Supreme Court says no women need apply to Golf Club. Mod warning post 119

MagicMarker

WindSock wrote: »

You didn't. I did. My point was strippers are professionals and feel less insecure about dancing provocativley around strange men than the rest of women. Seeing as pole dancing classes are not in a lapdancing club, I would imagine most of those women wouldn't be comfortable with strange men in the class.

No. It's not comparing like with like. A lap dancing class or Curves isn't a purely social activity. It is a physical one. By that logic I could complain that they don't let women into the Mens Leinster Rugby team.

Once again bringing up ''security''. You're focusing on some women's insecurities and applying it to all women and using this as an excuse (a poor one at that) for women only gyms/classes etc. As I've already pointed out in this thread, males also have insecurities, possibly just a much as females! *shock horror*.

I really don't care about women only classes, or gyms. I just find it laughable that a ''feminist'' such as yourself can argue against a male only club while defending female only clubs. It's hypocrisy of the highest order.

MikeC101

Don't really understand the "women only gyms/classes are ok, men only clubs aren't" mentality to be honest. When you start defending this outlook on some abstract notions of insecurites, the argument doesn't really hold up. If you think one is ok, you're admitting you see reasons for exclusion based on gender. Why can those reasons only apply to one gender?

If a private club wants to discriminate, it should be free to do so, without being forced not to do so by the state. Hence, women only clubs are fine, as are men only. Certainly I'd raise an eyebrow at Portmarnock letting women play but not allowing them full membership and consider that hypocritical, but again, as a private club, they can do it if they want.

Dudess

I love how, on these threads, all women are held accountable for misandry.

You know the way when men are made to feel crap because of the actions of a few of them...?

MikeC101

WindSock wrote: »

You didn't. I did. My point was strippers are professionals and feel less insecure about dancing provocativley around strange men than the rest of women. Seeing as pole dancing classes are not in a lapdancing club, I would imagine most of those women wouldn't be comfortable with strange men in the class.

Those golfers on the television are professionals and feel less insecure about waving their big clubs about in front of strange women than the rest of us men.

I certainly don't want strange women ogling my buttocks as I wear my skin tight imitation leather plus twos on the golf course! Plus I'm insecure about my golfing ability, as last time I played I managed to hit a truck with the ball.

WindSock

MagicMarker wrote: »

Once again bringing up ''security''. You're focusing on some women's insecurities and applying it to all women and using this as an excuse (a poor one at that) for women only gyms/classes etc. As I've already pointed out in this thread, males also have insecurities, possibly just a much as females! *shock horror*.

I really don't care about women only classes, or gyms. I just find it laughable that a ''feminist'' such as yourself can argue against a male only club while defending female only clubs. It's hypocrisy of the highest order.

Not really. I haven't ever condemned male only gyms. Like I said, it's not like with like.

A secure and safe environement for females to work out is hardly a poor excuse for having them.

MikeC101

WindSock wrote: »

A secure and safe environement for females to work out is hardly a poor excuse for having them.

Would having men in the gym would make it an insecure and dangerous environment?

Anyway, I agree that female only gyms are a good idea. Why not, if there's a demand for them. Similarly, men only clubs are ok too. The choice of wording (secure and safe) is a little much though, no?

MagicMarker

WindSock wrote: »

Not really. I haven't ever condemned male only gyms. Like I said, it's not like with like.

A secure and safe environement for females to work out is hardly a poor excuse for having them.

Wow. Just, wow.

I think I'm done with talking to you Windsock.

WindSock

MikeC101 wrote: »

I certainly don't want strange women ogling my buttocks as I wear my skin tight imitation leather plus twos on the golf course! Plus I'm insecure about my golfing ability, as last time I played I managed to hit a truck with the ball.

You don't have to wear skin tight leather pants on a golf course if you don't want to.
Ability has nothing to do with women on the course. Likewise, not having men in a gym. Or in a shower for that matter.

speedboatchase

MikeC101 wrote: »

Anyway, I agree that female only gyms are a good idea. Why not, if there's a demand for them. Similarly, men only clubs are ok too.

Agreed, can we just stop this pointless argument between two people on this thread? Private female and male only gyms/clubs etc are perfectly fine and should co-exist. Hopefully this legislation will allow Portmarnock to exist without any legal challenges or public derision in the same way Curves exists today

Zulu

WindSock wrote: »

No. It's not comparing like with like. A lap dancing class or Curves isn't a purely social activity. It is a physical one.

Golf is physical. Seriously - what is your point?

WindSock

MikeC101 wrote: »

Would having men in the gym would make it an insecure and dangerous environment?

Anyway, I agree that female only gyms are a good idea. Why not, if there's a demand for them. Similarly, men only clubs are ok too. The choice of wording (secure and safe) is a little much though, no?

