Portmarnock golf club found in breach of Equal Status Act

Victor

PLEASE TRY NOT TO MAKE AMP LOCK THIS THREAD

---

I think the court made the right decision although I'm curious as to why no punishment appears to have been applied.

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/2581557?view=Eircomnet

Portmarnock golf club found in breach of Equal Status Act
From:ireland.com
Friday, 20th February, 2004

Female membership of Portmarnock Golf Club moved a step closer today after Dublin District Court ruled the club was in breach of equality legislation.

The Equality Authority took the case last November, claiming the men-only policy was discriminatory under the Equal Status Act 2000.

The club maintained that as a private organisation it was entitled to decide it own membership policy.

Women are allowed play at Portmarnock but cannot hold full membership and can only use the course at specified times.

But today Judge Mary Collins found in favour of the Equality Authority. However, a High Court case challenging the constitutionality of the Equal Status Act is still pending.

Counsel for the Equality Authority wanted the club to lose its certificate of registration, preventing it from selling alcohol for 30 days, but Judge Collins declined to levy any sanction.

The club had argued the Act did not prohibit its membership policy and only referred to discrimination against people who were already members.

Progressive Democrats TD Ms Fiona O'Malley said the ruling was "welcome legal confirmation that Portmarnock is actively discriminating against women".

She said it would have implications for other golf clubs that discriminate or "deliberately" obstruct female membership.

Villain

Yea heard that on the news, fair play in 2004 I think it's very sad that women wouldn't be allowed be members.

ixoy

It's not a public club though. It's private. Should the law not respect their views? They are not advocating hate, or any such thing, merely a meeting place for men...

Villain

Originally posted by ixoy
It's not a public club though. It's private. Should the law not respect their views? They are not advocating hate, or any such thing, merely a meeting place for men...

Bull**** their discriminating on the grounds of sex

Victor

Originally posted by ixoy
It's not a public club though. It's private.

So why do they need a bar licence?

Originally posted by ixoy
Should the law not respect their views?

Views yes, actions no.

Originally posted by ixoy
merely a meeting place for men...

I thought it was for playing golf?

Zombrex

Just throwing this out there

What about women only gyms and clubs that exclude men on the grounds that they make the women feel uncomfortable? These places offer women a refugee to work out and relax without unwanted attention from men.

Is it not grounds to exclude women, because men want the same thing, a place to get away from women and be themselves.

(personally I am torn on the issue, just wondering what others think ... like Victor said try not to get this thread banned with any sexest "women are stupid" comments.)

damnyanks

There is a womens only gym on O'Connel street. How about instead of fighting womens battles (Cause they can do it themselves) You go fight for male equality.

Got a free Irish Independent in college the other day. Had a pull out of best companies to work for. The majority had a high women to male ratio listed.

Stop fighting womens battles because they wont fight for us. Men do not get full equality.

I dont play golf... I don't enjoy golf. But if that private club wishes to have a policy they can do so.

Just like the whole farmers not promoting women in farming. They don't promote men in teaching do they ? I never saw anything to encourage me to become a teacher. (Huge unbalance of women to men in primary school teaching / training)

Of course maybe they dont' promote any industry in school apart from science. I know in the likes of America they have organizations such as "Women in Engineering" and so on. Maybe a bad way to compare.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

mike65

If the club is not taking advantage of public money then they should be allowed whatever rules they fancy. I wonder how many women will be applying for full memberships.

Mike.

MisterAnarchy

Portmarnock is a private club and was founded by men.(Royal Portmarnock was its old name)
Most of the comittee are old bigoted farts for whom I have no time.
However I believe that they should be entitled to their own opinions inside the grounds of their club.
As far as I know the members wives are allowed play for a very small fee .
This fee is far cheaper than an annual membership fee and is extremeely good value.
Women golfers want their cake and want to eat it too.
In my club they wanted full voting rights but wanted to pay half the fee of a man.
This didnt go down too well so eventually they were given full rights for the same fee as a man.
Now the vast majority of woman are unhappy as they preferred the old system.
The equality laws are a joke in this country.

crowl

What about women only gyms and clubs that exclude men on the grounds that they make the women feel uncomfortable? These places offer women a refugee to work out and relax without unwanted attention from men.

