Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Kyle Harris on November 07, 2007, 10:01:57 PM
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
-
Because golf is game of a certain decorum -- fairness in play, self-regulated/enforced, keeping yelps and outbursts largely to a minimum. Dressing properly is in the spirit of the game.
-
Kyle,
I have a theory that any activity that takes us out into the public arena for a period longer than say, an hour or so, requires some type of uniform. Consider church, work, school, spectator sports, etc.
Consider also the fact that golf came from traditions where actual club "uniforms" were worn until the latter past of the 19th century, and it's actually a bit surprising that we are able to play our game without some type of consistent conformity with established norms.
I'm not projecting any value judgements on this phenomenom, mind you. I'm simply trying to explain how we arrived here.
I guess the good news is that golf fashion. to some degree, at least seemingly tries to model itself on whatever might be seen as fanciful dress for the particular time period, whether that be plaid Sansabelt slacks with a 3 inch thick yellow belt, or the tight-fitting, ultra-short-sleeved, collarless black pasted on shirt of the present European tour.
I also think on some level, we try to show respect for each other through what we choose to wear. If I showed up at some traditional private club wearing short shorts, a muscle t-shirt, and a sideways cap I would dare say that while I might be flexing my individuality, I would also not be respecting the wishes of either my hosts or the other members of the club, so simple Miss Manner courtesy would suggest that it's best to err on the side of what's generally seen as acceptable.
This is all, of course, from a 1970s rebel. However, just as important as it is to keep an independent mind is to choose what things are worth fighting against. ;)
-
Phil,
Thanks for being my sacrificial lamb. Please don't take this personally.
But that's bullshit.
The spirit of the game is honing physical skills of manipulating a standard ball over a course prepared for the game while following a set of rules overseen in implementation by the golfer. At no point does what I wear influence my ability to do that. Nor does my outside appearance stand as a testament to my integrity or ability to police myself.
So no. Try again.
What I think you meant to say is that dress codes uphold the spirit of the institutions which, for the past century or so, have taken to the game and the advancement of the game. When you are following a dress code, you aren't honoring the game, but the people who govern it.
Remember, golf started on PUBLIC and practically USELESS ground that was shared by everyone in the region.
-
Mike,
I can assure you I'm taking this to a deeper level, for now, I need to root out the preconceived notions of what golf actually is. This will take an architectural turn soon enough.
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
I think it needs to be known that tucking shirts in should always be mandatory.
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
I think it needs to be known that tucking shirts in should always be mandatory.
Why? I find my shirt being untucked to be far more comfortable. Why can't my attire be comfortable while playing golf?
-
One of my favorite GCA-posted pictures -- I think by Huckaby -- is the 6th at Pebble Beach (arguably one of the most scenic spots on a golf course in the world) with everything but the hole itself blacked out with a marker.
My guess is that's where this thread is going.
For a while now, the aforementioned Huckster has been trying to get the lot of us here on GCA to differentiate between "golf architecture" and the experience of playing the game on interesting courses. I like discussing both parts of that equation, but during the latter, I like to play alongside folks who dress with some degree of respect for the game.
-
Phil,
Not quite where this thread is going.
But please, tell me why playing golf in jeans and a clean t-shirt is disrespectful to "the game?"
Furthermore, who are you (impersonal) to judge my respect for the game based on what I wear?
-
"But though the manners of aristocracy do not constitute virtue, they sometimes embellish virtue itself. It was no ordinary sight to see a numerous and powerful class of men whose every outward action seemed constantly to be dictated by a natural elevation of thought and feeling, by delicacy and regularity of taste, and by urbanity of manners. Those manners threw a pleasing illusory charm over human nature; and though the picture was often a false one, it could not be viewed without a noble satisfaction."
Alexis deTocqueville - Democracy in America, Volume II
Tocqueville devoted an entire section of Volume II to manners, required reading (in my humble opinion) if you are serious about researching the subject.
-
Kyle Harris writes:
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
You don't.
The vast majority of courses require no real dress code. If you decide you want to play at courses with dress codes, then you have to follow their rules.
Cheers,
Dan King
If you don't send me a couple hundred pounds a week, I'm going to start wearing your clothes.
--Simon Hobday (a golfer who was not very fashion-conscious, when asked what he wrote in a letter to the manufacturer of Munsingwear, a line of clothes endorsed by many European golfers)
-
One of the ballsiest (pardon the pun) moves I ever saw was a guy on our high school team back in the day who on a dare (from himself, I think) played the 15th hole of the North Course at The Woodlands (TX) CC naked. Hardest hole on the course and he made a par. Gave new meaning to the term "flop shot".
-
Phil,
Thanks for being my sacrificial lamb. Please don't take this personally.
But that's bullshit.
The spirit of the game is honing physical skills of manipulating a standard ball over a course prepared for the game while following a set of rules overseen in implementation by the golfer. At no point does what I wear influence my ability to do that. Nor does my outside appearance stand as a testament to my integrity or ability to police myself.
So no. Try again.
What I think you meant to say is that dress codes uphold the spirit of the institutions which, for the past century or so, have taken to the game and the advancement of the game. When you are following a dress code, you aren't honoring the game, but the people who govern it.
Remember, golf started on PUBLIC and practically USELESS ground that was shared by everyone in the region.
Kyle,
Perhaps you could look at it from a different perspective. In my view you are honoring the game by presenting yourself in a certain manner, whether you think it is a dress code or not. The game of golf by itself would be nothing if not for the people who have played it and have contributed to its history. People have made golf such a great sport and by dressing in a certain way or even behaving in a certain way, you are honoring the people who have come before you, and subsequently honoring the game itself.
I realize that what someone wears or the presentabilty of an individual doesn't define them, but it definitely makes an impression, right or wrong.
If guys like to wear jeans and tee shirts to play, so be it. There are many courses that will accomodate them. Personally, I don't find this sort of dress appropriate for the golf course. I might be a bit old fashioned for my age, but I don't care for the casual and sloppy dress that we find so often in today's world. A nice neat pair of pants don't cost anymore than a pair of jeans, it's not asking too much of people to be a bit more dressier.
-
Michael,
I've seen many a well-dressed man spit upon the fundamental aspects of the game of golf, often while they thought others weren't looking.
I'd rather play with a slovenly golfer who follows the rules than a well-dress cheating scum bag.
-
For a while now, I've been getting more "dressed up" for golf games than for Sunday church. That probably says more about the current state of modern Lutheranism than it does for my golfing buddies.
It's a slippery slope, Kyle. I prefer golfing crowds to softball crowds for a lot of reasons, dress being one of them.
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
I think it needs to be known that tucking shirts in should always be mandatory.
Why? I find my shirt being untucked to be far more comfortable. Why can't my attire be comfortable while playing golf?
Let us not forget your first words to me when you saw the picture of me at Kapalua two years ago (wow!).
But you confuse me, a lot, so would you just tell us where this thread is going?
Because, either you have changed your golf course morals (LOL, and I seriously doubt that btw), or you are giving us a load of BS (definite possibility), or you have another one of your crazy theories that somehow makes sense even though it's really hard to explain (ding ding ding)...
-
Phil,
Thanks for being my sacrificial lamb. Please don't take this personally.
But that's bullshit.
The spirit of the game is honing physical skills of manipulating a standard ball over a course prepared for the game while following a set of rules overseen in implementation by the golfer. At no point does what I wear influence my ability to do that. Nor does my outside appearance stand as a testament to my integrity or ability to police myself.
So no. Try again.
What I think you meant to say is that dress codes uphold the spirit of the institutions which, for the past century or so, have taken to the game and the advancement of the game. When you are following a dress code, you aren't honoring the game, but the people who govern it.
Remember, golf started on PUBLIC and practically USELESS ground that was shared by everyone in the region.
Kyle,
Perhaps you could look at it from a different perspective. In my view you are honoring the game by presenting yourself in a certain manner, whether you think it is a dress code or not. The game of golf by itself would be nothing if not for the people who have played it and have contributed to its history. People have made golf such a great sport and by dressing in a certain way or even behaving in a certain way, you are honoring the people who have come before you, and subsequently honoring the game itself.
I realize that what someone wears or the presentabilty of an individual doesn't define them, but it definitely makes an impression, right or wrong.
Jamie,
That is certainly a worthy view, and I do not begrudge anyone their privilege to wear what they deem is appropriate. However, when one attends a funeral, they typically wear the best attire they own. By some economic standards this would be a well tailored suit and tie, and by others this could mean a pair of nice denim jeans and a clean shirt.
Both are showing respect in what they are wearing.
Why is it that the institutions of the game of golf feel the need to dictate how one person shows respect through a dress code? What true value does this add to the spirit of the game other than a superficial mark of conformity to some unchallenged standard?
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
Kyle - Because the establishments at which you play choose to enforce one.
I've played in groups behind guys with plain white tee shirts and guys without shirts on a hot summer day. I've been paired up with a guy that wore a t-shirt with a picture of a big St. Bernard holding a golf club and the motto "Step back and let the big dog swing." I've been whooped by a guy wearing blue jeans.
You only need adhere to a dress code if you choose to play at places that require it. It's a trade-off I'm willing to take, based on the average quality of courses I've played with a dress code vs. the average quality of those without.
Don't like the office dress code? Go work somewhere else.
Don't like the school dress code? Go to school somewhere else.
Don't like the golf course dress code? Go play somewhere else.
There are a lot more pressing issues keeping the game of golf from the masses than dress code (I'm not saying that's where you are going with this, but there are bigger problems to solve.)
Short-sleeve, mock turtlenecks are pretty damn casual. It's not like we're living in a day and age where the standard golf attire is unpractical. No one is asking you to wear a coat or a tie. I've never been much of a dress code guy. I love the golf dress code. It's what I'd choose to wear if I were going to play anyway. Nothing's better than a pair worn-in golf pants.
Please don't take this personally. :)
-
Phil,
I can certainly understand your aesthetic desires. However, if I were to be invited to your club to play golf, and showed up in well maintained jeans and a clean non-collared shirt... what perceptions would their be by the members before they even met me, played golf with me, or socialized with me?
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
-
Tim,
Earlier tonight on the phone with Doug Braunsdorf I mentioned my desire to only play at places that will allow me to wear what I want.
You've got it, and I don't take it personally. I'm prepared to back up my statements.
I just wonder why people get so bent out of shape about the direction in which the regulation of the game is going in terms of equipment and golf architecture (and furthermore, what is accepted by the majority as quality design) when the very fundamental requirements to play the game at most venues completely curtail any form of individual expression or diversity of tastes.
The values of the game will adapt to the values of the institutions who carry it.
Golf is by nature a diverse and creativity sport.
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
I don't necessarily. But I'd imagine because they feel the need to put themselves out for worshipping their higher authority of choice.
Are we now comparing a country club's kangaroo court to God?
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
I think it needs to be known that tucking shirts in should always be mandatory.
Why? I find my shirt being untucked to be far more comfortable. Why can't my attire be comfortable while playing golf?
Let us not forget your first words to me when you saw the picture of me at Kapalua two years ago (wow!).
But you confuse me, a lot, so would you just tell us where this thread is going?
Because, either you have changed your golf course morals (LOL, and I seriously doubt that btw), or you are giving us a load of BS (definite possibility), or you have another one of your crazy theories that somehow makes sense even though it's really hard to explain (ding ding ding)...
Jordan, I apologize.
And looking back on those conversations and that thread, you were very unfairly judged by this group. In fact, I'm ashamed of the way you were treated.
This group completely took one picture of you out of context and judged your intelligence, insight and value to the group as a whole based on how you looked.
I also apologize that I may have contributed to this shallow and superficial attitude. Please, please, please give the people you meet in the future the chance to make an impression on you based on the virtue of their mind and not the clothes on their back, nor the looks on their face. Had we done that, perhaps you would have been given a better chance to show the depth of your mind instead of using your relative immaturity against you on the defensive.
I failed you two years ago, please forgive me.
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
David,
You must not have been to church lately. ;) If folks are wearing their best duds, then jeans and sweatsuits are the new formal wear.
Kyle,
I honestly don't think economic standards equate to someone wearing jeans or someone in more formal attire. There are enough dressier looking clothes available for the same price as jeans or casual wear, that it isn't that difficult to dress for formal if one chose to.
I don't think someone's freedom of expression or individualism is hurt by the current rules of many clubs. Aren't their several ways to express yourself in dress without having to wear jeans?
-
I'd rather play with a slovenly golfer who follows the rules than a well-dress cheating scum bag.
Relatively speaking sure, but absolute scales count as well. Plus, being well-dressed and following the rules doesn't have to be an either/or proposition.
First, slovenly is a strong word. I'd rather play with an untidy golfer who follows the rules than a slovenly golfer who follows the rules. Even farther up the chain would be a well-dressed golfer that follows the rules.
Well, at least most of the rules. I'll be the first to admit that while I've got a pretty good understanding of the rules and I play by the ones I know, I still learn new rules every year.
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
David,
You must not have been to church lately. ;) If folks are wearing their best duds, then jeans and sweatsuits are the new formal wear.
Kyle,
I honestly don't think economic standards equate to someone wearing jeans or someone in more formal attire. There are enough dressier looking clothes available for the same price as jeans or casual wear, that it isn't that difficult to dress for formal if one chose to.
Then let's bring it to a matter of taste. I think that I can convey respect for the game by wearing jeans and a t-shirt.
Why is that wrong?
-
Phil,
I can certainly understand your aesthetic desires. However, if I were to be invited to your club to play golf, and showed up in well maintained jeans and a clean non-collared shirt... what perceptions would their be by the members before they even met me, played golf with me, or socialized with me?
Kyle:
My "club" is a nine-hole muni whose demographic is probably best described as the Wisconsin annex of the Peter Jans. Jeans and a clean shirt of any kind raises the level of dressiness; the regulars would look down on you not for your dress, but for ordering a Pepsi instead of a Miller Lite after your Sunday morning round.
-
I'd rather play with a slovenly golfer who follows the rules than a well-dress cheating scum bag.
Relatively speaking sure, but absolute scales count as well. Plus, being well-dressed and following the rules doesn't have to be an either/or proposition.
First, slovenly is a strong word. I'd rather play with an untidy golfer who follows the rules than a slovenly golfer who follows the rules. Even farther up the chain would be a well-dressed golfer that follows the rules.
Well, at least most of the rules. I'll be the first to admit that while I've got a pretty good understanding of the rules and I play by the ones I know, I still learn new rules every year.
Tim,
Doing your best to uphold the rules is just fine by me, especially if you keep an open and are willing to learn. How you are dressed does not change that.
All,
Don't you realize how absolutely shallow this standard is? Who knows what sort of contributions to the game (in all aspects) are being curtailed because the very nature of this beast is generally perceived as shallow and elitist.
In our efforts to exclude, what are we potentially missing?
-
Phil,
I can certainly understand your aesthetic desires. However, if I were to be invited to your club to play golf, and showed up in well maintained jeans and a clean non-collared shirt... what perceptions would their be by the members before they even met me, played golf with me, or socialized with me?
Kyle:
My "club" is a nine-hole muni whose demographic is probably best described as the Wisconsin annex of the Peter Jans. Jeans and a clean shirt of any kind raises the level of dressiness; the regulars would look down on you not for your dress, but for ordering a Pepsi instead of a Miller Lite after your Sunday morning round.
:) That's wonderful.
Say you were a member at Medinah, then...
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
I don't necessarily. But I'd imagine because they feel the need to put themselves out for worshipping their higher authority of choice.
Are we now comparing a country club's kangaroo court to God?
Don't jump to conclusions now. The point is, it is an outwardly form of respect. Does this HAVE to be done in order to be actually respectful? That depends on why someone is doing it. For outward appearances, or themselves. BTW, I personally wouldn't consider it "putting my self out" if I was a church goer. If you want to play in something other than the traditonal garb, that's up to you. No one can tell you what's appropriate. Let me know when you try to show up at the club in your swim trunks and tank top though. ;)
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
I think it needs to be known that tucking shirts in should always be mandatory.
Why? I find my shirt being untucked to be far more comfortable. Why can't my attire be comfortable while playing golf?
Let us not forget your first words to me when you saw the picture of me at Kapalua two years ago (wow!).
But you confuse me, a lot, so would you just tell us where this thread is going?
Because, either you have changed your golf course morals (LOL, and I seriously doubt that btw), or you are giving us a load of BS (definite possibility), or you have another one of your crazy theories that somehow makes sense even though it's really hard to explain (ding ding ding)...
Jordan, I apologize.
And looking back on those conversations and that thread, you were very unfairly judged by this group. In fact, I'm ashamed of the way you were treated.
This group completely took one picture of you out of context and judged your intelligence, insight and value to the group as a whole based on how you looked.
I also apologize that I may have contributed to this shallow and superficial attitude. Please, please, please give the people you meet in the future the chance to make an impression on you based on the virtue of their mind and not the clothes on their back, nor the looks on their face. Had we done that, perhaps you would have been given a better chance to show the depth of your mind instead of using your relative immaturity against you on the defensive.
I failed you two years ago, please forgive me.
Kyle,
Your too funny.
If you need forgiveness, you have it.
I still dont understand this though.
Anything else you need, or want to come out with?
Your on a roll...
;D
-
Tim,
Earlier tonight on the phone with Doug Braunsdorf I mentioned my desire to only play at places that will allow me to wear what I want.
I'm interested to know what exactly it is that you desire to wear when playing golf that isn't allowed, and exactly why it is that you wish to wear such things - or is it the principal of the matter.
Do you really want to wear pants (or shorts - which should be banned, but that's a separate topic!) and a golf short, but just don't want to be required to wear it? Or do you have some secret desire to wear a Speedo bathing suit and leg warmers?
-
Michael,
I've seen many a well-dressed man spit upon the fundamental aspects of the game of golf, often while they thought others weren't looking.
I'd rather play with a slovenly golfer who follows the rules than a well-dress cheating scum bag.
Kyle -
That is precisely why de Tocqueville refers to the "illusory" and "often false" nature of manners. Focus!
There is no connection whatsoever between the clothes you are wearing and the spirit/essence/true meaning of golf.
Golf in America got rolling as a deeply aristocratic pastime.
At courses with a dress code, golfers still derive "noble satisfaction" from dressing up and observing others doing likewise. As usual, de Tocqueville's turn of the phrase is apt, current, and difficult to improve upon.
-
Kyle -
Why have you ignored Dan King's post? You are commenting on every other response but ignore his clear concise reply. Are you channeling Shivas or JakaB and arguing for argument sakes?
And, how would your mother like you to dress?
Mike
-
Phil,
I can certainly understand your aesthetic desires. However, if I were to be invited to your club to play golf, and showed up in well maintained jeans and a clean non-collared shirt... what perceptions would their be by the members before they even met me, played golf with me, or socialized with me?
I'd prefer that you show up in torn & tattered golf pants and a stained, dirty golf shirt. ;D
-
Honestly.
I am in love with one of the most wonderful and thoughtful people in the world. She loves every bit of my passion for the game and inspires and encourages these dorky tendencies and my love for golf courses in ways I can't even put to paper.
She's an artist, and a damn good one at that. She's also a musician and has the soul of a poet and the heart of a muse. Her beauty is amazingly classic and she carries herself with an elegance typically attributed to royalty (the good kind, not the sleazy inbred kind).
Her work has inspired millions and she takes no credit for it. The simple satisfaction of expression is enough for her.