Not really when you consider the amount of women that have encountered unwanted negative attention from males.
For the rest of those women, or for the rest who can manage, they don't mind using mixed gyms.

Not only that, but equipment in Curves caters to the female form.

WindSock

Zulu wrote: »

Golf is physical. Seriously - what is your point?

I didn't say it wasn't. But women aren't excluded from playing. They are excluded from the Golf Club Membership. Doesn't really make much sense.

Can they do that to black people?

speedboatchase

WindSock wrote: »

Not really when you consider the amount of women that have encountered unwanted negative attention from males.
For the rest of those women, or for the rest who can manage, they don't mind using mixed gyms.

Not only that, but equipment in Curves caters to the female form.

I've read a few of your posts and I don't actually get the point you're making, I mean no offence. Are you against a male-only golf club? Are you against all private clubs restricting a gender or do you consider it a case by case basic?

Zulu

Do you want to allow exclusion based on sex (re: Portmarnock, Curves, ICA, pole dancing classes) or not?

speedboatchase

WindSock wrote: »

I didn't say it wasn't. But women aren't excluded from playing. They are excluded from the Golf Club Membership. Doesn't really make much sense.

Can they do that to black people?

Sure why not, if I want to create a private club for only members of my race I don't see the problem. Same goes for if I want to start a private religious club and don't want other faiths involved. And the exclusions of being members but still allowed play on Portmarnocks part was probably an ill-advised concession to help public relations

Zulu

Dudess wrote: »

I love how, on these threads, all women are held accountable for misandry.

I didn't see noone holding you accountable for nothin'!

WindSock

speedboatchase wrote: »

I've read a few of your posts and I don't actually get the point you're making, I mean no offence. Are you against a male-only golf club?

No. I am not against a male only golf club. I am against that they feel they must make it a policy to exclude female membership yet let them play on the course. And exclude females from socialising in the club in which they are allowed play. They call it a Golf Club. Why not just call it a Mens Club? (The social part)

WindSock

speedboatchase wrote: »

Are you against all private clubs restricting a gender or do you consider it a case by case basic?

I amn't against all private clubs restricting gender. But I think it would depend on some cases where it is a social club whether it should be done or not. Or even a strict policy.

speedboatchase

WindSock wrote: »

No. I am not against a male only golf club. I am against that they feel they must make it a policy to exclude female membership yet let them play on the course. And exclude females from socialising in the club in which they are allowed play. They call it a Golf Club. Why not just call it a Mens Club? (The social part)

So if they banned women from playing altogether and called it a Mens Golf Club? Calling it a simply a Mens Club might be confusing.

WindSock

speedboatchase wrote: »

So if they banned women from playing altogether and called it a Mens Golf Club? Calling it a simply a Mens Club might be confusing.

Or the Mens Club could be annexed from the Golf Club itself

I am more interested in general attitudes towards women in this country rather than a sports and social club, tbh. I personally don't give a hoot about golf or stuffy old boys.
However if I did love golf and ran a business I might feel differently.

Zulu

WindSock wrote: »

No. I am not against a male only golf club. I am against that they feel they must make it a policy to exclude female membership yet let them play on the course. And exclude females from socialising in the club in which they are allowed play. They call it a Golf Club. Why not just call it a Mens Club? (The social part)

This is a little confusing - am I right in saying you wouldn't have a problem if they banned women altogether?

WindSock

Zulu wrote: »

This is a little confusing - am I right in saying you wouldn't have a problem if they banned women altogether?

I've already addressed this to another poster.

thebman

WindSock wrote: »

I didn't say it wasn't. But women aren't excluded from playing. They are excluded from the Golf Club Membership. Doesn't really make much sense.

Can they do that to black people?

Well I'm sure membership allows them to have access to other facilities in the gold club.

Ones that make the male membership feel uncomfortable or they would have joined a club that allowed female members if they wanted to socialise with women after playing golf.

I don't get the argument, if this was the other way around, I don't think you'd have any problem with it based on what you've said in previous posts.

If these men have problems being around women in a social environment then let them be on their own. It doesn't cause any problems, forcing them to allow women would most likely cause tension.

Procasinator

WindSock wrote: »

No. I am not against a male only golf club. I am against that they feel they must make it a policy to exclude female membership yet let them play on the course. And exclude females from socialising in the club in which they are allowed play. They call it a Golf Club. Why not just call it a Mens Club? (The social part)

Okay, but does the name matter in the grand scheme of things? You agree they can have a male only club. But you don't like the fact that the girls are allowed to use some of the club facilities, but are not allowed to join the social club.