These clubs do not get a licence to sell alcohol from the government as they are not registered clujbs and are therefore not covered by the legislation. These clubs are all silly and should not exist in this day and age.

damnyanks

They should not exist.... but they do!

And to be honest I'm sick of this crap. I like women... I like them naked... I like them dressed... I like to talk to them.... I even have some female friends.
(Just incase someone thinks that I dislike them)

The fact is these sort of stories will always happen and it is always women being wronged. Men & Women get pissy and what not over it.

Yet when men are being discriminated against its tough ****... buck up sunshine and stop your moaning. I am sick of it. That links to the engineering for women group site.... I didn't go through it so much so sorry if I'm wrong. But did I see it has support from the government. Why dont they have things like this for men ? Or why dont they try and get women into "less prestigious" jobs such as bus driving (Which was like 98:2 male to female ratio in that Irish Independent magazine)

As was pointed out there are other areas where there are far more women then men yet nothing is done. There are clubs for women only, nothing is done. Pile of crock!

oscarBravo

Originally posted by daveirl
Of course they wanted to become full members but still have the women's fee (which was smaller)

I don't think that's the case. I know of some women who found it a bit of a dilemma, having to choose between equality and low cost, but I don't think anyone reasonable seriously expected the same rights for half the price.

Originally posted by MisterAnarchy
Women golfers want their cake and want to eat it too.
In my club they wanted full voting rights but wanted to pay half the fee of a man.
This didnt go down too well so eventually they were given full rights for the same fee as a man.
Now the vast majority of woman are unhappy as they preferred the old system.

There's a simple solution to this: introduce tiered membership for both men and women, with full membership granting voting rights and the freedom to play any time, and associate membership restricting times and not allowing voting. Tada!

Victor

Originally posted by Wicknight
What about women only gyms and clubs that exclude men on the grounds that they make the women feel uncomfortable? These places offer women a refugee to work out and relax without unwanted attention from men.

Refugee? I presume you mean refuge. These gyms are few and far between. The equality acts allow for separate but equal provision to exist, however if the premises is not large enough for this to happen, then they don't need to comply. Separately, it could be argued that these gyms provide a service specifically for women as a group, just in the way a testicular cancer group or an abused womens’ support group may provide a one gender only service. However, I have never heard of a major business deal being struck in the lady's gym, but many have been struck at a golf club.

Originally posted by damnyanks
I dont play golf... I don't enjoy golf. But if that private club wishes to have a policy they can do so.

It’s not so much a matter of Portmarnock saying “women aren’t allowed in” but “women that are allowed in will have lesser rights than the men”. That makes them a service provider, not a club. Can you imagine McDonalds saying “You can’t buy a Happy Meal because you are an adult”. And as an alcohol licence is essentially a licence to print money in this country, why should the club get this tacit subsidy from the public.

Originally posted by daveirl
I don't know the specifics of this case but I remember a couple of years ago when all this Golf Club hassle started it was mainly because women couldn't become full members at clubs around the country. i.e. could only play on specific days and couldn't vote. Of course they wanted to become full members but still have the women's fee (which was smaller)

And as oscarBravo indicates, many clubs amended their rules to create full and associate memberships based on price, not gender.

Originally posted by daveirl
I agree with the people saying that the system is already biased towards women. Take a look at this site Basically it's dedicated to giving women an unfair advantage in Engineering courses by giving them a mentor while leaving males to drop out or whatever.

Of all the engineers I have ever met (I’m a quantity surveyor) only two were women.

Originally posted by daveirl
How is this not discriminatory.

It is for the purpose of rectifying past and current discrimination against women in engineering. It’s like the emancipation of slaves after the American Civil War – the slaves were freed, but no compensation was paid for having their rights breached in the first place. This legacy continues to today.

Originally posted by daveirl
And even if you agree with this, where is the government funded group to address the male/female imbalance in something like nursing?

Maybe there is an argument for this, although I don’t think nurses making anything near what engineers do. And guess who run the nursing unions? Disproportionately men.

Originally posted by damnyanks
Yet when men are being discriminated against its tough ****.

