In what way are you a golf snob?

« **Reply #175 on:** August 19, 2007, 08:06:50 PM »

Dave

My reason for suggesting the termination is that the topic has moved far far beyond about being a golf snob and has entered quite personal areas. Those of religion,marriage and personal beliefs. Debating cheater lines or how a sand trap is build is great for a site like this. Telling someone they should stay or not say in a bad marriage is not.

I am sorry if you found my onion offensive I did not intend it to be.

John

« **Reply #176 on:** August 19, 2007, 09:08:23 PM »

Shivas,

A widow with two young children marries a man who turns out to be a pedophile.

And you and JakaB think she should remain true to her vows and remain married despite the terrible harm that has or may come to her children ?

« **Reply #177 on:** August 19, 2007, 09:33:54 PM »

Thanks Dave

I see your position.

My issue is what rule is broken? A divorce is allowed. It certainly not be a good outcome but totally allowed by the law of our land.

Much as the Rules of Golf we may not like or agree with all of them but they are the rules.

« **Reply #178 on:** August 19, 2007, 09:54:22 PM »

In golf we have the Rules of Golf that define and state the rules we play by. In marriage it is not so clear we have no such book.

I have had friends who did not see it as wrong to cheat on the spouse. I find it very wrong but that is how I am.

I guess where we differ is I do not see a black and white rule book on marriage as I do with golf.

Second I do not see golf as any where as serious an undertaking as marriage.

Using golf as an analogy for life strikes le as wrong just as using war as an analogy for the NFL. At a 50,00 foot view it makes for great conversation but on the ground they are not the same. I guess I see golf and marriage they same way.

« **Reply #179 on:** August 20, 2007, 12:20:42 AM »

C'mon, its certainly possible for a divorce to happen even if both parties follow all "the rules" (whatever those are) What if the man and woman get married in agreement at the time on whether or not they want children, then later one of them changes their mind? Or is it again the rules to change your mind about something like that when you are 10 years older and wiser than when you got married?

« **Reply #180 on:** August 20, 2007, 07:47:58 AM »

Bankruptcy - It is not uncommon for a membership committee to deny a man who has gone bankrupt. Does he also get a pass from the same people who support divorce? I don't see the difference in that it is just another form of failure that may have happened because of unforetold events.

« **Reply #181 on:** August 20, 2007, 08:08:32 AM »

Shivas,

What you fail to understand is that human beings are unique individuals prior to entering into marriage.

The act of marriage isn't going to reconfigure their internal structure, the way their brain works or doesn't work and their character.

Some are flawed beyond the ability to recover.
Some camoflage those flaws and some partners aren't capable of detecting the warning signs generated by the flaws.

And, in many cases, those inherent flaws, which aren't going to magically disappear when they say, "I do" prevent them from playing by the rules. They are simply incapable of doing so.

If you married a woman and six years into the marriage she became criminally insane, (and I can understand that after she'd been married to you for six years

) and she was institutionalized for 25 years to life, should you remain married to her ?

In this case, playing by the rules was beyond her ability.
Completely Involuntary on her part.

Why should someone who's unexpectedly exposed to those serious flaws remain in a destructive relationship ?

Marriage doesn't change one's inherent qualities and characteristics, despite the fact that many enter into marriage with the expectation that they can bring about changes they'd like to see.

P.S. How do you feel about arranged marriages ?

« **Reply #182 on:** August 20, 2007, 10:29:13 AM »

Quote from: Sean Arble on August 18, 2007, 11:52:36 AM

Quote from: Tom Huckaby on August 17, 2007, 05:51:49 PM
Sean:

If you really do believe this absolute, with no qualifications and no possible reasons to deviate from it:

read John to say that he respected divorced men less than non-divorced men. That doesn't seem harsh to me if one truly believes in marriage and what it takes to make one work.

Then well, we shall once again agree to disagree. I just can't believe any reasonable person would believe that, nor make number of marriages a basis for giving respect.

In any case, I leave you in the capable hands of Mr. Huntley, who you obviously must respect less than me, given I've been married to the same woman for 15 years and he's been married more than once.