All she did, when we finally had the opportunity to go out on the golf course, was ask me why? I told her the standard and she put up a little fight and asked that.
Honestly, I couldn't give her a reason, and I certainly couldn't force her to go against something that her fundamental ethics say is wrong.
If the institutions of the game are making people like her stay away and not come near it... something is VERY wrong.
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
David,
You must not have been to church lately. ;) If folks are wearing their best duds, then jeans and sweatsuits are the new formal wear.
Jamie, I haven't. I stopped going years ago. :-[
-
Kyle -
Why have you ignored Dan King's post? You are commenting on every other response but ignore his clear concise reply. Are you channeling Shivas or JakaB and arguing for argument sakes?
And, how would your mother like you to dress?
Mike
Mike,
Honestly in the shuffle Dan's post got lost on me as I was already automatically scrolling below it to read other posts.
My mother was ecstatic to hear that golf required collared shirts, actually.... ask my high school golf coach.
Dan,
Why do the vast majority of golfers' accept that they do? In my experience, your response is in the significant minority.
The game has built up a sense of tradition which may very well destroy it.
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
David,
You must not have been to church lately. ;) If folks are wearing their best duds, then jeans and sweatsuits are the new formal wear.
Kyle,
I honestly don't think economic standards equate to someone wearing jeans or someone in more formal attire. There are enough dressier looking clothes available for the same price as jeans or casual wear, that it isn't that difficult to dress for formal if one chose to.
Then let's bring it to a matter of taste. I think that I can convey respect for the game by wearing jeans and a t-shirt.
Why is that wrong?
It's not altogether wrong. There are a lot of courses that will allow you to convey your respect for the game while wearing jeans. There are also a lot of places that won't. Whether it is perceived as stuffy or eliteist is debatable. It is what it is. Look at proferssional tennis for example. Ladies and gents used to wear the "tennis whites" all the time. Now they wear all sorts of wild looking stuff, except for Wimbledon. Everyone wears white, or they don't play. You don't see anyone skipping that event because of a dress code.
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
David,
You must not have been to church lately. ;) If folks are wearing their best duds, then jeans and sweatsuits are the new formal wear.
Kyle,
I honestly don't think economic standards equate to someone wearing jeans or someone in more formal attire. There are enough dressier looking clothes available for the same price as jeans or casual wear, that it isn't that difficult to dress for formal if one chose to.
Then let's bring it to a matter of taste. I think that I can convey respect for the game by wearing jeans and a t-shirt.
Why is that wrong?
It's not altogether wrong. There are a lot of courses that will allow you to convey your respect for the game while wearing jeans. There are also a lot of places that won't. Whether it is perceived as stuffy or eliteist is debatable. It is what it is. Look at proferssional tennis for example. Ladies and gents used to wear the "tennis whites" all the time. Now they wear all sorts of wild looking stuff, except for Wimbledon. Everyone wears white, or they don't play. You don't see anyone skipping that event because of a dress code.
If they did... how would it change tennis?
If Tiger skipped Augusta because they kept tweaking it, how would that change perception of golf courses?
If he skipped Augusta because he wanted to wear a t-shirt, how would that change dress codes?
Would it not make him the best golfer in the world?
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
David,
You must not have been to church lately. ;) If folks are wearing their best duds, then jeans and sweatsuits are the new formal wear.
Jamie, I haven't. I stopped going years ago. :-[
No worries, I'm not a big church go'er either, but from what I have seen lately, the ole' "Sunday best" is no longer a useful phrase. ;D
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
David,
You must not have been to church lately. ;) If folks are wearing their best duds, then jeans and sweatsuits are the new formal wear.
Kyle,
I honestly don't think economic standards equate to someone wearing jeans or someone in more formal attire. There are enough dressier looking clothes available for the same price as jeans or casual wear, that it isn't that difficult to dress for formal if one chose to.
Then let's bring it to a matter of taste. I think that I can convey respect for the game by wearing jeans and a t-shirt.
Why is that wrong?
It's not altogether wrong. There are a lot of courses that will allow you to convey your respect for the game while wearing jeans. There are also a lot of places that won't. Whether it is perceived as stuffy or eliteist is debatable. It is what it is. Look at proferssional tennis for example. Ladies and gents used to wear the "tennis whites" all the time. Now they wear all sorts of wild looking stuff, except for Wimbledon. Everyone wears white, or they don't play. You don't see anyone skipping that event because of a dress code.
If they did... how would it change tennis?
If Tiger skipped Augusta because they kept tweaking it, how would that change perception of golf courses?
If he skipped Augusta because he wanted to wear a t-shirt, how would that change dress codes?
Would it not make him the best golfer in the world?
Tiger already wears a T-Shirt. ;D
(http://www.wisconsinwx.com/TigerWoods.jpg)
-
Jamie,
One of my initial thoughts for a thread title was going to be, "Wear a mock neck shirt and save golf architecture."
In fact, that might be the essay's title.
-
Jamie,
One of my initial thoughts for a thread title was going to be, "Wear a mock neck shirt and save golf architecture."
In fact, that might be the essay's title.
Do you care to enlighten us as to where your thoughts are going on this issue. There has to be a method to your madness. ;)
-
Golf in America got rolling as a deeply aristocratic pastime.
As it did in its country of origin -- Scotland. If not aristocratic, certainly a game for the very well-off -- equivalant in some ways today to polo in America.
-
If the institutions of the game are making people like her stay away and not come near it... something is VERY wrong.
I don't like George Clooney as an actor at all. In fact, I won't watch a movie he is in. They could make a movie out of my favorite book, with all my favorite movie stars, and if he were in it, I'd have to give serious thought to skipping it.
The film institution wouldn't be MAKING me stay away. I'd be CHOOSING to stay away.
The truth comes out -you are blinded by love, which is fine.
I'd expect that if she loves you back she could see and appreciate your passion for the game and overcome a silly thing like dress code without wasting time blaming it on the institution.
-
Kyle, The best answer I can come up with is...out of respect for others around you.
That is completly within the spirit of the sport.
But, in actuality, it is our own Bob Huntley whose arguments have ressonated the truth of the matter. His disdain for the person who has the gawdawfulest looking legs, yet insists on wearing shorts that show too much of a bad thing.
Trust me, I have gone full circle on this issue. I onced believed as you do in this thread, that it shouldn't matter what I wear, since it does not gaurantee ungentlemanly behavior. But, if you are out in public one should consider looking presentable. If for no other reason than it actually makes you feel better, have more confidence and who knows? maybe Play better.
"What not to wear" on TLC is a great place to learn some fundementals.
I'll share one story about a local pro on the Monterey peninsula. He was scheduled to play in Bing's clambake and showed up for a Wednesday practice round at Pebble. On the tee were Chi Chi and the two gentleman who flew him up from Puerto Rico. The starter went over to Mr. Roduiquez(sp?) and asked if a local pro could join their threesome. He said "No problem" and was introduced. Chi Chi took one look at this guy with his soiled canvas bag and his dirty shoes and said "You a pro, mon? Musta been a tough year". Well this guy proceeds to birdie the first and eagles the second. Whereupon Chi Chi walked up to him and apologized for his earlier comment.
-
Honestly.
I am in love with one of the most wonderful and thoughtful people in the world. She loves every bit of my passion for the game and inspires and encourages these dorky tendencies and my love for golf courses in ways I can't even put to paper.
She's an artist, and a damn good one at that. She's also a musician and has the soul of a poet and the heart of a muse. Her beauty is amazingly classic and she carries herself with an elegance typically attributed to royalty (the good kind, not the sleazy inbred kind).
Her work has inspired millions and she takes no credit for it. The simple satisfaction of expression is enough for her.
All she did, when we finally had the opportunity to go out on the golf course, was ask me why? I told her the standard and she put up a little fight and asked that.
Honestly, I couldn't give her a reason, and I certainly couldn't force her to go against something that her fundamental ethics say is wrong.
If the institutions of the game are making people like her stay away and not come near it... something is VERY wrong.
Jamie,
That's it, right there. I began to wonder why there is something of a dearth of true creativity in golf architecture after that incident.
Obviously, golf architecture isn't all art, but it certainly does require an open and creative mind. I think the people that would be inherently skilled at creating masterpiece and intriguing golf courses are also the type of people that would be immediately turned off by some of the pointless dogma that is perpetuated by most of the clubs and organizations that host the game.
The image of golf is one of high barriers of entry and elitist and shallow people to those who don't play the game. While this is not entirely true, it's not entirely accurate.
If my fiance were to accompany me on a golf course on certain days, she would be judged harshly because her attire did not "fit" with the rest of the club. This is not say she is dressed like a slut nor inappropriately, it's just part of who she is. It also speaks nothing of her character or personality.
I would also be judged based on being with her.
I am not shallow like that, and from talking to non-golfers, that aspect of the game is a MAJOR turn off. Face it, the majority of golf facilities set the standard that you can judge the quality of the golfer (and by natural extension, the person) based on what they are wearing. If that were NOT true, then no dress codes would apply as it wouldn't matter. I think that by enforcing and regulating what is ultimately a non-issue in terms of golf's values we are severely undercutting the game's growth.
-
Kyle, I don't want this to be a religious discussion, but why do people wear their best clothes when attending church?
David,
You must not have been to church lately. ;) If folks are wearing their best duds, then jeans and sweatsuits are the new formal wear.
Kyle,
I honestly don't think economic standards equate to someone wearing jeans or someone in more formal attire. There are enough dressier looking clothes available for the same price as jeans or casual wear, that it isn't that difficult to dress for formal if one chose to.
Then let's bring it to a matter of taste. I think that I can convey respect for the game by wearing jeans and a t-shirt.
Why is that wrong?
It's not altogether wrong. There are a lot of courses that will allow you to convey your respect for the game while wearing jeans. There are also a lot of places that won't. Whether it is perceived as stuffy or eliteist is debatable. It is what it is. Look at proferssional tennis for example. Ladies and gents used to wear the "tennis whites" all the time. Now they wear all sorts of wild looking stuff, except for Wimbledon. Everyone wears white, or they don't play. You don't see anyone skipping that event because of a dress code.
If they did... how would it change tennis?
If Tiger skipped Augusta because they kept tweaking it, how would that change perception of golf courses?
If he skipped Augusta because he wanted to wear a t-shirt, how would that change dress codes?
Would it not make him the best golfer in the world?
I hope it wouldn't change tennis or golf. Call me a fuddy duddy geek, but I find it refreshing that Wimbledon sticks to it's gun's and doesn't cave in to the latest fashion demands. In this day and age, there is something to be said for that.
-
If the institutions of the game are making people like her stay away and not come near it... something is VERY wrong.
I don't like George Clooney as an actor at all. In fact, I won't watch a movie he is in. They could make a movie out of my favorite book, with all my favorite movie stars, and if he were in it, I'd have to give serious thought to skipping it.
The film institution wouldn't be MAKING me stay away. I'd be CHOOSING to stay away.
The truth comes out -you are blinded by love, which is fine.
I'd expect that if she loves you back she could see and appreciate your passion for the game and overcome a silly thing like dress code without wasting time blaming it on the institution.
Tim,
She knows and loves me well enough to see that I am very uncomfortable being forced into wearing what I don't want to wear. She wasn't asking why as a way to stick it to the man, she was asking why to understand what exactly about this game appealed to me.
-
I will go see a movie simply because Clooney is in it....
And I don't avoid golf courses where folks wear cut-offs jeans and muscle shirts.
-
Which brings me back to my previous question...
What is it exactly that you want to wear on a golf course and what about pants (or shorts) and a golf shirt make you so uncomfortable?
-
Kyle, The best answer I can come up with is...out of respect for others around you.
That is completly within the spirit of the sport.
But, in actuality, it is our own Bob Huntley whose arguments have ressonated the truth of the matter. His disdain for the person who has the gawdawfulest looking legs, yet insists on wearing shorts that show too much of a bad thing.
Trust me, I have gone full circle on this issue. I onced believed as you do in this thread, that it shouldn't matter what I wear, since it does not gaurantee ungentlemanly behavior. But, if you are out in public one should consider looking presentable. If for no other reason than it actually makes you feel better, have more confidence and who knows? maybe Play better.
"What not to wear" on TLC is a great place to learn some fundementals.
I'll share one story about a local pro on the Monterey peninsula. He was scheduled to play in Bing's clambake and showed up for a Wednesday practice round at Pebble. On the tee were Chi Chi and the two gentleman who flew him up from Puerto Rico. The starter went over to Mr. Roduiquez(sp?) and asked if a local pro could join their threesome. He said "No problem" and was introduced. Chi Chi took one look at this guy with his soiled canvas bag and his dirty shoes and said "You a pro, mon? Musta been a tough year". Well this guy proceeds to birdie the first and eagles the second. Whereupon Chi Chi walked up to him and apologized for his earlier comment.
Adam,
I'd go crazy trying to adjust myself to show respect for others around me.
I'm a nice guy, enjoyable company for most and generally agreeable. I am accepting and loving.
If you can't see past what I'm wearing and notice that, frankly, you don't deserve to know me because I won't waste time proving to you who I am at the expense of those who already know.
-
I will go see a movie simply because Clooney is in it....
And I don't avoid golf courses where folks wear cut-offs jeans and muscle shirts.
Well, you and I cancel one another out on the Clooney issue!
I also don't avoid courses which allow a relaxed dress code, but I don't specifically seek them out either because I know I'm going to wear the same thing no matter where I play.
-
Which brings me back to my previous question...
What is it exactly that you want to wear on a golf course and what about pants (or shorts) and a golf shirt make you so uncomfortable?
Depends on my mood, as it does with all of us in terms of dress. Tonight to class I wore a collared shirt and jeans. The point is, outside of practical considerations (if it's cold, wet, hilly, hot...) why should I have to adapt myself?
Some days I'll be dressed up, other days in gym shorts and a t-shirt.
I want to be able to act on my mood!
-
Golf in America got rolling as a deeply aristocratic pastime.
As it did in its country of origin -- Scotland. If not aristocratic, certainly a game for the very well-off -- equivalant in some ways today to polo in America.
I'd challenge that. Big time. It was played on useless public lands. Shared with goatherds and merchantmen.
I think golf became aristrocratic when people started BUYING LAND on which to play it. The minute the course became a real estate venture was the minute aristocracy took over.
-
Kyle, Did it ever occur to you that sweater folders sell collard shirts?
-
Adam, I'm not following...
-
If the institutions of the game are making people like her stay away and not come near it... something is VERY wrong.
Kyle -
A while back I met a tall, green-eyed redhead who was an exceptional athlete.
This was before Tiger Woods turned modern golf on its ear. She thought that golf was a foolish, elitist, environmentally destructive pursuit.
Over time she became more and more curious about my devotion to golf. Finally, one day we set off to the driving range. She was a natural and was hitting the ball through the air in no time. She said that she wanted to get geared up, take some lessons, and join me for the occasional nine.
Dressing up for these outings was a key component of her enthusiasm for golf. I will never forget the joy that both of us derived from her in the spats, skirt and collared tank top.
Please don't forget that the possibility of wearing new, fine, provocative clothing could attract people to the game.
-
Dress code? What dress code?
(http://s226.photobucket.com/albums/dd44/johnmkirk/390991166207_0_ALB.jpg)
-
...is it any wonder that he is one of the more well-respected and influential architects of the past 15 years?
I think the very fact that Tom Doak allowed himself to be photographed like that in what I'm assuming was a candid shot is a high testament to his artistic integrity.
-
If the institutions of the game are making people like her stay away and not come near it... something is VERY wrong.
Kyle -
A while back I met a tall, green-eyed redhead who was an exceptional athlete.
This was before Tiger Woods turned modern golf on its ear. She thought that golf was a foolish, elitist, environmentally destructive pursuit.
Over time she became more and more curious about my devotion to golf. Finally, one day we set off to the driving range. She was a natural and was hitting the ball through the air in no time. She said that she wanted to get geared up, take some lessons, and join me for the occasional nine.
Dressing up for these outings was a key component of her enthusiasm for golf. I will never forget the joy that both of us derived from her in the spats, skirt and collared tank top.
Please don't forget that the possibility of wearing new, fine, provocative clothing could attract people to the game.
Michael, the point there is... she wanted to.
What if she didn't? What if that didn't fit her personality.
On the other end, what if I wanted to dress like Bobby Jones in three piece and plus fours?
-
Golf in America got rolling as a deeply aristocratic pastime.
As it did in its country of origin -- Scotland. If not aristocratic, certainly a game for the very well-off -- equivalant in some ways today to polo in America.
I'd challenge that. Big time. It was played on useless public lands. Shared with goatherds and merchantmen.
I think golf became aristrocratic when people started BUYING LAND on which to play it. The minute the course became a real estate venture was the minute aristocracy took over.
Kyle, golf became aristocratic as you say because of the ball. The cost to manufacture them (featheries) was expensive. The best ball makers could only make 3-4 a day and 3 or 4 a round was needed to play. In fact, the balls were more expensive then the clubs that struck them. This made the game very expensive to play. The guttie changed all that. Most of the clubs in the UK played on courses on public land in the early days.
-
...is it any wonder that he is one of the more well-respected and influential architects of the past 15 years?
I think the very fact that Tom Doak allowed himself to be photographed like that in what I'm assuming was a candid shot is a high testament to his artistic integrity.
Kyle,
So Tom's jeans give him integrety? Give me a break. I guess using that logic Tom Simpson must have the least integrity with his cape and his Rolls Royce...
-
David, I had realized that, but still believe that there wasn't as much of a barrier as there was post-America.
The public land thing, to me, means that the game was more accessible and not so aristocratic. Some of the pioneers of the game were from very humble backgrounds, but I do submit that the aristocracy took to the game more so than the proletariat.
Was there an increase in schlub play when the guttie came out?
-
...is it any wonder that he is one of the more well-respected and influential architects of the past 15 years?
BECAUSE HE'S WEARING JEANS? I THOUGHT THIS WAS PHOTO FROM A TOUR TOM WAS GIVING ON ONE OF HIS COURSES......
I think the very fact that Tom Doak allowed himself to be photographed like that in what I'm assuming was a candid shot is a high testament to his artistic integrity.
NO OFFENSE, BUT I DO BELIEVE YOU'RE REACHING THERE BUBBA.
-
Golf in America got rolling as a deeply aristocratic pastime.
As it did in its country of origin -- Scotland. If not aristocratic, certainly a game for the very well-off -- equivalant in some ways today to polo in America.
I'd challenge that. Big time. It was played on useless public lands. Shared with goatherds and merchantmen.
I think golf became aristrocratic when people started BUYING LAND on which to play it. The minute the course became a real estate venture was the minute aristocracy took over.
Kyle:
Read up on some golf history. Golf may have been played on "common land" (and I'd suggest the use of that phrase has a much different meaning in the UK than it does here), but it was played initially -- pre-1850 -- by a very elitist set, largely due to its cost. Equipment -- clubs and most particularly feathery balls -- were quite expensive, and well beyond the means of most Scots. It wasn't until the advent of the guttie, the single-most important invention in the game, that golf became a sport of and for the masses.
Pre-guttie (1852) the UK had fewer than 25 golf clubs. Almost all of those were centered in the wealthiest parts of the country -- largely ports and trading centers. The clubs that survived from that era -- the Honourable Company, Prestwick, Royal Aberdeen, the R & A, Royal Burgess -- are among the most elitist clubs in golf.
-
...is it any wonder that he is one of the more well-respected and influential architects of the past 15 years?
