We've launched the new forums! Read more here

What do you think of the "No women members allowed" at Augusta

JB said:
So then my thoughts hold true the entire time. That women should not have womens only clubs either correct? No female only health spas or anything else?

Talking about the PGA and talking about Augusta National are two very different things. People always want to make a fuss about women not being able to get into certain things, yet nobody says anything about mens limitations. WOmen have played in the PGA. Yet men have not played in the LPGA.

There are plenty of clubs (not golf) in this country that are female only. There are colleges that are female only. Yet because of Augusta's popularity, and exclusivity, it becomes a target. Martha Burke did this already and made a HUGE ordeal out of something. When the time came less than 25 people IIRC showed up for her protest.
Click to expand...

Hey JB
Isn't this a great debate? I love it! ;)

But of course, you know me and as much as I say I'm just collecting data, I have to respond.

I think the men would be welcome on the LPGA (by me and my fellow female bloggers for sure anyway ;)), but I don't think the men's egos would allow them to enter. Oops, did I say that out loud? :D

Absolutely there are a ton of clubs out there and private schools that are men/women only. I don't argue with that. I am just wondering how people feel about Augusta - not only its lack of females but its elitist status.

I know of golf clubs in my city that did not allow Jewish people to join. It wasn't all that many years ago either (i.e. in the last 20 years). Is that okay because it is a private club? Maybe legally yes, but morally? I leave that question with you...
 
I believe that you are incorrect about the LGPA. I believe the rules specifically say that men cannot compete. I think people miss the point. Women play Augusta all the time. While accompanied by a male member. As a Jew, i will answer your question and say yes, it is fine. It does not bother me in the least. My question has always been this way. If a club is male only, the only people that seem to care is women. Yet if a club is female only, you never hear anyone complain about it. It seems equality wants to only run one way.
 
RocketSauce said:
i think that it will to be hard for you to keep your opinion out of the article. i just get the feeling that you dont agree with their policy. or am i mistaken?
Click to expand...


I like Gayle's blog and articles a lot, but RS, I might agree with you on this one.
 
JB said:
I believe that you are incorrect about the LGPA. I believe the rules specifically say that men cannot compete. I think people miss the point. Women play Augusta all the time. While accompanied by a male member. As a Jew, i will answer your question and say yes, it is fine. It does not bother me in the least. My question has always been this way. If a club is male only, the only people that seem to care is women. Yet if a club is female only, you never hear anyone complain about it. It seems equality wants to only run one way.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised if the "powers that be" at the LPGA didn't allow men. Heck, the don't allow Duramed players to Monday-qualify for LPGA tournaments. But Nationwide guys can Monday-qualify for PGA events. LPGA has some work to do on their rules I think.

Happy to agree to disagree. But I don't think the only people who care are women. That's a generalization that I think is a bit unfair.

But we all have our own opinions and I'm happy to be able to debate them here. If we all agreed, life would be boring.
 
You are right about that. Debates can be fun and interesting if done properly. THe generalization was moreso about you have yet to hear too many men complaining about a club not allowing them in. Its in their makeup so to speak.
 
Golfgal said:
I think the men would be welcome on the LPGA (by me and my fellow female bloggers for sure anyway ;)), but I don't think the men's egos would allow them to enter. Oops, did I say that out loud? :D
Click to expand...

Really? If someone had the opportunity to roll through an LPGA event and get the winner's paycheck, I bet you'd find some takers.
 
You got that right Grogger.
 
As far as the private club/school/workout facility/etc, I have no problem if they choose to be male or female only. If they choose to restrict a large portion of the population one way or the other that's their choice.

It's somewhat funny when you hear about women complaining over membership to something like Augusta - but when was the last time you heard about men protesting over gaining access to Curves?

Spoiler
Yeah, I know, Curves isn't that exclusive but it's the first female-only membership that came to mind, and it's EVERYWHERE!
 
