[Lyne Morrison]

There is a lot of nonsense in this thread - not GCA's finest moment.

Is there another sport where women are so ridiculed and derided?

"Criticism is easy to do, but rarely worth listening to, mostly because it's so easy to do."

Lyne

[Lyne Morrison]

For some time now I've wanted to write an article extolling all of the reasons why making the game more women - focused is the key to growth and economic stability of the industry and golf courses in particular.

Nice to see others in the industry are recognizing this as well.   I would argue that it's not just course setup, but golf course architecture that needs to get ahead of this trend.   


https://www.pga.org/articles/setting-golf-courses-success-collaborative-guidebook-debuts

Mike, please do put pen to paper, this is a subject that needs more airplay from 'informed' commentators.

The Setting up for Success document is a body of work that provides another key step in educating the industry on how to better serve a range of golfers with slower swing speeds - including many women, beginning juniors, some seniors, those who are less mobile etc.

It is a document that is overdue - and it can and should influence change - that is, if golf is to come of age and become more inclusive.

Lyne

[Brent Hutto]

It's kind of funny that the clubs I've belonged to, all of which have incredibly cheap costs of membership compared to the kind of places Shiv is talking about, treat women and kids as plain old golfers. Exactly as they treat men.

If I were the sort of person to engage in rash generalization I might speculate that there's some common factor between the huge (by my standards) expense of belonging to those clubs and the fact that such clubs treat women as second-class members. Maybe having "women's times" or "women's days" seems perfectly natural to the same sorts of individuals for whom ten grand a year and a hundred grand to join seems like an affordable way to get your golf. Those clubs are also in many cases of, by and for people who think paying someone 50 or 100 bucks to schlep their golf bag for them every round is an expected part of the game.

But like most generalizations it might ring true enough when I say it but the reality is no doubt much more nuanced, having more to do with place, time and selective recall than with innate characteristics of "those people". From my vantage point, the "rich entitled country club guy" is a tempting meme to buy into. From some other vantages points the "women play slow" meme is equally quote-unquote "obvious".

[John Kavanaugh]

The only reason that women may play slower than men is that they, like me, play by the rules.  Putting everything out just flat takes time. 

None of the clubs where I am a member have any restrictions on women either real or cultural.  The thing about Victoria National is that it is so damn hard that very few women play twice unless they are what I would consider an expert player.  No way I can stay ahead of them when they are on the up tees, not to mention playing in twosomes with their spouses.

Just before you honk your horn ask yourself who is the most angry person you know.

[Jud_T]

As far as I know "ladies times" stem from a quainter time when the wives all stayed home and prime weekend times were reserved for the male breadwinners.  I believe this practice has been struck down in court in several states by breadwinners who lacked a penis.

[Dan Herrmann]

Jud - you're 100% correct.

All I know is the gal I married loves golf as much as I do.  Pretty darn perfect, if you ask me.

[A.G._Crockett]

There is a lot of nonsense in this thread - not GCA's finest moment.

Is there another sport where women are so ridiculed and derided?

"Criticism is easy to do, but rarely worth listening to, mostly because it's so easy to do."

Lyne

This isn't ridicule.  This is a fact.  The reason other sports don't have the same issue with womens' play is that they have separate womens' games and leagues on different courts or fields.  There's no reason to point out that womens' basketball isn't played at nearly the same level and at a much slower pace than mens', for example - because they're not on the same court at the same time.  It doesn't matter whether they're good players or bad players.  What matters is that they play slowly, and nobody ever gets on their case about it.  There's a reason there are ladies' times on weekends.  Nobody wants to do it necessarily, and they wouldn't if the ladies could play fast.  The reason the good times are reserved for men (or "members" in the current PC parlance) is that the women are slow, nobody wants to be stuck behind them and they're immune to the kind of peer pressure and self-selection that men use to shame the slow men into not taking the early times.    It's one thing for a guy to call out his buddy for being slow; it's quite another to call out his wife for it.

David,
That is NOT the reason that there are "ladies times" on weekends at a very, very few clubs.  It is simply a holdover from the days in which is was presumed that women had weekdays more or less free and could play then, while men were working.  It's an artifact of a bygone era; nothing more than that.