I think the very fact that Tom Doak allowed himself to be photographed like that in what I'm assuming was a candid shot is a high testament to his artistic integrity.
Kyle,
So Tom's jeans give him integrety? Give me a break. I guess using that logic Tom Simpson must have the least integrity with his cape and his Rolls Royce...
Lloyd, I didn't say that - that would be the same logic that I am standing up to here.
I'm saying that Doak didn't give a rats' ass if this group went all Jordan Wall on him because of that picture. The man LOOKS comfortable and happy.
Wow, I feel bad about that.
-
Was there an increase in schlub play when the guttie came out?
Yes, in fact there was. The mere decrease in cost because of the guttie allowed this to happen.
-
...is it any wonder that he is one of the more well-respected and influential architects of the past 15 years?
I think the very fact that Tom Doak allowed himself to be photographed like that in what I'm assuming was a candid shot is a high testament to his artistic integrity.
Kyle,
So Tom's jeans give him integrety? Give me a break. I guess using that logic Tom Simpson must have the least integrity with his cape and his Rolls Royce...
Lloyd, I didn't say that - that would be the same logic that I am standing up to here.
I'm saying that Doak didn't give a rats' ass if this group went all Jordan Wall on him because of that picture. The man LOOKS comfortable and happy.
Wow, I feel bad about that.
Kyle,
Then you do equate artistic integrity with not giving a rat's ass??
-
Golf in America got rolling as a deeply aristocratic pastime.
As it did in its country of origin -- Scotland. If not aristocratic, certainly a game for the very well-off -- equivalant in some ways today to polo in America.
I'd challenge that. Big time. It was played on useless public lands. Shared with goatherds and merchantmen.
I think golf became aristrocratic when people started BUYING LAND on which to play it. The minute the course became a real estate venture was the minute aristocracy took over.
Kyle:
Read up on some golf history. Golf may have been played on "common land" (and I'd suggest the use of that phrase has a much different meaning in the UK than it does here), but it was played initially -- pre-1850 -- by a very elitist set, largely due to its cost. Equipment -- clubs and most particularly feathery balls -- were quite expensive, and well beyond the means of most Scots. It wasn't until the advent of the guttie, the single-most important invention in the game, that golf became a sport of and for the masses.
Pre-guttie (1852) the UK had fewer than 25 golf clubs. Almost all of those were centered in the wealthiest parts of the country -- largely ports and trading centers. The clubs that survived from that era -- the Honourable Company, Prestwick, Royal Aberdeen, the R & A, Royal Burgess -- are among the most elitist clubs in golf.
The Honourable Company bounced around a bit, didn't they? Didn't they ultimately move to Muirfield?
Were the golf courses upon which these clubs played owned by the clubs? Could others play them as well?
The difference here is that these clubs were created by the men of means because they wanted to play the game, not necessarily control the golf course. Others could play on the course and these men had their standards and the others had theirs.
Yes, that standard existed then, but the standard didn't bar others from playing the game, or the same courses, per se.
-
Not giving a rats' ass about the perception of others, yes.
-
I capped this conversation for me at midnight, I need to be up in 5 hours to go setup a golf course and level off some irrigation heads and drainage bins.
I'm not ignoring anybody, just need to sleep and work.
See you all tomorrow and thanks for humoring me.
Just promise to think about this some more.
-
Kyle, Sweater folders are know as pros. Courses that have a dress code and you show up not in uniform means you must either leave or BUY the uniform.
Play where you're welcome. Dress for your self and forget the uniform.
-
Kyle, Sweater folders are know as pros. Courses that have a dress code and you show up not in uniform means you must either leave or BUY the uniform.
Play where you're welcome. Dress for your self and forget the uniform.
I thought that's where you were going, just didn't want to interpret.
I won't discuss what else I told Doug about service personnel at golf courses until later.
-
Golf in America got rolling as a deeply aristocratic pastime.
As it did in its country of origin -- Scotland. If not aristocratic, certainly a game for the very well-off -- equivalant in some ways today to polo in America.
I'd challenge that. Big time. It was played on useless public lands. Shared with goatherds and merchantmen.
I think golf became aristrocratic when people started BUYING LAND on which to play it. The minute the course became a real estate venture was the minute aristocracy took over.
Kyle:
Read up on some golf history. Golf may have been played on "common land" (and I'd suggest the use of that phrase has a much different meaning in the UK than it does here), but it was played initially -- pre-1850 -- by a very elitist set, largely due to its cost. Equipment -- clubs and most particularly feathery balls -- were quite expensive, and well beyond the means of most Scots. It wasn't until the advent of the guttie, the single-most important invention in the game, that golf became a sport of and for the masses.
Pre-guttie (1852) the UK had fewer than 25 golf clubs. Almost all of those were centered in the wealthiest parts of the country -- largely ports and trading centers. The clubs that survived from that era -- the Honourable Company, Prestwick, Royal Aberdeen, the R & A, Royal Burgess -- are among the most elitist clubs in golf.
The Honourable Company bounced around a bit, didn't they? Didn't they ultimately move to Muirfield?
Were the golf courses upon which these clubs played owned by the clubs? Could others play them as well?
The difference here is that these clubs were created by the men of means because they wanted to play the game, not necessarily control the golf course. Others could play on the course and these men had their standards and the others had theirs.
Yes, that standard existed then, but the standard didn't bar others from playing the game, or the same courses, per se.
The Honourable Company originally played over the common land of Leith, roughly five holes or so, and now a city park in Edinburgh. The club then moved to the Old Musselburgh links, site of some of the first Opens, then desirerous of their own course to control, moved to the land now known as Muirfield.
It is helpful, I think, to distinguish between clubs as we may know them here in the States, and clubs in Scotland. Clubs here are most commonly associated with control over a course, with the course being the primary reason for the existence of the club. In Scotland, many clubs in their origin shared golf courses, or had rights to play on certain courses.
I'd argue in Scotland, during the game's beginnings, where the game was played was less important to this discussion than who played it. The game itself was fairly rudimentary, and courses were barely much more than meadows and seaside scruffy land (links) with some holes. But clubs were very well-organized and elitist -- it was not a game for the common person, pre-guttie.
Perhaps tomorrow we can discuss the famed fishermen golfers of Inverallochy; it may fit your thesis.
-
Phil have you read Hamilton’s “Golf: Scotland’s Game”? In it he makes the case that the expensive golf you are talking about was called the Long Game, with fine wooden clubs and hand made balls, but there was also the Short Game. This was played with cheaper cork balls or stones and cruder sticks. The target was not usually a hole but something like a church door and it was played by those who couldn’t afford to join a club and all that went with it.
When Shivas get’s back from his enforced rest he’ll run a “Top Ten Subjects for creating Threads on GCA”. This is about no 6.
-
Every time I see a Perry Golf bus show up in Scotland, I can't help but hum Sondheim's great song, "Send in the Clones." I also feel the same way when visiting the posher of the Scottish clubs and feel a bit out of place if I am not wearing tweed and carrying a walking stick.
A club is a club is a club, and it hasn't changed much since Gertrude Stein first made this observation. Just as she and Alice Toklas dressed for androgyny, most club members dress so that they will look and feel like all the other members. That, in many ways, is what "clubs" are for--to show to the world and yourself that you belong; to something.
My take on this is the same as Dan King's--if you want to play at a club where there is a dress code, conform. If not conforming is more important to you than not playing, don't play there.
One of the reasons I like my favourite club (mfc) is that it doesn't really care what you wear as long as you follow the "Etiquette" section of the Rules of Golf. As far as I can see, there is nothing in that section referring to how you should or shouldn't dress. At mfc I've worn jeans and shorts and no socks and no shoes and tee shirts and torns sweaters and fancy dress and even been cuttered and bucked (not all in the same round, I must say). The only time I saw anybody from mfc reprimanded for clothing offenses was when they played buck naked at 4am and were caught by the butcher's wife as she walked her dog across the first fairway.
-
I no longer own a pair of jeans because I dress for golf everyday. A couple of years ago I bought a set of FootJoy teaching shoes thinking that I could wear shoes for both life and play on a continuous basis eliminating the tenuous need to change shoes during the day. My experiment failed when I slipped on some wet grass. The teaching shoe is more of a symbol of a profession than a golf instrument.
-
I no longer own a pair of jeans
Shame on you, John. Little children are starving in Vietnam because their big sisters have been out of a job ever since Hugo Boss's "Kavanaugh" line was discontinued.
-
"Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?"
Kyle:
Probably for the very same reasons you need to follow dress codes attached to anything else in life.
Do you want to discuss and debate that too? ;)
If you do we should probably begin to discuss some of the ramifications that may essentially fall under a broad concept known as "Privacy" (or the rights of freedom of association) and all that can entail, including its legal ramifications.
-
Kyle,
"It's not time to make a change, just relax, take it easy,
You're still young that's your fault, there's so much you have to know."
Cat Stevens
-
well, Kyle, you had me interested here for awhile, but I stopped reading this thread halfway through
I think someone already posted: you don't like dress codes, don't go to places that require one
crime, wars, poverty...lots of other things that deserve our attention A LOT MORE than this issue
-
Kyle,
Do you think creativity in GCA is lacking because fewer creative minds enter the field because these creative minds stay away from golf because it has a dress code?
If so, read more closely some of what the architects on here say...they are trying to create a product they can sell...it just looks like art to some people.
-
crime, wars, poverty...lots of other things that deserve our attention A LOT MORE than this issue
I really wish the people on this site that complain about crime, war and poverty and the such would shut up and do something about them. I once told a Priest that I was bothered that I spent time building roads when I should be out curing the worlds ills...He told me the world needs roads and to keep up the good work. The world needs considerate golfers too.
-
crime, wars, poverty...lots of other things that deserve our attention A LOT MORE than this issue
I really wish the people on this site that complain about crime, war and poverty and the such would shut up and do something about them. I once told a Priest that I was bothered that I spent time building roads when I should be out curing the worlds ills...He told me the world needs roads and to keep up the good work. The world needs considerate golfers too.
and how do you know that I am NOT trying to do something about them?
you should think more before you type sometimes
-
Kyle -
Are you OK with government mandated dress codes?
-
crime, wars, poverty...lots of other things that deserve our attention A LOT MORE than this issue
I really wish the people on this site that complain about crime, war and poverty and the such would shut up and do something about them. I once told a Priest that I was bothered that I spent time building roads when I should be out curing the worlds ills...He told me the world needs roads and to keep up the good work. The world needs considerate golfers too.
and how do you know that I am NOT trying to do something about them?
you should think more before you type sometimes
Paul,
I have seen your golfing schedule for the last few years. I will give you credit for attempting to protect the environment but when it comes to poverty and crime I can assure you that your time could be better spent than by golfing the globe and talking about it on the internet.
-
crime, wars, poverty...lots of other things that deserve our attention A LOT MORE than this issue
I really wish the people on this site that complain about crime, war and poverty and the such would shut up and do something about them. I once told a Priest that I was bothered that I spent time building roads when I should be out curing the worlds ills...He told me the world needs roads and to keep up the good work. The world needs considerate golfers too.
and how do you know that I am NOT trying to do something about them?
you should think more before you type sometimes
Paul,
I have seen your golfing schedule for the last few years. I will give you credit for attempting to protect the environment but when it comes to poverty and crime I can assure you that your time could be better spent than by golfing the globe and talking about it on the internet.
my last post wasting my time on this idiocacy: look in the mirror first before telling others what they should do, esp with all the posts you make here
and these kinds of discussions do make me spend less time here
-
Kyle Harris (sorry Crystals):
He's a rebel and he'll never ever be - any good
He's a rebel 'cos he never ever does - what he should
And just because he doesn't do what - everybody else does
That's the reason why I can't invite him to my club
Kyle, when you were an Eagle Scout. Did you got to all your meetings in dungarees and t-shirts? Of course not, you often wore a uniform much more formal than the "uniform" for golf. Why is that? Do you think students in private schools should be able to wear what they want as well or that their uniforms are a bad idea?
Golf allows a wide range of fashions, including Mike Malone's 30 year old polyester pants, white patent leather belt and big pointed collar Munsingwear shirt with pocket (he actually uses a pocket protector). It is a rather loosely defined uniform. When you go to a private club as a guest, you have a choice to abide by their rules or not accept the invitation. I guess we'll know the extent of your conviction by your actions.
Your challenge to golf convention, besides being in contrast with other aspects of your life, is weak and rather unimportant. Give it up, man.
-
Paul,
You are not the first to claim that building a more considerate golfing populus is a frivolous activity given the problems the world faces. I would claim that if we are going to create a more civil society we must start from the top down. If God had sent a true King as his son instead of some poverty stricken self appointed blow hard we would be in better shape today. I can make the argument that inconsiderate golfers are to blame for many layoffs and increases in crime. The CEO in a bad mood is more likely to make cuts in his workforce and then go home and beat his wife than the happy one. Karma flows downhill.
-
Barney,
You gotta try the Blue Diamond Gusset Jeans. They are made in Middle Tennessee.
(http://www.gussetjeans.com/images/cov628a.jpg)
Mike
-
Barney,
You gotta try the Blue Diamond Gusset Jeans. They are made in Middle Tennessee.
(http://www.gussetjeans.com/images/cov628a.jpg)
Mike
Do I have to tape my nuts to my ass to wear them?
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
To show respect to your host and the club.
-
Kyle,
To follow up on what Cory just posted: a dress code is also there to let you know that it's not about you. That holds true no matter where you find such a code, as Mike Cirba pointed out earlier.
-
I'll try to help out this thread a bit by getting back to Kyle's argument, which I think is this:
"Golf, in part because of its conformist nature exhibited by things like dress codes, inhibits people from joining the game, and perhaps even non-conformists who would make the game better and more enjoyable, including potential course designers."
I think that's a reach.
I think what inhibits more people from joining golf is what I might call a sort of recreational value judgement -- it's a fairly expensive endeavor that takes a long time to do. At its cheapest (for sake of argument, let's call it $25 for 18 holes), it's roughly three times the cost of a movie and takes twice as long. Oh sure, there are ancilliary benefits -- hanging with your buddies, getting in some valuable exercise (if you walk), being one with nature -- but one can do those in ways cheaper and more conveniently than playing 18 holes of golf. It's also something that can potentially be (Shivas' Kingdom-esque don't-care-about-scores aside) a frustrating endeavor, in that most people have to do it regularly in order to maintain a certain proficiency at it. That's unlike, say, bicycle riding, where I can go a year without riding a bike, and still do it ably and enjoyably after a year's time. I can't say the same about my golf game. Thus it tends to weed out quickly the occasional dabbler, who reasonably concludes after shanking a bunch of shots -- "I'm no good at this" -- and goes off to find something else to do that's more enjoyable and a better value for his time and money.
-
Kyle,
I'm partially on your side, and partially not. Let me explain.
First things first... first impressions are exactly that. There isn't much you can do about them, because its thier impression not yours and you can't force them to not have one. Whether you view this as shallow, lame, or whatever thats up to you. But if you don't care what other people think about you, then it shouldn't matter right?
Now as to dress codes on the course. As has been alluded to, it really is an ownership issue at play here. They own the course, you do not...simple as that. If the owner/manager wants a dress code then its thier right. This is regardless of whatever reason they have in thier mind for implementing it. And this is where I'm with you...I think all the notions of gentlemanness, tradition, blah blah blah is mostly just a bunch of hooey and people probably do it cause "well we've always done it this way son".
BUT!!! They can think whatever they want to justify imposing a dress code on you.
In the end, if you want to change this, then you need to go Warren Buffet on us, start scooping up golf courses, and implementing your own "non" dress codes. Until then its really a futile act on your part to get your panties in a wad over this. You don't like it? Understood. What can you do about it outside of buying the course? I suppose you could picket the course if you really feel strongly enough about it.
-
There are also courses that will not allow anyone with tatoos to play.
-
There are also courses that will not allow anyone with tatoos to play.
At the very least I like to see all employees cover tatoos.
-
Dress codes in golf protect your experience, and the golf course.
If it looks like a duck, it might be a duck. If it looks like a golfer, it might be a golfer.
That's why we have tennis, for people who can't look like a golfer, or doesn't want to look like a golfer.
Note that the original golfers wore jackets, some had to be red so people knew they were golfing (golfers). The guys with their shirts untucked were probably digging clams. ;)
-
Every time I see a Perry Golf bus show up in Scotland, I can't help but hum Sondheim's great song, "Send in the Clones." I also feel the same way when visiting the posher of the Scottish clubs and feel a bit out of place if I am not wearing tweed and carrying a walking stick.
A club is a club is a club, and it hasn't changed much since Gertrude Stein first made this observation. Just as she and Alice Toklas dressed for androgyny, most club members dress so that they will look and feel like all the other members. That, in many ways, is what "clubs" are for--to show to the world and yourself that you belong; to something.
My take on this is the same as Dan King's--if you want to play at a club where there is a dress code, conform. If not conforming is more important to you than not playing, don't play there.
One of the reasons I like my favourite club (mfc) is that it doesn't really care what you wear as long as you follow the "Etiquette" section of the Rules of Golf. As far as I can see, there is nothing in that section referring to how you should or shouldn't dress. At mfc I've worn jeans and shorts and no socks and no shoes and tee shirts and torns sweaters and fancy dress and even been cuttered and bucked (not all in the same round, I must say). The only time I saw anybody from mfc reprimanded for clothing offenses was when they played buck naked at 4am and were caught by the butcher's wife as she walked her dog across the first fairway.
I love seeing the Perry buses pull up, and agree with everything else you said, the golf dress code lets you feel like one of the club, comfortable.
-
What I don't get is the, "I feel more comfortable in jeans thing."
Am I the only the person who doesn't think jeans are all that comfortable? A decent pair of khaki's are much more comfortable to me.
I'll leave the tatoo subject alone. I can't even begin to understand that phenomenon.
-
My basic feeling on this issue mirrors what many have said - that to respect the game and the venues where it is played, it is only polite to follow both the policy of the course you are playing and the wishes of your fellow players.
What has always thrown me, though, is the bias against the one particularly evil fabric - denim. I can't decide if it is a bias against the working class (as represented by this one particular fabric which is apparently only to be worn at work), or.....who knows. I'm not surprised or bothered by a private club banning denim, per se, but it is also banned on many public courses that allow pretty much anything and everything else. I don't particularly like denim for golf, mainly because it's a heavy fabric to walk and play in, but it just seems unfair to single it out.
Speaking for myself, there are some other fabrics that should be banned on golf courses. Chenille, for one. And seersucker. Man, I hate that (although apparently many older Floridians disagree with me).
-
People like jeans because they work well without being washed. Sometimes you can wear a pair of jeans three or four days in a row without anyone noticing.
-
They're Everyman pants.
How did Everyman get on the grounds (other than to work, of course)?
-
C'mon Jamie,
I know you've got that Tavistock logo tattooed on you somewhere... ;)
I'm with you on the jeans, especially the ones women want you to wear down here in Texas, which are tight enough to cut off circulation and leave little to the imagination...
-
C'mon Jamie,
I know you've got that Tavistock logo tattooed on you somewhere... ;)
I'm with you on the jeans, especially the ones women want you to wear down here in Texas, which are tight enough to cut off circulation and leave little to the imagination...
Jeans, especially the tight variety look far better on women than they do on men. Those Texas gals should keep that style for themselves. ;)
I'm not a big fan of logos all over my shirts, I definitely don't want one as a permanent part of my anatomy.
