News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #50 on: July 18, 2013, 10:55:45 AM »
Tony - I'm not convinced the member of HCEG would be too concerned at losing the Open. The person who would be most annoyed would be the odious Mr Salmond. Kent county council put the economic benefit of the Open at £90m to Kent. If the R&A took the "East Lothian" Open to England, Ulster or Wales Salmond would have serious egg on his face.
Cave Nil Vino

Jeff Taylor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #51 on: July 18, 2013, 12:38:50 PM »
"But, are those same groups and clubs entitled to use any of the public's services paid for in taxation by half the population"

Which public services are we talking about?

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #52 on: July 18, 2013, 12:59:31 PM »
Tony - I'm not convinced the member of HCEG would be too concerned at losing the Open. The person who would be most annoyed would be the odious Mr Salmond. Kent county council put the economic benefit of the Open at £90m to Kent. If the R&A took the "East Lothian" Open to England, Ulster or Wales Salmond would have serious egg on his face.

Mark,

If HCEG decides they'd rather remain a men's club than retain the Open, why would Salmond be held responsible?
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #53 on: July 18, 2013, 09:36:31 PM »
Do we really have to rehash this again?  The club is free to do as it pleases until it holds and profits from, directly or indirectly, an event in the public domain.   

Says who?  Again, if change is really the goal, the people responsible are not host club members, but the R&A and the BeeB.  One controls the site the other controls the money making media.  Write your letters and start a campaign, but please don't accuse me of rehashing this when it is your name plastered all over these threads.  We get it, you don't like male only clubs making money from big time events.  Its small beer in the world of dislikes, but if you feel strongly - do something.  At the very least you can be seen not to support the event - then work up from there.  But please, don't be one of those guys who says tech is bad for golf while standing in line for a new driver.   

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024:Winterfield & Alnmouth,

Tony_Muldoon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #54 on: July 19, 2013, 03:46:04 AM »
Hi Lou,


I'm just curious why you chose to edit out the last line of the paragraph you quoted?


"I say it is hypocritical to lobby for inclusion in the Olympic movement and all that involves whilst at the same time to place your premier completion on courses run by exclusionary Clubs in 3 out of the next 5 years.  I say nothing against all male clubs, in fact I am a member of one, but the R&A have created this mess and it is a mess.  Golf has a poor history in this regard and the least the leading body can do is to move forward and  present us with a shining example of all that is right with golf."


As golfers isn't it in our 'self interest' to have the game we love, that occupies much of our time and in some ways defines us in the eyes of others, presented in the best light?  Perhaps if you had a daughter you might feel different about this matter, perhaps not.    I had the same feeling when I read Ran's comments about ignoring all the fuss about Trumps method's and just concentrating on playing the golf course. Such a narrow focus on self interest is short sighted at best.  Golf is by most accounts in trouble and the perception of it as being for old sexist men (which is incidentally  not a case that I'm arguing) does not help one bit.

As to my hypocrisy's, yes guilty as charged. But then I'm not claiming to represent anyone but myself.
 

 

Mark I understand your point.  I think everyone knows by now where I stand on this and I believe it's at the Political (Cameron got involved yesterday with a wild misaimed shot) and R&A level that change will be worked out.  Some of these Clubs will choose not to change their membership policy's and good for them.
 
 
Let's make GCA grate again!

Lou_Duran

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #55 on: July 19, 2013, 08:20:35 PM »
Hi Lou,

I'm just curious why you chose to edit out the last line of the paragraph you quoted?


"I say it is hypocritical to lobby for inclusion in the Olympic movement and all that involves whilst at the same time to place your premier completion on courses run by exclusionary Clubs in 3 out of the next 5 years.  I say nothing against all male clubs, in fact I am a member of one, but the R&A have created this mess and it is a mess.  Golf has a poor history in this regard and the least the leading body can do is to move forward and  present us with a shining example of all that is right with golf."


As golfers isn't it in our 'self interest' to have the game we love, that occupies much of our time and in some ways defines us in the eyes of others, presented in the best light?  Perhaps if you had a daughter you might feel different about this matter, perhaps not.    I had the same feeling when I read Ran's comments about ignoring all the fuss about Trumps method's and just concentrating on playing the golf course. Such a narrow focus on self interest is short sighted at best.  Golf is by most accounts in trouble and the perception of it as being for old sexist men (which is incidentally  not a case that I'm arguing) does not help one bit.