You say that slow play by women is a fact, and if that's the case I'm sure you must be able to cite some sort of study or other hard evidence.  There MUST be such a study, because otherwise, it would just be an opinion, right?  YOUR opinion...

I think that men such as yourself react to a slow player who happens to be female as a confirmation of what you already believed about an entire gender.  "See!  I told you so!  Women golfers are SLOW!" 

On the other hand, you react to a slow player who happens to be male on an individual level, rather than drawing a conclusion about THAT entire gender.  "Wow; that guy is a real a*****e for playing so slowly!"  This is, of course, exactly the way that men who hold a negative view of women drivers react, despite mountains of evidence (most especially actuarial tables and insurance rates) that prove that women are better drivers than men.  And yet somehow the stereotype persists!  Perhaps it's because people (men) repeat it as a self-serving "fact"...

At my club, the first tee time each Saturday and Sunday goes to two couples who play a fourball each day.  The second tee time goes to a group of men who rarely putt out, never look for balls that go into the woods, pick up at double bogey, so on.  The second group (in which I have played many, many times) never even sees the first group after the 4th hole, and the second group plays in 3 hours walking!

Does that anecdote prove that ALL women play quickly?  Of course not; that would be crazy!

[Dave McCollum]

I glanced through these comments and probably got the wrong impression:  a bunch of bigoted rubbish.  My own personal observation is that women’s weekday twilight leagues play faster than men.  As for everyday play, it depends on the group—some men and women are fast and some are not.  It has nothing to do with gender.  I will say that we have 80-100 women play a weekly game on Tuesday evenings and we are grateful for their participation.  They don’t drink and eat as much as the men, but they start a half an hour later (than the men) and finish earlier.  Many play on weekends and at other times.  My experience is that this is indeed an easy market to grow the game. Make it friendly and fun and eliminate sexism, no matter how that differs from typical male games, and let them take possession of their games.  Just like guys do.  It only becomes problematic when trying to mix the two, and that is so only when determining who is in charge. Again, less a matter of gender than human nature.

[Ken Moum]

Mike Cirba:

I have thought the same for a long time.  Women are the only demographic in golf that has a real opportunity to expand significantly in number.  And if women come to the golf course more, so will their kids, who have been missing in equal numbers.

Part of the problem is that there are a lot of men in golf who don't want to see it happen.

The problem is still cost.

My wife and I both play... and travel golf can be horrifyingly expensive.  We are in Scotland, where every course we've played has a significant number of women playing.  But their annual dues are barely more than what it costs per month at "good" country clubs in the US.

And for us, as GCAer Stan Dodd once told me, there has to be some awareness of the golf per diem while travelling.  We played North Berwick a couple of weeks ago at a cost of more than $300 US, which is COMPLETELY out of our responsible golf per diem. 

And when we drew a tee time in the Old Course ballot, the tab, with her caddy fee and tip, ended up being more than $600.

We play at home on courses owned by an organization I am not a fan of, but it costs about the same as those two rounds for our ANNUAL dues. Because I play a lot with my wife, I also play with other women fairly often.  Damned few of the ones I know would choose to spend that kind of money on golf.

There is, IMHO, no answer other than making golf less costly and less time-consuming.  Just a couple days ago we played Cullen Golf Club in a competition for 10 GBP each, and finished in parely over three hours. And the course was full of golfers, male and female.  (It is also the most dangerous course I've ever played.)

K

[Ken Moum]

And, by the way, I just saw this from Ron Dodson

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/recreation-nature-discovery-park-ron-dodson-6013307305599262720

FWIW, I used to have some reservations about Dodson because of his argument with the "real" Audubon Society.  Then I spent some time interviewing him for a Golfdom article.  He's a an interesting guy, who's thought about golf and nature a lot.

K

[Dan Herrmann]

@Ken Moum - expense is the exact reason my wife and I play at a private club in the US.  Green fees for two every time is more expensive than our monthly dues.

And courses like Bandon are out.  Summer off-site guests pay $310 per round.  Add $60+ per person for a caddy, and we're well over $700 for one round of golf!  As much as I LOVE Bandon, we simply can't afford it anymore.