-
u·ni·form [yoo-nuh-fawrm] – adjective
1. identical or consistent, as from example to example, place to place, or moment to moment: uniform spelling; a uniform building code.
2. without variations in detail: uniform output; a uniform surface.
3. constant; unvarying; undeviating: uniform kindness; uniform velocity.
4. constituting part of a uniform: to be issued uniform shoes.
5. Mathematics. occurring in a manner independent of some variable, parameter, function, etc.: a uniform bound.
–noun 6. an identifying outfit or style of dress worn by the members of a given profession, organization, or rank.
7. a word used in communications to represent the letter U.
–verb (used with object) 8. to make uniform or standard.
9. to clothe in or furnish with a uniform.
the human condition, I'm afraid. Probably built into the Jeans[sic].
FBD.
-
Dressing as a golfer certainly does not make one act as a golfer. My local muni is a NYC owned course in Brooklyn. I have seen people of all types and of all wealth levels play on this course. Khakis and a collared shirt are worn by some of the most inconsiderate people and jeans and t-shirts by some that would epitomize the game.
I agree however that I feel most comfortable in Khakis and an untucked collared shirt. Tattoos on a golf course don't bother me, people getting drunk or smoking marijuana however drives me crazy.
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
I'd say that today when you play golf you are someone's guest.
And as a guest we should abide by our hosts' rules.
It may be a private club, it may be a for-profit public course. You're still someone's guest (even if you're paying).
And while I agree that one's dress is uncorrelated to his likelihood of being a gentleman or abiding by the rules of golf, I would say that I enjoy a round more when I see other golfers dressing in a manner that demonstrates respect for those around them.
I think my one experience at Oakmont would have meant a little less if the guy in the next fairway had been wearing cutoff jeans and no shirt.
As Crash Davis once said to Nuke Laloosh, "You don't respect yourself and that's your problem. But you don't respect the game -- and that's my problem."
-
Kyle
Here's an argument for you that might help.
Hobbes argued that we group together in townships and estalblish rules of accepatable, or required behaviour, not out of love or respect for our fellow man, but out of self interest - we're safer in numbers.
From your point of view, as a student of GCA, you can see all of the local munis you want dressed however you like. If however you wish to see the classics, you'll need to figure out a strategy for yourself.
Or, you could join a club with a dress code, and once you were an established member, you could lobby your fellow memebers to change the rule. You might even succeed, hell, you could be in Golf Magazine 2027 as one of those innovators.
If it really bothers you, and it seems to, figure out your priorities and then a strategy, and live your life accordingly. Do you want to see the classics? Do you want change?
-
Kyle,
Do you think creativity in GCA is lacking because fewer creative minds enter the field because these creative minds stay away from golf because it has a dress code?
If so, read more closely some of what the architects on here say...they are trying to create a product they can sell...it just looks like art to some people.
Does the Average dess creativly?
-
I've endeavored to relax the dress code at just about every place I've worked but I actually tend to dress up when playing golf. I'll never understand, however, why some people feel compelled to break out their silks on a golf course. I prefer my golf a little on the rugged side and I don't like it when golfers dress like they're going to a garden party.
I'm not on Kyle's bandwagon, but I'm here to stick up for the alleged fashion fax paux of untucked shirts. Some shirts are made to be untucked. I'm not talking about some ridiculously flowing Tommy Bahama number (see above about garden parties) or an oversized polo shirt that reaches to one's knees. There are shirts, usually with no vents, that are meant to be worn untucked and, IMO, are fine for the golf course. Sorry--just a pet peeve of mine.
-
Are you talking about the collared shirt with elastic on the bottom that are made for obese seventy year old men. My dad loves those things and has gone so far to recommend them to me...sorry, but I do still steal his socks. I did take a little crap this year for sporting the black Dr Shoals diabetic sock that can be purchased at WalMart in a quarter cut style.
-
Kyle, I did not read all of the responses to this question. But here is my two cents.
I grew up in NYC when you wore a jacket and tie to Yankee stadium. Only recently have I gone sans sport jacket when I travel by plane. Obviously you can wear what you want in public places. But like in so many areas of society today there seems to be little concern about one's appearance. I can't believe how many hats I ask people to remove when they come into the church building. Wear what you like but don't make me look at you if I am in your foursome. It is rude to others to be slovenly dressed in public places. We have taken freedom to mean I can do what I want. That is the lowest form of freedom There is also the freedom to take others into consideration. Dress is an extension of what goes on inside. I suspect you will think this is bullshit. But you asked.
-
Kyle,
WWHW? ;)
What would Hogan Do? ;D
-
Why there is a 'dress code' anywhere is still a mystery to me. Whatever happened to 'mind own business'? Perhaps more importantly, what ever happened to " ....... the content of their character'?
Humans come in two distinct types [viva le difference and all that]. No surprises except to those who have been taught shame from birth [nearly all of us, then].
Clothing serves some functional purposes, no doubt about it. As for the rest, it is just psycho-social pressures that determine.
Why care?
As for golf, it is a microcosm of human society. The importance of golf course dress codes is silly out of the greater context.
Why care?
Is self-importance [therefore, force others into your mode] the basis of this stylized activity and it's 'need' to define worthiness.
"the content of their character'
No, the question of golf dress codes is not very important in itself; but it does represent well a human 'need' for self-importance that stretches in to virtually all endeavor.
Doug [the psychologist has spoken and you properly should genuflect] ::)
PS: This question is bound to come up occasionally. Can't resist putting it in context.
-
Kyle, I did not read all of the responses to this question. But here is my two cents.
I grew up in NYC when you wore a jacket and tie to Yankee stadium. Only recently have I gone sans sport jacket when I travel by plane. Obviously you can wear what you want in public places. But like in so many areas of society today there seems to be little concern about one's appearance. I can't believe how many hats I ask people to remove when they come into the church building. Wear what you like but don't make me look at you if I am in your foursome. It is rude to others to be slovenly dressed in public places. We have taken freedom to mean I can do what I want. That is the lowest form of freedom There is also the freedom to take others into consideration. Dress is an extension of what goes on inside. I suspect you will think this is bullshit. But you asked.
Tommy,
I understand where I think you are coming from on this, but I'm not sure why we have the "norms" we have now. If Jesus came walking into your church tommorow in his conditions and clothings of his time what would you think? He likely would not have bathed in several days, hair long and un-shampood/conditioned. His robe would likely be stained and not clean by our standards. His feet would be dusty and dirty and only wearing something equivilant to flip-flops. If someone like this entered your church today, you would likely think him a homeless-person.
On a side note, what Jesus taught more than anything was that it was your internal state of mind/intentions that mattered much more so than the outwardly/external things.
Additionally who did Jesus hang out with? The well dressed, proper behaving upper class of Jerusalem? The Bible I read says it was the downtrodden/poor/lesser peoples without the means for the finer things in life. Yet by your comments its seems like these people would be the least welcomed in your abode.
At what point did wearing all of these modern clothes become the expected norm for proper worship of God?
-
Why there is a 'dress code' anywhere is still a mystery to me. Whatever happened to 'mind own business'? Perhaps more importantly, what ever happened to " ....... the content of their character'?
Humans come in two distinct types [viva le difference and all that]. No surprises except to those who have been taught shame from birth [nearly all of us, then].
Clothing serves some functional purposes, no doubt about it. As for the rest, it is just psycho-social pressures that determine.
Why care?
As for golf, it is a microcosm of human society. The importance of golf course dress codes is silly out of the greater context.
Why care?
Is self-importance [therefore, force others into your mode] the basis of this stylized activity and it's 'need' to define worthiness.
"the content of their character'
No, the question of golf dress codes is not very important in itself; but it does represent well a human 'need' for self-importance that stretches in to virtually all endeavor.
Doug [the psychologist has spoken and you properly should genuflect] ::)
PS: This question is bound to come up occasionally. Can't resist putting it in context.
Doug,
I went to lunch today with my wife and on the walk back to our car we met a young gentleman who was dressed in a manner that declares himself a misfit and thug. It bothered me to the point that I moved between him and my wife. His clothes offended the both of us and I don't know why I should be subjected to this by a kid on lunch break from school. I'm sure as hell not going to be forced to feel unsafe when on private property where I have ownership rights. note: I send my kids to a private school with a dress code.
-
Are you talking about the collared shirt with elastic on the bottom that are made for obese seventy year old men.
No.
Tommy,
I can't speak for Kyle, but I think that's bullshit. Who decides what's "slovenly dressed"?--some old man stuck in another era? Coat and tie to a baseball game? No, thanks. Ties are vestiges of the Victorian era and should be abolished. Of course, I have my own opinions of what is and what is not acceptable dress, but I try to keep an open mind. My one absolute rule is that pants must cover one's ass.
-
I was just thinking...when Kyle gets out of school today...you know how he answers EVERY reply?
This is gonna take him all night!
-
Why there is a 'dress code' anywhere is still a mystery to me. Whatever happened to 'mind own business'? Perhaps more importantly, what ever happened to " ....... the content of their character'?
Humans come in two distinct types [viva le difference and all that]. No surprises except to those who have been taught shame from birth [nearly all of us, then].
Clothing serves some functional purposes, no doubt about it. As for the rest, it is just psycho-social pressures that determine.
Why care?
As for golf, it is a microcosm of human society. The importance of golf course dress codes is silly out of the greater context.
Why care?
Is self-importance [therefore, force others into your mode] the basis of this stylized activity and it's 'need' to define worthiness.
"the content of their character'
No, the question of golf dress codes is not very important in itself; but it does represent well a human 'need' for self-importance that stretches in to virtually all endeavor.
Doug [the psychologist has spoken and you properly should genuflect] ::)
PS: This question is bound to come up occasionally. Can't resist putting it in context.
Doug,
I went to lunch today with my wife and on the walk back to our car we met a young gentleman who was dressed in a manner that declares himself a misfit and thug. It bothered me to the point that I moved between him and my wife. His clothes offended the both of us and I don't know why I should be subjected to this by a kid on lunch break from school. I'm sure as hell not going to be forced to feel unsafe when on private property where I have ownership rights. note: I send my kids to a private school with a dress code.
John, what was he wearing? Wearing a hoody doesn't make you a thug (Unless im one ;))
-
There are plenty of places you can dress like a slob and still play golf. Many golf courses inexplicably don't have a denim allergy and will let people play in jeans. Other courses let you whack the white one with your shirt out of your pants and still others let you wear a bloody t-shirt. I suggest that the slobs out there play them to their heart's content. Very few of them will be on anybody's list to play, which is just fine by me, because I won't have to see any of the slobs while I'm playing.
-
Why there is a 'dress code' anywhere is still a mystery to me. Whatever happened to 'mind own business'? Perhaps more importantly, what ever happened to " ....... the content of their character'?
Humans come in two distinct types [viva le difference and all that]. No surprises except to those who have been taught shame from birth [nearly all of us, then].
Clothing serves some functional purposes, no doubt about it. As for the rest, it is just psycho-social pressures that determine.
Why care?
As for golf, it is a microcosm of human society. The importance of golf course dress codes is silly out of the greater context.
Why care?
Is self-importance [therefore, force others into your mode] the basis of this stylized activity and it's 'need' to define worthiness.
"the content of their character'
No, the question of golf dress codes is not very important in itself; but it does represent well a human 'need' for self-importance that stretches in to virtually all endeavor.
Doug [the psychologist has spoken and you properly should genuflect] ::)
PS: This question is bound to come up occasionally. Can't resist putting it in context.
Doug,
I went to lunch today with my wife and on the walk back to our car we met a young gentleman who was dressed in a manner that declares himself a misfit and thug. It bothered me to the point that I moved between him and my wife. His clothes offended the both of us and I don't know why I should be subjected to this by a kid on lunch break from school. I'm sure as hell not going to be forced to feel unsafe when on private property where I have ownership rights. note: I send my kids to a private school with a dress code.
John;
How a misfit? You said 'mistfit and thug'. Could he have been a thug without also being a misfit [fittingly, a thug]? If not, stop being redundant! :D
John, I lived in Knoxville, TN, during the years when Jake Butcher & Family/Company ripped off tens of thousands of people for their entire life savings. Thuggery on a GRAND scale. Yet I never saw any one of them when they were not dressed 'in a manner in which they had become undeservingly accustomed'.
And you never told your evidence that the man you met was a 'thug', let alone a 'misfit'.
Aside from all that, I can see your point of view ::).
Doug
-
I know he is a misfit because he is attending the school for misfits that is structured for students who no longer can attend regular high school. The facility is next to where we eat lunch. I know he was a thug because he intimidated my wife with his "I will not give up my space in the middle of the sidewalk attitude". I had to move her to my side against the building as he passed and his clothes are just a part of the entire show.
-
I know he is a misfit because he is attending the school for misfits that is structured for students who no longer can attend regular high school. The facility is next to where we eat lunch. I know he was a thug because he intimidated my wife with his "I will not give up my space in the middle of the sidewalk attitude". I had to move her to my side against the building as he passed and his clothes are just a part of the entire show.
Ahh, me comprehende
-
I know he is a misfit because he is attending the school for misfits that is structured for students who no longer can attend regular high school. The facility is next to where we eat lunch. I know he was a thug because he intimidated my wife with his "I will not give up my space in the middle of the sidewalk attitude". I had to move her to my side against the building as he passed and his clothes are just a part of the entire show.
Clearly, he was either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated.
-
I know he is a misfit because he is attending the school for misfits that is structured for students who no longer can attend regular high school. The facility is next to where we eat lunch. I know he was a thug because he intimidated my wife with his "I will not give up my space in the middle of the sidewalk attitude". I had to move her to my side against the building as he passed and his clothes are just a part of the entire show.
Clearly, he was either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated.
Or druged.
-
"...on the walk back to our car we met a young gentleman who was dressed in a manner that declares himself a misfit and thug."
Reminds me of another classic line: "You sir....are no gentleman."
I knew John reminded me of someone, NOW I can put a face to the name! ;D ;D
-
So John;
You are saying your wife tried her 'move aside, lowlife scum' attitude, and he stood his ground?
Hmm, I guess I had to be there ............. :-\
Doug
[John, calm down, I'm teasing you ;D]
-
So John;
You are saying your wife tried her 'move aside, lowlife scum' attitude, and he stood his ground?
Hmm, I guess I had to be there ............. :-\
Doug
[John, calm down, I'm teasing you ;D]
I understand that the majority of people on this site believe that on a public sidewalk you have the right to walk wherever you choose. I'm sorry but I believe that you always walk right hand to the outside. This young gentleman had a moral obligation to scooch over so we could pass without breaking stride. He balked and I called him on his bluff, stopped, manuvered my wife away from the danger and prepared the two of us for further evasive action. My initial responsibility is to put me between my wife and the trouble. This was just as we had entered the sidewalk so I was already in the early process of getting her off the roadside area so he may have not noticed my actions.
-
My Dad taught me to walk on the street side of a woman.
Nowadays, I suppose he'd have to teach me to walk on the thug/misfit side!
-
My Dad taught me to walk on the street side of a woman.
Nowadays, I suppose he'd have to teach me to walk on the thug/misfit side!
I could not see the guys hands. Sometimes when it comes to personal protection you have to make quick and sometimes rash moves. One of my personal favorites is the fake phone call so I can stop and see who is following me.
-
From a personal perspective, I honestly don't care what anybody wears - not enough to tell them to change their clothes - which is the bottom line. I try to evaluate people based on their actions, not their clothes. I will do it at one of the clubs that I am a member (if my guest happens to do something "inappropriate", but I would not approach anybody else on the matter because I don't care) only because I have agreed to abide by the all the rules of the clubs.
Sure, I may lean toward not hiring someone because of outrageous clothes if I thought they could potentially harm business. On the other hand, I wouldn't hesitate to hire someone with outrageous clothes if I thought it would help business.
Clothes are a statement of sorts, no different from verbal statements. I wouldn't judge a guy based on one comment - so why do it over clothes?
Like bunkers, too much is made of clothes in the world of golf.
Ciao
-
Why are there dress codes?
Because people are different - different values, different tastes, different standards, etc. One person's tasteful is another's opposite.
As Dan King said, if you don't like it, there's plenty of other places to play.
I'm always wary of something done to "grow the game of golf". I don't much care if some people choose to value different things than me, whether it's dress codes or other criteria for association. I think continually changing things to get more people into the game is mostly just pandering.
In addition to all that, I pretty much agree with what Sean just said.
:)
-
Kyle, I did not read all of the responses to this question. But here is my two cents.
I grew up in NYC when you wore a jacket and tie to Yankee stadium. Only recently have I gone sans sport jacket when I travel by plane. Obviously you can wear what you want in public places. But like in so many areas of society today there seems to be little concern about one's appearance. I can't believe how many hats I ask people to remove when they come into the church building. Wear what you like but don't make me look at you if I am in your foursome. It is rude to others to be slovenly dressed in public places. We have taken freedom to mean I can do what I want. That is the lowest form of freedom There is also the freedom to take others into consideration. Dress is an extension of what goes on inside. I suspect you will think this is bullshit. But you asked.
Tommy,
I understand where I think you are coming from on this, but I'm not sure why we have the "norms" we have now. If Jesus came walking into your church tommorow in his conditions and clothings of his time what would you think? He likely would not have bathed in several days, hair long and un-shampood/conditioned. His robe would likely be stained and not clean by our standards. His feet would be dusty and dirty and only wearing something equivilant to flip-flops. If someone like this entered your church today, you would likely think him a homeless-person.
On a side note, what Jesus taught more than anything was that it was your internal state of mind/intentions that mattered much more so than the outwardly/external things.
Additionally who did Jesus hang out with? The well dressed, proper behaving upper class of Jerusalem? The Bible I read says it was the downtrodden/poor/lesser peoples without the means for the finer things in life. Yet by your comments its seems like these people would be the least welcomed in your abode.
At what point did wearing all of these modern clothes become the expected norm for proper worship of God?
Kalen, I can't disagree with what you say. When i was an inner city pastor I had people come to my office and worship dressed in all kinds of clothing. Obviously the content of one's heart is more important than the external. Societal norms are just that norms that change with time. The kids that come to church dress all kinds of ways and it is fine. The adults that come for the most part are white collar workers and generally dress as they would at work. For them it is a matter of showing respect and the importance of exhibiting on the outside what is going on inside.
To be honest if Jesus were to show up in Annapolis in 2007 I doubt that he would be dressed as a first century Jew. But who knows.
I guess where I am coming from is that periodically I will sit on a plane next to someone dressed in tee shirt and ragged jeans with a hat on. I grew up in New York in the fifties and early 60's when it was a relatively formal city. Old habits die hard. I was taught that you dress well out of respect for those that have to look at you.
-
So..
Where do these pants fit in?
http://www.loudmouthgolf.com/
(http://www.loudmouthgolf.com/images/10bmgbw.jpg)
-
About fifteen years ago my son and I played in the Maryland Father/Son Tournament. Erik was about 16 with long red hair that went everywhere. After we had played I wanted to introduce him to the pro. As we entered the shop I asked Erik to tuck in his shirt and see what he could do with his hair. He tucked his shirt in but informed me that his hair "wanted to be free." What do you say to that. He is a lawyer who litigates and his hair is still free, but he dresses well. :)
-
To be honest if Jesus were to show up in Annapolis in 2007 I doubt that he would be dressed as a first century Jew. But who knows.