My old college had a bar. People outside of the college were allowed to drink there most of the time, except for some events. They were, however, not allowed to join the club.

I can go to many gyms without joining them, but I might have some disadvantages: higher cost per visit, can't get programmes/assessments from staff, etc.

I don't really see the problem here, besides you nit-picking on the name of the club.

Zulu

WindSock wrote: »

I've already addressed this to another poster.

You did, I just wanted you to confirm I got it right; I didn't want to misquote you.

So I'm correct in saying: you'd have no problem if they banned women altogether? ie: you've no problem with clubs/groups/societies that exclude people based on their gender?

WindSock

thebman wrote: »

Ones that make the male membership feel uncomfortable or they would have joined a club that allowed female members if they wanted to socialise with women after playing golf.

I don't get the argument, if this was the other way around, I don't think you'd have any problem with it based on what you've said in previous posts.

Those posts were referring to Curves and Pole dancing. Not to a social club.

If these men have problems being around women in a social environment then let them be on their own. It doesn't cause any problems,

But don't disguise it as something else for which it isn't. Then you don't have to make up rules to exclude anyone as everyone knows where it stands.

forcing them to allow women would most likely cause tension.

But forcing to keep women out, doesn't?

Trankton

WindSock wrote: »

Can they do that to black people?

They can do it to black women!!!

WindSock

Procasinator wrote: »

Okay, but does the name matter in the grand scheme of things? You agree they can have a male only club. But you don't like the fact that the girls are allowed to use some of the club facilities, but are not allowed to join the social club.

It's a bit exclusionary, don't you think?

My old college had a bar. People outside of the college were allowed to drink there most of the time, except for some events. They were, however, not allowed to join the club.

As far as I am aware of, anyone in this country has access a 3rd level education.

I can go to many gyms without joining them, but I might have some disadvantages: higher cost per visit, can't get programmes/assessments from staff, etc.

You can join a high paying gym if you have the ability to earn more money. A person can't change their gender or skin colour as easily.

I don't really see the problem here, besides you nit-picking on the name of the club.

Like I said before. It is misleading. Exclusionary and I don't see it as nit-picking when women were excluded, by law for a long time from many many places.

I like to think we have grown up a bit since then and become a bit more aware and that we don't need petty little rules and laws made to stop the girls crossing over to the boys side of the room to talk to them, again.

Trankton

WindSock wrote: »

I am more interested in general attitudes towards women in this country rather than a sports and social club, tbh.

Then why are you continually posting in a forum about Portmarnock Golf Club, I'm sure there are plenty of equality type forums you could get stuck into and actually stick to the point!!

WindSock

Trankton wrote: »

They can do it to black women!!!

Black Jewish Lesbians, no doubt









White people only club. Try and start one, and see how far you will get.

WindSock

Trankton wrote: »

Then why are you continually posting in a forum about Portmarnock Golf Club, I'm sure there are plenty of equality type forums you could get stuck into and actually stick to the point!!

The forum is AH. Anyone can post in it. Unless you are gay.

speedboatchase

This is just pointless and going round and round in circles. Basically Windsock believes it's "exclusionary" to not allow women membership to a golf club but play there, but it's ok for a gym to completely exclude men from any activity or membership of Curves fitness clubs. Sounds sexist but let's all remember that "women were excluded, by law for a long time from many many places" and "we don't need petty little rules and laws made to stop the girls crossing over to the boys side of the room to talk to them, again".

Except we need rules stopping boys crossing over to the girls room because it would be a potentially "dangerous" situation. Incredible trolling, I'm in awe

WindSock

speedboatchase wrote: »

This is just pointless and going round and round in circles. Basically Windsock believes it's "exclusionary" to not allow women membership to a golf club but play there, but it's ok for a gym to completely exclude men from any activity or membership of Curves fitness clubs. Sounds sexist but let's all remember that "women were excluded, by law for a long time from many many places" and "we don't need petty little rules and laws made to stop the girls crossing over to the boys side of the room to talk to them, again".

Except we need rules stopping boys crossing over to the girls room because it would be a potentially "dangerous" situation. Incredible trolling, I'm in awe

It's a Womens' gym. The equipment and programmes are in place to suit a womans physique. I have been over this many times, yes. It is not like with like. It is more similar to a womens shower.
I have also said plenty of times I have no problem with a Mens' gym.

Men and women have different bodies to each other. Shock horror!!!

What Curves isn't - A social club dressed up as a Golf Club that excludes a gender from joing by law, just because.

Zulu

In fairness folks, the hypocrisy being posted here is as clear as day to everyone. I wouldn't worry too much about it.
Just remember, exclusion based on gender is ok. See here.

MagicMarker

Clearly, men and women's bodies have difference, but the basics behind health and fitness apply to ALL equally.