And God help you if you respect me more than him. I mean that with 100% sincerity.

TH

AsHuckster

I can honestly say that I don't follow your post. I have never met you or Bob so there isn't any sort of "respect" question involved. I don't know either of you so I couldn't draw any conclusions about any aspect of your lives.

Ciao

Sean:

I thought my post was pretty easily understandable. But I do like and respect you (as much as one can regarding someone he's only "met" though this electronic medium), so I shall try again.

Your post that I quoted says to me that you absolutely respect more those who are married to the same woman, never have been divorced, than those who have been divorced.

If you do mean that - absolutely - than that means you respect Bob Huntley less than me, as he has been divorced and I've been married only once, to the same woman, for nearly 15 years now.

You can follow that logic, right?

So I ask you - is it that absolute?

Because many people here have met each of me and Bob Huntley. And they have to be peeing their pants laughing at the thought that I deserve more respect than him.

Capiche?

I'm hoping you don't see this as an absolute. I gotta say that a lot of the posts in this thread are scaring me.

Shivas - of course I've been married only once too, as has damn near everyone I know from the Catholic school world. I just have to say taking such a strong position on this to the tune that all who have been divorced should somehow be looked down upon is pretty scary. I know you can't mean that.

Can you?

TH

ps - as for playing by the rules all the time, just try it on a crowded public course on a weekend. Just try walking back to the tee after an unexpected lost ball or OB. This is one of those ideas that's great in principle, rather far-fetched in practice.

pss - I'm burying this way down here, because tooting my own horn is not my style, but well... I am rather proud, as for a golfer of my lack of skill two club championships in 4 years is a pretty nice achievement. Click on this link if interested:
http://www.stmgc.com/

« **Reply #183 on:** August 20, 2007, 10:48:17 AM »

David

On the rules of marriage the statement that they are well known is really an issue of local culture. In certain areas multiple wives is quite acceptable. I would say here it is not. I think I have a pretty good sense of what is right and wrong in my marriage but I am not sure I can say that about all marriages.

Pat notes a key point about people entering marriage with their own unique personalities and quirks. Many times they do a good job in hiding those that may be viewed as less than good. The example of a battered wife is a good one, many times this occurs after the I Do's are stated and real life starts. I do not agree with running to a lawyer for a divorce after every fight or disagreement, it is incumbent upon the partners to try to work out differences and overcome them. Sad is it is many times it is not possible and the marriage really ceases to exists. They may well physically stay together but are not married. Marriage to me is far more than a man and a woman sharing a house and jointly raising children.

I think your comment in marriage "measure twice cut once" is genius the problem in getting married is you cannot always see all of the board you are attempting to cut. I pled guilty to stealing your line with my son over the weekend, but I did give you credit

« **Reply #184 on:** August 20, 2007, 12:03:34 PM »

Quote from: John Kavanaugh on August 17, 2007, 05:15:31 PM

Quote from: Mike Benham on August 17, 2007, 05:13:51 PM
Quote from: Brad Swanson on August 16, 2007, 11:05:58 PM

... but I am the poster boy of having a few tees stored in every nook and cranny of our house.

I have numerous red pencils with erasers from a not to be named golf club ... the quality of the pencils are quite good and come in quite handy when driving in your car and keeping in your pocket when doing home improvement projects.

Perhaps I should send some to Sergio and point out how the eraser works.

Whew...I thought the most handsome man on the board was gonna chime in on divorce and I was going to have to say that with his looks I couldn't stay married either.

JK - I assume you are talking about Brad and your man-crush is now public ...

« **Reply #185 on:** August 20, 2007, 12:23:24 PM »

Quote from: John Keenan on August 20, 2007, 10:48:17 AM

David

On the rules of marriage the statement that they are well known is really an issue of local culture. In certain areas multiple wives is quite acceptable. I would say here it is not. I think I have a pretty good sense of what is right and wrong in my marriage but I am not sure I can say that about all marriages.