Funniest thing I've read on here in awhile. :)
-
From a top 100, classic club:
DRESS CODE FOR MONDAY OUTINGS
Men: Shorts are NOT permitted at any time. Slacks and collared shirts are the standard required dress on Club grounds. Jeans or denim of any type, cargo pants and flip flops or sandals are not permitted. Turtlenecks and mock turtleneck shirts tailored for golf are acceptable shirts. Golf shirts must be tucked-in. Wearing headgear (hats, caps, of any kind) is not permitted in any area of the Clubhouse.
DRESS CODE FOR MEMBERS AND THEIR GUESTS
The Club staff has been directed by the Board of Governors to advise Members if their dress or that of their guests is not considered in compliance with the following dress code, and to deny access or service to them if the exception to appropriate dress is not immediately remedied.
The dress code applies to all areas of the Club grounds, including the Clubhouse, the golf courses, the practice areas and the parking lots.
Members and guests must only use the appropriate locker room to change shoes and other attire. Metal or ceramic spiked shoes may not be worn on Club grounds.
Men: Slacks and collared shirts are the standard required dress on Club grounds, with exceptions noted below. Jeans or denim of any type, cargo pants and flip flops or sandals are not permitted. Turtlenecks and mock turtleneck shirts tailored for golf are acceptable shirts. Golf shirts must be tucked-in. Wearing headgear (hats, caps, of any kind) is not permitted in any area of the Clubhouse.
Jackets and ties are to be worn at all times in the Dining Room, except for breakfast and Sunday evenings when jackets only are acceptable. Slacks and collared shirts may be worn in all areas of the Clubhouse other than the Dining Room prior to 6:00 PM. After 6:00 PM, men eighteen years of age and older are to wear jackets throughout the main and upper levels of the Clubhouse.
Men’s Shorts Policy: Men may wear appropriate shorts for golf at any time of the year. Appropriate shorts will include only substantially knee-length Bermuda shorts tailored for golf. No other types of shorts, including cargo, camping, tennis, athletic, cutoffs of any kind or denim may be worn. Only short golf socks (no higher than ankle length, such as peds or ankle cuff socks) may be worn with the shorts. No other types of socks, including knee-length, sweat socks or other athletic socks may be worn.
Appropriate shorts may be worn throughout the lower level of the Clubhouse, and may be worn on the Terrace if there is a breakfast or lunch related to a golf function. Shorts are never permitted in other areas of the Clubhouse.
Ladies: Slacks or substantially knee-length skirts, culottes or Bermuda shorts, and shirts with sleeves and/or a collar, are the standard required dress on Club grounds, with exceptions noted below. Jeans or denim of any type, tank tops and flip flops are not permitted.
The above dress is permitted throughout the Clubhouse prior to 6:00 PM, other than in the Dining Room. In the Dining Room (other than on Ladies Guest Day), and in other areas of the Clubhouse after 6:00 PM, comparable attire to that required for men is to be worn.
I think the real issue is when a dress code goes too far. It is drawing that line that is the problem or perhaps just stick to the dress of the '20s or so. Without hesitation when I am told the length of my socks the club has gone too far. Frankly, it is only the last 8 years or so that I began to wear shorter socks, as athletic socks were 'more traditional'.
-
Would Payne Stewart have been welcome there?
-
I will be typing out my reply shortly. If I don't respond to any posts after this one - that's why.
-
Kyle, I did not read all of the responses to this question. But here is my two cents.
I grew up in NYC when you wore a jacket and tie to Yankee stadium. Only recently have I gone sans sport jacket when I travel by plane. Obviously you can wear what you want in public places. But like in so many areas of society today there seems to be little concern about one's appearance. I can't believe how many hats I ask people to remove when they come into the church building. Wear what you like but don't make me look at you if I am in your foursome. It is rude to others to be slovenly dressed in public places. We have taken freedom to mean I can do what I want. That is the lowest form of freedom There is also the freedom to take others into consideration. Dress is an extension of what goes on inside. I suspect you will think this is bullshit. But you asked.
Tommy,
I understand where I think you are coming from on this, but I'm not sure why we have the "norms" we have now. If Jesus came walking into your church tommorow in his conditions and clothings of his time what would you think? He likely would not have bathed in several days, hair long and un-shampood/conditioned. His robe would likely be stained and not clean by our standards. His feet would be dusty and dirty and only wearing something equivilant to flip-flops. If someone like this entered your church today, you would likely think him a homeless-person.
On a side note, what Jesus taught more than anything was that it was your internal state of mind/intentions that mattered much more so than the outwardly/external things.
Additionally who did Jesus hang out with? The well dressed, proper behaving upper class of Jerusalem? The Bible I read says it was the downtrodden/poor/lesser peoples without the means for the finer things in life. Yet by your comments its seems like these people would be the least welcomed in your abode.
At what point did wearing all of these modern clothes become the expected norm for proper worship of God?
Kalen, I can't disagree with what you say. When i was an inner city pastor I had people come to my office and worship dressed in all kinds of clothing. Obviously the content of one's heart is more important than the external. Societal norms are just that norms that change with time. The kids that come to church dress all kinds of ways and it is fine. The adults that come for the most part are white collar workers and generally dress as they would at work. For them it is a matter of showing respect and the importance of exhibiting on the outside what is going on inside.
To be honest if Jesus were to show up in Annapolis in 2007 I doubt that he would be dressed as a first century Jew. But who knows.
I guess where I am coming from is that periodically I will sit on a plane next to someone dressed in tee shirt and ragged jeans with a hat on. I grew up in New York in the fifties and early 60's when it was a relatively formal city. Old habits die hard. I was taught that you dress well out of respect for those that have to look at you.
Tommy,
I appreciate your comments and involvement in the man upstairs' work. It just seems more attention is given to the outward than the inwardly things....of course its understood, those are almost always the easier things to observe and make an opinion on.
Social norms is an interesting concept to look at especially as it relates to what people wear in public. Clothing norms have obviously changed a lot over the years as we don't wear 1st Century robes anymore. ;) But if jeans and T-shirts become the norm, then I would think this would be acceptable because society has spoken. I would also submit that every generation goes thru this with the next one and after a few cycles of this it would become very arbitrary as to which one is "proper" and shows "respect". I don't see anyone playing golf in a suit and tie as was the acceptable norm decades ago.
I have no problem with people who choose to wear nice clothes and dress old school...even Mayday Malones polyesters... ;D. But I don't feel this should be expected of others.
-
"...on the walk back to our car we met a young gentleman who was dressed in a manner that declares himself a misfit and thug."
Reminds me of another classic line: "You sir....are no gentleman."
I knew John reminded me of someone, NOW I can put a face to the name! ;D ;D
I seem to remember John K stating that he didn't find the movie funny. I happen to think that the good judge is one of the funniest characters ever. Every time I read one of the negative comments on photo taking, I think of him.
-
I liked Gone with the Wind...Don't tell me this is another Caddyshack reference. It is not that I didn't think parts of the movie were funny, it is the fact that I have never sat through the entire movie. I can't even tell you how it ends.
Favorite Movie Quote #9
Scarlett (Vivien Leigh): Sir, you are no gentleman.Rhett (Clark Gable): And you Miss, are no lady. Don't think that I hold that against you. Ladies have never held any charm for me.
'Gone With The Wind'
-
This will be a multi-part response. First I'd like to address some of the individual comments made and then move on to a more broad response.
Wayne,
Bet you guessed I'd start with you. As a true Philadelphian responding to another Philadelphian, Wayne brought up the point that he felt would most expose my hypocrisy and hit me in a personal soft spot. I love the guy.
First, I never WAS an Eagle Scout. I AM one. No past tense when it comes to Scouting's highest achievement.
Second, the uniform in Scouting has been challenged and debated countless times, and each time it is determined that the uniform is essential to furthering the aims of Scouting by promoting teamwork and comaraderie. At no point did I say that there was not a time or place for a uniform or dress code.
Your comparison is flawed. The uniform is one of the central tenets to Scouting. Dress codes are not central tenets to playing golf.
Cory,
You and I have played together many times, and on 5 occasions I have been a guest at your place of employment at the time, or at sometime in the past. In each of those occasions I have abided by the dress code, not for your sake, but for the sake of the club at which you were employed.
If I were to show up at your apartment in a t-shirt and jeans, as I have in the past, neither you or Kate would be offended, unless you're hiding something from me. ;) My point there is, that my dress is not in anyway showing respect or disrespect to you. It is, however, showing respect or deferment to the rules of the club. Perhaps, it could be argued that I show respect to you by presenting myself in a manner which will not have you branded as the person who let in "that guy." However, what mandates me being labeled as "that guy" is not you, but the club - so I see a difference.
Tom Paul/Mike Benham,
This is not about the government's right to infringe upon the privacy of private clubs or lives. This is about open discourse concerning a long held tradition and scrutinizing the image of the game presented by that tradition. I am not using this platform for political gain nor to advance a political idea. Leave politics out of this, it is not germane.
Paul Turner,
This morning I woke up at 5AM, ate breakfast, went to work and proceeded to assist in verticutting, topdressing and syringing greens. I also leveled several irrigation heads and drains. I am speaking to what I know and love.
Jim Kennedy,
I find this idea disturbing to say the least. Golf is a game played by an individual. How that person plays the game and the skills he acquires and using in doing so are both individual and unique. Golf is VERY much about the individual.
Kalen Braley,
The idea that those who enter the market to make money dictate what the market wants is frightening to me, and the idea that people will allow such to dictate that to them is even worse, in my mind. This is no different than a mandatory cart policy, especially when the reasoning is that a course is difficult to walk. Why can't I make that determination? Why can't I make the determination as to what is appropriate attire to enjoy my day at their club while they take my money? It is because we accept this as normal that we are subject to it.
Jason Connor,
This is perhaps the scariest thought of all. When I invite someone into my home or to spend my time with, I do not set rules for their conduct. The invitation, in and of itself, should dictate to them that they may behave in whatever manner they feel appropriate. I am the one responsible for extending the invitation and in doing so, saying that I find their behavior both appropriate and in harmony with my values.
To impose rules and regulations upon how people are my guests is both controlling and impolite. What are we really saying by dictating behavior to people we want to spend time with and share our club? If I were to enjoy several rounds of golf with someone I met at a local muni by happenstance who just happens to always wear the same jeans and t-shirt and wish to invite him at my club - why is it that I have to dictate a dress code to him that happens to go against the very nature in which he enjoys the game, and the very nature in which he enjoys the game with me?
I think the idea that a person should "honor" their host by changing or adapting their behavior is absolute crap. The host is essentially saying, "I have, you do not, but you can have if you do this."
Next up, a general response.
-
Kyle,
I understand how you would like to see things happen, if you were running the show, but often things just don't work out that way. I refer you to Captain Jack Sparrow for a "pearl" of wisdom:
"The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do. For instance, you can accept that your father was a pirate and a good man or you can't. But pirate is in your blood, boy, so you'll have to square with that some day. And me, for example, I can let you drown, but I can't bring this ship into Tortuga all by me onesies, savvy? So, can you sail under the command of a pirate, or can you not?
You have to decide if you can or cannot abide by the dress codes at certain golf courese. Its no more complex than that.
-
Kyle, I did not read all of the responses to this question. But here is my two cents.
I grew up in NYC when you wore a jacket and tie to Yankee stadium. Only recently have I gone sans sport jacket when I travel by plane. Obviously you can wear what you want in public places. But like in so many areas of society today there seems to be little concern about one's appearance. I can't believe how many hats I ask people to remove when they come into the church building. Wear what you like but don't make me look at you if I am in your foursome. It is rude to others to be slovenly dressed in public places. We have taken freedom to mean I can do what I want. That is the lowest form of freedom There is also the freedom to take others into consideration. Dress is an extension of what goes on inside. I suspect you will think this is bullshit. But you asked.
Tommy,
I understand where I think you are coming from on this, but I'm not sure why we have the "norms" we have now. If Jesus came walking into your church tommorow in his conditions and clothings of his time what would you think? He likely would not have bathed in several days, hair long and un-shampood/conditioned. His robe would likely be stained and not clean by our standards. His feet would be dusty and dirty and only wearing something equivilant to flip-flops. If someone like this entered your church today, you would likely think him a homeless-person.
On a side note, what Jesus taught more than anything was that it was your internal state of mind/intentions that mattered much more so than the outwardly/external things.
Additionally who did Jesus hang out with? The well dressed, proper behaving upper class of Jerusalem? The Bible I read says it was the downtrodden/poor/lesser peoples without the means for the finer things in life. Yet by your comments its seems like these people would be the least welcomed in your abode.
At what point did wearing all of these modern clothes become the expected norm for proper worship of God?
Kalen, I can't disagree with what you say. When i was an inner city pastor I had people come to my office and worship dressed in all kinds of clothing. Obviously the content of one's heart is more important than the external. Societal norms are just that norms that change with time. The kids that come to church dress all kinds of ways and it is fine. The adults that come for the most part are white collar workers and generally dress as they would at work. For them it is a matter of showing respect and the importance of exhibiting on the outside what is going on inside.
To be honest if Jesus were to show up in Annapolis in 2007 I doubt that he would be dressed as a first century Jew. But who knows.
I guess where I am coming from is that periodically I will sit on a plane next to someone dressed in tee shirt and ragged jeans with a hat on. I grew up in New York in the fifties and early 60's when it was a relatively formal city. Old habits die hard. I was taught that you dress well out of respect for those that have to look at you.
Tommy,
I appreciate your comments and involvement in the man upstairs' work. It just seems more attention is given to the outward than the inwardly things....of course its understood, those are almost always the easier things to observe and make an opinion on.
Social norms is an interesting concept to look at especially as it relates to what people wear in public. Clothing norms have obviously changed a lot over the years as we don't wear 1st Century robes anymore. ;) But if jeans and T-shirts become the norm, then I would think this would be acceptable because society has spoken. I would also submit that every generation goes thru this with the next one and after a few cycles of this it would become very arbitrary as to which one is "proper" and shows "respect". I don't see anyone playing golf in a suit and tie as was the acceptable norm decades ago.
I have no problem with people who choose to wear nice clothes and dress old school...even Mayday Malones polyesters... ;D. But I don't feel this should be expected of others.
Kalen;
I have honestly hoped we were growing as a specie, and liberty was to be our emphasis. Determining 'appropriateness' of any action which does not damage another should surely be left to the individual considering that action.
I still have to ask all: Why care? What is the 'need' inside all of you/us to make the World in our image, to judge the worthiness of others by asking only if we would? Can we not grow into a culture of cooperative individuals rather than cogs in each others' wheels?
I dunno. I do know that this seemingly trivial question has some very important implications for our acceptance of human liberty.
'Social norms' are simply a statistic, and surely should never be used as compulsion.
I love this stuff.
Doug
-
Doug -
The flip side is that the insistence of no dress code is as controlling and compulsory as having a dress code.
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
Because those are the rules established by the members of the host club.
If you don't like the rules, don't visit the club.
-
Pat,
America 1861
North: Why can't a black man be free to dictate his own life in your states?
South: Because those are the rules, if you don't like it, leave.
Hyperbole, yes. I am not trying to say that clubs should not be allowed to have dress codes or rules of conduct. I am asking why they do, and what it says about the club and the nature of the game of golf as a whole that they do and are generally accepted as tradition.
When I ask why and get the response that "them's the rules" I begin to really question the true reason.
-
The problem you're having, Kyle, is that you're assuming everyone has your common sense and good judgment.
Dress codes didn't evolve from the occasional person who looked sharp in jeans and a t shirt or whatever, they evolved from the even rarer guy with his pants hanging halfway off his #$$, an offensive t shirt, whatever. That's what prompts folks to make rules.
Look at the photo of Tiger in the mock turtleneck - he looks better in that thing than I look in a tux. But when someone comes in wearing a mock turtleneck with plaid shorts, one black sock, one white sock and his hat turned backwards - well, the mock turtleneck gets beat down by association.
Dress codes are an unfortunate byproduct of the fact that people tend to think only of themselves, and not of others.
What makes one person comfortable does not always make another.
-
I am asking why they do, and what it says about the club and the nature of the game of golf as a whole that they do and are generally accepted as tradition.
Kyle, I am not sure I see why you continue think it has anything at all to do specifically with 'golf as a whole.' It is something that applies to most of our interactions, be it politicians in Congress wearing suits or the Comcast cable guy wearing his Comcast outfit or judges in England with their wigs.
Congrats on the job by the way. What did you wear to the interview? ;)
-
In the spirit of full disclosure, and I have no problem admitting this. It has been brought to my attention that I have apparently drawn the ire of those around me for my dress and appearance and that my host felt some pressure because of it.
I am sorry to that host, and to any of the other people who have had me at their club. If you'd like, please PM me if I've ever embarrassed you.
-
Kyle, you're welcome to wear whatever you'd like at my club.
Of course, it's a muni.
In a weird way, I appreciate dress codes more now that I'm a parent. I think there are soooooooo many things (sorry about the MWardspeak) that you think are crazy, until you're confronted with them as a parent. Then, you start to understand.
Sorry Mom & Dad! :)
-
Pat,
America 1861
North: Why can't a black man be free to dictate his own life in your states?
South: Because those are the rules, if you don't like it, leave.
Hyperbole, yes. I am not trying to say that clubs should not be allowed to have dress codes or rules of conduct. I am asking why they do, and what it says about the club and the nature of the game of golf as a whole that they do and are generally accepted as tradition.
When I ask why and get the response that "them's the rules" I begin to really question the true reason.
Kyle,
I don't think your analogy really fits here. Even though it may be Politically Uncorrect, slavery did have a huge economic benefit to it, and it was profitable. Enforcing a dress code if anything seems to be working against a club financially in the form of lost customers.
I understand why you ask why, or at least I think I do. I'm with you on this one, I think many of the responses as to the why is mostly hooey, but it doesn't change the fact that the code is the code. I think you know full well what the whys are. I think what you are really asking is "why would someone espouse these beliefs when they seem so archaic?"
As an analogy, I took a sociallogy course in college and the best they could tell from research and analysis is that societys opionions and beliefs change mostly due to attrition of people espousing one belief set, and thier offspring espousing a different belief set.
But until then, you just have to live with the fact that it almost always comes down to "because I said so, thats why"
-
Kyle,
By reading your posts, I am guessing you actually were serious when apologizing to me.
However, I think that if a dress code is set it should be followed, whether you like it or not. I think it's BS that you would let a guy whom you played with at a local muni a few times wear jeans and a t-shirt at your club. Theres no way. And would the club really allow it anyways?
The last thing I am ever going to do go to a golf course with improper attire, as set by the course's dress code. I've learned before that there are dress codes for a reason. Rules are meant to be followed. I may like them or I may not, but my opinion on the rules does not determine whether I follow them or not.
-
Yeah, Jordan I was serious.
But use your own values and mind to determine which rules you should follow and which you should fight.
I can sense your passion for the game with every post, so you'll naturally see the dress codes as no big deal. With age and experience comes different perspective and enjoyment of things, perhaps I have outgrown or outlived this game and its institutions.
Maybe it's time to go back to my music.
-
With age and experience comes different perspective and enjoyment of things, perhaps I have outgrown or outlived this game and its institutions.
Kyle,
As far as I can see, you're 24.
When I was 24, I travelled around the world making music. By the time I was 27 I thought of myself as a world weary, seen this done that, kinda guy. It wasn't until I was closer to 40 than 30 that I realised how little I had seen, and how little I knew.