[Eric Strulowitz]

Mike Cirba:

I have thought the same for a long time.  Women are the only demographic in golf that has a real opportunity to expand significantly in number.  And if women come to the golf course more, so will their kids, who have been missing in equal numbers.

Part of the problem is that there are a lot of men in golf who don't want to see it happen.

The problem is still cost.

My wife and I both play... and travel golf can be horrifyingly expensive.  We are in Scotland, where every course we've played has a significant number of women playing.  But their annual dues are barely more than what it costs per month at "good" country clubs in the US.

And for us, as GCAer Stan Dodd once told me, there has to be some awareness of the golf per diem while travelling.  We played North Berwick a couple of weeks ago at a cost of more than $300 US, which is COMPLETELY out of our responsible golf per diem. 

And when we drew a tee time in the Old Course ballot, the tab, with her caddy fee and tip, ended up being more than $600.

We play at home on courses owned by an organization I am not a fan of, but it costs about the same as those two rounds for our ANNUAL dues. Because I play a lot with my wife, I also play with other women fairly often.  Damned few of the ones I know would choose to spend that kind of money on golf.

There is, IMHO, no answer other than making golf less costly and less time-consuming.  Just a couple days ago we played Cullen Golf Club in a competition for 10 GBP each, and finished in parely over three hours. And the course was full of golfers, male and female.  (It is also the most dangerous course I've ever played.)

K

Have to agree.

My wife and I are prpbably done  with the long distance golf trips.  I am all for people charging whatever they want, but with the cost of lodging, car rentals, air fares,  and then the cost of the green fees, it is a question of value.

For example, we could easily pay $500-600 at a top venue in Europe or the US.  That is for four hours or less of golf.  Compare that to a trip we took to Panama, where we went peacock bass fishing all day with a private guide and caught well over a hundred fish, and with tip it was $300.  The $600 for a round of golf at a top venue would pay for two nights in a decent hotel room in NYC.  So it just comes down to value, and I no longer see value in golf trips to upscale or well known venues.  There are so many good venues in the South to spend a long weekend or more  at a fraction of the cost.  Many places people have never heard of,  but offer great conditions and great golf.

My club recently got purchased by Club Corp and I must say they have some good deals for the traveling golfer.  If I were to do any more trips, I would do it through them.

[Steve Lang]

  Eric, Are you a Club Corp ONE member?  Seems to be a good deal...

[Eric Strulowitz]

Eric, Are you a Club Corp ONE member?  Seems to be a good deal...

Yes Steve, I am a Club Corp One member.  To be honest, when I heard all the benefits this offered locally here in Atlanta and for playing/dining out of state,  my first inclination was "too good to be true".  But it is all the real thing, can't tell you how many really nice clubs we have played for cart fee only.  Got a decent discount on an upcoming stay at Pinehurst resort, plus dine for 50% off at my home club.

If you have any questions about Club Corp One, send me a message and be glad to get back to you!

Eric

[jeffwarne]

It's kind of funny that the clubs I've belonged to, all of which have incredibly cheap costs of membership compared to the kind of places Shiv is talking about, treat women and kids as plain old golfers. Exactly as they treat men.

If I were the sort of person to engage in rash generalization I might speculate that there's some common factor between the huge (by my standards) expense of belonging to those clubs and the fact that such clubs treat women as second-class members. Maybe having "women's times" or "women's days" seems perfectly natural to the same sorts of individuals for whom ten grand a year and a hundred grand to join seems like an affordable way to get your golf. Those clubs are also in many cases of, by and for people who think paying someone 50 or 100 bucks to schlep their golf bag for them every round is an expected part of the game.

But like most generalizations it might ring true enough when I say it but the reality is no doubt much more nuanced, having more to do with place, time and selective recall than with innate characteristics of "those people". From my vantage point, the "rich entitled country club guy" is a tempting meme to buy into. From some other vantages points the "women play slow" meme is equally quote-unquote "obvious".

Women are even slower on random munis that at fancy schmancy clubs.  The one thing I will say about women is that they're amazing about letting people play through.  Why might that be?  (Hint:  they get lots of practice at it!!) 

