Should a sexist institution like St Georges host the Open ?

First topic message reminder :

Bearing in mind that the Open is the pinnacle event in the British golfing calendar, should it be awarded to a club that will not permit half the British population as a member ? OK, it probably wont even consider 99.9% of the population but if you are a woman it's not even up for debate. I believe someone high up at the R&A was recently asked this question and his answer was it wasn't up to the R&A to influence social engineering. What a wonderfully enlightened man he must have been.....
So for me I can accept that they have a right to be a male only institution, however I'd equally have to say that such an institution should not be considered fitting to host the Open.
I thought Id post this thread after freading an article by Matthew Syed in this mornings Times by the way...not a Guardian in sight....

Am i to assume no attempt to convince me of any difference between RSG and anything else such as the ladies business meeting to mean there are none?

Of course there are casually racist people in this country. That doesn't mean that RSG must be among them.

If they were excluding ladies on some belief that they are lesser beings then i have a problem with it. That is sexism.
I suspect they just liek to play their golf with other blokes. I don't see a moral problem in that

Sorry I thought Id made it clear that having a written mandate laid out to exclude women was my reason for the difference. Institutionalised sexism.
And no they are not casually racist, they are very officially sexist.

Plenty of the things in every day life that are gender specific have written rules. In fact most. That's not a difference, it's a similarity

There's a difference between choosing to spend time playing golf with other men and having a prejudice towards women

Kind of going round in circles here. Pretty obvious we arent going to agree.

I agree with that!

Good article though. 103 responses in a day shows you've got your finger on the pulse on the 606v2 public

I think half of them were from you and me mate. But yeah I think its a good question and a good debate showing with no personal slights at anyone which is great.

Ha, yeah it makes a change to get this far without having to avoid some insults!!

Two points.
1] Totally agree with LP that women golfers discriminate more against women who work full time than any other golfing group.

2] Why does everyone exempt Royal Troon when these views are aired.
I think that the royal family should threaten to withdraw the prefix unless these golf clubs are open to both sexes.
Just like they do when they announce the next of kin for King.

DTW, Troon was actually listed in the Times artice this morning. Story about a guy who was a member there and took his young daughter inside an area of the clubhouse and was verbally lambasted by an irate committee member which upset the little girl who couldnt understand why she had to leave.
Of course you can argue that the member should have been aware of the rules but I can assure you if anyone spoke like that to me in front of my little girl they would remember the conversation for quite some time.

Doon that makes a lot of sense. If these places want to have the prefix Royal, they should be places that are accepted by the majority of people. I'm guessing that golfers will fall into 3 equal camps on this subject.

1) Don't think about, doesn't affect me so not bothered.
2) Those who despise the type of elitist places run by old curmudgeons.
3) Those who think they should be able to do it and take their hat off to them.

Good article, good debate

Diggers wrote:Sorry I thought Id made it clear that having a written mandate laid out to exclude women was my reason for the difference. Institutionalised sexism.
And no they are not casually racist, they are very officially sexist.

Sexist (and racist) is an emotive word. I would take it to mean something like "discrimination, based on nothing to do with merit, to the disadvantage of" one group or another. You could argue not being allowed to be a member of RSG falls into that bracket but I'm tempted to think not. I suspect this sort of thing is more of a "we just fancy being an all-male club" kind of thing. Personally I think they're likely losing out by not allowing women members but that's their look out.

On balance I think I'd rather the Open went to, shall we say, an all-inclusive sort of club but I don't think the Open being hosted at such a venue is going to remotely address more important discriminatory issues in the U.K.

What really confuses me is the attitude that a private club can do what it likes. fully support the idea that a private club should do exactly as government legislation describes, in this most definitely includes discrimination laws. If an application to join a club like Muirfield or RSG's comes in from a female golfer the club should not be able to reject it on the grounds of sex. Is it me or is this all very simple and some people on here are either choosing to be, or are very stupid?

Mac

I think the key word in your argument is private. Personally, I think private clubs should be able to do what they want.

It's no different to a bunch of guys hanging out together and deciding who can and can't be in their gang. You have mates and I'm sure there must be instances when someone has tagged on with you on a night out or whatever and as a group, you didn't want him back so an invite wasn't extended to him. That's no different.

If it is a public organisation then it's a different set of rules altogether.

Mac - Is a golf club any different to other gender specific organisations? Have you tried applying for membership at the ladies business thing I referred to earlier?

If you think this is something that only happens in stuffy golf clubs then maybe you are stupid?

Mac
There is the rub~ you can't apply to join these clubs. You hare invited.

Diggers
There are some right planks who are members of Not so Royal Troon, same with HCEG.
Prestwick is a class act though.