I'd like to suggest, in the nicest possible way, that unless I'm mistaken, you're a young man. It may be a little early to be outliving or outgrowing the game of golf...
Just a thought.
-
Lloyd,
I just reread the letter to the fans that Peter Gabriel wrote upon leaving Genesis in 1975.
"The vehicle we had built as a co-op to serve our songwriting became our master and had cooped us up inside the success we had wanted. It affected the attitudes and the spirit of the whole band. the music had not dried up and I still respect the other musicians, but our roles had set in hard. To get an idea through "Genesis the Big" meant shifting a lot more concrete than before. For any band, transferring the heart from idealistic enthusiasm to professionalism is a difficult operation. I believe the use of sound and visual images can be developed to do much more than we have done. But on a large scale it needs one clear and coherent direction, which our pseudo-democratic committee system could not provide. As an artist, I need to absorb a wide variety of experiences. It is difficult to respond to intuition and impulse within the long-term planning that the band needed. I felt I should look at/learn about/develop myself, my creative bits and pieces and pick up on a lot of work going on outside music. Even the hidden delights of vegetable growing and community living are beginning to reveal their secrets. I could not expect the band to tie in their schedules with my bondage to cabbages. The increase in money and power, if I had stayed, would have anchored me to the spotlights. It was important to me to give space to my family, which I wanted to hold together, and to liberate the daddy in me. Although I have seen and learnt a great deal in the last seven years, I found I had begun to look at things as the famous Gabriel, despite hiding my occupation whenever possible, hitching lifts, etc. I had begun to think in business terms; very useful for an often bitten once shy musician, but treating records and audiences as money was taking me away from them. When performing, there were less shivers up and down the spine. I believe the world has soon to go through a difficult period of changes. I'm excited by some of the areas coming through to the surface which seem to have been hidden away in people's minds. I want to explore and be prepared to be open and flexible enough to respond, not tied in to the old hierarchy. Much of my psyche's ambitions as "Gabriel archetypal rock star" have been fulfilled - a lot of the ego-gratification and the need to attract young ladies, perhaps the result of frequent rejection as "Gabriel acne-struck public school boy". However, I can still get off playing the star game once in a while. My future within music, if it exists, will be in as many situations as possible. It's good to see a growing number of artists breaking down the pigeonholes. This is the difference between the profitable, compartmentalized, battery chicken and the free-range. Why did the chicken cross the road anyway? There is no animosity between myself and the band or management. The decision had been made some time ago and we have talked about our new direction. The reason why my leaving was not announced earlier was because I had been asked to delay until they had found a replacement to plug up the hole. It is not impossible that some of them might work with me on other projects. The following guesswork has little in common with truth: Gabriel left Genesis. 1) To work in theatre. 2) To make more money as a solo artist. 3) To do a "Bowie". 4) To do a "Ferry". 5) To do a "Furry Boa round my neck and hang myself with it". 6) To go see an institution. 7) To go senile in the sticks. I do not express myself adequately in interviews and I felt I owed it to the people who have put a lot of love and energy supporting the band to give an accurate picture of my reasons."
I think, in some form, this is along the lines of what I'm feeling. I am by nature a creator, a non-conformist and a dreamer. Sometimes I need to gain new perspectives to gain new motivations - and the institutions of the game do not allow that by nature of their social inertia.
It is nigh on impossible for me to experience the Merions or Pine Valleys of the world in a different context than those imposed upon me by their rules.
That is not to say the rules are bad or that they do not have purpose, but at the same time, they do stifle those who seek to view things a bit differently and harmlessly.
Perhaps this is why I prefer being on golf courses at night.
-
This a pretty interesting thread and it brings out a lot of strong feelings. In some ways it illustrates the clash of cultures that happens in pretty much every generation. It seems that today every sub-culture has its own dress.
I am a skier. It is very easy to tell off mountain who skis and who snowboards. The dress is a dead give away.
Go to any college town and it is pretty easy to see who are the "townies" and who students. In fact my daughter teaches at Carleton College in Northfield MN. It coexists with St. Olaf College. Each college has its own dress and according to my daughter the two can be distinguished in town.
High schools have a bunch of subcultures, each with its own dress.
these "uniforms" are but an extension of how each group sees itself and wants to distinguish itself. I guess people like me need to lighten up a bit. But can't we at least remove our hats inside a building? :)
-
I try to evaluate people based on their actions, not their clothes.
Sean,
Turning up for a game of golf at a golf club inappropriately attired IS an action. It's negligence, it's either intentional 'pushing of the envelope' or it's laziness in not having done one's research.
Likewise, turning up dressed in a manner that is never going to cause offence or trouble IS an action, it is an act of courtesy. Turning up prepared with a suit and tie at certain British clubs is sensible, you might not need it, but you might be asked for lunch and the last thing you want is to have to borrow one of the jackets or ties kept for the unprepared.
And to all concerned. Let me make it clear, I don't particularly enjoy putting on a suit to eat, but it just doesn't bother me that much..how inconvenienced am I by it? Not much. Anyone who travels knows you have to pack for the unexpected. How hard is it to pack a suit?
I also believe that there are clothes out there which will satisfy all clubs dress codes which are not going to make you look like 'a square' or something from the new Ralph Lauren commercial. I wear hiking trousers, I actually like Marks and Spencer's Italian wool sweaters.. look really hard and there are even nice (ish) golf shoes. I'm absolutely compfortable in my golf wear, just at Pat Mucci is in his. Would we both be reconisabe as golfers without our clubs? Maybe not. We're both OK with that, I think.
-
It is nigh on impossible for me to experience the Merions or Pine Valleys of the world in a different context than those imposed upon me by their rules.
That is not to say the rules are bad or that they do not have purpose, but at the same time, they do stifle those who seek to view things a bit differently and harmlessly.
Kyle, exactly how would you like to experience Merion or Pine Valley?
-
It is nigh on impossible for me to experience the Merions or Pine Valleys of the world in a different context than those imposed upon me by their rules.
That is not to say the rules are bad or that they do not have purpose, but at the same time, they do stifle those who seek to view things a bit differently and harmlessly.
Kyle, exactly how would you like to experience Merion or Pine Valley?
On a fit of whimsy. I'd like to feel that I could pop over there (as a member) and play golf without having to spend time in a locker room getting ready or 45 minutes at home dressing to the nines to fit the part.
I'd like to be able to look like a golfer by playing golf - not dressing in a certain way.
-
I'm sure I speak solely for myself, but I would happily play dressed as Little Bo Peep or have my caddy wheel me around on a gurney like Hannibal Lector (complete with mask and straight jacket) for the opportunity to have the Merions or Pine Valleys of the world impose their rules upon me.
I see where you're coming from Kyle, but as a wise man once told me, "somtimes life's a shit sandwich and you just have to take a bite". I would prefer to show up to work dressed like I was headed to a Phish concert, but it's not in the cards.
-
For the vast majority of people, golf is not work.
-
It is nigh on impossible for me to experience the Merions or Pine Valleys of the world in a different context than those imposed upon me by their rules.
That is not to say the rules are bad or that they do not have purpose, but at the same time, they do stifle those who seek to view things a bit differently and harmlessly.
Kyle, exactly how would you like to experience Merion or Pine Valley?
On a fit of whimsy. I'd like to feel that I could pop over there (as a member) and play golf without having to spend time in a locker room getting ready or 45 minutes at home dressing to the nines to fit the part.
I'd like to be able to look like a golfer by playing golf - not dressing in a certain way.
Kyle, private clubs have their own rules that are made by the members of the club. I saw Bill Coore play in jeans at Sand Hills yet for years I played in slacks at Baltusrol until this year. They changed the rules. If you are going to go to Merion it is simple you follow their rules whether it is in dress or taking a caddy or using cell phones or tipping. The members have decided what behavior and dress are appropriate for their club. You can dress as you want and they can also ask you to either change or leave. It is simply a matter of courtesy to know what those rules are and follow them without judging them.
-
Kyle,
Did you get kicked off a golf course dressed in your Dr. McCoy Star Trek uniform stopping off for a round before a convention? I get it, they wouldn't let you play in a mock turtleneck and that is why you are so miffed.
Hey, at least we don't have to dress up like the 70s anymore. Though Mike Malone still does. It isn't because he is a cheap Quaker (although he is ;)). He just likes Sansabelt slacks ;D
-
Tommy, I realize that.. hence my qualifier (as a member).
I understand that having no stake in the game (meaning, I didn't pay to be member) means I don't have any right to dictate terms.
-
Kyle,
Did you get kicked off a golf course dressed in your Dr. McCoy Star Trek uniform stopping off for a round before a convention? I get it, they wouldn't let you play in a mock turtleneck and that is why you are so miffed.
Hey, at least we don't have to dress up like the 70s anymore. Though Mike Malone still does. It isn't because he is a cheap Quaker. He just likes Sansabelt slacks ;D
I look terrible in mock turtlenecks, and hate anything tight against my neck in general. Actually, I explained my reasoning on the top of Page 2 of this thread.
Scout uniforms have collars... come to think of it. I'd have to play in the pants though, as the shorts are awful short and tight. In fact, my Order of the Arrow Vigil name is the Lenni Lenape word for "Round ball Friend" which is a double entendre for my proclivity to golf, and an unfortunate scout uniform related incident.
I should also note that my Star Trek uniform is that of a Captain from The Next Generation era.
-
"I look terrible in mock turtlenecks. Actually, I explained my reasoning on the top of Page 2 of this thread."
I'm trying my best to think what you wouldn't look terrible in. I'm having trouble with that one, Kyle ;)
If you think I'm going to go back and read any of this thread and your feeble protests...you are Malonian in your craziness. I'm just killing time busting your balls while printing out Brooklyn Eagle articles on Merion. I'll get to Shinnecock sometime after that...but there's 801 articles!
"I should also note that my Star Trek uniform is that of a Captain from The Next Generation era."
What was her name again?
-
"I look terrible in mock turtlenecks. Actually, I explained my reasoning on the top of Page 2 of this thread."
I'm trying my best to think what you wouldn't look terrible in. I'm having trouble with that one, Kyle ;)
If you think I'm going to go back and read any of this thread and your feeble protests...you are Malonian in your craziness. I'm just killing time busting your balls while printing out Brooklyn Eagle articles on Merion. I'll get to Shinnecock sometime after that...but there's 801 articles!
I'd like to start perusing that too, Willie Park did a lot of his barnstorming around New York during his first trip to the US.
But remember, cognitive dissonance can be a wonderful thing.
You're also confusing Star Trek: TNG with Star Trek: Voyager.... cretin. ;)
-
Kyle,
That was really a dumb response, one that ignores the rule of law and societal values.
Examining an 1800 issue in the context of 2000 values is flawed to the core.
You would judge a film by basing the analysis on but a single frame.
One should view issues by also including the historical perspective.
As to those who would judge people based on their actions rather than how they dress, how they dress is a willful act, and as such, they should be judged by that act in the context of the environment they've entered.
Dressing unconventionally or like a slop is disrespectful to your host, his/her fellow members and guests, the club and the staff.
It's a selfish, self absorbed act that merits being banned from the property.
[size=4x]
If people don't have the courtesy to conduct themselves properly, and that includes conformance to dress codes, they're not worthy of an invite.[/size]
-
Kyle,
That was really a dumb response, one that ignores the rule of law and societal values.
Examining an 1800 issue in the context of 2000 values is flawed to the core.
You would judge a film by basing the analysis on but a single frame.
One should view issues by also including the historical perspective.
As to those who would judge people based on their actions rather than how they dress, how they dress is a willful act, and as such, they should be judged by that act in the context of the environment they've entered.
Dressing unconventionally or like a slop is disrespectful to your host, his/her fellow members and guests, the club and the staff.
It's a selfish, self absorbed act that merits being banned from the property.
[size=4x]
If people don't have the courtesy to conduct themselves properly, and that includes conformance to dress codes, they're not worthy of an invite.[/size]
Pat, I simply asked why the dress codes are as they are, and what is so disrespectful about them. It was not so much a hard comparison of slavery and dress codes, but of the general attitude about what we assume is tradition - it's circular logic, there at one point had to be a reason and purpose and it couldn't have "always been that way."
I admitted it was hyperbole, but to me, the idea that someone can assume I am disrespectful to them based on how I look is absurd.
You're right though, they aren't worth of an invite.
I must ask you, based upon our one dinner together and your knowledge of my personality, would I be unworthy of an invite?
-
Kyle,
Hard to say if this "experiment" has ever been verified, but its my take that this is not too far off from why things are as they are so to speak:
-----------------------------------------------------
The "Monkey experiment" was an experiment performed in which it was shown how social inertia causes behaviour which develops in response to a negative stimulus to persist in a population of monkeys, even after the stimulus is removed.
Researchers placed five monkeys into a cage, which, at its centre, had a ladder leading up to a bunch of bananas. Soon enough, one of the monkeys attempted to scale the ladder to grab a banana. The researchers responded by spraying cold water over all of the monkeys. Later, when another monkey attempted to climb the ladder, the researchers again sprayed all of the monkeys with cold water.
The monkeys quickly grasped the causal relationship and meted out physical punishment to any monkey which attempted to climb the ladder.
From this point onwards, the researchers did not spray any more water on any of the monkeys, and they removed one of the existing monkeys, introducing a new monkey into the cage. The new monkey, not yet aware of the apparent connection between climbing the ladder and being drenched in cold water, soon proceeded to start climbing the ladder. The other monkeys swiftly punished this transgression and pinned the new monkey down with force. Needless to say, the new monkey quickly learned to avoid the ladder.
Then, the researchers removed another monkey from the original group from the cage and introduced another new monkey. Since the new monkey was unaware of the perils of climbing the stairway to the bananas, it soon attempted to do so. This monkey too was severely dealt with, and the monkey who was introduced prior to new monkey enthusiastically took part in the punishment of the newcomer.
The researchers replaced the remaining three monkeys from the original group in the same way, each time observing the same behaviour.
Thus, even though the original "population" of monkeys was completely replaced and even though the cause for their behaviour was never experienced by any of the "second generation" monkeys, the behaviour introduced by the first generation persisted.
The researchers suggested that social inertia causes similar, if more complex phenomena in human beings.
-
Kalen,
To me, then, it's not so difficult to understand why green committees seek to make their golf courses TV ready during the peak seasons, among other "me too" attitudes in regard to architecture and conditioning.
-
This thread reminds me of the endless discussions I had with my mother when I was in my teens...and probably into my early 20s. I wanted to dress the way I wanted to dress, while my mother thought I had an obligation to look presentable to the outside world. I look back on some of the stuff I used to wear, and the length of my hair at that time, and I cringe -- not because I looked foolish (I often did), but because of the embarrassment I caused my mother.
If there is no one in the world who cares how you look, wear a diaper, or a garbage bag, if it makes you more comfortable and there is no dress code where you're going. But if there is someone who cares, you're really not dressing just for yourself. Your parents, your spouse, your siblings, your closest friends, even your kids care whether your attire is causing negative attention or making other people uncomfortable.
Respect for the game of golf? I'm not sure what that means. But respect for others who play golf? We all know what that means. More importantly, we know what it means to show respect for the people who really do care more about us than what we wear. It's one way we show love -- by deciding, sometimes, not to exercise our freedom.
I wish I'd understood that better when I was younger.
-
Oh, by the way, CB Macdonald conceived the 10th hole at Merion East as an Alps while wearing pajamas with one of the buttons on his backside undone.
-
Oh, by the way, CB Macdonald conceived the 10th hole at Merion East as an Alps while wearing pajamas with one of the buttons on his backside undone.
But(t), none of us had to look at him while he did it.
Bart
-
This is perhaps the scariest thought of all. When I invite someone into my home or to spend my time with, I do not set rules for their conduct. The invitation, in and of itself, should dictate to them that they may behave in whatever manner they feel appropriate. I am the one responsible for extending the invitation and in doing so, saying that I find their behavior both appropriate and in harmony with my values.
To impose rules and regulations upon how people are my guests is both controlling and impolite. What are we really saying by dictating behavior to people we want to spend time with and share our club? If I were to enjoy several rounds of golf with someone I met at a local muni by happenstance who just happens to always wear the same jeans and t-shirt and wish to invite him at my club - why is it that I have to dictate a dress code to him that happens to go against the very nature in which he enjoys the game, and the very nature in which he enjoys the game with me?
I think the idea that a person should "honor" their host by changing or adapting their behavior is absolute crap. The host is essentially saying, "I have, you do not, but you can have if you do this."
Kyle -
I have not met Bob Huntley. I know that he is a man that gets a great deal of respect from many on this site. I also know from his posts that he is a man with a very strong opinion when it comes to wearing hats indoors.
Are you telling me that you think he is imposing, controlling, and rude if he expects you to take your hat off in his home, but you are not imposing, controlling, and rude if you know of his strong feelings and choose to ignore them?
If you don't like the rules of the house - pick another house to visit.
-
Oh, by the way, CB Macdonald conceived the 10th hole at Merion East as an Alps while wearing pajamas with one of the buttons on his backside undone.
But(t), none of us had to look at him while he did it.
Bart
So then, do not look when people wear other things which meet your disapproval. Or just get over it and chalk it up to liberty.
The only arguement I have really heard is that the right to limit other people's liberties is equal to the right to have liberty. If you believe that, I hope you are not American. If you are, you missed it!
Doug
-
Kyle,
I don't think you can advocate rejection of a club's dress code and expect an invite to that club, especially if your rejection is manifested in not conforming to the dress code.
As to why clubs have dress codes I could spend hours on the subject.
But, the histories don't matter.
What matters is ..... the club's policies/rules.
If you abide by them, you're welcome.
If you don't, you're not welcome.
If you're invited to a black tie affair and you show up in Bermuda shorts and a tee shirt you can't expect to be welcomed and embraced by your hosts.
It's a matter of common sense and common courtesy.
-
This is perhaps the scariest thought of all. When I invite someone into my home or to spend my time with, I do not set rules for their conduct. The invitation, in and of itself, should dictate to them that they may behave in whatever manner they feel appropriate. I am the one responsible for extending the invitation and in doing so, saying that I find their behavior both appropriate and in harmony with my values.
To impose rules and regulations upon how people are my guests is both controlling and impolite. What are we really saying by dictating behavior to people we want to spend time with and share our club? If I were to enjoy several rounds of golf with someone I met at a local muni by happenstance who just happens to always wear the same jeans and t-shirt and wish to invite him at my club - why is it that I have to dictate a dress code to him that happens to go against the very nature in which he enjoys the game, and the very nature in which he enjoys the game with me?
I think the idea that a person should "honor" their host by changing or adapting their behavior is absolute crap. The host is essentially saying, "I have, you do not, but you can have if you do this."
Kyle -
I have not met Bob Huntley. I know that he is a man that gets a great deal of respect from many on this site. I also know from his posts that he is a man with a very strong opinion when it comes to wearing hats indoors.
Are you telling me that you think he is imposing, controlling, and rude if he expects you to take your hat off in his home, but you are not imposing, controlling, and rude if you know of his strong feelings and choose to ignore them?
If you don't like the rules of the house - pick another house to visit.
Tim,
If I am not one to take my hat off indoors, then yes, it is.
If I know his strong feelings and choose to ignore them, then yes, I am.
I can assure any of you, that if I were to invite you to some social or golf function I would not be offended if you did not fit any expectation of mine, because well, I have none. The anonymity of the internet precludes me knowing any of you and there is an inherent risk in extending such invitations. However, I understand that I am ultimately responsible for the invitation and therefore ultimately responsible for whomever that person chooses to be.