I'm not the most politically correct person around, and frankly am not really looking for women (or anyone else for that matter) to "save golf", but I'd say there's some pretty rash generalizations here.
In my experience women get around the course at least as fast as men, and often much faster as they can be right on top of you as you walk backwards off a green to your tee, and they generally move forward.
And women actually putt out as opposed to men who rarely do.

[A.G._Crockett]

It's kind of funny that the clubs I've belonged to, all of which have incredibly cheap costs of membership compared to the kind of places Shiv is talking about, treat women and kids as plain old golfers. Exactly as they treat men.

If I were the sort of person to engage in rash generalization I might speculate that there's some common factor between the huge (by my standards) expense of belonging to those clubs and the fact that such clubs treat women as second-class members. Maybe having "women's times" or "women's days" seems perfectly natural to the same sorts of individuals for whom ten grand a year and a hundred grand to join seems like an affordable way to get your golf. Those clubs are also in many cases of, by and for people who think paying someone 50 or 100 bucks to schlep their golf bag for them every round is an expected part of the game.

But like most generalizations it might ring true enough when I say it but the reality is no doubt much more nuanced, having more to do with place, time and selective recall than with innate characteristics of "those people". From my vantage point, the "rich entitled country club guy" is a tempting meme to buy into. From some other vantages points the "women play slow" meme is equally quote-unquote "obvious".

Women are even slower on random munis that at fancy schmancy clubs.  The one thing I will say about women is that they're amazing about letting people play through.  Why might that be?  (Hint:  they get lots of practice at it!!) 

I'm not the most politically correct person around, and frankly am not really looking for women (or anyone else for that matter) to "save golf", but I'd say there's some pretty rash generalizations here.
In my experience women get around the course at least as fast as men, and often much faster as they can be right on top of you as you walk backwards off a green to your tee, and they generally move forward.
And women actually putt out as opposed to men who rarely do.

Jeff,
I'd add that if you talk to course rangers, they'd tell you that if a group of women are playing slowly and are asked to speed up, the response is VERY different than for the average group of men that are asked to do the same thing.

[Steve Lang]

  from the anecdotal file ...

Ms Sheila (pictured in reply#30) says she doesn't like to play with women either ... They play too slow.   All it takes is one man or woman being pokey...

[Jim_Kennedy]

To paraphrase the old George Carlin line about other drivers (the ones driving slower than me are idiots, the ones driving faster are maniacs) I guess anyone with less money than me is a loser I don't want to play golf with and anyone with more than me is an entitled dick.

That's a very PC comment.  My experience with PC comments is that's theyre pure malarkey.  It's not equivalent to "other drivers".  It's simple facts.  Women are slower than men and if anybody can point to anything even remotely true and scientific or methodical that says otherwise, I will print a screen shot of this thread and eat it.  

Dean Knuth:
Two days spent following groups at Torrey Pines outside San Diego and a day watching resort golfers at Pebble Beach showed that average men are as likely to be slow as high-handicap women. A short-hitting woman typically will walk right up to her ball and hit it again. The slow-playing men were very deliberate on every stroke, often taking two or more practice swings. They would stand and watch each shot until it stopped and then slowly put the club away and move on. When I approached them to say that I was from the USGA and that I had determined that they were a slow group, they were shocked. Typical response: "I've never been told that I'm slow, and I don't believe it." Or there was indignation: "I paid good money to enjoy my round, and I deserve to take as much time as I need."

NGF:

"The National Golf Foundation has found that, while less frequent women golfers tend to take 10 to 15 minutes longer than men for an 18-hole course, those women who play more than eight rounds a year actually take between 10 and 12 minutes less than their male counterparts to complete a round of golf.” While inexperienced female golfers are found to take longer than men to play, experienced female golfers take a shorter time than men to play proving that there are no grounds on which to discriminate women in golf because of slow play.

[A.G._Crockett]

To paraphrase the old George Carlin line about other drivers (the ones driving slower than me are idiots, the ones driving faster are maniacs) I guess anyone with less money than me is a loser I don't want to play golf with and anyone with more than me is an entitled dick.