Pat notes a key point about people entering marriage with their own unique personalities and quirks. Many times they do a good job in hiding those that may be viewed as less than good. The example of a battered wife is a good one, many times this occurs after the I Do's are stated and real life starts. I do not agree with running to a lawyer for a divorce after every fight or disagreement, it is incumbent upon the partners to try to work out differences and overcome them. Sad is it is many times it is not possible and the marriage really ceases to exists. They may well physically stay together but are not married. Marriage to me is far more than a man and a woman sharing a house and jointly raising children.

I think your comment in marriage "measure twice cut once" is genius the problem in getting married is you cannot always see all of the board you are attempting to cut. I pled guilty to stealing your line with my son over the weekend, but I did give you credit

John,

If a man has been divorced/bankrupt or shot an eye out while loading a BB gun it is not so much a judge of character but more a judge of his ablilty to evaluate the risks associated with a given situation. It is just a small piece of the fabric of one mans life. What is funny to me is that I do not believe it is legal for me to ask a potential employee if he has ever been divorced or blind in one eye but I can still discriminate against the person who has been bankrupt. There are so few things left that a man can discriminate against it begins to take the honesty out of the interview process. I was even quoted in a book once for saying I would never hire a golfer...I would never say the same about a divorcee.

note: The name if the book is "GOLF...it's a funny game" by David Scaletti. If you want the quote buy the book.

« **Reply #186 on:** August 20, 2007, 01:13:47 PM »

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on August 19, 2007, 05:07:48 PM

Tim Pitner,

Defining Golf as a "Gentleman's" game is neither classist nor sexist. Let's just chalk it up to your not getting it.

Okay Pat, that sounds reasonable.

I think we can agree that the term "gentleman" excludes women. The term is defined as "a man of noble birth or superior social position" or "a man of independent means who does not need to have a wage-paying job." Thus, the classism of which I speak. When considering some of the obnoxious snobbery that unfortunately is associated with golf, I think it's best to avoid loaded (not to mention hackneyed) phrases like "a gentleman's game." With that said, I obviously agree that golf is a game of character, integrity and good manners.

« **Reply #187 on:** August 20, 2007, 01:20:56 PM »

Quote from: Shivas Schmidt on August 20, 2007, 01:06:24 PM

Quote from: Patrick_Mucci on August 20, 2007, 08:08:32 AM

P.S. How do you feel about arranged marriages ?

I think arranged marriages have a lower percentage of divorce precisely because the parties don't go in with types of false expectations that you've raised above.

David,

Somewhere in the English Book of Common Prayer, I believe there is mention of the words, "to love, honour and obey." I daresay that the modern version differs somewhat in the "obey" part but surely an arranged marriage cannot be based on love? Having seen some the grotesque unions fostered upon young women in various parts of the world I cannot believe you honestly feel that way.

Bob

« **Reply #188 on:** August 20, 2007, 01:25:32 PM »

Sean:

That's much better. I guess this turned on how one interprets the word "respect", which I was looking at as binary - that is, you respect someone or you don't. Your last post explains your position much better, that it's just something that you choose to go into the measure of a person. I still don't think I'd ever look down on anyone simply because he's been divorced, but reading your post here I don't think you would either. It's just something that happens, and there can be explanations. Fair enough.

Your previous posts scared me a bit.

TH

« **Reply #189 on:** August 20, 2007, 01:33:52 PM »

Wow. Lots of judging going on here.

Not sure how anyone can make blanket statements regarding divorce since each one is unique. Probably has something to do with your religious beliefs which is fine. They're your beliefs. But I'd have much more respect for people who kept their negative comments regarding certain beliefs to themselves. Especially on a golf course architecture website discussion group.

I am not divorced (not that it would or should matter regarding anything, expcept for getting hired by John K, and being respected by some on this site) but I certainly find these comments towards divorcees offensive.

« **Reply #190 on:** August 20, 2007, 01:45:24 PM »

Thanks man.

As for the rest, I kinda glossed over the aiding and abetting.

« **Reply #191 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:03:17 PM »

How many different logos of top tier clubs can someone where at one time without being obnoxious? I guess there is a maximum of five with a hat, belt, shirt, shorts and socks. I don't think I've seen anyone wearing five different logos, but I have seen four at once. Logo socks are goofy in any case and I would make fun of anyone wearing them.

