The issue IMO is not that they don't let women in.. . . it is about ACCESS . . if that was Joe Ratty Course the women would not give a rat's ass about it But coming on . . .being a MEMBER of Augusta has power [in some circles] and it is all about POWER how many deals are DONE ON THE GOLF COURSE Two CEOs putting it out . . . well . .as a Woman CEO of say . . er. . . Worldcom you won't be able to compete with the Male Ceo of AT&T at this course because. . .guess what YOU NOT ALLOWED THERE This basically what Black folx argued HOWEVER the difference is this Black folx were not allow to participate on a much larger scale for one. . and Second. . . Black folx were more. . .CONTROLLED Take Montgomery for instance The busses said. . .sit in back . . .. or not at all black folx said. . not at all . . .then white folx missed out on that extra bus fair and were somewhat publically shamed and tried to break the boycott THROUGH VERY VIOLENT MEANS Hoottie seems to have no shame and will lose no money . . . so he don't care what the women do. I think the women are doing the right thing. . . . I think hootie is within his rights. . . . I don't like it . . . NOT ONE BIT As for tigger woods. . . he could play Augusta long before black folx. . . remember. . he use to put on his card that he was ASIAN . . .so .. . . he was not technically black in his mind if the women had sex changes it would be the best solution Rocket River
I've never played Augusta unfortunately , but I can ASSURE you there are plenty of TOP NOTCH PUBLIC COURSES all across America that a woman can take a customer to and impress the living hell out of them what card? He never even played Augusta before he won his 1st US Amateur
That's because none of you have given me *one* adequate explanatory reason for your position (apart from the caveman thing, which I don't think counts!). Basically, your argument consists of repeating 'racial discrimination and gender discrimination are different, dammit' over and over. But I still don't see *why* you think they're different. (Note: of course the *historical* circumstances have been different: slavery and segregation were more scummy! But I'm talking about their difference *now*, in these circumstances, which I think is negligible.) Oh, and if amateur women suck at golf, it's probably because *they're not allowed to play very f*cking much*!!! Ref: your theory that I'm some radical fringe extremist is silly. I might be on the fringes of this *board*, which is hardly difficult... But this is obviously an inconsistency in the law, and it needs to be changed.
They're not discriminating, they're excluding women. Is it discriminatory when men and women must use different restrooms? No. Would it be if there were separate Black and White restrooms? Yes. Is it discrimminatory when you have a WNBA or an LPGA? No. Would it be if you had a Black NBA and a White NBA? Yes. That's all I can come up with. Not very good, I know.
MSN Home | Hotmail | Search | Shopping | Money | People & Chat A sports guy's point of view Masters of their domain By Bill Simmons Page 2 columnist For everyone's sake, I tried to stay away from this whole "Females joining Augusta National Golf Club" controversy. It's like the old saying goes: "If you don't agree with something, but it isn't bothering anybody too much, then just shut up, look the other way and concentrate on the important things in life -- like playing 'Grand Theft Auto: Vice City' so much that you actually lose feeling in some of your extremities." OK, I made that up. If old white Southerners want to keep Augusta National as their private playground, it's their prerogative. But every time the name "Augusta" came up, I looked the other way ... at least until last week, when I heard a Boston sports radio caller invoke Jackie Robinson's name. That's right, as in, "The first female joining Augusta would be like Jackie breaking baseball's color line." Apparently, we've gone collectively insane. Robinson's case centered on an unconscionable level of bigotry, a despicable collection of baseball players and owners, and a class system that desperately needed an overhaul. Augusta's case centers on one simple premise: From time to time, guys enjoy hanging out with other guys. That's the crux of the issue, isn't it? Augusta's members aren't arguing that women are second-class citizens who shouldn't play golf. We're talking about a group of rich Southerners who enjoy hitting golf balls, telling raunchy jokes, playing poker, ordering people around like Judge Smails, and not answering to anybody. Hey, I don't like them, either. But don't guys have the fundamental right to hang out with other guys? Don't females have the right to purchase their own golf clubs and make them exclusionary to men? Doesn't our constitution condone gender-specific clubs? How does any of this involve discrimination and equal rights? Of course, some women don't see it this way, something I dealt with last month in my "Ten Tips For Watching Football With the Guys" column. Besides having fun with stereotypes, the column's purpose was to bang home that guys enjoy watching football with other guys, it's a time-worn male bonding ritual, and for the love of God, just leave us alone. I even ended the column with the ski bunny story, just to point out that, yes, there are women out there who know sports and love sports. We accept them, we appreciate them ... we would just rather watch sports with our buddies. I can't emphasize this enough: It's nothing personal. Well, this drives hard-core female sports fans batty. But I know sports too! I know just as much as you! I'm totally offended that you wouldn't watch sports with me! Why take it so personally? It's a comfort thing, just like playing at Augusta is a comfort thing for those stuck-up Southerners. Sometimes, guys just enjoy hanging out with other guys. It's really not that complicated. But here's the thing ... If you're arguing that Augusta should accept female members because (a) this is the 21st century, and (b) the old standby phrase "This is how we've always done it" doesn't fly anymore, that's fine. I'm on your side. Just realize that, if we're operating under that assumption, then we should overhaul every aspect of our culture. The WNBA has been around for six seasons, while the XFL lasted just three months. If women are truly equal, then why do so many expect men to buy dinner on the first date? Why are guys always the ones buying introductory drinks at bars? Why are men forced to purchase engagement rings that sometimes cost more than new SUVs? Why do weddings revolve completely around brides, as grooms become hood ornaments for the entire day? Why do the vast majority of married women take their