I just don't think it's right to attempt to change or control that person to fit some standard I have unfairly set.
You all need to read more carefully, especially Pat.
I am saying that the club's policies do matter. I am saying that people should follow the dress codes as established.
All I'm asking, is WHY they exist, and what the possible consequences of such policies could ultimately be.
A lot of shallowness and judgment has been passed on this thread in my direction based on one simple question.
I also think it is a rather ringing indictment that very few have bothered to ask the question themselves and attempt to look at the other point of view, with all the brain power on this site, that's rather disappointing.
-
"All I'm asking, is WHY they exist, and what the possible consequences of such policies could ultimately be."
Kyle
You have been on this site long enough to know that the only answer ever given on this site to the first part of this question (even by intelligent commentators such as Pat Mucci and Bob Huntley is...
"Because."
...and the answer to the second part of this question can be boiled down to..
"Damned if I know, but maybe the sky will fall."
-
""...on the walk back to our car we met a young gentleman who was dressed in a manner that declares himself a misfit and thug."
Reminds me of another classic line: "You sir....are no gentleman.""
BillB:
Don't you just love the way they talked to each other back in the day?
That reminds me of Benjamin Disraeli.
In Parliament a back bencher on the other side of the aisle got up and said:
"Mr. Disraeli you might likely die on the gallows or of syphyllis."
Disraeli rose in response and said:
"Sir, that depends whether I embrace your politics or your mistress."
-
"Tom Paul/Mike Benham,
This is not about the government's right to infringe upon the privacy of private clubs or lives. This is about open discourse concerning a long held tradition and scrutinizing the image of the game presented by that tradition. I am not using this platform for political gain nor to advance a political idea. Leave politics out of this, it is not germane."
Kyle:
You're right, this is not about the government's right to infringe upon the privacy of private clubs or lives. When I mentioned the basic constitutional right of "privacy" (Freedom of Association) I intended to say it is not a government right but the flipside of that---eg an individual's right.
And because of that individual right and another or so (Freedom of speech ;) ) an open discourse on this subject or most any other subject is always possible as has been evidenced by the fact this thread is already six pages long. ;)
I guess anyone would have to say that the traditions of golf aren't much more than the accumulated preferences of people who form clubs and get together to play golf in and around those clubs.
If, in the opinions of some, the image of the game this presents needs to be discussed and scrutinized, then so be it.
If and when that happens I would expect there will always be differing opinions, and that's fine too.
But I suppose in and around some clubs the working modus operandi when it comes to something like a dress code might always be that old adage "When in Rome do as the Romans do".
At least I hope it will be because I believe in that individual right of freedom or association and all that it means, despite the fact that in many ways I still am a broken down old New York liberal. ;)
-
The anonymity of the internet precludes me knowing any of you and there is an inherent risk in extending such invitations.
This is one reason why dress codes exist, safety. If you acquiesce to the code you are initially seen as less of a threat.
"What you do speaks so loud that I cannot hear what you say."-RWEmerson
...what the possible consequences of such policies could ultimately be.
None. Check the golf landscape, there are many places that will let you wear most anything. If you came to Hotchkiss wearing cargo shorts and a Bob Marley T-shirt, with your dreadlocks sticking out the back side of a kerchief, I'd let you play, no problem mon.
..'course, something to remember:
"Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society"-MTwain
-
Private clubs are all about the Freedom of Association.
Dress codes are all about the Freedom of Non-Association.
-
Kyle,
Don't fight The Golden Rule...it applies everywhere...always has and always will.
-
Kyle,
Don't fight The Golden Rule...it applies everywhere...always has and always will.
How is Kyle fighting the Golden Rule when he questions the need for rules regarding the length of a golfer's socks?
-
All I'm asking, is WHY they exist, and what the possible consequences of such policies could ultimately be.
I used to wonder about that as well. Then one day, while playing with my brother at the only course in the town where I then lived, a couple of guys in cutoffs and tank tops drove by with a cooler of beer in the back of their cart.
My brother, who had been playing at country club for several years, said, "You know I forgot about guys like that, there aren't any where I play."
It took several weeks for it sink in that I preferred playing places where there weren't any tank tops and cutoffs.
In the intervening years I have played as either a member or season pass holder at course with and without dress codes, and with varying kinds of codes. (Where I am now, denim is permitted in the winter, for instance.)
Over that time, I find that most people DO act better when they are dressed better. And that's why some courses have a dress code.
Ken
-
It is only a matter of time where much like seat belt laws we will have recreational mandated dress codes to protect us from the sun. I am sure that Kyle has a dress code at work and still remember the first time I saw greenskeepers dressed nicely in all the same shirt. I really thought that added a touch of class to the course. I also just had a long conversation with an employee of mine about our dress codes at work. It does boil down to safety.
-
It is nigh on impossible for me to experience the Merions or Pine Valleys of the world in a different context than those imposed upon me by their rules.
That is not to say the rules are bad or that they do not have purpose, but at the same time, they do stifle those who seek to view things a bit differently and harmlessly.
Kyle, exactly how would you like to experience Merion or Pine Valley?
On a fit of whimsy. I'd like to feel that I could pop over there (as a member) and play golf without having to spend time in a locker room getting ready or 45 minutes at home dressing to the nines to fit the part.
I'd like to be able to look like a golfer by playing golf - not dressing in a certain way.
C'mon, now you are just exaggerating the point. ;)
It doesn't take 45 minutes to toss on a pair of pants or shorts and a collared golf shirt. Do jeans and a t-shirt defy the laws of physics and somehow get on your body quicker? :D
I haven't seen too many guys dressed to the nines at either course, just pretty normal golfwear. Heck...The walk from the clubhouse to the first tee at PV is just a sandy path, not a Paris Runway.
-
I find that most people DO act better when they are dressed better.
I think you're confusing cause and effect.
You don't think that dressing up those clowns in the Beer Cart would change the way they act -- do you?
-
The only arguement I have really heard is that the right to limit other people's liberties is equal to the right to have liberty. If you believe that, I hope you are not American. If you are, you missed it!
Doug
You might pause to consider the difference between public action and private, and then further reflect on what being American means.
:)
-
The "Golden Rule" is highly overrated. If you are a masochist does it not give you the liberty to harm other people?
-
I find that most people DO act better when they are dressed better.
I think you're confusing cause and effect.
You don't think that dressing up those clowns in the Beer Cart would change the way they act -- do you?
Actually, I do.
I believe that the expectations set by a dress code have an effect on people's behavior.
I also think that people's own self-image is changed when they have on different "uniforms."
I used to live in South Dakota, and the percentage of yuppies at the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally is amazing. But when they are in uniform, they take on some of the biker persona. They don't become Hell's Angels, but they sometimes act like one.
Nevertheless, also agree that having a dress code acts somewhat as an exclusionary device.
Ken
-
This thread is a silly exercise. I'm not sure why anyone is continuing to indulge a weltschmerz-stricken 24 year old whose existential musings seem prompted by his fiancee's queries, a cogent response to which he could not muster.
Dress codes are inherently arbitrary. It doesn't matter whether the prescribing institution is a golf club or the Boy Scouts of America. Yet Kyle has rationalized the latter organization, saying that it "promotes camraderie," falsely assuming that the dress codes of a a golf club be equally defensible as promoting the same or equal values.
Has this thread been reported to the moderator yet? There was the initial promise of some architectural tie-in, but none has been forthcoming, and given the logic employed by this thread's sponsor, I'm not holding my breath.
The existence of dress codes are silly, but that doesn't mean its worthy of discussion/debate.
-
SPDB,
With apologies, I do not have access to a computer while working so I can't pop in. Furthermore, since I'm being asked to connect the dots for everyone here, tying the culture of a country club into the effect of that culture on architecture is going to take some time. Therefore, the fact that thread has sat here for two days without such a connection is a testament to the patience of the moderators and hopefully, their respect for my opinion. I am gracious for the chance and opportunity.
As I've stated, the idea here is not to challenge the right of a club to set standards of action for their members. The mention of my continued participation in Boy Scouts was an attempt to point out that I accepted the right of the Boy Scouts of America to allow units to mandate uniforms for participation in their activities. I acknowledge this right, understand the purpose, and accept the consequences of such actions. I believe the uniform does help with programming and further the values we set to demonstrate and identify.
I also acknowledge the right of the golf or country club to mandate certain dress codes and codes of conducts for its members on its property. This, too, was never my point of contention. Where my problem lies is in the immediate acceptance of these standards and the seeming lack of understanding of the potential or already occurring circumstances of such a standard.
The point that I think is being missed here is that the country club, our attire and playing golf are 3 mutually exclusive things. I think we are all in agreement that we play and enjoy the game for reasons other than membership at a privileged club or dressing in a certain well-groomed manner. This is the first point that must be acknowledged in order to follow my line of thinking.
Point A: Golf is a game enjoyed by its participants for the mental, physical and emotional challenges presented over the course of a round.
I've heard mention that Golf has addictive qualities, and this certainly could be true. We find ourselves thinking about the game, the courses and challenges throughout the day. We sit in anticipation of our next round, especially when scheduled in advance. We relish the challenge of different or new courses. Indeed, one of the inherent novelties and attractions of the game is that there is ALWAYS somewhere "new" to play.
It is at this last point where two very important factors enter the equation. First, the motivation of the golfer to play elsewhere. Yes, there are many golfers who may play one course 97% of the time and enjoy the game as much as the next guy. However, rarely do we find a golfer who plays exclusively at one place. The second factor is the need for diversity, in order for the first factor mentioned in this paragraph to derive satisfaction, there must be diversity. Luckily, golf is played on courses of such a scale that simply changing the location provides enough diversity for most.
I do acknowledge that not every golfer thinks this way, but I think it's safe to say that every golfer who posts on this forum does. Why else would there be discussion of different golf courses and their designs. So perhaps I am speaking right now of roughly... 70% of golfers.
Now to the point. At some point, the golfer must make a choice and compromise. I grew up playing a municipal course where the only requirement of dress was soft spikes and a shirt with a collar. Any other attire was deemed appropriate and many of my early rounds were in after-school practice with a golf shirt untucked in the jeans I wore that day. Soon, I began wondering how my skills could be tested anywhere, as unlike basketball 10 feet on the east side is not 10 feet on the west side. Naturally, I sought out courses of similar "pedigree" as the muni I learned the game upon. This expanded my course experience to maybe... 5 or 6 places.
At the age of 15, not much mattered to me. I enjoyed golf. I would do anything to play golf and in order to acquiesce my desire to play more venues, I would have to make my first compromise:
Following a more stringent dress code.
The first thing to go was the denim, and the shirt got tucked in and a belt added. I began caddying, and on Mondays, I had to wear the caddy's uniform of a white shirt and khakis along with the assigned caddy's hat. This was, naturally, to make me stand out in case something happened in which case the privilege could be suspended, this is a side point but it represents the ultimate in my concession to dress codes.
I am willing to believe that MOST every poster on this board was exposed to golf before graduation from high school, or even college. I do not know this, but I think that people who are exposed to the game at a later age are not as intense about the game or the golf courses as we, the frequent contributor are.
The point is this: Golf at courses with dress codes will attract the type of person who is willing to concede a freedom (outside of monetary freedom) to play the game. This is where the issue lies. When a person is willing to concede one thing (no matter the perceived importance) that person WILL be tested as to how far the concessions can go.
Supported play, meaning with a caddy or golf cart during certain times makes a golfer either concede an extra fee to play, or limits the golfer to playing at certain times of a day.
Green committees will make decisions to change the playability or conditioning of the golf course because we concede those decisions to them.
Give the devil and inch, and he'll take a mile.
Naturally, at some point the members do say, "Stop!" but by that point, it's usually too late. The culture bred by such codes is that of "obedience or denial." We do not make waves because we fear the consequences of being excluded from that one "new to us" golf course. While I do understand that for many, the dress codes at country clubs do coincide with their everyday attire (in fact, through most of high school and college, this was true of me). However, I believe that one reason dress codes never get challenged is the fear of being branded and criticized as I have been in this thread, and denied access to other golf courses.
This type of culture excludes and even turns off an essential personality type to any group: the person who is willing to challenge an established norm for the sake of reevaluating the values of the group in question. The idea here is not to rid the country of country clubs with dress codes, nor to stomp on the time honored and accepted behaviors that surround the game but to ensure that we are constantly scrutinizing and re-evaluating those values for the sake of advancement and the freshness of ideas.
It is on that last point where the Boy Scout comparison falls through. The values and ethics of the Boy Scouts ARE constantly challenged and always have been. They are seen as dynamic and changing and open discourse is permitted and encouraged. Most country clubs do not fall into this category and those that do are challenged from the outside (Augusta National v. Martha Burk or the PGA of America v. Shoal Creek) and not from internal forces. One thing Hootie Johnson did right in his response to Martha Burk was to word the response in such a way that left the possibility of future female members at Augusta. I believe this is why only a handful of people showed up to protest as Augusta showed that it DOES constantly critique and re-evaluate its values - albeit at a slow pace.
With this being said, it no longer surprises me that golfers are willing to concede to playing dross and banal golf courses and that the idea of mass-produced golf courses from name design firms. It also no longer surprises me that PGA Tour Player signature designs that are so watered down and lacking in character are popular and able to make money. The heaviest and most influential institutions of the game, by their design, support concession and sameness by making golfers choose very early on to concede to a certain set of rules in order to satisfy a fundamental appeal of the game.
Now, this may seem too ideal, and I thought that it was until today when I realized that there exists a club where the only thing required to join is an interest in the game of golf and in golf architecture...
GOLFCLUBATLAS.com
Is it any small wonder that this forum, without pretense to any sort of conduct outside of accepted courtesies and devoid of all superficial behavior requirements like dress codes and other hoops through which to jump, is a haven for free thinking, creative application of golf course designs and deep relationships? We are a very diverse lot, and one of free thinkers and those willing to challenge...
...and it's a good thing.
-
Is it any small wonder that this forum, without pretense to any sort of conduct outside of accepted courtesies and devoid of all superficial behavior requirements...
This is where I think you're missing the point, Kyle. Yes, you don't know what the rest of us are wearing now. But within the context of a website, we are conducting ourselves in a way that is the on-line equivalent of a dress code -- because that makes this a much more pleasant site to visit than those internet food-fight sites.
At a golf course, a minimum regard for one's appearance is an accepted courtesy, too.
-
Is it any small wonder that this forum, without pretense to any sort of conduct outside of accepted courtesies and devoid of all superficial behavior requirements...
This is where I think you're missing the point, Kyle. Yes, you don't know what the rest of us are wearing now. But within the context of a website, we are conducting ourselves in a way that is the on-line equivalent of a dress code -- because that makes this a much more pleasant site to visit than those internet food-fight sites.
At a golf course, a minimum regard for one's appearance is an accepted courtesy, too.
Rick,
It's deeper than that and you know it. This website is devoid of any sort of superficial standards. We do not know anything about the other posters accept that they were accepted by Ran to post on this website. We know nothing else unless they tell us. The ONLY requirement to posting here is acceptance by Ran and a grasp of the English language.
We conduct ourselves in such a manner because we want to advance discussion. It is completely de facto and not de jure. Furthermore, nobody is compelled to post, respond or even read anything on this site. Everything done here is completely voluntary and of free will and mind. We simply agree to discuss one topic, and even then we are permitted to break out, post an OT thread and see whether or not it gets deleted. We are permitted to become testy and even challenge the generally accepted norms.
I believe it is you who are missing the point. The acceptability of dress is not in contention, it's the ability of the members to question and challenge it without retribution or a change in perception of that member's character.
Here we can do that with little fear of retribution or denial of privileges.
The thing is, there are posters on here who would not be able to join ANY private golf club, yet their opinions, thoughts and dedication to the game are probably more well-rounded and higher than the majority of private club golfers.
-
Your efforts on this thread are, in my mind, a complete waste of time, both yours and mine. I don't even want to bother explaining it to you as that would be a continued waste of my time. Frankly, I am surprised you bother to argue this position at all and even more so the manner in which you do.
-
Your efforts on this thread are, in my mind, a complete waste of time, both yours and ours. I don't even want to bother with explaining it to you as that would be a continued waste of my time. Frankly, I am surprised you bother to argue this position at all and even more so the manner in which you do.
Then why respond? And seriously Wayne, who are you to speak for 1500 people and countless other lurkers?
I'll call Tommy or Ran right now and get their opinions.
-
"Then why respond?"
That's the best question you've posed on this entire thread ;)
"And seriously Wayne, who are you to speak for 1500 people and countless other lurkers? "
You're right there, Kyle. I changed my wording.
-
"Then why respond?"
That's the best question you've posed on this entire thread ;)
...and deflect?
-
Kyle,
I think you are doing harm to your career given most of the money is at upscale clubs. Have you thought about the potential image you are projecting about yourself. It is not much different than the clothes people choose to wear.
-
Kyle,
I think you are doing harm to your career given most of the money is at upscale clubs. Have you thought about the potential image you are projecting about yourself. It is not much different than the clothes people choose to wear.
What image am I projecting?
-
"I'll call Tommy or Ran right now and get their opinions."
Come on, Kyle. Surely this issue doesn't rise to a level of importance that you need to reach out to them in their private time. Just consider it my opinion and it differs from yours.
-
"I'll call Tommy or Ran right now and get their opinions."
Come on, Kyle. Surely this issue doesn't rise to a level of importance that you need to reach out to them in their private time. Just consider it my opinion and it differs from yours.
I do consider it a difference of opinion, but you definitely overstepped a line by speaking for the rest of the board.
-
"I do consider it a difference of opinion, but you definitely overstepped a line by speaking for the rest of the board."
I replied that you were right and changed my wording. If you wish to continue holding it against me, have at it. I overstepped a line? Stop acting so childish and get over it. You've gone from merely absurd to utterly boring.
I'm off this thread. Post whatever reply you like. I won't be reading it.
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
Because you will look nicer when you follow the "appropriate dress codes"; and I am sick and tired of looking at people who do not meet my opinion of what "looks nice".
Appropriate dress codes have often evolved partly as a result of what makes people look dignified. In the distant past some of these dress codes could result in outfits that could be very uncomfortable, although very dignified. So the dress codes evolved to outfits that were more comfortable, but still dignified. Now they are continuing to evolve to only comfortable, but with out any dignity in the look.
What does this mean, dignified. The clothes have a cut, and hang on the body in a manner to accentuate the best features, and to cover-up the worst features. Many of the outfits strictly of comfort result in the wearer looking bad, dumpy, and unpleasant.
In the past the dress codes only considered what was best for society, but ignored the needs of the wearer. Eventually the dress codes took both into consideration. The current dress code (of wear what ever one chooses, or NO dress code) is an act of selfishness. All that matter is how I feel, but it does not matter how the result looks to others.
So now we have to see people wearing ill-fitting sweat suits at the grocery store, baggy over-sized shorts at nice department stores, t-shirts with holes at the library, and wearing hats in classrooms (and sometimes even in church).
How difficult can it be to wear a pair of nice slacks, a proper fitting shirt with a collar, and shoes not falling apart. It does not require a visit to Brooks Brothers to look nice. Even Target, Marshalls, or even many used clothing shops have these clothes.