As to my hypocrisy's, yes guilty as charged. But then I'm not claiming to represent anyone but myself.

No specific reason other than it was not pertinent to what I was attempting to address.  And I was not accusing you of being a hypocrite specifically, only that we all tend to talk out of both sides of our mouth from time to time.

IMO, the world in general and golf specifically have much, much larger fish to fry than the acceptance of women to an all male golf club or the awarding of an important event under its auspices to a club which has some policies that are contrary to current populist (not necessarily majority) notions of equality.  Like so many other things plaguing the confused minds of those yearning to dominate society through the sheer force of a large government, the concept of equality under the law (or in the eyes of God) has been bastardized by these justice warriors well beyond common sense, practicality, or the ability to implement with any hope of success.  I have to wonder what percentage of women really give a rat's ass about being precluded from joining Muirfield because of their gender, particularly, if, in fair play, by removing that obstacle, men would then have "the right" to join clubs and participate in activities previously restricted to the fairer sex.

I do have a daughter and I do want her to have access to every reasonable opportunity that adds value to her life.  The universe of these is so vast that somehow missing out on Muirfield, Augusta National or Preston Trails doesn't merit a second thought.  It would indeed be a great example of hypocrisy if a club which discriminates based on gender (say the R & A) would preclude Muirfield or Troon for that reason.

What ails golf, IMO, has little to do with the ruling bodies' current stances on club policies and governance.  Rather than seeking a role in social engineering, they might better spend their time identifying the various causes of why golf is losing steam and coming up with some practical, achievable solutions.  Initiatives on the pace of play, water usage, and other sustainability issues are good first steps.  Reviewing the possibility of bifurcating the rules relating to balls and implements as well as the conditions of play (e.g. redefining course boundaries) might be another.  But if the golf powers want to play in the larger political field which very much affects the future of the game in significant ways, taxation and tort law are but two areas that beg attention.

I am greatly enjoying the Open and how Muirfield is playing.  If you guys need a European Martha Burke to stir things up, there are no shortage of those.  Not like there is not enough on your plate already over there.

Cheers.   

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #56 on: July 21, 2013, 03:45:10 PM »
As an aside I played golf with a group of friends yesterday, many of whom were at the Open on the Friday, spending an inordinate amount of time socialising it has to be said. Due to certain connections they were inside the clubhouse, which was stacked with wives, girlfriends and female hangers on. I'm told Condoleesa Rice was there although what category she comes into, I'm not sure  ;).

Niall

Mark Chaplin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #57 on: July 21, 2013, 06:20:48 PM »
I had a very interesting chat today with a young lady who was one of the campaigners to get women into the MCC (Marylebone Cricket Club). She became a respected member within a couple of years of women being able to join. She has no problem with the HCEG being men only and the Open being played there. Her issue is the R&A runs golf, as the MCC ran cricket and it is they who should have lady members as the ruling body not the venues.
Cave Nil Vino

Tony_Muldoon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #58 on: July 22, 2013, 07:51:40 AM »
Lou we seem to be speaking about different things so I’m still puzzled why you selected my post but I’ll try to reply to your points.


No specific reason other than it was not pertinent to what I was attempting to address.  And I was not accusing you of being a hypocrite specifically, only that we all tend to talk out of both sides of our mouth from time to time.

Understood I never thought it was a personal attack. Some of the most consistent folk who avoid even the tang of Hypocrisy are also crashing bores; a certain amount of holding contradictory views makes life interesting.  However when the Self appointed governing body acts “inconsistently” then I think it fair game to call them on it.

IMO, the world in general and golf specifically have much, much larger fish to fry than the acceptance of women to an all male golf club or the awarding of an important event under its auspices to a club which has some policies that are contrary to current populist (not necessarily majority) notions of equality.  Like so many other things plaguing the confused minds of those yearning to dominate society through the sheer force of a large government, the concept of equality under the law (or in the eyes of God) has been bastardized by these justice warriors well beyond common sense, practicality, or the ability to implement with any hope of success.  I have to wonder what percentage of women really give a rat's ass about being precluded from joining Muirfield because of their gender, particularly, if, in fair play, by removing that obstacle, men would then have "the right" to join clubs and participate in activities previously restricted to the fairer sex.