But who discriminates against men? Mostly it’s other men. Who demands that the chick with the big breasts be hired? How used to run night clubs that had “Ladies Night” (also ruled illegal recently).

Originally posted by damnyanks
Or why dont they try and get women into "less prestigious" jobs such as bus driving

Possibly a point, but you will see a lot more women driving buses today than even 5 years ago. However, you will note that the real discrimination isn’t in the type of work, but in pay and promotion.

Originally posted by damnyanks
There are clubs for women only, nothing is done.

Honestly – how many?

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/topstories/2584783?view=Eircomnet

Golf club breaches equality law
From:ireland.com
Saturday, 21st February, 2004

Portmarnock Golf Club's exclusion of women as members was ruled discriminatory under the Equal Status Act in the Dublin District Court yesterday.

Judge Mary Collins ruled that the Act meant the purpose of the club was to play golf and not specifically men's golf, and so it could not be exempt under the discrimination legislation.

However, the judge adjourned a decision on imposing the sanction that the club should lose its certificate of registration for 30 days. She said she would await the result of a High Court challenge to the constitutionality of the Act being taken by the club.

Judge Collins said the Equality Authority had sought a declaration that Portmarnock was a discriminatory club under the Act. The facts were not in dispute. The club restricted its membership to men under its rule that "only gentlemen be properly elected". She was satisfied that interpretation of Section 9 of the Act was the core issue in the case.

Section 9 stated that "a club shall not be considered to be a discriminating club by reason only that if its principal purpose is to cater only for the needs of persons of a particular gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, religious belief, age, disability, nationality or ethnic or national origin . . . it refuses membership to other persons."

The relevant words were "the principal purpose" and "to cater only for", she said. "I think these words are clear. The principal purpose of the club I believe is to play golf, the ordinary words do not ascribe to men's golf, a special need," Judge Collins said.

Accordingly, she ruled that the club was discriminatory and did not come within the exemption provided in the section.

Judge Collins said counsel for the Equality Authority had contended there was no ambiguity in Section 9 as the purpose of the club members was to play golf.

Counsel had said the club's contention that its principal purpose was only playing men's golf was a logical absurdity as women played golf there but could not be members. The "need" as quoted in the Act to restrict to men's golf was not identified, he had said.

Counsel had said the purpose of the Act was to prohibit discrimination and prohibit clubs from acting in a discriminatory way.

In the Constitution equality itself was a constitutional right.

He had said reliance of the club on the right to association did not give the right to contract out of social policy. The balancing of rights must come into play.

Judge Collins said counsel for the club had contended that the central issue was the interpretation of Sections 8 and 9 of the Act which were complex and not easily interpreted. Counsel had said the court must interpret the Act taking into consideration whether it would violate the constitutional right to association and rights to privacy and property. These rights would be breached if the certificate of registration were refused. He drew a distinction between clubs which totally excluded people and members of a club who are discriminated against. He had said it was necessary to consider the constitutional provisions regarding membership of a private club being a voluntary private association. All single gender clubs came within the exemption and allowed exception for special interest groups.

After the judgment, Mr Frank Callanan SC, for the Equality Authority, said the sanction to prevent alcohol being sold should be imposed. Mr Donal O'Donnell SC, for Portmarnock Golf Club, said it was a sanction provided by the Act. He applied for imposition of the sanction to be adjourned until after the High Court ruling on the constitutionality of the Act as it would run the risk of wrong being done to the club which could not be remedied if the Act was ruled unconstitutional. If the Act was ruled constitutional it would come into effect, he said.

BrianD3

Bah! that mentorlink website is a load of BS. There is not one hard fact in the entire website that would stand up to close scrutiny. All the articles about so-called discrimination against women in engineering are based on women's "feelings" consequently everything is very vague and sounds more like paranoia than anything else. There are many absolutely ridiculous and silly statements and there is stereotyping of men. Which is ironic given that the site is campaigning against gender stereotyping - obviously it's only possible to stereotype women, not men :rolleyes:

Examples from article Equality and the Woman Engineer:

"Women report a pressure to agree to overtime/Saturday working if they not interested in football. The assumption here is that if a woman hasn't commitments in sport she will therefore be available to work"

"Many men find it difficult to understand platonic relationships, as opposed to other male-female relationships"

"asked at interview would I be wearing high heeled wellies"

Zombrex

Originally posted by damnyanks
They should not exist.... but they do!

