A while back, I joined a gym that made me sign a waiver before participating. It had a bunch of stuff I didnt really like in it, but went through with it anyway. Something they stuck at the end struck me as absurd and had me thinking "There's no way this is enforceable." It was a clause that basically said the contract was to be interpreted as if the gym wasn't the drafter.
Months later, I felt like looking into some of the legal principles behind this and came across "contra proferenetum." It seems kind of crazy to me that an adhesion contract (a term I have also recently learned of) could essentially have me, an unsophisticated party who had no hand in writing a non-negotiable take-it-or-leave-it contract, make a claim in that contract that has me disclaim the protections that go along with that by pretending that it wasn't a non-negotiable take-it-or-leave-it contract that I might as well have co-authored.
I have heard that illegal contract terms are unenforceable, even if a party drafts them into a contract. I suspect that isn't relevant to this discussion, but the concept strikes me as similar. How might a court react to this contract clause as I've represented it?