MustPuttBetter wrote:If they were excluding ladies on some belief that they are lesser beings then i have a problem with it. That is sexism.
I suspect they just liek to play their golf with other blokes. I don't see a moral problem in that

Actually ladies are able to play golf at RSG, but only with a man and they pay no fee, so clearly this is not the case.

So what is the case then BlueFox?

Because i could argue against them being sexist with the same reasoning

Am I the only one who looks at the 'all male' club thing with a knowing smile.
I know at one of the aforementioned clubs where the student caddies could tell a tale of uncomfortable moments.

Not sure anywhere have i said they are sexist though to be honest I can see no other reason for the barring of women. As i said ealier I have no problem with their right to do this, but by allowing such a place to hold The Open the R&A are only hindering the efforts of many other organisations within golf to make it an all inclusive sport.

Maybe someone who has played there can confirm this is true or not, but Id also imagine a course that is men only will also just be incredibly uptight and stuffy with all its other rules. Exactly the kind of golf course I'd never want to play anyway.

Doon the Water wrote:Am I the only one who looks at the 'all male' club thing with a knowing smile.
I know at one of the aforementioned clubs where the student caddies could tell a tale of uncomfortable moments.

Do tell.

BlueFox - this is where we disagree

I don't believe that just because a group of guys wants to have it's membership as male only that necessarily makes them sexist indivuduals

In the same way i don't believe the Women's Institute to be a sexist organisation

If you genuinely believe that those two things are inseparable then we're just not going to agree on this one

I was having a think about this topic yesterday evening and wondering why a club like RSG might wish to exclude women. From my experience at private members golf clubs I can sort of understand their thinking. At the moment, golf is a very male dominated environment where unfortunately women are not given the same rights. This means that at a lot of golf clubs, particularly private ones, there is this underlying political issue of men having more rights than women at a golf club. As a member that just wants to enjoy their golf in their leisure time, would you really want to have to even think about these politics? I do not agree that it is right for women to be seen as second class citizens on the golf course but until the whole industry changes it's thinking, men only golf clubs will exist if only to avoid this issue that inequality brings.

Just wondered what your thoughts and experiences were with mixed membership golf clubs?

rossa
Unlikley~ that club have members who are the top legal eagles in the country!

Just because women may not be permitted membership (but are not prevented from playing) I don't see how this could be considered treating them like 2nd class citizens.
They are not exluded from the course, RSG make no statements about preventing/discouraging women from visiting their club, they just want to keep the membership all male.
If there is a womens club that permit men to visit and play but they would like the membership and committee to be all female, so what ? I'd have no issue with this - it's their club, they make the rules, live with it, really wouldn't make me feel like a second class citizen...

[quote="MustPuttBetter"]BlueFox - this is where we disagree

I don't believe that just because a group of guys wants to have it's membership as male only that necessarily makes them sexist indivuduals


Actaully neither do I, I am just in the case of RSG unable to offer another explanation.

Open week is the R&A's main opportunity in the year to promote the game amongst the wider population. It is my view that holding the event at a male only club will only further leave that audience with a view that the sport is male dominated and unwelcoming to females.

'holding the event at a male only club will only further leave that audience with a view that the sport is male dominated and unwelcoming to females'

RSG is not a male only club and is not unwelcoming to females, it wants to retain an all male memebrship/committee.
Your statement is misleading, making assumptions/guesses will invariably lead to exagerated facts/incorrect answers.

Fair enough BlueFox

I just don't agree that it does leave that impression at all

Grizzly, I think that you may have missed my point. I was merely opening up the question as to what people's experiences with golf clubs were because my experiences at a couple of private clubs is that women are treated like second class citizens and as such there is a political issue within these clubs that might make life easier being a member of a single sex golf club. Whether you personally would feel like a second class citizen is a moot point - I was questioning whether you had seen or had experiences at golf clubs where women were seen or felt like second class citizens and, if so, do you think it would be better to just join a single sex golf club rather than deal with this.

sharrison - I was challenging your assumption that RSG was a male only club and unwelcoming to females.

As to your question, I can't answer because I am not a member of any golf club

Apologies sharrison, I've just re-read my posts which may have come across as short and rude, they were not intended to.

Grizzly wrote:'holding the event at a male only club will only further leave that audience with a view that the sport is male dominated and unwelcoming to females'

RSG is not a male only club and is not unwelcoming to females, it wants to retain an all male memebrship/committee.
Your statement is misleading, making assumptions/guesses will invariably lead to exagerated facts/incorrect answers.

RSG is quite clearly a male only club, i.e. only Males may be members of that club. It allows females to play the course but only with male members and it does not have ladies tee's. Please explain to me how this gives the impression that it is welcoming to females.