Let's see, I could put together a Pine Valley shirt, Merion shorts, Gulph Mills belt and a Shinnecock hat. That would be pretty obnoxious, right? I don't think I've ever mixed more than two logos (I usually don't wear a hat) and with my gut I can't even tell if I'm wearing a belt anyway

What say other snobs?

« **Reply #192 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:05:15 PM »

Quote from: Michael Blake on August 20, 2007, 01:33:52 PM

Wow. Lots of judging going on here.

Not sure how anyone can make blanket statements regarding divorce since each one is unique. Probably has something to do with your religious beliefs which is fine. They're your beliefs. But I'd have much more respect for people who kept their negative comments regarding certain beliefs to themselves. Especially on a golf course architecture website discussion group.

I am not divorced (not that it would or should matter regarding anything, expcept for getting hired by John K, and being respected by some on this site) but I certainly find these comments towards divorcees offensive.

Whose religion believes in hurting children? I hate the religion card being played in these arguments.

« **Reply #193 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:09:35 PM »

Can we please put an end to this off topic discussion about divorce. Is there a divorceatlas.com that you guys can take this to?

Back to being a GOLF snob. I don't like GCA.com threads where the guy who starts it is 75% or more of the replies. Go talk to yourself somewhere else or come up with a more interesting topic!

« **Reply #194 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:14:55 PM »

Clayman started the thread. I thought Shivas did an amazing job tying in divorce with the rules of golf. I just met my wife and her parents for lunch partly because of reflection about how I follow the rules of golf so much better then the rules of marriage. Of course I plan on getting me some for the trouble.

« **Reply #195 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:27:10 PM »

Wayne, I couldnt agree more about the Logo issue, it is preety hilarious to see what some people come up with!

I refuse to play with anyone wearing jeans, plain and simple.

« **Reply #196 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:36:00 PM »

Quote from: Shivas Schmidt on August 20, 2007, 02:29:47 PM

Hey, I didn't bring this topic up...I just saw it and opined on the connection somebody else brought up...

I would like to see if there is a topic that can be brought up that we can't somehow tie into golf. I love the golf analogy. To turn it around I recently accused out super of practicing Mommy Maintenance because everytime a green gets sick he installs a fan to blow on it. I did say after a few drinks that Jesus didn't bring back Lazarus by going in the cave and blowing him but that doesn't work as well in mixed company. A new thread for you Shivas.

« **Reply #197 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:40:18 PM »

J.B. Wayne knows that.

Thanks Wayne.

I do tend to agree, especially when the input isn't furthering the discourse. Just concurring.

The over logoed was introduced to me in Reilly's "Missing Links".

I suppose we could encourage, starting from the hat down, gca afficionados wear their Top 4 list.

On the subject of golf being a gentleman's game, I'd argue that golf strives to be a gentleman's game. Both the film titled "Gentleman's game" and Rick's book "Missing Links" made the point that gentlemen are not defined by the courses they play, or belong to. I can confirm that the core group of golfer's at Pacific Grove Muni are amongst the most respectful of the game and other's, I know of.

« **Reply #198 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:50:58 PM »

Haven't read the other 6 pages of this thread and these probably have been mentioned: Able bodied teenagers in golf carts and hats on backwards. GRRRR...

« **Reply #199 on:** August 20, 2007, 02:54:45 PM »

About four nights a week I take my 12 year old son out to play in a cart. We show up at 7pm and I get a cooler with 3 MicUlts and the cart gives us a chance to play more holes.

I used to hate teen twits with national logoes on their gear but now that I always make my son dress for golf he has quite the collection. I am sure other people hate seeing that just as I did..screw em.

News:

John Keenan

Patrick_Mucci

John Keenan

John Keenan

Doug Siebert

John Kavanaugh

Patrick_Mucci

Tom Huckaby

John Keenan

Mike Benham

John Kavanaugh

Tim Pitner

Bob_Huntley

Tom Huckaby

Michael Blake

Tom Huckaby

wsmorrison

John Kavanaugh

wsmorrison

John Kavanaugh

Christopher Klingenstein

John Kavanaugh

Adam Clayman

Doug Wright

John Kavanaugh