Can clubs discriminate over Joining Fees?

[Jacko_G]

Sorry but you still haven’t explained PD and Diane Abbot and suspect you won’t because it was utterly ridiculous to even attempt to use it as a comparison because it’s irrelevant

Thankfully people like yourself don’t get involved in recruitment of people to golf with your attitude - people being able to join without a JF has no relevance to when you joined and had to pay one , there is loads of different people who don’t pay a JF for differing reasons - doesn’t bother me

If a club has done it to attract ladies and it works then they should be applauded and the club long term will see the benefits of a diverse membership.

At the end if the day you can argue that it was done to attract a certain class of members. If you believe that it benefits the club by encouraging a diverse membership then that's fine.

However others may see it as discrimination based on the fact that this class of member is paying significantly less for the same benefits.

You can choose what camp you are in and what you believe, doesn't mean that you are any more correct than the other camp.

Like CC98 I'm also bowing out as it's just going round in circles again and turning into point scoring.

⛳⛳⛳⛳

Let's play golf.

 

[doublebogey7]

Ask her to do your finances she’s good at maths.
She could be the number two in the government in the future !
And the way politics are at the moment that’s possible.

She was put in a seat she couldn’t lose for quotas.
If you positively discriminate that means you are excluding someone else that’s not right imo.

Are you sure about that as far as I can tell Labour didn't introduce Quotas for prospective Parliment seats until the mid-2000's nearly 20 years after Ms. Abbot became an MP? It is true that she occupies a safe seat but she has increased her majority over the years der constituents feel she is doing a good job.

Not by any means is she my favorite politician but this constant reference to difficulty with sums in one interview is nothing more than casual sexism/racism.

 

[Papas1982]

Are you sure about that as far as I can tell Labour didn't introduce Quotas for prospective Parliment seats until the mid-2000's nearly 20 years after Ms. Abbot became an MP? It is true that she occupies a safe seat but she has increased her majority over the years der constituents feel she is doing a good job.

Not by any means is she my favorite politician but this constant reference to difficulty with sums in one interview is nothing more than casual sexism/racism.

Maybe on behalf of the media who showed it constantly, but i wouldn't say that anyone who references it is either sexist or racist. The mistake is simply high profile. So she has to deal with it.

 

[doublebogey7]

Maybe on behalf of the media who showed it constantly, but I wouldn't say that anyone who references it is either sexist or racist. The mistake is simply high profile. So she has to deal with it.

I didn't say anyone was either sexist or racist but are you seriously saying because the media use casual sexism/racism as part of an argument its ok for the rest of us to follow suit.

 

[clubchamp98]

Sexist or racist for saying someone can’t do their job properly that’s a new low.

My old mum would be horrified with my “attitude” that men and women are equal!!!

I’m out now .

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Sexist or racist for saying someone can’t do their job properly that’s a new low.

My old mum would be horrified with my “attitude” that men and women are equal!!!

I’m out now .

It’s because you brought Diana Abbott into it and tried to suggest she is something to do with positive discrimination- so what discrimination are they trying to combat by her winning her seat in the election ?

 

[Papas1982]

I didn't say anyone was either sexist or racist but are you seriously saying because the media use casual sexism/racism as part of an argument its ok for the rest of us to follow suit.

I'm saying that the media may have had a racist/sexist agenda when they put her in the spot light. But people using her as an example after that is neither racist or sexist. She simply made the highest profile gaff so gets mocked for It.

 

[doublebogey7]

I'm saying that the media may have had a racist/sexist agenda when they put her in the spot light. But people using her as an example after that is neither racist or sexist. She simply made the highest profile gaff so gets mocked for It.

Would you not say the Chancellor getting his numbers wrong is more high profile, but post the original headline this never gets mentioned, but then he is a white privileged male.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...4-today-programme-election-2017-a7742006.html

 

[Papas1982]

Would you not say the Chancellor getting his numbers wrong is more high profile, but post the original headline this never gets mentioned, but then he is a white privileged male.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...4-today-programme-election-2017-a7742006.html

I don't know what you're trying to prove tbh.

I have acknowledged that the media may have their own agenda which gave her mistake more air time. Which Is why the public give her more stick.

But that doesn't make them same members of public sexist or racist.

I don't Google no cock ups. So can only reference what is generally in the public domain.

That said, having just read the article it woukd appear that he got support due to his party. Not race. No who has an agenda?

Also, I'd say that stating one wrong number 32 not 52. Is a little less laughable than having the range of, what was it. 10k to 8billion?

 

[azazel]

A forum heavily populated by men, probably the majority in their 40s and older, getting their knickers in a twist about a golf club trying to attract more ladies to play. Shock! There really is a reason that some stereotypes become that way...