I do feel you are applying your well known belief in the danger of large Government to a governing body that we as golfers (outside the USA) voluntarily decide to abide by.  Why can’t you see my point that it’s the perception of Golf as an Old Man’s game that makes it less than  appealing to the young and to many other people who would gain real benefit from  playing a round a week but have never been exposed to what’s good about the game.  I’m not trying to reengineer society just point out that the R&A are needlessly blighting their own Championship with this policy. I have repeatedly said that Muirfield have the right to choose their own members, please acknowledge this and stop turning this into an issue that I’m not addressing. 

I do have a daughter and I do want her to have access to every reasonable opportunity that adds value to her life.  The universe of these is so vast that somehow missing out on Muirfield, Augusta National or Preston Trails doesn't merit a second thought.  It would indeed be a great example of hypocrisy if a club which discriminates based on gender (say the R & A) would preclude Muirfield or Troon for that reason.


Now we are in agreement. It follows from what I have been saying that if the R&A want to represent the game of golf it is absurd that they are a synonymous legal representative of an all male group. They are cagey on this matter saying they are still looking at the relationship between the two organisations. 

What ails golf, IMO, has little to do with the ruling bodies' current stances on club policies and governance.  Rather than seeking a role in social engineering, they might better spend their time identifying the various causes of why golf is losing steam and coming up with some practical, achievable solutions.  Initiatives on the pace of play, water usage, and other sustainability issues are good first steps.  Reviewing the possibility of bifurcating the rules relating to balls and implements as well as the conditions of play (e.g. redefining course boundaries) might be another.  But if the golf powers want to play in the larger political field which very much affects the future of the game in significant ways, taxation and tort law are but two areas that beg attention.

The issue’s  you are discussing mainly affect and concern existing golfers. I am looking out at the folk who do not play golf and never even wonder how long it takes to play.  I have no idea who you socialise or do business with, but I would say less than 10% of my regular social set are golfers and for the majority of the other 90%, Golf apparently has a real image problem. The Open featured sterling pace of play and was a model example of water conservation and more sustainable course management. However the China People’s Daily ran an article focussing on the Gender issue as did all the press in GB&I and it all reflected poorly on the image of golf.  I repeat , this row was entirely unnecessary and does the game of golf a disservice. 

I am greatly enjoying the Open and how Muirfield is playing.  If you guys need a European Martha Burke to stir things up, there are no shortage of those.  Not like there is not enough on your plate already over there.


Like you I greatly enjoyed what I managed to see of the golf. Well done Phil.


Cheers.   
« Last Edit: July 22, 2013, 08:06:03 AM by Tony_Muldoon »
Let's make GCA grate again!

Tom_Doak

  • Karma: +1/-1
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #59 on: July 22, 2013, 07:58:50 AM »
I was wondering yesterday why it had been 11 years since the last Open at Muirfield, and I'm prepared to think this is one of the reasons, that the R & A doesn't like bringing this issue back into the spotlight, especially considering its own status.

I also wonder, after reading this thread, which of you posters have daughters, but I think I could probably make some educated guesses.

V. Kmetz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #60 on: July 22, 2013, 08:44:57 AM »
I can't analyze the rest of the world's mores, but here in America we are now undergoing (seems fast to some, slow to others) the hard change that comes post-Enlightenment...

Gender and Race was never contemplated in the founding documents, nor the tradition behind them.

I watched a stimulating panel about whether or not the US Constitution is worth preserving; and one panelist was citing the Hobbsian formula to which those makers/founders  tested their ideas:

1. Q: Where does Law come from?
    A:  It comes from Constitution?
2. Q: Where does Constitution come from?
    A:  it comes from the consent of the governed?
3. Q: where does this consent come from
    A: It comes from those traditions of natural rights which pre-date any Constitution

My point, with this Golf issue, was that the very tradition (as in all things) is so overwhelmingly "Male," (and if we want to go there, "White/Caucasian") that there is no underpinning, no social tradition, no contemplation of the gender role (or the natural rights of those not White Male) that the older the institution (like many British clubs in the crosshairs) have to reference and/or formulate consent over.

