Originally Posted by Golfingdad
I also think that "sexist" is being used incorrectly here. Just because there weren't any actual single female members until recently doesn't mean they didn't allow women.
I'm not sure why that distinction would be relevant. Since they don't have to allow women, let's speak hypothetically. Whether a group disallows them access completely or only limits their access to a certain level wouldn't negate the justification they are using to discriminate.
Originally Posted by jamo
I don't mind Costas in a general, but I don't like it when he uses his sports platform for political issues (which happens to be just about every time he appears on my TV).
This is where I would disagree. I don't really know much about Costas' political views other than the gun commentary, but I do believe that public platforms (especially when it comes to sports) are some of the best places to get those issues out in the open...especially ones that nobody is willing to talk about. For some issues, that is the only way real progress will ever be made on minority or unpopular viewpoints. Sweeping things under the rug or ignoring them is the exact reason why history tends to repeat itself on matters of racism and bigotry as is evinced in present day politics.
Anyway, I've read the past 5 pages a couple of times and feel I have a comfortable grasp of the arguments. I can tell most people here would consider me a self-serving idiot as well if we went in-depth on this issue. That would be fruitless though, as most people are willing to reduce the discussion down to, "they are a private club, they can do what they want." I'm not sure why they think a manifestation of discrimination being legal speaks to the morality of it's inspiration. For anybody that truly cares about such things, that is the heart of the matter.
But I digress. I'm glad Costas said this during the radio show and hope the discussion grows louder over time. It will probably never happen, but I've been surprised before!