Dress codes that do exist typically evolve through society’s selection of what is good. A rejection of dress codes has evolved through individuals ignoring any societal obligation, no matter how minimal it impacts those individuals to follow society’s dress code. It has not been unusual for societal codes to be overly constraining on individuals. Typically – sometimes slowly – those codes evolve to something improved. However, there is a difference between an individual attempting to “adjust” a societal code to something that works better for both the individual and society, as opposed to when an individual chooses to just ignore how one’s behavior affects the other members of society.
-
Why do I need to follow dress codes to play golf?
Because you will look nicer when you follow the "appropriate dress codes"; and I am sick and tired of looking at people who do not meet my opinion of what "looks nice".
Appropriate dress codes have often evolved partly as a result of what makes people look dignified. In the distant past some of these dress codes could result in outfits that could be very uncomfortable, although very dignified. So the dress codes evolved to outfits that were more comfortable, but still dignified. Now they are continuing to evolve to only comfortable, but with out any dignity in the look.
What does this mean, dignified. The clothes have a cut, and hang on the body in a manner to accentuate the best features, and to cover-up the worst features. Many of the outfits strictly of comfort result in the wearer looking bad, dumpy, and unpleasant.
In the past the dress codes only considered what was best for society, but ignored the needs of the wearer. Eventually the dress codes took both into consideration. The current dress code (of wear what ever one chooses, or NO dress code) is an act of selfishness. All that matter is how I feel, but it does not matter how the result looks to others.
So now we have to see people wearing ill-fitting sweat suits at the grocery store, baggy over-sized shorts at nice department stores, t-shirts with holes at the library, and wearing hats in classrooms (and sometimes even in church).
How difficult can it be to wear a pair of nice slacks, a proper fitting shirt with a collar, and shoes not falling apart. It does not require a visit to Brooks Brothers to look nice. Even Target, Marshalls, or even many used clothing shops have these clothes.
Dress codes that do exist typically evolve through society’s selection of what is good. A rejection of dress codes has evolved through individuals ignoring any societal obligation, no matter how minimal it impacts those individuals to follow society’s dress code. It has not been unusual for societal codes to be overly constraining on individuals. Typically – sometimes slowly – those codes evolve to something improved. However, there is a difference between an individual attempting to “adjust” a societal code to something that works better for both the individual and society, as opposed to when an individual chooses to just ignore how one’s behavior affects the other members of society.
I am sensing some sarcasm in this post, I just don't understand why it is so long. Usually sarcastic posts are only a line or two, oh well.
-
I think I've got it all figured out now. Kyle and Shivas had dinner two weeks ago and made a bet to see who could start a post about something they care little about and then keep the argument going for the most number of posts in an attempt to surpass the arts and crafts thread.
They are both doing quite well.
I was following along in an amused manner until Kyle got called out on Boy Scout uniforms and decided to defend them in the midst of all this dress code hoopla. That's what alerted me to the reality of the situation.
Smile. You're on candid camera! ;D ;D ;D
I should post this on the Ted Robinson thread as well to be fair. I've just given Kyle one extra notch.
-
Okay Tim,
If you're going to post that, I'm going to call you out on it.
Why is the Boy Scout thing even germane to this discussion?
How did it discredit what I had to say?
I should note that Shivas and I had quite the conversation on his camera thread too... ;)
-
Kyle,
I think you are doing harm to your career given most of the money is at upscale clubs. Have you thought about the potential image you are projecting about yourself. It is not much different than the clothes people choose to wear.
What image am I projecting?
You are projecting an image of someone who puts their needs above that of the team. That I know for sure and could speculate on much more but don't see the need to get hurtfull. I know that if I was hiring a superintendent I would want someone who understands the value of presentation. You have given me the impression you don't.
In golf course set up image just might be everything. It is without question huge when hiring an inexperienced young person. I usually know when I watch someone park their car if I am going to hire them or not. Yes, the interview process does start earlier than most people think.
-
It seems pretty obvious that the Boy Scout outfit is a dress code. What if all those boys decided they felt more like jeans and a t-shirt or athletic shorts and a football jersey or a bathing suit with no shirt on any given day or whatever the heck you said a few pages back? Heck, at least on a golf course I can choose between brand, color, material, and style of golf shirt.
I think you cited "camraderie" or some other rationalization like that. Are young children so mindless that they can't feel like a team (or a pack) if they aren't all dressed the same?
I have no problem with the Boy Scouts having a dress code, but what a double stadard to be completely okay with it in that environment and yet deny its right to exist on a golf course where the decision is made by the owner and operator. How are we to expect the creative masses to join the Boy Scouts if they are skipping out on the golf experience simply due to constrained clothing choices?
-
John, have you read BLINK. The interview process doesn't even need to take place. Just break into their place when they aren't home.
-
John, have you read BLINK. The interview process doesn't even need to take place. Just break into their place when they aren't home.
No..I don't read anything. Is your avitar the Obama logo?
-
Kyle,
I think you are doing harm to your career given most of the money is at upscale clubs. Have you thought about the potential image you are projecting about yourself. It is not much different than the clothes people choose to wear.
What image am I projecting?
You are projecting an image of someone who puts their needs above that of the team. That I know for sure and could speculate on much more but don't see the need to get hurtfull. I know that if I was hiring a superintendent I would want someone who understands the value of presentation. You have given me the impression you don't.
In golf course set up image just might be everything. It is without question huge when hiring an inexperienced young person. I usually know when I watch someone park their car if I am going to hire them or not. Yes, the interview process does start earlier than most people think.
John,
Questioning a convention and asking why can't I, and being a person who puts their needs above that of a team are two very different things.
Would I want to work for someone who can't see the difference? I don't know.
Have I done dumb shit?
Yes, of course.
Would past employers question my ability to be a superintendent?
Yes, I know it for sure as they've told me. I've messed up because of image and getting careless more than I care to think about. People who have posted on this thread KNOW this, and have been affected by it.
I learn, I move on, and I know my deficiencies and strengths. Questioning long held authorities for the sake of evaluating my values, and those of an institution, is not one of them though.
Thanks for answering though, and yes, I agree that a lot of evaluating a person happens by watching what they do when they think nobody is looking. But it works both ways, and dress codes only mask that.
-
Kyle,
I think you are doing harm to your career given most of the money is at upscale clubs. Have you thought about the potential image you are projecting about yourself. It is not much different than the clothes people choose to wear.
What image am I projecting?
You are projecting an image of someone who puts their needs above that of the team. That I know for sure and could speculate on much more but don't see the need to get hurtfull. I know that if I was hiring a superintendent I would want someone who understands the value of presentation. You have given me the impression you don't.
In golf course set up image just might be everything. It is without question huge when hiring an inexperienced young person. I usually know when I watch someone park their car if I am going to hire them or not. Yes, the interview process does start earlier than most people think.
Doesn't Apache Stronghold essentially wear jeans and a t-shirt every day? Haven't many on this site commented that he's one of the nicest guys they've seen in the desert? He's a great guy, but he doesn't dress nicely from what I've heard.
Would people respect him more if he wore proper golf attire?
There's your GCA tie-in.
-
Kyle,
I said the image you are projecting not the image you are trying to project. Until you own your own course I am not sure you can afford to be so truthful in a public forum. You basically said exactly all the same things on the camera thread. It is not good.
-
It seems pretty obvious that the Boy Scout outfit is a dress code. What if all those boys decided they felt more like jeans and a t-shirt or athletic shorts and a football jersey or a bathing suit with no shirt on any given day or whatever the heck you said a few pages back? Heck, at least on a golf course I can choose between brand, color, material, and style of golf shirt.
I think you cited "camraderie" or some other rationalization like that. Are young children so mindless that they can't feel like a team (or a pack) if they aren't all dressed the same?
I have no problem with the Boy Scouts having a dress code, but what a double stadard to be completely okay with it in that environment and yet deny its right to exist on a golf course where the decision is made by the owner and operator. How are we to expect the creative masses to join the Boy Scouts if they are skipping out on the golf experience simply due to constrained clothing choices?
Tim,
You read nothing of what I posted in my lengthy post on page 6 and it's showing.
The Boy Scouts' values and ethics are under constant scrutiny and evaluation. Discourse and conversation are encouraged and welcome. Changes are made and adapted and Scout Troops are free to determine the level of uniforming suitable for them and their program.
The uniform is not a barrier of entry and advancement is not denied, nor is access, based on a lack of uniform. Furthermore, if a troop determines that uniforming is important, they are encouraged to provide the means for those who cannot uniform themselves through subsidization and uniform exchanges - because teenagers grow out of uniforms.
I could go on, but I think you can see how this is nowhere near the stringency of a country club. Don't get me started about the differences between non-profit scout troops, and for profit pro shops.
-
John, have you read BLINK. The interview process doesn't even need to take place. Just break into their place when they aren't home.
No..I don't read anything. Is your avitar the Obama logo?
What if I said yes?
Reading is overrated anyways as I'm sure you already know.
-
I was honestly not being sarcastic.
-
I like Obama, he is my Senator from Illinois. I saw the same logo behind him in a speech and think it is a nice design. I'm impressed if it is his logo and original design for his campaign.
-
"All I'm asking, is WHY they exist, and what the possible consequences of such policies could ultimately be."
Kyle
You have been on this site long enough to know that the only answer ever given on this site to the first part of this question (even by intelligent commentators such as Pat Mucci and Bob Huntley is...
"Because."
Rich,
I could explain and expound on the answer well beyond "because", but I choose not to.
I thought that common sense and common courtesy summed up the answer.
If I have to go into great detail, historical perspectives, human nature and behavior it could take days and I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so.
If one asks "why" they probably won't understand or agree with my response, so why waste my time, it's far too precious.[/color]
...and the answer to the second part of this question can be boiled down to..
"Damned if I know, but maybe the sky will fall."
I looked out the window and the only thing falling right now is rain. However, it's supposed to turn to snow in a few hours. ;D[/color]
-
Common courtesy doesn't exist. To make courtesy common, it has to be dictated.
Joe
-
Tim,
You read nothing of what I posted in my lengthy post on page 6 and it's showing.
Guilty as charged. I gave up on page 2 or 3 and then joined back in.
The Boy Scouts' values and ethics are under constant scrutiny and evaluation. Discourse and conversation are encouraged and welcome. Changes are made and adapted and Scout Troops are free to determine the level of uniforming suitable for them and their program.
The uniform is not a barrier of entry and advancement is not denied, nor is access, based on a lack of uniform. Furthermore, if a troop determines that uniforming is important, they are encouraged to provide the means for those who cannot uniform themselves through subsidization and uniform exchanges - because teenagers grow out of uniforms.
Golf courses can determine the level of uniforming suitable for them as well. I don't think anyone can dispute that it is a course by course decision.
So, you'd be okay with the golf course requiring a dress code if they provided the clothes? That's not consistent with your comments about wanting to play Pine Valley in your PJs (I'm taking artistic liberties now.)
I could go on, but I think you can see how this is nowhere near the stringency of a country club. Don't get me started about the differences between non-profit scout troops, and for profit pro shops.
Again, if your issue is accessibility to the game due to cost, then there are several more pressing barriers of entry to golf than attire. Go to Goodwill and buy a second-hand pair of pants.
I thought your issue was that we are driving creative forces away from the game due to dress requirements. How is this any different in the Scouting world if the local troop leader chooses to enfrorce a dress code - whether it is provided free of charge or not?
-
Scouting is not a program designed to advance creativity.
Neither is golf, but a common complaint is that new golf courses are banal and bland, and that established classics are commonly dumbed down and denuded of all the truly creative elements that made them special in the first place.
Scouting's means are consistent with their desired ends.
Golf Club's means are not necessarily consistent with those ends.
-
Neither is golf, but a common complaint is that new golf courses are banal and bland, and that established classics are commonly dumbed down and denuded of all the truly creative elements that made them special in the first place.
Common complaint? Where?
Joe
-
I like Obama, he is my Senator from Illinois. I saw the same logo behind him in a speech and think it is a nice design. I'm impressed if it is his logo and original design for his campaign.
Yes, its a great design with some clever imagery. He is a hell of a speaker too, he was at Arizona State a few weeks ago and the place was packed, I think 6-8 thousand people showed up.
-
Neither is golf, but a common complaint is that new golf courses are banal and bland, and that established classics are commonly dumbed down and denuded of all the truly creative elements that made them special in the first place.
Common complaint? Where?
Joe
Well, here. Sorry, the context of common is in terms of the poster on GCA, which is a significant minority of the golfing community.
-
I prefer to look at dress codes as liberating: one less decision I have to make. I make too many as it is, it feels good not to have to make another.
Maybe that's why I like black tie events so much.
-
I prefer to look at dress codes as liberating: one less decision I have to make. I make too many as it is, it feels good not to have to make another.
Maybe that's why I like black tie events so much.
Austin Heller practically had to staple a tuxedo on to Howard Roark.
-
I'm no Howard Roark, I'm only me.
-
I'm no Howard Roark, I'm only me.
Good boy, you get it. Can't wait to actually join you for some golf some time, and because of you, I now thoroughly enjoy Mexican cuisine.
-
Common courtesy doesn't exist. To make courtesy common, it has to be dictated.
Joe,
When I'm seated on a packed bus or train, noone dictates that I get up and give my seat to a woman who's standing, it's merely common courtesy imbued in me by my parents.[/color]
-
The Google search for "boy scout creativity" came back with 741,000 results, most of which on the first couple pages seem to be relevant the Scouts promoting creativity.
Do country clubs require a dress code for their architects while creating the course? Does Doak really have to show up in a golf shirt and pants to drive the bulldozer around or to shape a bunker? Was Pete Dye required to wade around in the swamps at what is now Sawgrass in golf attire?
If there is a common complaint about banal and bland golf courses on this site, then I would think that would be directed at the architects and not at the golfers.
You are shaping the argument as it pleases you. I am as well at the moment, but I'm just doing so in the interest of keeping this on level ground. As others have pointed out here, this thread isn't going to solve anything, but I enjoy a good debate.
-
I'm no Howard Roark, I'm only me.
Good boy, you get it. Can't wait to actually join you for some golf some time, and because of you, I now thoroughly enjoy Mexican cuisine.
One thing about Mexican cuisine, it is thorough.
Joe
-
Common courtesy doesn't exist. To make courtesy common, it has to be dictated.
Joe,
When I'm seated on a packed bus or train, noone dictates that I get up and give my seat to a woman who's standing, it's merely common courtesy imbued in me by my parents.[/color]
And I would contend that your level of courtesy may not be common.
Joe
-
The Google search for "boy scout creativity" came back with 741,000 results, most of which on the first couple pages seem to be relevant the Scouts promoting creativity.
Do country clubs require a dress code for their architects while creating the course? Does Doak really have to show up in a golf shirt and pants to drive the bulldozer around or to shape a bunker? Was Pete Dye required to wade around in the swamps at what is now Sawgrass in golf attire?
If there is a common complaint about banal and bland golf courses on this site, then I would think that would be directed at the architects and not at the golfers.
You are shaping the argument as it pleases you. I am as well at the moment, but I'm just doing so in the interest of keeping this on level ground. As others have pointed out here, this thread isn't going to solve anything, but I enjoy a good debate.
No he doesn't, but he has to change the 18th at Beechtree to make it more appealing for the clubhouse...
That attitude has to start somewhere, and it's because nobody tells these people to shove it when it comes to asking others for concessions.
-
Pat
Thanks for your reply. I tenbd to agree with everything Joe H. has said on this thread, plus.....
Like most people of our generation, I had "common" courtesy drilled into me when I was young too, and most of it still sticks. Some doesn't, such as always rushing forward to open a door for a woman. I'd still do it for my dear Aunt Rhoda (of she were still alive) but I learned nearly 40 years ago that trying to do the same thing when a one-legged aggrieved feminist tries to hop in front of you requires that it is you who must accept the courtesy.
I was fortunate enough to have been brought up by iconoclastic parents who understood the hypocrisy of those who used "courtesies" as shields from rather than windows into reality.
Speaking of windows, how many of us who believe that dressing "as the Romans do" is a "common courtesy" can view "Caddyshack" without relizing that, as Swift said: "Satire is a glass (mirror) in which we see everybody but ourselves?" Would you rather play a round with Carl Spackler or Judge Smails?
Would common courtesy not ask, nay even demand, that we respect the dress sense of others when inviting them to our clubs?
-
If you decide you want to play at courses with dress codes, then you have to follow their rules.
Seven pages (7!) about apparel, from a sport that gave us Tom Weiskopf, and it's all summed and settled in Dan's remark on page one (1!).
-
If you decide you want to play at courses with dress codes, then you have to follow their rules.
Seven pages (7!) about apparel, from a sport that gave us Tom Weiskopf, and it's all summed and settled in Dan's remark on page one (1!).
Slag, swing and a miss on the point.
-
Kyle:
I certainly hope you don't have to worry about the moderators of this website taking this thread off. While it isn't exactly about golf course architecture, so what? It is about something pretty interesting to golf and its culture in the over-all. If the moderators or the contributors to this site can't handle that I think this website will become unnecessarlily restricting---not a good thing.
You said:
"Where my problem lies is in the immediate acceptance of these standards and the seeming lack of understanding of the potential or already occurring circumstances of such a standard.
The point that I think is being missed here is that the country club, our attire and playing golf are 3 mutually exclusive things. I think we are all in agreement that we play and enjoy the game for reasons other than membership at a privileged club or dressing in a certain well-groomed manner. This is the first point that must be acknowledged in order to follow my line of thinking."
In that case I'm not going to continue to follow your line of thinking because I'm not willing to acknowledge the mutual exclusivity of those three things.
I'm still not that certain why you have a problem with the acceptance of a standard such as a dress code at some clubs or what your problem is with the potential or already occuring circumstances of such a standard.
On the other hand, you seem to give some evidence in the next paragraph of what you think the problems are---eg that the "country club", "our attire" and "playing golf" are three mutually exclusive things.
I would suggest that is not necessarily the case at all, particularly in some clubs. In some clubs the idea is something like the extended family concept and those who belong seem to feel some comfort in that fact.
Perhaps it all goes back to the fact that man is something of a tribal animal---that he feels somewhat safe in the community of those he feels think and act like him and that that idea gives him comfort that he's protected in some way from others who he feels don't think at all as he does.
I think I understand where you're coming from but you may need to consider more carefully that golf, like life, is a great big thing and there really is room in it for a whole lot of diversity.
Only problem is that diversity may never exist in the same place or in all places at the same time.
It's all part of the "Big World" theory, I guess. ;)
I think you've made your point but you probably need to recognize that not everyone will agree with it.
-
I'll offer an opinion on the subject.
Just to note, I always dress in my "proper golf attire", but I really am more with Kyle on this. I could care less.
If we did take the brakes off of the golf dress code entirely I could see that a LOT of sport clothing manufacturers will come up with some ingenious, functional, comfortable, and expensive things for us to wear. In the end I think the uiniform would once again define itself and though proper golf attire would once again change by definition, those who don't abide will still be frowned upon.
On the other hand, most guys I see in other foursomes on my weekend round are fat middle aged guys with saggy butts. You are not going to force them out of their pleated khaki pants and into jeans for all the gorse in Scotland. I this case, once again the clothing is functional at a certain level.
-
I like Obama, he is my Senator from Illinois. I saw the same logo behind him in a speech and think it is a nice design. I'm impressed if it is his logo and original design for his campaign.
Yes, its a great design with some clever imagery. He is a hell of a speaker too, he was at Arizona State a few weeks ago and the place was packed, I think 6-8 thousand people showed up.
:-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X etc
Doug [who thinks we need a political forum for the site]