Air France has now publicly denied that it closed the sauna in its Paris Charles de Gaulle lounge because passengers were engaging in sexual activity inside. Fair enough, but I stand by what I reported: that is what an Air France lounge manager told me when I specifically asked why the sauna had been permanently closed.
Air France Denies Sex Shut Down Its Paris Lounge Sauna…I’m Not Convinced
Last week I wrote about the rather unfortunate demise of the sauna in the Air France business class lounge in Terminal 2E, Hall L at Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport.
I had noticed during my visit that the sauna was locked and marked “staff only.” Since I used it every time I visited the lounge and was looking forward to using it again, I went back and asked a lounge manager whether the closure was temporary.
He told me it was permanent.
When I asked why, he explained, rather delicately, that passengers had been “doing things in there that they should not have.”
I asked him to clarify.
The look I received made further clarification unnecessary.
That story went rather viral, and Air France has now weighed in with a different explanation:
“We would like to deny this information. The men’s/women’s sauna was closed in September 2025 due to low usage and as part of our commitment to standardizing all the services offered in our lounges at Paris Charles de Gaulle 2 for our customers.
“We still offer relaxation areas featuring complimentary 20-minute treatments from our partner Clarins, as well as showers and rest areas for passengers whilst they wait for their flights.”
Okay…
I Stand By My Reporting
Let me be very clear about something: I did not invent the explanation in my original story, nor did I hear it from another passenger or read it on Flyertalk or reddit.
An Air France lounge manager told me directly that the sauna had been closed because passengers were doing things inside that they should not have been doing.
Could that employee have been wrong? Of course.
Could he have been making a joke that I took too literally? I suppose, although that was certainly not how the conversation came across. Quite the contrary, he was very serious and he spoke excellent English so it wasn’t a language barrier.
Could Air France have had several reasons for closing it? That strikes me as the most plausible explanation.
Air France now says low utilization and “standardizing” services were the reasons. Perhaps those were indeed the corporate reasons for finally pulling the plug, while misuse of the facility was another factor discussed internally or among lounge employees.
Those explanations are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
But Air France’s Explanation Raises Questions
But I do find the “low usage” explanation a little curious.
This was not a proposal for a sauna that Air France decided against building because projected utilization was too low. The saunas were already there.
Air France spent heavily renovating the Hall L lounge and proudly advertised its two private saunas when the lounge debuted in 2018. They were part of a 550-square-meter wellness area that Air France called the largest of its kind in its lounge network.
So why permanently lock the doors because not enough people were using them?
To be fair, a sauna is not free to operate simply because the room already exists. There are electricity costs, cleaning costs, inspections, maintenance, and presumably additional work for lounge staff (especially if they were cleaning bodily fluid off the wood). If very few passengers were using it, perhaps Air France simply decided those costs were no longer worthwhile.
And “standardization” is certainly believable in the sense that Air France’s other CDG lounges emphasize Clarins treatments, showers, and relaxation areas rather than saunas.
But that’s also a shame. Why should every lounge need to offer precisely the same amenities? The sauna was one of the things that made Hall L special.
There’s another twist: Air France’s own corporate website still advertises a sauna as available in the Terminal 2E Hall L lounge, even though the passenger-facing lounge page no longer lists it. The landing page for the Wi-Fi network in the lounge also still lists the sauna as a lounge amenity.
Perhaps someone should standardize the website too…
CONCLUSION
Air France says sexual activity had nothing to do with closing its Hall L sauna, which it says was shuttered in September 2025 because of low usage and an effort to standardize lounge amenities.
I take note of that denial. But I also stand by my original reporting. I asked an Air France lounge manager directly why the sauna was permanently closed, and his answer was perfectly clear (and reasonable!).
Maybe the manager was misinformed…orr maybe a lightly used sauna that was occasionally being used for extracurricular purposes became more trouble than it was worth.
Whatever the precise calculus, the door remains locked.
Too bad. I really liked that sauna.



No worries… I’m sure the ‘happy endings’ will continue with Clarins & , ahem.., “relaxation areas’… Mais oui !
Or maybe those frisky saunas are now reserved for exclusive ‘corp9rate use’ due to increased demand/popularity..
Could have been drug use
Maybe walk back the gay bathhouse lead photo a bit? It’s giving Fox News Red meat
1. No one at the AF lounge told you that. The entire story seems to be “oh his eyes said everything”? which was great for the initial story. It’s a blog. report whatever.
2. But now, even AF has publicly said that’s not why. To be blunt, your initial story didn’t sound very French.
3. The initial story seemed to blame the men and women’s sauna issue on gay sex (without deliberating saying it)? with about zero consideration of the separate women’s sauna rationale or really even much mention of its separate existence..
Not trying to create red meat, but it was more than an eye stare…I have better things to do than to make things up and I find the AF response hilarious. Come on, Max.
If forced to place a bet, I’d take “sex was the reason” and “management preferred not to admit it was sex.”
Whatever the cause, I find it unfortunate that this was closed. Surely there were less draconian ways of addressing the problem?