husband's names? Why are America's military forces dominated mostly by men? Why is chivalry still in vogue? Because this is how we've always done it. Oh, well, that solves it. So we're living by one rule, unless that rule isn't convenient anymore, then we're throwing it out the window? That makes a ton of sense. The same hypocrisy thrives in the sports world. The WNBA and XFL suffered the same woeful ratings and limited audiences ... so why has the WNBA been given six years to succeed when the XFL was cancelled after three months? Female reporters and broadcasters want to be given the same chances as their male counterparts ... isn't it ironic how some capitalize on their looks to get ahead? Why can female reporters walk into NBA locker rooms when players are dressing, yet male reporters can't walk into WNBA locker rooms? If colleges exist to make profits, how is Title IX constitutional when it eliminates money-making programs in favor of programs that don't earn a dime? And if colleges exist to provide education, why would they possibly admit rent-an-athletes like DaJuan Wagner and Eddie Griffin? Which is it? Why the two orders, Colonel Jessup? When you look at Serena Williams' wardrobe, you know the WTA is capitalizing on sex appeal. Again, I'm just pointing this stuff out. I support Title IX, I would much rather watch Bonnie Bernstein than Armen Keteyian, and the XFL sucked just as much as the WNBA does. But you can't have it both ways. For instance, the most fascinating sport of the past decade has been women's tennis, mainly because they exploit the talents and sex appeal of their players, market the hell out of them, and appeal to men and women. And nobody says a peep. Men aren't allowed to say why we're really watching -- because the sport has more grunting, bouncing, flapping and sweating than the average Skinemax movie -- so we make up lame excuses like "They have more rallies" and "They have more personality than the men." Translation: We like breasts. For some reason, we aren't allowed to say this. It's sexist. And yet there's Serena Williams dressing like a dominatrix at the U.S. Open, and there's Jelena Dokic wearing a sports bra that's looser than Frank Layden's neck, and there's Anna Kournikova raking in $20 million from endorsements without ever winning a tournament. Yup, we just like watching them hit tennis balls. Never has a sport been more honest and dishonest at the same time. Of course, women know this -- they know this -- and they conveniently look the other way, even as their tennis sisters are apparently filming the upcoming p*rn movie "Hookers In Spandex." Yet they won't look the other way with Augusta, because that's an "important" cause. Women's rights are at stake. Somebody needs to become the Jackie Robinson of ... um, female country club members, because this group has apparently been exploited long enough. I know it has been keeping me up at night. If you want females joining Augusta, and if you rightly insist that women are equal to men, then I'm calling you on it. Let's be equal. Completely, totally equal. Let's throw out any tradition that ever revolved around the phrase, "Because this is how we've always done it." Let's start fresh. We'll even hand over the clicker half the time -- with the money we would save on engagement rings, we could afford to buy two plasma-screen TVs (one for us, one for you). But if you're not willing to start fresh, and if you keep clinging to these hypocrisies that complicate every aspect of the male-female relationship, you're shooting yourselves in the collective foot. You're right, it is time for a change. But you need to change, too. Don't hate guys like Hootie Johnson. Feel sorry for them. Whatever happens, one thing will never change: Sometimes, guys just enjoy hanging out with other guys. Unfortunately, we aren't as creative and ingenious as women. The only male bonding vehicles we ever came up with? Sports, beer, golfing, Vegas, fantasy drafts, video games, strip joints, poker, Golden Tee and NFL Sundays. Guys can't interact for extended periods of time unless there's some sort of attention-consuming buffer. We can't just say "let's go to dinner," gab about our lives for two hours, glance through some photos, get bombed on two glasses of Chardonnay and call it a successful night. And we can't interact quite as happily and naturally with a woman in the room, mainly because we're always afraid of what we might say or do. That's what this whole Augusta thing was about -- these old geezers are trying to preserve the only form of male bonding they have left. To all the females reading this, don't hate these guys. Feel sorry for them. Pity them. You are turning their pathetic world upside down. If you can't appreciate that, then maybe -- just maybe -- you're the ones being shortsighted about this whole thing. Bill Simmons is a columnist for Page 2 and ESPN The Magazine. THE SPORTS GUY ALSO SEE: Bill Simmons Archive The Sports Guy: Draft day swan song The Sports Guy: They were old, but those days weren't good The Sports Guy's Official UCR scale The Sports Guy goes Hollywood The Sports Guy: Put Stern at helm of good ship USA The Sports Guy: King me The Sports Guy: Swamp Things The Sports Guy's Ramblings ESPN TOOLS Email story Most sent Print story -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ESPN.com: Help | Advertiser Info | Report a Bug | Contact Us | Tools | Jobs at ESPN.com Copyright ©2002 ESPN Internet Ventures. Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and Safety Information are applicable to this site. Visit our lite site if you're having problems with this page. More Useful Everyday MSN Home | Hotmail | Search | Shopping | Money | People & Chat ©2002 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Search the Web
This comment is just as ridiculous as NJRocket's aspersion that most amateur women suck at golf and men don't want to play with them. I have never heard of women not being allowed to play much - perhaps at some select private courses, but that is far in the minority. Golf ability is a function of time spent practicing correctly - and some women and some men don't put in the time to do well. Most men I know are more than happy to have women play with them. It happens rarely enough that it's a welcome change, and I can't recall one round out of hundreds in the last few years that I played with a woman and regretted it. However, that doesn't mean that Hootie should be forced to let women join the club however. If I lived in Augusta, they would be discriminating against me as well, since they don't let middle-class white guys join. That's the whole freakin' point about being an exclusive club - they can choose to exclude whoever they want.