That's a very PC comment.  My experience with PC comments is that's theyre pure malarkey.  It's not equivalent to "other drivers".  It's simple facts.  Women are slower than men and if anybody can point to anything even remotely true and scientific or methodical that says otherwise, I will print a screen shot of this thread and eat it.  

Dean Knuth:
Two days spent following groups at Torrey Pines outside San Diego and a day watching resort golfers at Pebble Beach showed that average men are as likely to be slow as high-handicap women. A short-hitting woman typically will walk right up to her ball and hit it again. The slow-playing men were very deliberate on every stroke, often taking two or more practice swings. They would stand and watch each shot until it stopped and then slowly put the club away and move on. When I approached them to say that I was from the USGA and that I had determined that they were a slow group, they were shocked. Typical response: "I've never been told that I'm slow, and I don't believe it." Or there was indignation: "I paid good money to enjoy my round, and I deserve to take as much time as I need."

NGF:

"The National Golf Foundation has found that, while less frequent women golfers tend to take 10 to 15 minutes longer than men for an 18-hole course, those women who play more than eight rounds a year actually take between 10 and 12 minutes less than their male counterparts to complete a round of golf.” While inexperienced female golfers are found to take longer than men to play, experienced female golfers take a shorter time than men to play proving that there are no grounds on which to discriminate women in golf because of slow play.

Holy crap!  Actual data instead of random generalizations and stereotypes!  This could lead to trouble...

[jeffwarne]

To paraphrase the old George Carlin line about other drivers (the ones driving slower than me are idiots, the ones driving faster are maniacs) I guess anyone with less money than me is a loser I don't want to play golf with and anyone with more than me is an entitled dick.

That's a very PC comment.  My experience with PC comments is that's theyre pure malarkey.  It's not equivalent to "other drivers".  It's simple facts.  Women are slower than men and if anybody can point to anything even remotely true and scientific or methodical that says otherwise, I will print a screen shot of this thread and eat it.  

Dean Knuth:
Two days spent following groups at Torrey Pines outside San Diego and a day watching resort golfers at Pebble Beach showed that average men are as likely to be slow as high-handicap women. A short-hitting woman typically will walk right up to her ball and hit it again. The slow-playing men were very deliberate on every stroke, often taking two or more practice swings. They would stand and watch each shot until it stopped and then slowly put the club away and move on. When I approached them to say that I was from the USGA and that I had determined that they were a slow group, they were shocked. Typical response: "I've never been told that I'm slow, and I don't believe it." Or there was indignation: "I paid good money to enjoy my round, and I deserve to take as much time as I need."

NGF:

"The National Golf Foundation has found that, while less frequent women golfers tend to take 10 to 15 minutes longer than men for an 18-hole course, those women who play more than eight rounds a year actually take between 10 and 12 minutes less than their male counterparts to complete a round of golf.” While inexperienced female golfers are found to take longer than men to play, experienced female golfers take a shorter time than men to play proving that there are no grounds on which to discriminate women in golf because of slow play.

Holy crap!  Actual data instead of random generalizations and stereotypes!  This could lead to trouble...

AG
While I anecdotally agree with their conclusions, I would have a hard time buying ANYTHING the NGF says on ANY subject

[Dan Herrmann]

For what it's worth, my club is having its annual woman's member-guest tomorrow. -- Sunday.   They have the grounds and clubhouse to themselves and it's very successful.  I'm proud they do it.

[John Kavanaugh]

Dan,

Do any of the women bring along their Boy Toys?  Nothing like some eye candy for the participants.  Is there a dance so the husbands don't feel left out?

[Sven Nilsen]

Dan,

Do any of the women bring along their Boy Toys?  Nothing like some eye candy for the participants.  Is there a dance so the husbands don't feel left out?

Ever heard of caddies?  A round of golf lasts longer than a tennis lesson.

[DMoriarty]

But caddies have too much baggage.

[John Kavanaugh]

Dan,

Do any of the women bring along their Boy Toys?  Nothing like some eye candy for the participants.  Is there a dance so the husbands don't feel left out?

Ever heard of caddies?  A round of golf lasts longer than a tennis lesson.

   ...   
If Andy Dufresne's wife had slept with a caddie he would have never been convicted.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()