Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They are a private club - they can admit or deny whoever they like.
Because of what the institution is. Membership at Augusta - and other clubs like it - isn't about golfing (previously women could golf there, they just couldn't be members of the club). Augusta is a place for the monied corporate and political elite to come together and initial and hash out business deals, to decide on political runs and backing, to jockey for corporate board positions etc, etc, etc. I imagine Augusta has several members who don't golf.
By excluding women from Augusta and clubs like it, you're locking women out of upper echelons of business and the halls of power. That's kind of the way these places were designed.
Because of what the institution is. Membership at Augusta - and other clubs like it - isn't about golfing (previously women could golf there, they just couldn't be members of the club). Augusta is a place for the monied and political elite to come together and initial and hash out business deals, to decide on political runs and backing, to jockey for corporate board positions etc, etc, etc. I imagine Augusta has several members who don't golf.
By excluding women from Augusta and clubs like it, you're locking women out of upper echelons of business and the halls of power. That's kind of the way these places were designed.
OK - but they are a private club - and they have just admitted women to the club.
When they were not admitting women as members - what prevented any woman who wanted to participate in "upper echelons of business" or the "halls of power" from beginning their own clubs?
I think that it is great that women can join Augusta now - but I didn't have any problem when they weren't allowed either - the club has its rules - and they have the liberty to enforce them.
There shouldn't be a controversy over women being admitted or not admitted as members - we are discussing a private club - which can associate with whom they wish.
OK - but they are a private club - and they have just admitted women to the club.
True, it's their decision. I was just addressing your question about why this in particular is controversial. It, and institutions like it, function much differently in our society than a bridge club or poker group, hence policies like this are controversial in a much different way.
Quote:
When they were not admitting women as members - what prevented any woman who wanted to participate in "upper echelons of business" or the "halls of power" from beginning their own clubs?
Think about that for a minute. Nothing stops women from starting their own club, but really, how much good would it do? It's very hard to get on a corporate board when those decisions are all being made by rich old men while shuttered up at private, rich-men-only clubs deciding which among them should get the position.
Quote:
There shouldn't be a controversy over women being admitted or not admitted as members - we are discussing a private club - which can associate with whom they wish.
But it is controversial.
Last edited by hammertime33; 08-20-2012 at 02:52 PM..
Why is it considered a 19th-century mindset to want to be around one's own kind? Are we not allowed to have differences anymore?
Should Jewish synagogues be integrated with Muslim mosques? Would that be considered a good thing?
There is nothing wrong with differences, its keeping differences apart that is the issue. As an african american male, i would love nothing more, than to have all things intergrated. I call it 19th century because that was mindset back in the 1800's when blacks were segregated. Being with around one's own kind is exactly the mindset I hope we one day eliminate, although i know it will never happen
OK - but they are a private club - and they have just admitted women to the club.
When they were not admitting women as members - what prevented any woman who wanted to participate in "upper echelons of business" or the "halls of power" from beginning their own clubs?
I think that it is great that women can join Augusta now - but I didn't have any problem when they weren't allowed either - the club has its rules - and they have the liberty to enforce them.
There shouldn't be a controversy over women being admitted or not admitted as members - we are discussing a private club - which can associate with whom they wish.
The reason this is controversial, is because augusta national represents the mindset that existed in the 50's 60's and 70's. This is a club that held a view that minorities and women were not good enough to be part of their club and discriminated against them. That is a mindset that alot of people want to see disappear.
In a historic change at one of the world's most exclusive golf clubs, Augusta National invited former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and South Carolina financier Darla Moore to become the first female members since the club was founded in 1932. ''This is a joyous occasion,'' chairman Billy Payne said Monday.
For some, it was a long time coming. Martha Burk and her women's advocacy group first challenged the club 10 years ago over its all-male membership.
The battle ended in typical style for Augusta National, with an understated announcement that left even Burk stunned. ''Oh my God. We won,'' she blurted out when contacted by The Associated Press.
Burk was not the first advocate to draw attention to women being left out, but it was an exchange with former chairman Hootie Johnson in 2002 that ignited the issue. Feeling as though the Augusta National was being bullied, Johnson stood his ground, even at the cost of cutting loose television sponsors for two years, when he famously said the club might one day ask a woman to join, ''but that timetable will be ours and not at the point of a bayonet.''
The comment became either a slogan of the club's resolve not to yield to public pressure or a sign of sexism, depending on which side of the debate was interpreting it.
I would like to preface this post as I don't want it misconstrued. I don't believe in going out of my way to make life difficult for anyone for any reason. In regard to women, we need their brainpower just as much as men, and their nurturing side (except for the feminists) that brings compassion, understanding, and of course, beauty . I don't mind an all-girls club at all, but there is no doubt that there is a double standard here. I had hope for Augusta, not because they were being "sexist," but because it's a private (all-male) club and they can do whatever they want. And I am obviously not a fan of the feminist agenda, which is to defeat the "Old Boys Network." I was surprised, actually, that Augusta stood up to the public pressure initially because I see increasingly less and less of that. Male bonding is male bonding and men have every right to do that, just as women have every right to go to the health clinic that was advertised in my local paper as "Women Caring For Women." What would people say, for example, if boys pushed for membership in the Girl Scouts? All girls, and completely sexist that boys are excluded just because of their sex. Right?
Looking at the language is this article is telling. Even the most successful men in society bowed to political/social pressure. The feminist machine wins yet another one. I think what is happening to men is also important for women, but for different reasons. What does the future hold for men...and women?
Last edited by Free-R; 08-22-2012 at 09:14 AM..
Reason: added link to article
Why should woman executives be excluded from the forum where most high level business deals are made? Are these elite men distressed by the potential competition?
I guess it depends on what the "it" you are referring to is.
In this case, what is all over for men is another organization that takes the form of a private social organization, but is in fact an opportunity for people to conduct various kinds of business discussions and transactions. What is over is the ability of wealthy and powerful men to exclude women from the opportunities to succeed and advance in business that men have always enjoyed.
This decision is an unmitigated good thing. The only negative thing that any rational person could say about it is that they took far too long to do it.
Why should woman executives be excluded from the forum where most high level business deals are made? Are these elite men distressed by the potential competition?
It's a private organization that has no bearing on other types of discrimination. I take some issue with defining it as "exclusion." It's just a bunch of men who want to be around other men like men have always done for forever. Develop a..."Augustine" National, and compete with the men.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is It Over For Men? Augusta National Adds Two Women As Members
. I don't mind an all-girls club at all, but there is no doubt that there is a double standard here. I had hope for Augusta, not because they were being "sexist," but because it's a private (all-male) club and they can do whatever they want. And I am obviously not a fan of the feminist agenda, which is to defeat the "Old Boys Network." I was surprised, actually, that Augusta stood up to the public pressure initially because I see increasingly less and less of that. Male bonding is male bonding and men have every right to do that, just as women have every right to go to the health clinic that was advertised in my local paper as "Women Caring For Women." What would people say, for example, if boys pushed for membership in the Girl Scouts? All girls, and completely sexist that boys are excluded just because of their sex. Right?
