Cowboys-Celtics-ChiSox's Blog
Views
2657
Comments
22

 

It must be April. Augusta National is once again buzzing, just as it does this time every year. Magnolia trees and fresh cut greens. Amen corner and Green Jackets. Golfs Superbowl, the Masters, is coming to a television near you this weekend. In 3D no less, if you should be blessed with such piece of equiptment.

Of course, with the Masters on everyones mind, the topic of who should or should not be allowed membership to a private club is once again a hot topic. Women have traditionally not been allowed membership status at Augusta National so every year multiple "equal rights" groups demand that policy be changed. The Masters largest sponsor, IBM, now has a female CEO. The last four CEO's of IBM were all offered memberships at Augusta National. So that's this year's rallying cry. "If they don't let her in, IBM should stop sponsoring the event"

 

I'm all for free speech, of course, but these people really should tone down their rhetoric. It is little more than an indefensible attention seeking ploy at this point. Unless, of course, they want to give equal time to places and professions that exclude MEN as well. Women are not barred from playing golf at Augusta National, females regularly play the course. There is no discrimination issue here at all. Augusta National is a privately owned and operated country club. It's members are selected by invitation only (I couldn't get in either, and I'm an "elite white male"). The #1 objective of any private club is exclusivity. That's the whole point. They can choose whoever they want to include or exclude. If a bunch of old rich white guys want to hang out together smoking cigars, drinking brandy, telling dirty jokes, and whatever the  hell else they do there, then who are we to tell them they can't, or that they must allow rich old ladies, too?

I know...I know. "It's not fair! It's gender discrimination!". Yep, I agree, it is. So what? Whoever creates a private club gets to decide who they want as members. No, you and I don't get to overrule them based on what's "fair". By their very design, private clubs can't be 'fair'. Exclusion is what they are all about.

 

Want to be a Shriner so you can wear a Fez and drive one of those cool miniature cars while helping Children's hospitals? (Come on, you do, admit it) Sorry, no can do. The Shriners are a private club within yet another private club, the Freemason's.

First you have to be selected into the Freemason's, make it through all of their rituals to move up through the ranks and then hope you get selected by the Shriner's to join their group. Sorry ladies, women aren't allowed to be shriners, either. Should I expect protests outside of every parade, circus, and hospital they participate in or support going forward? If they don't change their obvious gender bias, they should lose their charitable tax status and be forced to turn in their funny hats, right?

I can't walk into a VFW, slap down a buck, and order a Budweiser simply because I'm not a veteran. It's not fair, I tell you! I like cheap beer just as much as an Iraq war vet!

Read the rest of this blog HERE

April 6, 2012  12:21 PM ET

Hey CCC, you make several strong points here. I guess it doesn't bother me either way as I can see both sides but am not affected. It isn't for me. Same with the VFW. I'm eligible and don't begrudge what it is; just not ready to sit down with the old guys and tell war stories. I'd much rather do that in "The Reef" out in Port Hueneme, CA with my old Seabee buddies.

I do think one sticking point for the PGA is that they have a policy not to team with any organization that discriminates. We're walking a fine line here because it isn't necessarily discrimination as much as exclusivity. The do allow women to golf as guests and family members. It's just a bit sticky but not quicksand.

April 6, 2012  12:51 PM ET
QUOTE(#1):

I do think one sticking point for the PGA is that they have a policy not to team with any organization that discriminates. We're walking a fine line here because it isn't necessarily discrimination as much as exclusivity. The do allow women to golf as guests and family members. It's just a bit sticky but not quicksand.

Many/most PGA tournaments take place on private courses. They tend to be in better shape without all the extra foot traffic and easier to prepare for tournaments.

It is absolutely discrimination, by design. The question is...so what? It's a private country club. You can't call up and set a tee time just because you want to play the course no matter what your gender (or income) is. Heck, you can't even fill out an application unless you are first invited to. It's not a case of women trying to get in and being refused...they just aren't invited to begin with, as far as we know.

I have no doubt at all that the PGA would give anything for Augusta National to publicly bring in a female member, unfortunately for Finchem, they have no say in the matter. It's not like they could move the Masters to a different course, and they sure can't dictate anything to Augusta.

I don't know if you clicked the link to read the second page of the blog, but really, we don't even know for sure that they -don't- have any female members or that they explicitly exclude women. That's an assumption because none has ever been identified publicly, but Augusta doesn't release their membership list nor a copy of their bylaws. It's all speculation and assumption.

Also on the second page of the blog, for those who didn't read it, I bring up for women only and curves "health clubs". Commercial businesses that cater strictly to women. No men allowed at all. That is clear cut gender discrimination, yet they get away with it. I don't see any of these 'protestors' standing outside of those facilities demanding gender equality.

I call people like these the professionally offended. They have nothing better to do with their lives so they find a 'cause' to fight against. I'll guarantee not a single one of them would ever stand a snowballs chance in hell at ever being a member of Augusta National regardless of their gender policy, but it makes them feel important to protest something, I guess.

April 6, 2012  01:53 PM ET

Triple C, let me start by apologizing for not reading the full post. I really think you hit the nail on the head. Wish I hadn't made my post before reading everything. Maybe I'll join a VFW now and invite you in for a cheap beer or two. In fact, I'll buy the first few rounds.

Seriously, dude. Nice post.

April 7, 2012  02:24 AM ET

No problem. Usually when I post the first part of a blog here I make sure it works as a standalone. On this one, you really don't get the full gist of the blog unless you also read the second page.

And thanks.

Comment #5 has been removed
Comment #6 has been removed
Comment #7 has been removed
Comment #8 has been removed
April 7, 2012  11:34 AM ET
QUOTE(#5):

golf sucks...FORE!!!!

Brilliant analysis. I can't believe ESPN hasn't hired you yet...

Comment #10 has been removed
April 7, 2012  01:15 PM ET
QUOTE(#10):

Exactly.

The woman in my avatar is Anna Rawson of the LPGA. If that doesn't make you want to score a hole in one then I would probably be forced to question your sexuality. :)

Comment #12 has been removed
Comment #13 has been removed
Comment #14 has been removed
Comment #15 has been removed
Comment #16 has been removed
April 7, 2012  02:45 PM ET
QUOTE(#15):

Been married to the same women for 20+ years now.

Then it's probably been a while since you scored a hole in one. :)

April 7, 2012  02:46 PM ET
QUOTE(#16):

HA-HA-HA...ooppss. Meant to say woman. One wife is enough!

I just figured you were a Mormon...

Comment #19 has been removed
 
Comment #20 has been removed

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Start Your Own Blog

Start Now

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    'Melo wants to be wooed (like, Howard wooed)
    Views
    2398
    Comments
    1353
  2. 2
    Cashman scratching his head over Pineda
    Views
    1479
    Comments
    742
  3. 3
    Vogel coaching for his job
    Views
    808
    Comments
    742
  4. 4
    Farrell defends Fenway's 'sleep room'
    Views
    2187
    Comments
    481
  5. 5
    Youthful Red Wings are rattled
    Views
    2197
    Comments
    292

SI.com

SI Photos