and frustration among members.
An Inclusive Mission at Odds with the Policy
According to Bodies in Motion’s website, the gym prides itself on being an inclusive space where people from all backgrounds can thrive.
But many members now feel that this policy directly contradicts that mission.
Comments online have described the rule as nonsensical and rooted in age discrimination.
“If you have a teenage daughter and want to introduce her to the gym, you can’t even go in with her if you’re too old,” one person pointed out.
Others argued that instead of drawing in younger members, the policy might end up alienating a large segment of their clientele.
Calls for Action and Membership Cancellations
The backlash hasn’t stayed confined to Mumsnet.
On Reddit and other forums, people are expressing outrage and calling for change.
Many suggested that affected members should “vote with their wallets” and cancel their memberships until the rule is reversed.
One commenter summed it up bluntly: “Either way, I’d be cancelling my membership and making very clear why.”
A Few Supporters, but Still a Divisive Issue
Although the overwhelming response has been negative, a few voices have defended the gym’s decision.
Some believe it’s reasonable to offer exclusive hours to help young women feel less self-conscious.
One user highlighted the fact that many teenage girls stop exercising due to discomfort or anxiety and suggested that having a protected time slot might help keep them active.
From a legal standpoint, others argued that as long as the gym can show a legitimate purpose — which they claim they have — they’re within their rights to create such a policy.
But even those supporters admitted that the business might suffer if enough people find the policy off-putting.
What’s Next for Bodies in Motion?
At this point, the gym has yet to issue an official statement addressing the backlash.
Meanwhile, frustration among current and potential members continues to grow.
Will the policy hold?
Or will mounting public pressure force the gym to reconsider its approach?
Only time — and perhaps a few cancelled memberships — will tell.