I would be interested in hearing about this ''special'' equipment curves has, please tell me more. How do women in unisex gyms ever cope? :rolleyes:

Trankton

speedboatchase wrote: »

Incredible trolling, I'm in awe

Not sure it's trolling, as over the years I've found many of the feminist types (not all) to have attitudes like this (particularly those crazy extreme feminists).

They're like spoilt children who when they get everything they want decide that they also want everthing belonging to everyone else. And why should they get it, well because they're women of course.:)

I agree that this country was very male orientated way back in the day but I believe we have moved on from this and have a very equal society. So now we just get all the nit-picking on all the little issues as they have nothing else to be whining about.

Again, this is not directed against all women or feminists but against that small minority which exist just to complain and make life difficult for everyone else.

Zulu

WindSock wrote: »

What Curves isn't - A social club dressed up as a Golf Club that excludes a gender from joing by law, just because.

...don't forget the ICA is an exclusive social club.

speedboatchase

Zulu wrote: »

...don't forget the ICA is an exclusive social club.

Windsock, should I be allowed join the ICA?

WindSock

I don't know, do you want to? Can I join the CYMS? Don't really want to as I have no interest.

DeVore

WindSock wrote: »

I don't know, do you want to? Can I join the CYMS? Don't really want to as I have no interest.

Classic deflection.


The question was "should he be allowed".

DeV.

Warfi

Trankton wrote: »

Not sure it's trolling, as over the years I've found many of the feminist types (not all) to have attitudes like this (particularly those crazy extreme feminists).

They're like spoilt children who when they get everything they want decide that they also want everthing belonging to everyone else. And why should they get it, well because they're women of course.:)

To say that Windsock (or anyone else for that matter) are trolling and have 'feminist attitudes' because they have an opinion that's different to yours does not an argument make.

First of all, women got the equailty they enjoy today because women in the past got up off their ar*es and fought for their (and every woman's) rights. I'm sure back in the day they were probably labelled as troublemakers because they dared (imagine that?) to speak their minds.

Remind you of anything?

Now there are arguments about women being members of a golf club. Like Windsock, I wouldn't give a damn about the club or joining it. Let them have their male club if they want it. But obviously somebody's annoyed about it and decided to take it to court. They have every right to do so. Maybe the people who are fighting for this are worried that society will slip back into old ways if things are left unchecked. I don't know, I'd have to talk to them and find out.

So should you by the looks of things. You seem to think a woman having an opinion is akin to a woman having an 'attitude'. That's far more worrying than a male member only golf club, in my opinion.

WindSock

DeVore wrote: »

Classic deflection.


The question was "should he be allowed".

DeV.

I don't think there should be a law in place that excludes him from joining, if he so wants to. I don't know if there is a law or policy in place that excludes men or anyone else who don't fit the demographic. Are city women allowed in?

At least it is what it says it is.

WindSock

This...

Warfi wrote: »

You seem to think a woman having an opinion is akin to a woman having an 'attitude'. That's far more worrying than a male member only golf club, in my opinion.

Is also what worries me the most.

MagicMarker

I love women and their opinions.

I just don't like hypocrites.

MikeC101

WindSock wrote: »

You don't have to wear skin tight leather pants on a golf course if you don't want to.

Shouldn't I have the right to wear what I want in the safe and secure environment of my club without worrying about being ogled like a piece of meat?

WindSock wrote: »

Ability has nothing to do with women on the course. Likewise, not having men in a gym. Or in a shower for that matter.

The point is men can be as insecure about things as women. In this case, it may be ability. Why not? You are not the sole arbitrator of what's ok to feel insecure about and what isn't.

For the record, I think the Portmarnock rules of allowing women to play but not become members is quite silly, but their club, their rules.

WindSock

MagicMarker wrote: »

I just don't like hypocrites.

I also dislike hypocrites. Guess we have something in common afterall.

speedboatchase

MagicMarker wrote: »

I love women and their opinions.

I just don't like hypocrites.

QFT.

MagicMarker

This thread should be closed now. No point feeding the trolls any longer.

WindSock

MikeC101 wrote: »

Shouldn't I have the right to wear what I want in the safe and secure environment of my club without worrying about being ogled like a piece of meat?

Sure. What if there were gays in the club though?

The point is men can be as insecure about things as women. In this case, it may be ability. Why not? You are not the sole arbitrator of what's ok to feel insecure about and what isn't.

You are right, I amn't. I am only giving reasons as to why I believe these thing exist in the first place.

speedboatchase

Agree, it's completely devolved. I'm glad the prevailing attitude from the offset from majority of posters was that the ruling was correct

*scuttles off to Films forum*