Muirfield Golf Club Picks Discrimination Over the British Open – New York Times
On Golf
By KAREN CROUSE
Maybe the gentlemen of Muirfield who led the charge against admitting women as members are not misogynists, merely misguided. When they think of women on the links, perhaps their reference point is the 1900 Olympics, where the American Margaret Abbott prevailed in the women’s event. According to the Olympic historian David Wallechinsky, Abbott later told people her path to victory had been paved by an apparent misunderstanding involving her competitors from France, who turned up to play in high heels and tight skirts.
The 600-plus all-male members of Muirfield Golf Club who failed to reach a two-thirds majority in their vote to admit women would certainly seem to be stuck in a bygone century, one in which men and women didn’t harmoniously coexist in boardrooms and legislative chambers, much less clubhouses.
In the consummation of the marriage between sporting events and corporate sponsors, a host site sacrifices its freedom to maintain its discriminatory membership practices. The Royal and Ancient was right to remove Muirfield, which has hosted 16 British Opens, from the tournament rotation. If a club wants to close its doors to a sizable segment of the population, that’s its prerogative. But it can’t have its exclusionary practices and also enjoy the high visibility every few years of hosting a major attended by thousands and viewed by millions.
The gentlemen of Muirfield who were amenable to change — 64 percent of the 616 members who cast ballots — were thwarted by a group of roughly 30 members, who vigorously dug in their heels. An article in the daily newspaper The Scotsman revealed the contents of a letter distributed by the dissenters that expressed concerns about slow play and making women “feel uncomfortable” as reasons for upholding its all-male membership.
The letter added that the club was “quite unique with its fraternity built inter alia, on foursomes play with a round taking only the same time as lunch and leaving enough time for a further round after lunch (even in midwinter). This is one of miracles in modern-day play and is much admired. Our foursomes and speedy play would be endangered.”
The Scurvy Thirty’s rationale that women would clog their course is an antiquated ploy. It calls to mind the story told by a friend, an avid golfer, of a round she played with her husband at the Legend at Arrowhead, an Arnold Palmer-designed course in Glendale, Ariz.
In the parking lot, two men saw her retrieve her clubs from the trunk and harrumphed that they had better hurry up and get to the first tee lest they get stuck playing behind a dithery woman. They did tee off first, and my friend and her husband spent the round waiting on every shot because the men were so slow.
The gentlemen of Muirfield are not completely lacking in chivalry. They will continue to welcome women on the course and in the clubhouse as guests and visitors. Perhaps one of the 397 members who voted for admitting women will host Condoleezza Rice, the former United States national security adviser and secretary of state — and a member at Augusta National — who is known for her fast play.
At the PGA Tour stop at Pebble Beach in 2013, she seldom took more than 20 seconds to hit, prompting the professional in her pro-am group, Jason Bohn, to describe her as the perfect partner. “She doesn’t mess around, which is beautiful,” Bohn said.
But Rice probably wouldn’t sway any of the Scurvy Thirty with her swiftness. If the gentlemen of Muirfield want to talk about a snail’s pace, how about the fact that it took two years of consultation among themselves to decide, ultimately, not to budge from their 18th-century moorings?
Jason Day and Jordan Spieth can be slower than an uphill putt after a rainstorm. Would the gentlemen of Muirfield prefer not to play with the top two male golfers in the world because their foursomes and speedy play would be endangered? Of course, slow play is the excuse the members hide behind so they don’t have to address their slow evolution.
Golf’s return to the Olympics this summer after a 112-year absence is rooted in inclusiveness. As Tim Finchem, the PGA Tour commissioner, noted last week, golf’s power brokers showed little interest in joining the Olympic family until they commissioned a study that showed that dozens of countries that invest government money in sports invest only in sports that are in the Olympic program.
“We agreed to go into the Olympics primarily focused on growing the game and recognizing that overnight there would be coffers from governments opened up to provide financial support to grow the game,” he said.
But it’s duplicitous to expect to grow the game through the biggest multisport spectacle on the planet even as one of the game’s most affluent and influential clubs refuses to expand its membership. It’s like building a new course in the middle of a drought. No matter how impressive the blueprint, if the ground, or base, is arid, the project is doomed.