As I said elsewhere, but maybe didn't say clearly, I don't think much of the argument that men can have Augusta because women get to have their women-only venues too. I think it oversimplifies the situation. The two are not equivalent, for reasons that seem to me to be obvious, and thus the argument is flawed. In that unfortunately hostile other thread mentioned above, I never did hear a decent justification for the rule at Augusta. It can't be slow play, as women are permitted to play. If slow, or crummy, play were really the issue, half of the white-haired old men who make up the Augusta membership would be kicked off the roles. So femaleness is a poor proxy for bad play, as there is excessive individual attribution uncertainty involved in playing speed and performance (what I mean by that is Annika and Lorena could kick the crap out of most of the male members of this internet community, for example, but those self same members are not excluded from getting on the waiting list at Augusta if they have the dough, but Annika and Lorena are.) No, I believe the only justifications ventured for the Augusta exclusion are (i) it is a long-standing tradition (which is not actually a justificiation, just a fact), and (ii) it gives the men an escape from the behavioral norms that apply when having social congress with women. I don't want to make light of #2 -- especially in the South, there are some distinct differences in how men are expected to behave around women, and I certainly believe the ability to have a place to associate free from the intrusions of the fairer sex is considered a value-added to the Augusta members. Given my appreciation that there is something to justification #2 (but not #1), I would normally not give much of a dang about the rule, except for this additional fact: Augusta is special. Augusta is not just any old country club. Rather, Augusta, through its members, has thrust itself into the public eye as among the greatest of american golf venues. It is the host site of one of the 4 great golf ventures every year, a fact its membership carefully husbands in all sorts of ways. Accordingly, membership at Augusta is something special. And for that reason, the members at Augusta, I believe, have greater obligation as well. I understand why women would believe the exclusion is unfortunate and misguided. In the case of Augusta, I tend to agree, notwithstanding the existence of the LPGA and Curves.

Edit: Here's an old picture of the membership list back around 2004. Look at the ages on some of those dudes! Eesh. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/golf/masters/2002-09-27-augusta-list.htm
 
Last edited:
Golfgal,

I have to assume you've read Marcia Chambers' Unplayable Lies. It's 12 years old and heavy handed, but her points remain valid. It's a variation on WSE's #2.

Middle aged white guys still run this country.

Left to ourselves, all of us prefer to hang out with the folks we're most comfortable with--folks who look like us and come from the same place. Often, we need to be forced out of that little comfort zone.

When it's time to do a deal, give some business, whatever, we like doing it with the folks we're comfortable with. And if the only folks we're really comfortable with are the folks who look like us and have the same background, the system just perpetuates itself.

So the trick is to get some new faces at the table. It doesn't matter what a private club's rules say about not talking business. The members of an exclusive private club are going to hang together. Those who aren't allowed to join have seriously fewer opportunities to cut those deals. This goes back to WSE's earlier point about exclusive clubs created by the oppressed not being an issue on the same level. It's not about equality of resutl; it's about equality of opportunity.

And all of your already know all this.
 
IMO, its a pretty simple idea. Augusta is a private establishment, and they have the right to determine things like this. It is a constitutional right.
 
JB, your argument that you don't ever hear men complaining about all women's clubs is because they don't want to join them. I am willing to bet that if there was a golf course as prestigious as Augusta that only females could join men would be complaining. Augusta is a story because it is Augusta! There was a thread on here recently about what are the top courses people would love to play and at least 90% of posters said Augusta. The reason that there is a debate and that people don't think it is fair is because they want to be let in on the fun too. All of it, not just playing there, but being a member. It is not as if there is a women's equivalent or any equivalent for that matter that they could join.

I personally don't mind that it is an all boys club, but I am not sure if that is just because I wouldn't be able to afford to join even if I was allowed.
 
Sox, your forgetting one thing though. Millions of people want to join Augusta, male and female. But not anybody can. Price and other factors play a huge role.
 
is it actually in the rules there that women are not allowed to join? or is it just that there are no women members? i could've sworn i read somewhere that nowhere in the rules does it say women cannot join.... i could be wrong though. i am a lot, lol
 
JB said:
Sox, your forgetting one thing though. Millions of people want to join Augusta, male and female. But not anybody can. Price and other factors play a huge role.
Click to expand...

That is actually exactly what I was saying. Millions of people want to join Augusta, only a few can. If there were equivalent male and female applicants, lets say even money, prestigious family name, whatever, the man would be accepted and the woman wouldn't. Just because it is hard to get into doesn't mean that there aren't women out there that wouldn't fit the bill. I think you are proving my point, people only care if they want a piece of the pie and as you said, millions of people want to join Augusta.
 
soxngolf said:
That is actually exactly what I was saying. Millions of people want to join Augusta, only a few can. If there were equivalent male and female applicants, lets say even money, prestigious family name, whatever, the man would be accepted and the woman wouldn't. Just because it is hard to get into doesn't mean that there aren't women out there that wouldn't fit the bill. I think you are proving my point, people only care if they want a piece of the pie and as you said, millions of people want to join Augusta.
Click to expand...

i dont think you can apply to be a member there. i think it is by invitation only
 
You are correct in that entire point. However, it is a moot point. There is a waiting list like you would not believe, so male or female, not too many are getting in. But there are clubs that still do not allow Jews or men, or women, or anything else. Yet nobody gets up in arms. Augusta has allure, yet the funny thing about the whole situation is Martha Burke started this, and yet only made a stink about Augusta. There are many clubs that are men only. Just like there are many facilities that are women only.

