|
October, 2002
The current flap over membership
at the Augusta National Golf Club purports to center around female membership
at an all-male golf club. Obviously, the controversy wouldn't have achieved
such epic proportion if Augusta were not the home of the Masters Golf
Tournament, one of the four national American events in the golf world
called Majors. The Masters is a stop on the PGA, an all-male venue.
It's as if women were demanding
to be allowed to play at Yankee Stadium, because the World Series has
been hosted there more times than non New Yorkers care to remember.
Intimidate the World Series sponsors and advertisers because women are
not allowed to play on that hallowed ground.
Is this really an issue?
Salary equity in the job market
between men and women is a legitimate issue, for sure. Long overdue
and not yet fully achieved. But private club membership? Ms. Martha
Burk, head of the National Council of Women's Organizations seems to
think so, but the title of her organization is suspect in itself. "Women's
Organizations?" How gender specific. Does the Evanston (Illinois)
Women's Club accept men? If so, what's the point in calling it a Women's
Club? If not, where's the equity?
Augusta National Golf Club is an
old (1932) and very exclusive private golf club for rich and powerful
men who, for reasons of their wealth and power, choose to associate
with one another. What's wrong with that? Are "women's rights"
being offended by that? If rich and powerful women want to organize
a very exclusive golf club, is anyone preventing that occurrence? Is
Augusta's preference for rich and powerful men up for grabs because
they are the venue for a revered and historic golf tournament? Why?
It's a men's tournament, for God's sake.
C'mon, Martha, find an issue that's
worthy of discussion.
Let's suppose Ms Burk is successful
in extorting a woman member of Augusta. Where then is the case for an
Hispanic member? (although for all I know, there well may be one). What
about the Vietnamese? Are the Muslim minority any less deserving? If
the rich and powerful are represented, where is the equal opportunity
for the poor and powerless? Where would you have it end, Martha? When
private persons organize private clubs, are they no longer able to choose
their association?
There is a difference, Martha,
between prejudice and preference. If I prefer to organize a club made
up entirely of old, unpublished writers, who are all men with political
points of view, that is my right and my preference. If I organize a
club of old, unpublished writers of all genders and ethnic backgrounds,
with political points of view and then refuse membership to an old,
black woman unpublished writer with political points of view, then I
am correctly and properly charged with prejudice. Even so, if my rather
arcane club is private and subject to the membership rulings of a board,
then the club is still well within its stupid right to act prejudicially.
Even if you win, Martha, what will
you have accomplished? Successful extortion is extortion, none the less.
Your attempted forced membership of a woman at Augusta is merely an
embarrassment to women.
Actually, Martha, you are an embarrassment
to women as well. Has that occurred to you?
Get out of the Archives and read what Jim's writing
today |