Repeat. For. Thousandth. Time. Inconsistent. Law. Exclude. Everyone. Or. No one. Brain. Exploding. Frustration.
THREE separate people have tried to explain it in plain terms, or using examples...everything except a freaking flowchart. Sorry it doesn't register with you as being "adequate." Ridiculous. Women play at many, many clubs. Augusta ain't the only game in town. women play golf just as much as men do...just sometimes at different places. In your view...which is by FAR a minority view. Not going to happen.
As I've said, you've used examples of gender discrimination to explain why there should continue to be gender discrimination. I still don't get it. Explain to me why discriminating based on body parts and discriminating based on skin colour are different things in *this particular instance* - that is, *playing golf*. Actually, I'll save you the trouble. You can't. That was one of your patented 'going to extremes to prove a point' jokes. Sorry no one got it, I should have used an emoticon. Just because I'm in a minority on *this board* (which is filled with a bunch of middle class white males!) doesn't mean that my view doesn't have validity! It nearly did! The ERA didn't fail by much, you know.
Well, just because I don't think the government should do anything at this point to Augusta doesn't mean I don't think that discriminating on the basis of sex is OK. There should be a law against it.
That's really inconsistent. You don't think the government should do anything but there should be a law against it. Wow... So should the government be able to regulate everything you do with your private property...or only thing that you personally agree with?
At this point, there's nothing the government can do to Augusta. I don't think they should at this point since there is no law saying they can. However, I think that there should be a law passed saying that they can't discriminate on the basis of sex just like they can't discriminate on the basis of race. It wasn't that hard to understand, especially for a law school graduate. Wow...
Yeah...and after the law is passed, we can form a group called the NAAWG (Nat'l Assoc for the Advancement of Women Golfers) And another thing RM95...I hope, in accordance with your equal rights opinoins...that you go to as many male strip clubs as female strip clubs in Vegas this weekend...
Here's an idea... Why don't we just have the government make it so they can dictate what you do with your private property. They'll just take all those choices out of your hands. OBVIOUSLY government knows better than we do, right? I don't agree with Augusta's decision...but I defend their right to do it. I defend the right to do a lot of things I disagree with. So what shouldn't the government regulate in your view? And if the government has nothing better to do than regulate the membership at a golf club in Georgia...then I think we need vastly smaller government.
Jesus. I'm through with this and pretty much any other argument with you Refman. If you can't tell a difference between a big organization discriminating, and Joe Schmoe sitting on his front lawn allowing whoever he wants into his house, then I understand why you're unemployed. I mean come on. Do you believe that it being illegal for people to discriminate on the basis of race or religion is a detriment to your own private property? Why has the government done this? Do they know better than Refman? Some people. Actually, I'm betting a lot of people think it's just as bad to maliciously discriminate on the basis of sex as it is to discriminate for any other illegal reason. I feel sorry for you, or anyone else who doesn't think that.
Listen jackass...they don't write discrimination laws only to appl y to large organizations. They apply to Mom and Pops too. They apply to any property that you would own that could be characterized as a business whatsoever. Glad to know that you have nothing better to do then to slam on a guy who has run into a streak of bad luck. You are an *******.
This is the worst thing I have ever seen posted on this BBS. If you had any clue as to what was going on in the job market right now, you would know that there are thousands of highly intelligent, highly qualified people out there without a job in the city of Houston alone. I can't believe you would stoop to a level so low as to insult someone's livelihood -- all because you just got humiliated in a debate. Truly pathetic.