No probs Grizzly.

Two of the clubs that I've been a member at always felt like there was an issue between the sexes. As an example, in big comps the men have to play off the blue tees, some 10-30yds back of the normal competition tees yet women still get to peg it off the reds?!? Another thing that I've found in comps is that the women want to play with their partners or people that they know which then makes the groupings selected, bringing in a whole different bag of issues. Although these types of issue may be minor, I can sort of understand why a club like RSG can exist as there will be enough people that just want to play some golf without dealing with this.

bluefoxgolf wrote:

Grizzly wrote:'holding the event at a male only club will only further leave that audience with a view that the sport is male dominated and unwelcoming to females'

RSG is not a male only club and is not unwelcoming to females, it wants to retain an all male memebrship/committee.
Your statement is misleading, making assumptions/guesses will invariably lead to exagerated facts/incorrect answers.

RSG is quite clearly a male only club, i.e. only Males may be members of that club. It allows females to play the course but only with male members and it does not have ladies tee's. Please explain to me how this gives the impression that it is welcoming to females.

The parking spaces are larger...

Hi folks, don't wish to step on anyones toes on this but the Telegraph have picked up on this as well and have made the following article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/golf/theopen/8635730/The-Open-2011-RandA-chief-Peter-Dawson-says-only-media-care-about-men-only-clubs-like-Sandwich.html

Sharrison, are yo usuggesting that at RSG there wont be cliques who always want to play together. Thats was certainly the case at my old club, cant see how bringing women into that changes it at all.

Diggers, I have certainly found more issues with cliques amongst men than women but as is the nature of the industry, it is more accepted. A group of men like a committee are usually the worst as well...

Grizzly
HCEG allow women to play on the course, they just don't have female toilets or changing rooms.
If you ask nicely the starter will allow women use of his facility!

Hero
Lazy journalism by Kelso.

Try telling St Rule GC that St Andrews is all male.

The R&A are all male not St Andrews.
Did I read somewhere that the R&A were going to allow female members to join.
It will be a brave member who proposes a woman for membership.

Doon the Water wrote:Grizzly
HCEG allow women to play on the course, they just don't have female toilets or changing rooms.
If you ask nicely the starter will allow women use of his facility!

Lazy sports journalism comes as standard in the Telegraph now. Another of today's pieces is Oliver Brown on Alex Hay. Includes three examples of Hay's commentary, all three of which he nicked from the BBC's Wednesday night preview, and a quote from Alliss on his colleague, taken from the same source.

There seems to be a bit of misunderstanding here and I'd like to clear things up about RSG. I've been there and played the course so I'm speaking from experience.

1) Women ARE allowed to play the course.

2) Women ARE allowed into the clubhouse.

The only thing that women aren't allowed to do is be a member of the club.

Hope that clears up some of the confusion

If you want lazy journalism, here's a peach from dear old Auntie;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14097038

'A few years ago'? How hard can it be to look up?

The open should be held in Northern Ireland again due to the amount of talent from NI plus there are some excellent courses there.

Should it?, and aside from McIlroy and McDowell is there really that much talent there?
I agree most would like to see it over there again, possibly at the expense of having it at the god foresaken Old Course every five years, but only if the infrastructure is in place to make it happen.

Ireland is home to five major trophies in the last few years. It's the home of golf in Europe. There hasnt been a major winner from England, Scotland or Wales in years. Of course the open should be held here.

Don't be ridiculous, that's nothing to do with it, most of the last 20 Opens have been won by American's, should we hold it there?
In any event Paddy is from Ireland, not Northern Ireland so has nothing to do with where the Open is played, in terms if GB &NI he is effectively a foreigner.

leinsterbaby wrote:The open should be held in Northern Ireland again due to the amount of talent from NI plus there are some excellent courses there.

I'm pretty sure that I read something about that recently and the R&A do not think that their courses have the infrastructure around them to host an event like The Open. Am not sure about N Ireland but quick trip to Ireland would suggest that they are right - roads that have been half built and just end in the middle of nowhere, bridges over them with no roads leading up to either side of the bridge etc etc. The pin up boys of Europe 2006 are sadly suffering more than most.

They also stated that their policy of choosing a venue has never been and will not be influenced by the form of players. Bit harsh on the two NI major winners but they're so old and stuffy it'll probably be hard to change their mind...

More than half the population of NI hold Irish passports I'd say Harrington is very familiar with NI. Most Brits know nothing about NI and it's courses. Rory and Gmac have put it back on the map. time for the open to come to Ireland, true home of European golf.

You are right about them being old and stuffy. Infrastructure is fine.

Infrastructure in Ireland was good enough to hold the Ryder Cup no? This is also a bigger event.