Should single sex golf clubs be allowed to exist?

[Fish]

A couple of interesting views/opinions already posted but, what is the general thought here?

Discuss

http://nationalclubgolfer.com/featu...ould-singlesex-clubs-be-allowed-to-exist.html

 

[DAVEYBOY]

NO!!!

 

[hovis]

No. Also dont like dedicated tee times. All are equal!

 

[Robobum]

Yeah, why not. Exclusively female or exclusively male just means another choice.

Private club totally funded and supported by itself....crack on

 

[guest100718]

Sure, why not.

 

[pbrown7582]

A club should be entitled to have its own rules and requirements if that means you have to be female or male fine i see no problem in that. If you dont like the rules dont join

 

[Fish]

No. Also dont like dedicated tee times. All are equal!

So to be equal you'd remove Ladies Days from clubs which are traditional Tuesdays around here.

If so, that would stand for seniors also!

 

[doublebogey7]

I think they should be allowed to exist, as to change the law to ban them would have unintended consequences for other private clubs. However I don't feel it is in the best interests of the game to allow such clubs to be affiliated to golf's governing bodies.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Private clubs should be able to run their clubs as per how the members voted. If that means no female members then that's how it should be for them - it's not illegal.

 

[Foxholer]

No problem with the concept of single sex clubs.

But I find a significantly higher percentage of the members than normal (at least of the Male only ones) have extremely out of date attitudes.

That doesn't mean there aren't plenty of similar attitudes in mixed clubs!

 

[cookelad]

I think clubs should have the right to choose who they let in but it should do so on a person by person basis not a blanket ban based on gender, ethnicity, sexual preference etc

 

[DCB]

Firstly The Royal Burgess Golfing Society isn't your run of the mill golf club. It was spawned out of the same pond as The Honourable Company of Edinburgh Golfers and Royal Musselburgh Golf Club. Only one of the three is what could be classed as a run of the mill club nowadays. RBGS will no doubt visit the process again in years to come, but, they've made their decision and hell will freeze over before they budge on that in the meantime.

Nice course, nice clubhouse but very much an old fashioned type of environment. If that's what they want, then it's up to them. It's not for me though.

 

[HotDogAssassin]

In response to those that have said a private club can make whatever rules they choose, if you don't like them don't join. What if the question was based upon single race rather than single sex membership? I'm confident that no one would advocate a club having a 'white only' rule, plus it would be unlawful. So where's the difference?

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Oh good god not again!!!!

 

[Foxholer]

In response to those that have said a private club can make whatever rules they choose, if you don't like them don't join. What if the question was based upon single race rather than single sex membership? I'm confident that no one would advocate a club having a 'white only' rule, plus it would be unlawful. So where's the difference?

What about The Black Lawyers Association?

 

[upsidedown]

Yup not got a problem with it

 

[Deleted member 15344]

In response to those that have said a private club can make whatever rules they choose, if you don't like them don't join. What if the question was based upon single race rather than single sex membership? I'm confident that no one would advocate a club having a 'white only' rule, plus it would be unlawful. So where's the difference?

But the question isn't based on race or colour of skin so it's irrelevant to the debate

 

[Hacker Khan]

Of course legally they can exist. But personally I think morally and for the good of the image of the game they should not exist, and certainly not given prestigious championships.

But I suspect the people who run golf and who can make these changes hold slightly different, some may say more antiquated views, so unless there becomes a huge financial reason to get rid of them they will stay.

 

[cookelad]

But the question isn't based on race or colour of skin so it's irrelevant to the debate

While not mentioned in the OP I don't think it is irrelevant, could you imagine the uproar if a club started refusing members because of the colour of their skin? And yet having a blanket ban on one gender or the other is deemed acceptable/allowed!

 

[FairwayDodger]

But the question isn't based on race or colour of skin so it's irrelevant to the debate

It's not irrelevant in the slightest. In many ways it gets right to the nub of the matter. It's currently illegal to discriminate based on race but not based on gender. The OP (I think) is asking whether it should be illegal to discriminate based on gender.

By ignoring the question and hiding behind the current legal position you are just copping out. Which seems unlike you, Liverpoolphil....