Augusta is invitation only. There are no applicants.
 
and there are other country clubs in this country that have only male members. but i dont think ive ever heard of anyone protesting them
 
RocketSauce said:
and there are other country clubs in this country that have only male members. but i dont think ive ever heard of anyone protesting them
Click to expand...

Back when the whole thing happened with Augusta and Ms. Burke, Real Sports on HBO did an episode about it. Bryant Gumble was a member at the time of a club that did not allow women.
 
JB said:
Sox, your forgetting one thing though. Millions of people want to join Augusta, male and female. But not anybody can. Price and other factors play a huge role.
Click to expand...

Listen, I agree fully that they can do anything they want as a legal matter. And certainly that membership at A.Nat. is a valuable and rare commodity they rightly dole out only in highly limited quantities. Naturally, then, the market will bear a huge price point. We live in a capitalist society so allowing the market to work is hardly objectionable. But none of those facts explains why a criterium for membership should rightly be posession of male genitalia. Given the thin justifications for the policy I've heard, it certainly seems a reasonable subject of criticism.

Another point about that membership list I linked up. Look at the huge predominance of really really really old farts. What that suggests is that membership is held by many of the members themselves not so much as a golden opportunity for personal rounds on the course per se, but is instead a valuable business commodity and/or marker for social prestige. Heaven forbid a woman VP of Coca-Cola be able to make the same use!

Edit: sorry I'm one handed and the discussion is passing me by. The answer to why the fuss about Augusta is it has thrust itself into that position. Its membership is rare and valued because it hosts the Masters, not bc lots of people want to join a club in the hinterlands of Georgia. Its members enjoy all the benefts of being members of the venue for the Masters; therefore, with that benefit comes the added responsibility of accomodation. At least it is a valid argument.
 
Last edited:
I respect your points WSE and the way in which you express them.

My counter would be ... why would the female VP of Coca-Cola want to be a member of a club with a bunch of "really really old" male farts?

I'd give her much more credit for finding a fantastic club somewhere and turning into the next, "all female" Augusta. I think the "valuable business commodity" argument is severely overstated. If it really is a good 'ol boys club, they aren't going to extend her those benefits anyway.

Show some boobs (as opposed to balls, I suppose), take some initiative, and form a good 'ol girls club that the men are all champing at the bit to join.
 
worst_shot_ever said:
Listen, I agree fully that they can do anything they want as a legal matter. And certainly that membership at A.Nat. is a valuable and rare commodity they rightly dole out only in highly limited quantities. Naturally, then, the market will bear a huge price point. We live in a capitalist society so allowing the market to work is hardly objectionable. But none of those facts explains why a criterium for membership should rightly be posession of male genitalia. .
Click to expand...

again, and i could be wrong about this, but i dont think it states ANYWHERE in the rules there that females are not allowed to join. i am pretty sure there are just no female members and never have been. im sure i read this somewhere. but does anyone know for sure? maybe im mistaken?
 
RocketSauce said:
i think that it will to be hard for you to keep your opinion out of the article. i just get the feeling that you dont agree with their policy. or am i mistaken?
Click to expand...

Hey Rocket..

I'm sorry I missed this...I would have responded earlier...

You know...I actually don't know my position on this whole issue. Wierd isn't it? The argument about Brownies, private girl schools and Curves just doesn't ring with me. I just don't see Augusta National - home of the biggest golf major in the USA in the same league as those. Our daughter goes to an all girls school and she is there because it has the best academic reputation in the city. But I am looking forward to her integrating with boys next year. I think that's important. I'm not into segregation.

That being said, I don't know where the line should be drawn on the rights of private clubs to exclude anyone. In my heart, I just feel it is wrong. The "no dogs no woman" sign in Scotland still bothers me when I think about it. The fact that golf clubs in my city didn't allow Jewish people to join bothers me.

So my personal feelings are more about my feelings of morality, not about legal rights. Anyway...I'm probably more of the mind of Tiger and what he said in 2002:

"Hootie is right, and Martha is right. That's the problem," Woods said after a practice round for the Disney World Golf Classic. "They're both right, but they're going about it the wrong way. If they both sat down and talked about it, it would be resolved a lot better than what's going on right now."

Maybe people just need to talk rationally about things and maybe they'll change for the betterment of everyone.
 
well, the way i feel about it is the same as many others: its a private club, they can allow whomever they want in. i honestly dont see why it is even an issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top