We think "Mmmmm, but the lineage of gender and race struggles for equality have been going on for a good long time now (150 years), to the extent that this is antiquated, barbarian...we know better... and of course, we shouldn't let the public coffers be advantaged by anyone who doesn't practice what is (now) Enlightened policy..."

But the problem (in all areas) is that the underpinning of this essential "fairness" and "equality" has to combat (in the Western sense) 1500 years of previous tradition (2500 if we go to the Greeks) in which gender and race were not consideration for the political and moral philosophy of our species. 

So, guess what...IMO, we are going to be lumped in with the Enlightenment by future history...we are still undergoing the movement.  We may be (rightly or wrongly, depending on your view) indeed making laws and now treating gender and race equally, bu tthe previous thousands of years of traditions are still in conflict with what we do.  If we look to tradition and Founding generations for help; it's not there...it's not even on the map.

This is the essential disconnect and contemporary tension in what we believe are worthwhile traditions to keep and which ones are in need of change.  The world is not an old man, in this regard; its an adolescent.  It is only just in the last .05% of Western history that ALL the players are included in the program (white, black, men, women, religious, agnostic).

Did the Enlightenment mean for White Males only?

We are determining to contravene the answer you would have received in 1787.

This is the way of things.

cheers

vk




"The tee shot must first be hit straight and long between a vast bunker on the left which whispers 'slice' in the player's ear, and a wilderness on the right which induces a hurried hook." -

Joe Bausch

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #61 on: July 22, 2013, 08:56:36 AM »
What if the Champion Golfer yesterday had not stuck to the typical speech after being presented the Claret Jug.  With his wife and daughters there, he had quite the opportunity.  I wonder if it crossed his mind?
@jwbausch (for new photo albums)
The site for the Cobb's Creek project:  https://cobbscreek.org/
Nearly all Delaware Valley golf courses in photo albums: Bausch Collection

Jeff Taylor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #62 on: July 22, 2013, 09:08:16 AM »
Opportunity to what, lecture his host on how they run or should run their club?
Can't think of a way to be more rude.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2013, 09:11:43 AM by Jeff Taylor »

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #63 on: July 22, 2013, 09:44:59 AM »

What if the Champion Golfer yesterday had not stuck to the typical speech after being presented the Claret Jug.  With his wife and daughters there, he had quite the opportunity.  I wonder if it crossed his mind?

Joe,

When Phil sent his entry in, he accepted being in Rome.
If he wanted to make a statement, he could have done so by not sending his entry in.
But, once he submited his entry, he was in Rome.

Had he made a comment about the club's policies during his acceptance speech it would have been in the worst possible taste.

With all the wealth accumulated by women, why do you think there aren't any "women's" golf clubs ?,


Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #64 on: July 22, 2013, 10:10:58 AM »
Pat,

Ladies Golf Club of Toronto. 

Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Jeff Taylor

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #65 on: July 22, 2013, 10:34:49 AM »
Where should the protesters meet?

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #66 on: July 22, 2013, 01:33:36 PM »
Where should the protesters meet?

At the home of the woman who's stupid enough to propose holding a Tour event there in the year 2013, not to mention a Major...
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

Niall C

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #67 on: July 22, 2013, 01:51:59 PM »
I was wondering yesterday why it had been 11 years since the last Open at Muirfield, and I'm prepared to think this is one of the reasons, that the R & A doesn't like bringing this issue back into the spotlight, especially considering its own status.

I also wonder, after reading this thread, which of you posters have daughters, but I think I could probably make some educated guesses.

For those of you with sons, how pissed off are you that they can't get into the Girl Guides ?

Niall

Patrick_Mucci

Re: Here we go again......
« Reply #68 on: July 22, 2013, 02:26:56 PM »
Jud T,

Men can be card holding guests at the Ladies Golf Club of Toronto, hence there is no "women's ONLY" golf club.

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back