Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2016 8:20:29 GMT -5
As some of you may know, yesterday Muirfield Golf Club (just outside Edinburgh, Scotland) held a vote concerning the ban of female membership, as women are unable to join the club. (NOTE: Women are allowed to play the course as guests despite the membership ban)
The required target to reach was two-thirds (432) of all 648 votes in order to allow women to become members.
A majority of members voted for female membership, however they fell short of the target by 14 votes, thus meaning the ban on female membership will remain in place.
Many people are very unhappy about the decision, and in response, the R&A have announced that Muirfield will no longer be on the Open Championship rota.
As an avid male golfer, I am very disappointed about the result, I believe that golf is a ladies' game as well as a gentlemen's game and sexism has no place in the sport. I also believe that this result will damage the image of golf in general, as female participation in golf is increasing every year. The R&A have done the right thing to strip the club of its rights to host the Open since they started allowing female membership in September 2014 and I stand by them 110%.
I hope you agree that this was a very bad and foolish decision by the golf club and women have as much right as men to be a member of a golf club.
|
|
|
Post by thatoneuser on May 20, 2016 9:55:38 GMT -5
Only recently did Augusta National Golf Club (the course that hosts the Masters tournament every year in April) allow female membership and on an extremely limited basis. Sexism is stupid.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2016 10:06:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by TCM on May 20, 2016 11:44:12 GMT -5
It would be rather entertaining for someone to even remotely try an defend this position. It's right out of a 6-year old's 'No Girlz Allowed' type mentality.
|
|
|
Post by higeboshi on May 20, 2016 11:59:46 GMT -5
It would be rather entertaining for someone to even remotely try an defend this position. It's right out of a 6-year old's 'No Girlz Allowed' type mentality. OK, I'll give it a shot. "I've been told by people that actually spend any significant amount of time around girls that they don't have balls. Why on Earth would I want to share my course with someone that's just going to come up to me and ask to borrow my balls? It's absurd!"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2016 12:06:13 GMT -5
Uh oh I think this thread might spiral out of control. Notice me Senpai!
|
|
arsenette
Administrator
Rambling Rican
Posts: 16,617
Staff Member
|
Post by arsenette on May 20, 2016 12:25:41 GMT -5
The previous defenses used were that it is a private organization and they don't ban women from using the course (unlike Augusta for about 100 years). This day and age though that kind of thing should be abolished. However, a private organization with a voting system have to deal with the fall out of their own rules.
|
|
|
Post by TCM on May 20, 2016 12:33:33 GMT -5
The previous defenses used were that it is a private organization and they don't ban women from using the course (unlike Augusta for about 100 years). This day and age though that kind of thing should be abolished. However, a private organization with a voting system have to deal with the fall out of their own rules. Yeah, that was something I noticed when briefly looking it up after (it being private). In which case, you always hear the argument 'there are private women's clubs.' But it's always weird that people try and use that argument considering 1. life and society revolves around you as the default majority, you just sound like you're complaining that you aren't catered to more than you already are and 2. social minorities tend to create their own because of the fact they don't have as many spaces of their own, compared to there always being somewhere for the social majority to land. And like you said, obviously consequences were going to happen, you'd have to be completely obtuse to not recognize that if you voted nay. The measure missed out by 14, that's quite an implication there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2016 12:52:53 GMT -5
The previous defenses used were that it is a private organization and they don't ban women from using the course (unlike Augusta for about 100 years). This day and age though that kind of thing should be abolished. However, a private organization with a voting system have to deal with the fall out of their own rules. SENPAI NOTICED ME!!! Lol but seriously yes you made some good pointers there it is just politically incorrect in modern society to discriminate against gender, nationality, religion, race etc. It's a shame Muirfield could not move on and they have damaged their own reputation.
|
|
arsenette
Administrator
Rambling Rican
Posts: 16,617
Staff Member
|
Post by arsenette on May 20, 2016 12:55:15 GMT -5
Yep. But regardless it's a private organization and they can be as bigoted and sexist as they want. That's the ugly side of freedom. People would be up in arms if an all-female club suddenly narrowly voted against lifting the ban of men in their facilities. The shoe has to fit on both feet. It is probably why I'm not outraged. This is how democracy works. They put it to a vote and they lost. They now have to live with the consequences of that. All in all though.. it's a private golf course. If it were a public necessity like an educational institution (which by the way happened to me with me being the 3rd class of girls going into a school that was all boys for over 100 years in Philly back in the 1980's), or a medical facility or public office things would be different. But it's a private business and they can put whatever crazy rules they want even if we don't like it. Even if it seems like a totally neanderthal thing to do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2016 5:07:41 GMT -5
Some good news. Royal Troon have voted to allow women members Just in time for the Open!
|
|