or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by misty_mountainhop

Bull. He was called on it, he accepted it, he was DQ'd. End of story but now, somehow, you think he should have an additional penalty outside of what is proscribed for what he did? Come on.
Think the 18th should be the easiest? When was the last time you saw a good finish at the 18th on St. Andrews during a British Open? Maybe Daly and Rocca? With that exception, it's the most boring finish I can think of. Whether it's a par 3, 4 or 5, I think it needs to be a good risk/reward hole. Birdies there for the brave maybe but penalties for not pulling it off.
Pretty much always done it a la Nicklaus. Sometimes will do a Justin Rose and, while behind ball, use the club shaft with one eye closed to get a good fix on a near/intermediate target that's on my chosen line.
Neat GIF. 2013 looks awkward. Love how he swung it in '94 and 2000.
Went for 'other'. Really like the 'standard' Rifle shafts (see signature). True Temper DG as a close second. Hate PX as, for me, they feel very harsh.
Sure thing. I'm pretty comfortable although a few (k-troop and one or two others) make some difficult points. Pretty sure such a position based around pregnancy would be untenable in the U.K. I guess life is discriminatory but that doesn't mean things out of voluntary control shouldn't be ironed out as when they can be. Obviously not an entirely black/white issue, hence the increasing traffic and comment. Enjoy.
Yes, it is. Sorry, you are not correct on this. I also never said anyone was chucked for having sex - that has nothing to do with it. It's to do with the genders being treated demonstrably differently based purely on an accident of anatomy/biology. I'll accept (maybe) the point re. men impregnating women. In fact, I said as much above re. a contract which stipulates a 'no sex' clause. That would non-discriminatory. The situation as is being discussed is definitely...
The pregnancy is immaterial?? Good luck trying to convince anyone of that. You seem to be missing the point. The fact that this is based around something that is gender-specific makes it, de facto, sex discrimination. We obviously aren't going to agree on this so I'll leave it now.
Big deal. He apologised? Wow. Damage done. He's like the barrister in the legal drama making a point which the judge immediately says is inadmissable and that the jury should disregard. Too late, the idea is already in those jurors minds. If he apologised and meant it, great. I don't think that absolves him from facing any (possible) consequences though and nor should it.
I'm sorry you don't see it the right way. It's discrimination. This sort of thing has been done to death here (this side of the pond). Argued legally and it's discrimination. If I, as a guy, break my back sky diving and it puts me out of action for ages, that is something anyone, male or female, can do. There's no discrimination if I'm told my scholarship is pulled. I can't, however, get pregnant having sex whereas my female colleague on the team can. She gets chucked off...
New Posts  All Forums: