Question:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -One correction: Henry Bloch, co-founder of H&R Block. Supposedly, he changed the H to a K in his last name for the firm so it wouldn’t sound so Jewish. I went to school with his daughter in KC (KS side, actually). It was interesting after growing up where there were so many wealthy Jewish kids to later find out that there were places in the US (as well as private clubs, but us middle class kids didn’t belong to any clubs, anyway) where Jews were targeted in public schools and excluded from social events. Private clubs can still do what ever they want. In 1990, it became public that the Shoal Creek membership, sit of that year’s PGA Championship, did not have any minority members. It became a major news story. Hall Thompson, the club’s founder and president, even said in a taped interview, "It’s just not done around here." The PGA ruled that Shoal Creek had to accept (I don;t know it fit was accept a black or just a minority) a member or lose the PGA Champ. The PGA Tour and the USGA followed suit and decided they would not hold any tournament at clubs without integrated memberships. Shoal Creek accepted a black member just before the start of the tournament. Cypress Point (Pebble Beach Pro-Am) and Butler National (Western Open) chose not to integrate their memberships and were subsequently dropped from the PGA tour rota. I think there were other courses (Aronimink -Sp? – GC in Philidelphia comes to mind) that would have/could have hosted PGAs or US Opens and were dropped from consideration. The same storyline made news that year when Tom Watson withdrew his membership in the Kansas City CC after the club denied membership to Henry Block, co-founder of H&R Bloch, presumably because Block was Jewish. My 2 cents: Private clubs can do whatever the hell they want. But to have an all-WASP membership and claim that there are no black, asian, Jewish or whatevers that meet their criteria is just plain ridiculous. If these clubs want to live in their fantasy world, fine, let ‘em. But I think they deserve to then be excluded from having major events held on their precious courses. Another 2 cents: I’d like to see the major golf publications drop exclusionary courses from their semi-annual rankings of the best golf courses in the US/World. Pine Valley does not allow anything buit white members, yet it’s suppossedly the top course in the world. Bullshit. Tell that to a black man who has a better chance of playing golf on Jupiter than at Pine Valley. I’ve been having a debate with a friend who just graduated from law school, and he seems to think that such blatantly racial discrimination has not existed since, oh, 1964 or so. I seem to recall a situation about 6-7 years ago concerning a private club that either had to accept blacks or lose a PGA tourney. This led to a blanket rule by the PGA that prohibited PGA events from being played at clubs that did not accept black (and maybe women?) members. I remember the specific instance of the Western Open being relocated to public Cog Hill from private, all-white Butler CC. Was the stipulation that a club had to have black members, or that it didn’t explicitly ban blacks? I don’t really recall… My 2 cents (worth about that much): Banning members based solely on race is exactly as wrong as including members based solely on race. In almost every instance of "racism" in the late 20th century, it is not the skin color that is the deciding factor; rather, it’s almost invariably some non-racial, tremendously significant factor (such as character, behavior, CULTURE, etc) that discriminates among people. There are very few members of the white race who are truly pure racists. It’s just that they’re concentrated in trailer parks and country clubs. Any clarification of the PGA ruling would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Eeyore
It should be easy to exclude anyone you want. First, demand exorbient fees to join. Next, require that you be recommended by a member or two. That last one will keep anyone out, while not explicitly excluding any special group. Greg
Response:
(posted and emailed) Another 2 cents: I’d like to see the major golf publications drop exclusionary courses from their semi-annual rankings of the best golf courses in the US/World. Pine Valley does not allow anything buit white members, yet it’s suppossedly the top course in the world. Bullshit. Tell that to a black man who has a better chance of playing golf on Jupiter than at Pine Valley.
I’d be interested in starting a letter writing campaign designed to "out" these clubs, and alert the PGA, Nike Tour, and major golf equipment makers and corporate sponsors that their association with them endangers their getting a larger slice of the money pie from the rush to golf that’s generating. Could you, or anyone, give me some names of these clubs? Earl Bryant, Jr. "We, the willing, lead by the unknowing NewMerced Group, Inc. are doing the impossible for the un- "De Oppresso Liber" so long with so little, we can now do remove "nospam" from my anything with nothing at all." email address before replying. PGP Key fingerprint = 25 37 69 4F 70 AD 81 DD 78 A2 11 00 28 E3 04 4F
Response:
The PGA has never been o the cutting edge of social causes. For many years they had a causcasian only rule. The incident you are referring to in your post was probably the tournament at Shola’s Creek!
Response:
: : Private clubs can still do what ever they want. : : The PGA ruled that Shoal Creek had to accept (I don;t : know it fit was accept a black or just a minority) a member or lose the : PGA Champ. The PGA Tour and the USGA followed suit and decided they would : not hold any tournament at clubs without integrated memberships. Shoal : Creek accepted a black member just before the start of the tournament. The problem with this was, IMO, that they did it the wrong way. They waived the initiation fee ($35,000) even though the gentleman could, by all accounts, easily afford it. This is not fair to the other members, or potential members. If a club is going to accept members regardless of the color of their skin…they should also accept intiation fees without regard to the color of skin. : My 2 cents: : : Private clubs can do whatever the hell they want. But to have an all-WASP : membership and claim that there are no black, asian, Jewish or whatevers : that meet their criteria is just plain ridiculous. If these clubs want to : live in their fantasy world, fine, let ‘em. But I think they deserve to : then be excluded from having major events held on their precious courses. Until I read this John, I had the distinct impression that you and I were at opposite ends of the argument. If this is how you really feel, you and I are in complete agreement, and it may suprise you to know that (while I’m not presuming to speak for him) David Laville has the same view. (Based on my e-mail corrospondence with him). : Another 2 cents: : : I’d like to see the major golf publications drop exclusionary courses from : their semi-annual rankings of the best golf courses in the US/World. Pine : Valley does not allow anything buit white members, yet it’s suppossedly : the top course in the world. Bullshit. Tell that to a black man who has a : better chance of playing golf on Jupiter than at Pine Valley. A point of divergence here…IMO, they are rating the golf course, not the club. The "club" may be composed entirely of KKK’ers, and still have the finest course in the world. The course doesn’t practice politics, the club does. — "DOS Computers manufactured by companies such as IBM, Compaq, Tandy, and millions of others are by far the most popular, with about 70 million machines in use wordwide. Macintosh fans, on the other hand, may note that cockroaches are far more numerous than humans, and that numbers alone do not denote a higher life form." (New York Times, November 26, 1991)
Response:
One correction: Henry Bloch, co-founder of H&R Block. Supposedly, he changed the H to a K in his last name for the firm so it wouldn’t look so Jewish. I went to school with his daughter in KC (KS side, actually). It was interesting after growing up where there were so many wealthy Jewish kids to later find out that there were places in the US (as well as private clubs, but us middle class kids didn’t belong to any clubs, anyway) where Jews were targeted in public schools and excluded from social events. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Private clubs can still do what ever they want. In 1990, it became public that the Shoal Creek membership, sit of that year’s PGA Championship, did not have any minority members. It became a major news story. Hall Thompson, the club’s founder and president, even said in a taped interview, "It’s just not done around here." The PGA ruled that Shoal Creek had to accept (I don;t know it fit was accept a black or just a minority) a member or lose the PGA Champ. The PGA Tour and the USGA followed suit and decided they would not hold any tournament at clubs without integrated memberships. Shoal Creek accepted a black member just before the start of the tournament. Cypress Point (Pebble Beach Pro-Am) and Butler National (Western Open) chose not to integrate their memberships and were subsequently dropped from the PGA tour rota. I think there were other courses (Aronimink -Sp? – GC in Philidelphia comes to mind) that would have/could have hosted PGAs or US Opens and were dropped from consideration. The same storyline made news that year when Tom Watson withdrew his membership in the Kansas City CC after the club denied membership to Henry Block, co-founder of H&R Bloch, presumably because Block was Jewish. My 2 cents: Private clubs can do whatever the hell they want. But to have an all-WASP membership and claim that there are no black, asian, Jewish or whatevers that meet their criteria is just plain ridiculous. If these clubs want to live in their fantasy world, fine, let ‘em. But I think they deserve to then be excluded from having major events held on their precious courses. Another 2 cents: I’d like to see the major golf publications drop exclusionary courses from their semi-annual rankings of the best golf courses in the US/World. Pine Valley does not allow anything buit white members, yet it’s suppossedly the top course in the world. Bullshit. Tell that to a black man who has a better chance of playing golf on Jupiter than at Pine Valley. I’ve been having a debate with a friend who just graduated from law school, and he seems to think that such blatantly racial discrimination has not existed since, oh, 1964 or so. I seem to recall a situation about 6-7 years ago concerning a private club that either had to accept blacks or lose a PGA tourney. This led to a blanket rule by the PGA that prohibited PGA events from being played at clubs that did not accept black (and maybe women?) members. I remember the specific instance of the Western Open being relocated to public Cog Hill from private, all-white Butler CC. Was the stipulation that a club had to have black members, or that it didn’t explicitly ban blacks? I don’t really recall… My 2 cents (worth about that much): Banning members based solely on race is exactly as wrong as including members based solely on race. In almost every instance of "racism" in the late 20th century, it is not the skin color that is the deciding factor; rather, it’s almost invariably some non-racial, tremendously significant factor (such as character, behavior, CULTURE, etc) that discriminates among people. There are very few members of the white race who are truly pure racists. It’s just that they’re concentrated in trailer parks and country clubs. Any clarification of the PGA ruling would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Eeyore
Response:
One correction: Henry Bloch, co-founder of H&R Block. Supposedly, he changed the H to a K in his last name for the firm so it wouldn’t sound so Jewish. I went to school with his daughter in KC (KS side, actually). It was interesting after growing up where there were so many wealthy Jewish kids to later find out that there were places in the US (as well as private clubs, but us middle class kids didn’t belong to any clubs, anyway) where Jews were targeted in public schools and excluded from social events. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Private clubs can still do what ever they want. In 1990, it became public that the Shoal Creek membership, sit of that year’s PGA Championship, did not have any minority members. It became a major news story. Hall Thompson, the club’s founder and president, even said in a taped interview, "It’s just not done around here." The PGA ruled that Shoal Creek had to accept (I don;t know it fit was accept a black or just a minority) a member or lose the PGA Champ. The PGA Tour and the USGA followed suit and decided they would not hold any tournament at clubs without integrated memberships. Shoal Creek accepted a black member just before the start of the tournament. Cypress Point (Pebble Beach Pro-Am) and Butler National (Western Open) chose not to integrate their memberships and were subsequently dropped from the PGA tour rota. I think there were other courses (Aronimink -Sp? – GC in Philidelphia comes to mind) that would have/could have hosted PGAs or US Opens and were dropped from consideration. The same storyline made news that year when Tom Watson withdrew his membership in the Kansas City CC after the club denied membership to Henry Block, co-founder of H&R Bloch, presumably because Block was Jewish. My 2 cents: Private clubs can do whatever the hell they want. But to have an all-WASP membership and claim that there are no black, asian, Jewish or whatevers that meet their criteria is just plain ridiculous. If these clubs want to live in their fantasy world, fine, let ‘em. But I think they deserve to then be excluded from having major events held on their precious courses. Another 2 cents: I’d like to see the major golf publications drop exclusionary courses from their semi-annual rankings of the best golf courses in the US/World. Pine Valley does not allow anything buit white members, yet it’s suppossedly the top course in the world. Bullshit. Tell that to a black man who has a better chance of playing golf on Jupiter than at Pine Valley. I’ve been having a debate with a friend who just graduated from law school, and he seems to think that such blatantly racial discrimination has not existed since, oh, 1964 or so. I seem to recall a situation about 6-7 years ago concerning a private club that either had to accept blacks or lose a PGA tourney. This led to a blanket rule by the PGA that prohibited PGA events from being played at clubs that did not accept black (and maybe women?) members. I remember the specific instance of the Western Open being relocated to public Cog Hill from private, all-white Butler CC. Was the stipulation that a club had to have black members, or that it didn’t explicitly ban blacks? I don’t really recall… My 2 cents (worth about that much): Banning members based solely on race is exactly as wrong as including members based solely on race. In almost every instance of "racism" in the late 20th century, it is not the skin color that is the deciding factor; rather, it’s almost invariably some non-racial, tremendously significant factor (such as character, behavior, CULTURE, etc) that discriminates among people. There are very few members of the white race who are truly pure racists. It’s just that they’re concentrated in trailer parks and country clubs. Any clarification of the PGA ruling would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Eeyore
Response:
Private clubs can still do what ever they want. In 1990, it became public that the Shoal Creek membership, sit of that year’s PGA Championship, did not have any minority members. It became a major news story. Hall Thompson, the club’s founder and president, even said in a taped interview, "It’s just not done around here." The PGA ruled that Shoal Creek had to accept (I don;t know it fit was accept a black or just a minority) a member or lose the PGA Champ. The PGA Tour and the USGA followed suit and decided they would not hold any tournament at clubs without integrated memberships. Shoal Creek accepted a black member just before the start of the tournament. Cypress Point (Pebble Beach Pro-Am) and Butler National (Western Open) chose not to integrate their memberships and were subsequently dropped from the PGA tour rota. I think there were other courses (Aronimink -Sp? – GC in Philidelphia comes to mind) that would have/could have hosted PGAs or US Opens and were dropped from consideration. The same storyline made news that year when Tom Watson withdrew his membership in the Kansas City CC after the club denied membership to Henry Block, co-founder of H&R Bloch, presumably because Block was Jewish. My 2 cents: Private clubs can do whatever the hell they want. But to have an all-WASP membership and claim that there are no black, asian, Jewish or whatevers that meet their criteria is just plain ridiculous. If these clubs want to live in their fantasy world, fine, let ‘em. But I think they deserve to then be excluded from having major events held on their precious courses. Another 2 cents: I’d like to see the major golf publications drop exclusionary courses from their semi-annual rankings of the best golf courses in the US/World. Pine Valley does not allow anything buit white members, yet it’s suppossedly the top course in the world. Bullshit. Tell that to a black man who has a better chance of playing golf on Jupiter than at Pine Valley. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ve been having a debate with a friend who just graduated from law school, and he seems to think that such blatantly racial discrimination has not existed since, oh, 1964 or so. I seem to recall a situation about 6-7 years ago concerning a private club that either had to accept blacks or lose a PGA tourney. This led to a blanket rule by the PGA that prohibited PGA events from being played at clubs that did not accept black (and maybe women?) members. I remember the specific instance of the Western Open being relocated to public Cog Hill from private, all-white Butler CC. Was the stipulation that a club had to have black members, or that it didn’t explicitly ban blacks? I don’t really recall… My 2 cents (worth about that much): Banning members based solely on race is exactly as wrong as including members based solely on race. In almost every instance of "racism" in the late 20th century, it is not the skin color that is the deciding factor; rather, it’s almost invariably some non-racial, tremendously significant factor (such as character, behavior, CULTURE, etc) that discriminates among people. There are very few members of the white race who are truly pure racists. It’s just that they’re concentrated in trailer parks and country clubs. Any clarification of the PGA ruling would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Eeyore
Response:
I’ve been having a debate with a friend who just graduated from law school, and he seems to think that such blatantly racial discrimination has not existed since, oh, 1964 or so. I seem to recall a situation about 6-7 years ago concerning a private club that either had to accept blacks or lose a PGA tourney. This led to a blanket rule by the PGA that prohibited PGA events from being played at clubs that did not accept black (and maybe women?) members. I remember the specific instance of the Western Open being relocated to public Cog Hill from private, all-white Butler CC. Was the stipulation that a club had to have black members, or that it didn’t explicitly ban blacks? I don’t really recall… My 2 cents (worth about that much): Banning members based solely on race is exactly as wrong as including members based solely on race. In almost every instance of "racism" in the late 20th century, it is not the skin color that is the deciding factor; rather, it’s almost invariably some non-racial, tremendously significant factor (such as character, behavior, CULTURE, etc) that discriminates among people. There are very few members of the white race who are truly pure racists. It’s just that they’re concentrated in trailer parks and country clubs. Any clarification of the PGA ruling would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Eeyore