Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon
I guess the players need some on-course sandwiches.
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
What were they thinking?! Bears are attracted to the menstruation which obviously puts male members in danger.
I can't wait to watch guys try to tee off while also fighting away bears!
RABBLE RABBLE TRADITION RABBLE RABBLE
The Mayans were right.
Ginni Rometty wasn't in this group. The last news I heard on all this was that IBM might put some pressure on Augusta National, since their CEO is traditionally invited to become a member.
No commercials
Images from the construction site of the new women's locker room.
So, they refuse to admit the CEO of IBM during the Masters, but they let these two ladies in? Why the sudden change of heart?
Rometty made it a non-issue and didn't ask for membership.
My lawn... you can stay on it.
Why?
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!
I wonder what Fuzzy Zeoller has to say about this?
/s
/15-yr-old jokes
...welcome to the 20th century. I love the Masters, but this has been a long time coming.
C. Rice a female is questionable.
Any comments from Booger, or Hooter, or whatever that guy's name was who kept pratting on about the sanctity of his "toonament"?
Maybe this will spur Curves into accepting male members.
Gentelemen Only Ladies Forbidden
\s
Because "Fuck" was already taken
The only stipulation was that they had to pee standingup
And no ladies' tees. Mens' tees or GTFO.
20th century.
Not sure how others feel, but the elitist culture of golf sickens me. The sport has become a mechanism for rich white people to surround themselves with other rich white people by paying exorbitant country club fees.
I never watch professional golf, it is boring, and being good is more a product of privilege than anything else.
lol
Strange, the reason you dislike golf is exactly the same reason I like golf. I'll assume the inverse is true for demolition derbies or grit eating contests or whatever it is the peons beneath me consider entertainment these days.
Looking at my hometown public course (in a fairly big metropolitan area) eighteen holes varies between $21-$45 depending on the day of the week, with a discount for weekday afternoons and a price bump for weekends and holidays. In high school, golf paid the same fees as football and basketball did.
Edit: I went back and forth on whether to say this or not, and I'm sure I'm about to get negged to bolivian, but I don't really see why it's okay to say something of this nature about one group of people/sport and not another. If you or I had posted this same comment replacing "golf" with another sport, "rich" for poor and "white" for another race, this whole site would be up in arms about it.
I don't agree with half of what gjking said, but he does have a point about golf talent being a result of priveledge. Obviously people like Tiger Woods are incredibly talented, but not many people have a shot at being good at golf.
With regards to your comment (your edit specifically), it doesn't really work that way. A rich white male can go to his local gym and practice basketball, just like a poor man could. They aren't priced out of that at all. But poorer people are definitely priced out of playing golf. Not only can many people not afford the fees, but buying equipment alone is at least a couple hundred dollars. Even having a local public course is something only the upper middle class generally have access to. That's why poor people instead turn to basketball/football/soccer, and golf is almost exclusively for rich people.
Oh there's no denying that basketball and soccer are less expensive to play, my issue is more about being critical of the logic behind his decision not to watch golf and the reaction from the board to his post. I will say, though, that affording the thirty dollars per week during the summer plus the initial equipment investment isn't something I would call upper middle class only. I know more than a few people in lower income brackets that spend about that much on baseball games, hockey games, ect.
Using the PGA in place of his general statement about golf, it's just as ridiculous to say that the PGA is unwatchable because it has a lot of white men with (probably) college educated parents from the suburbs competing as it is to say the NBA is unwatchable because it's made up of predominantly young black men from the inner city, with many coming from lower income households. Despite being substantively the same statement, the general reaction seems much different.
Seriously the patrons of many courses these days would fit in better on the next lane over from the Dude in "The Big Lebowski" than filling out Judge Smails foursome in "Caddyshack".
Don't hate golf. Abide.
The rudiments of soccer are cheap (a ball, something to vaguely determine goal boundaries), but soccer can and does get really flippin' expensive to get good at. League fees, travel, shoes and uniforms,expected volunteer time from parents, coaching, camping, private schools with the best teams, etc. don't come cheap.
Sure, you don't need those things to play, but if we're talking about relative opportunity to become a professional in a sport, you're still better off being wealthy.
On the flip side, hand-me-down clubs and a bucket of balls, the equivalent of back-alley soccer, are pretty inexpensive.
One of the other benefits of golf is that you can continue to enjoy it at any age, and players of any ability level can still enjoy each other's company (and even compete against each other). That's hard to do with contact team sports like soccer or basketball, or even other blueblood "yuppie" sports like tennis.
but I don't really see why it's okay to say something of this nature about one group of people/sport and not another. If you or I had posted this same comment replacing "golf" with another sport, "rich" for poor and "white" for another race, this whole site would be up in arms about it.
I'm not going to neg you or anything, your post was obviously respectful & genuine; but if you really don't see why it can cause an uproar you need to study more of this country's history and do some traveling. It would be nice if we were at the point where anything is "fair game", sadly we're not quite there yet.
"Shouldn't" might be the better word to incorporate there. I think my second paragraph of my second comment is a better way of saying what I originally meant, which boils down to race being an illogical factor to base sports viewership on.
It's less like that than it used to be.
....the NFL and NBA sicken me too. Its just a bunch of rich African Americans surrounding themselves with other rich African Americans. Then complain that there not enough black coaches, QBs, etc, yet 90% of the league is black.
\s
So basically, your a liberal ?
Of course, nobody should ever want to hang out with people who they have something in common with. I'll bet whatever activities you do for fun, you make extra sure to partake of them with people from all possible walks of life.
