Muirfield Out of Open Rota, Denies Women Membership

[krupa]

http://espn.go.com/golf/story/_/id/15605581/muirfield-loses-open-championship-vote-allowing-women-members

Muirfield members voted to maintain their "no women members" rule.  As a result, the R&A has taken them out of consideration for hosting the Open.

As a private club, Muirfield can do what they want, but the mindset seems a more than a little out-dated.

[boogielicious]

1 minute ago, krupa said:

http://espn.go.com/golf/story/_/id/15605581/muirfield-loses-open-championship-vote-allowing-women-members

Muirfield members voted to maintain their "no women members" rule.  As a result, the R&A has taken them out of consideration for hosting the Open.

As a private club, Muirfield can do what they want, but the mindset seems a more than a little out-dated.

The pressure is on for all clubs to be more inclusive. I just don't understand why you would want to attract half the population. But on the other hand, it is their club.

[Jeremie Boop]

Yet this year's host is still men only. And until 2014 St. Andrews was men only.  Augusta National was men only until 2012. I don't agree with clubs not allowing women to join, but I don't see why that has any bearing on them hosting an event. In the end, it doesn't really bother me much either way because we'll still be able to watch them play on fantastic courses.

Edited May 19, 2016 by Jeremie Boop

[krupa]

1 minute ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Yet this years host is still men only. And until 2014 St. Andrews was men only.  Augusta National was men only until 2012. I don't agree with clubs not allowing women to join, but I don't see why that has any bearing on them hosting an event. In the end, it doesn't really bother me much either way because we'll still be able to watch them play on fantastic courses.

The R&A doesn't want to be accused of supporting/approving sexism.

10 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

The pressure is on for all clubs to be more inclusive. I just don't understand why you would want to attract half the population. But on the other hand, it is their club.

I have read this 3 or 4 times and can't quite figure out what you mean.

[Jeremie Boop]

2 minutes ago, krupa said:

The R&A doesn't want to be accused of supporting/approving sexism.

Like I said, the host this year is still men only. So, I assume that they'll remove this course from the rotation if they don't change their policy as well. Either way, doesn't really make much difference to me because there are plenty of great courses to replace any that they remove from the rotation. I actually figure the next time they do a vote at Muirfield the change will pass though, it only failed by a fairly slim margin.

[boogielicious]

6 minutes ago, krupa said:

The R&A doesn't want to be accused of supporting/approving sexism.

I have read this 3 or 4 times and can't quite figure out what you mean.

Half the population of the Earth are female. I'm sure the UK has wealthy women who would join a private club.

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Half the population of the Earth are female. I'm sure the UK has wealthy women who would join a private club.

It's still confusing what you mean Scott. Are you sure you didn't mean to say "wouldn't?"

I think if a club wants to stay men-only that's their prerogative.

[Chilli Dipper]

For context, the Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St. Andrews (officially separate from the R&A) only voted to offer membership to women a year and a half ago. Muirfield's slot in the rota isn't going to come around again until the 2020s, and it's still the only championship-worthy venue near the Scottish capital of Edinburgh. This isn't the end of the story; there's still a lot of time for all sides to settle their differences.

[saevel25]

I have no issue with a private club wanting to be men only. The R&A has a right to set what ever level of standards they want for a course to be considered for The Open rotation. 

 

[Chilli Dipper]

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

It's still confusing what you mean Scott. Are you sure you didn't mean to say "wouldn't?"

I think if a club wants to stay men-only that's their prerogative.

Very true, but in Muirfield's case, the course was developed specifically to host the Open Championship. The question is whether the Honourable Company of Edinburgh Golfers believe resisting integration is worth forfeiting the major element of its identity.

[boogielicious]

13 minutes ago, iacas said:

It's still confusing what you mean Scott. Are you sure you didn't mean to say "wouldn't?"

I think if a club wants to stay men-only that's their prerogative.

yeah. 

[krupa]

3 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

Very true, but in Muirfield's case, the course was developed specifically to host the Open Championship. The question is whether the Honourable Company of Edinburgh Golfers believe resisting integration is worth forfeiting the major element of its identity.

Apparently some members consider that resistance to change is also a major element of their identity:

Quote

[A group of members] writing in a letter: "It is accepted that we may have to change, but we should not do so now on the basis suggested.

"A traditional resistance to change is one of the foundations of our unique position in golf and our reputation.

 

Edited May 19, 2016 by krupa

[David in FL]

5 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I have no issue with a private club wanting to be men only. The R&A has a right to set what ever level of standards they want for a course to be considered for The Open rotation. 

 

Yup.

I also have no issue with those organizations that limit their membership to only women.

[DaveP043]

This isn't much different from the decision by the R&A  not to schedule Turnberry to host the Open, based on its owner's public statements.  The members of Muirfield absolutely have the right to make their own decisions as to who is eligible for membership, just as Mr. Trump has the right to say whatever he chooses to say.  The R&A absolutely has the right to make its decisions based on public statements and membership policies of the various clubs.  I'm guessing that within the next several years the membership at The Honourable Company will find an additional 3 or 4% who will vote to allow female members, and return to its appropriate place in the Open rota.

[Marty2019]

16 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

This isn't much different from the decision by the R&A  not to schedule Turnberry to host the Open, based on its owner's public statements.  The members of Muirfield absolutely have the right to make their own decisions as to who is eligible for membership, just as Mr. Trump has the right to say whatever he chooses to say.  The R&A absolutely has the right to make its decisions based on public statements and membership policies of the various clubs.  I'm guessing that within the next several years the membership at The Honourable Company will find an additional 3 or 4% who will vote to allow female members, and return to its appropriate place in the Open rota.

I agree with all that, and will add that I would guess it's a generational thing; that as the older members die off, the percentages will swing in favor of change.  

[Golfingdad]

These discussions always go the same direction; "it's a private club, they can do whatever they want!"

Of course they can!  Nobody, including the R&A, is saying any differently.

The R&A is simply also recognizing their right to do as they wish as well ... by excluding them from the Open.  You'd think they'd understand. ;)

[krupa]

7 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

These discussions always go the same direction; "it's a private club, they can do whatever they want!"

Of course they can!  Nobody, including the R&A, is saying any differently.

The R&A is simply also recognizing their right to do as they wish as well ... by excluding them from the Open.  You'd think they'd understand. ;)

who's on first?  

[nevets88]

When your club membership requirements are less open than that of Augusta National's requirements, you know you're behind the times.