I don't like the political nature of your post, but I do think that golf's growing lack of inclusion for the working class in this era is affecting the quality of the sport in the arena of competition. I belileve that we are getting too many spoiled, entitled country club players on our tour, and it is a major reason why we are getting trounced by international players in too many majors and in the Ryder Cup.
If Rory McIlroy had grown up in the US, I doubt that he would have had the access to enough practice to become as good as he is now.
It's much worse on the LPGA, though; the US tour has been pretty much taken over by Asian players who, simply put, grossly outwork their US counterparts. Most of them are working class, and golf is their way "out" of their situations there.
This isn't a diatrabe against the rich, though, or even those who belong to country clubs. It's more of a wish that the US would find a way to provide access and teaching to young players who could develop into the next Rory McIlroy or Yani Tseng.
I strongly disagree that golf is becoming LESS accessible to the working class - what exactly do you base that on? Koreans are also taking over Starcraft, but we don't call that a class thing. Perhaps they do work harder, but I suspect their dominance in the women's tour has more to do with the relative popularity of women's golf in Asia.
The world needs ditch diggers too !
Go Blue!
I don't have a problem with it, but I wouldn't have admitted any women. It's a men's club...er...was. It is not, and never has been about equal rights, at least for me. I've never understood why people got so upset over it. It's a men's club. Where's the controversy? Is it really a big deal to have a private men's club? Nobody has ever been able to properly articulate to me why he/she was so upset.
The two main reasons I think are
1. They have as members many prominent public figures, politicians, CEOs of major corporations etc. So (you could argue) it follows that if they refuse to admit women, the members (again, members who have significant ties to the general public) support discrimination.
2. They host one of the most prestigious golf tournaments in the world. If they refuse to admit women, one could argue that advertisers, Jim Nance etc., the entire PGA . . . ., support a discriminatory policy.
They're a private club, in other words, but their ties to the public are significant and far reaching.
That's my understanding anyway.
The discrimination argument. Girl Scouts, Curves, PEO, and Im sure many others, don't allow men. So what?
obviously
Why would a man want to join the Girl Scouts? Is there something you're not telling us masterkaw?
The women's dentist association is a great orginization and many male dentists would like to be members of it. They frankly shut down three last year.
You know what, this might sound political and I don't care, but I support discrimination too. In the right context, that is. Sometimes guys just want to hang out with guys. Sometimes girls just want to hang out with girls. Why that's considered terrible and wrong, I don't know.
We should never have given them the right to vote.
You hit for the trifecta.
Actually you're 0 for 4, what with "you're" bad grammar.
And I advise you actually read a biography of Ms. Rice--were she born male, white, and rich, she'd have been added to Mt. Rushmore already.
Oh yes, finally we have gender equality in this country because a damn golf club admitted women. I really do not understand the big stink, sometimes men just want to play golf with other men and have some time to themselves. I don't think anyone would have a problem if a course opened next-door named Augustina that only allowed female members.
I just had to listed to some cranky old hag on ESPN radio bitch and moan about how "sexist" Augusta is and how she isn't happy with only two female members and that it is "was a long time coming". Quit complaining and build your own damn course. Under the guise of her "logic" fraternities are certainly sexist for not allowing female members. Guess what happened, sororities opened to only allowed female members and everyone was HAPPY!
As someone said above, why aren't men screaming about Curves or the Girl Scouts, or numerous other gender specific organizations? Another question, are they adding in Ladies' tees and building an entirely new locker room?
~Herm
Herm 2012.
You got my vote.
The Augustina idea. That actually sounds productive.
I too fail to grasp the big deal. Many all-female and a shrinking number of all-male institutions continue to exist. Many more groups are unofficially but de facto segregated by gender or race because that's how their members like it. The world does not fail to turn because of it. The reality is that Augusta is an extremely exclusive club that (probably) none of us on this board will ever be able to join, regardless of the configuration of our reproductive organs.
Hooray! A small number of insanely wealthy / connected women now can play golf with a small number of insanely wealthy / connected men! In that context, doesn't treating this as a huge women's rights victory ring a little hollow? I mean, at a time when, in some parts of the world, women can't drive, vote, show their faces, or have extramarital sex without getting killed for it, we're seriously going to make a big deal over whether or not a private organization wants to be a men's fraternity?
On the other hand, I supported this move for the same reason Daniel Tosh supports legalizing marijuana - now we don't have to hear about it anymore.
Anyone ever seen the lawn by the Martha Cook building?
It's awesome. All the statues and the metal picked fence. My roommate in undergrad was chilling there with his girlfriend one day and a girl asked him if he lived in Martha Cook. Rather than being polite and saying you can't be on our lawn because you are a boy; the girl made a mockery of the situation then kicked both my roommate and his girlfriend, who was not a Martha Cook resident, out of the area. I get where the residents at Martha Cook are coming from and I get where most of the members at Augusta are still coming from. It's not the end of the world if guys want to chill with guys and girls with girls.
Maybe an Mgoblog member may be allowed onto Martha Cook's lawn someday too?
For those who are interested, golf's best blog is www.GeoffShackelford.com ; Geoff is one of the best new-generation golf writers in the world, and as an acknowledged expert on Dr. Alister Mackenzie (the architect of Augusta National and the Cypress Point Club), he is a huge fan of the University of Michigan Golf Course.
And as always, if you want the dumbest low-level Spike-TV coverage of golf, you can reliably turn to Deadspin. As usual.
Great, now they'll be wanting to vote too...