And to be honest I'm sick of this crap. I like women... I like them naked... I like them dressed... I like to talk to them.... I even have some female friends.
(Just incase someone thinks that I dislike them)

If you don't dislike them maybe you should try not directing your anger towards "women" as a group, or making derogatory statements about them (you like them naked ... seriously wft?)

sigh :rolleyes:

the reason you don't hear about complaints against women only gyms isn't because loads of men are complaining and they are being turned away. It is because no one is complaining. That is hardly the fault of women, now is it.

Originally posted by Victor

It’s not so much a matter of Portmarnock saying “women aren’t allowed in” but “women that are allowed in will have lesser rights than the men”. That makes them a service provider, not a club.

I didn't know it was like that in this place. I agree, that is not acceptable. If women are allowed in then it can't be said that they are providing a male only refuge (:)). If they are allowed in, then to limit their rights as members only because they are women is unacceptable and quite blantently sexist.

damnyanks

Originally posted by damnyanks
There are clubs for women only, nothing is done.

---

Honestly – how many?

Sorry, I didn't mean it along the lines of secret society of women hating men type organizations

I meant women have far more support groups or at least advertised (Such as that engineering tutor group). More schemes exist to encourage women into certain industries. I have never heard of an organization that supports men in the way women get it

They should not exist.... but they do!

And to be honest I'm sick of this crap. I like women... I like them naked... I like them dressed... I like to talk to them.... I even have some female friends.
(Just incase someone thinks that I dislike them)

---

If you don't dislike them maybe you should try not directing your anger towards "women" as a group, or making derogatory statements about them (you like them naked ... seriously wft?)

sigh

That is exactly why I said that Wicknight. Someone was bound to point out my aggressive posting towards "women", it was a light hearted attempt at some form of humour... if I say I like naked men as well will that balance out the whole equality thing then ? . I do not dislike women. I usually do not divide groups into women & men. After allw e are all people. But from what I've seen women tend to get alot more support from the general public (Men & Women) over issues such as these. You are right in saying men dont seem to complain about these issues because it is not something that is generally accepted as a serious complait.

Women seem to have alot more support when it comes to equality as opposed to men... maybe I am wrong that is just what it seems like to me. I do not begrudge women equality. But from what it looks like men cannot fight for these rigshts without it being turned into some form of joke by outside parties.

Zombrex

Originally posted by damnyanks
More schemes exist to encourage women into certain industries.

why do you think that is? I do agree that there are hardly any schemes to get men into female industries. But I always assumed that is because no one is pushing for them, no one cares if there aren't male nurses or child care professionals. Have there been a number of schemes that have been rejected because they propote male takeup instead of female takeup? Where are the hords of screaming men demanding that this be changed?(see my sum up at the end for more on the screaming men)

Originally posted by damnyanks
I have never heard of an organization that supports men in the way women get it

The way women "get it." Women don't get anything. It is not like feminist organisations get a licence from the government and male organisations don't. Nothing is stopping the formation of these male organisations (especially not feminists), other than you would be hard pressed to find members. The only "male organisation" I ever seem to see are the extremist ones, such as the crowd who believe women who leave their husbands should be publically humiliated.

Originally posted by damnyanks
But from what I've seen women tend to get alot more support from the general public (Men & Women) over issues such as these. You are right in saying men dont seem to complain about these issues because it is not something that is generally accepted as a serious complait.

Support from whom?? Women tend to have a much louder voice, so you hear about it a lot more, but again that goes back to men not making a fuss, or not really giving a sh*t. Like honestly how many men do you know that would march for more men in nursing, or support organisations that fight for more men in child care. It is not like there is a huge movement of men fighting for equal rights and society just doesn't listen to them. There isn't a maleist movement, not because they tried and didn't get any where, but because they didn't try.

Men tend to just retread into the (rather tired) stance of look at what feminism has done bla bla bla, why should women get this bla bla bla it is sooo not fair bla bla bla instead of actually doing anything. You should see the thread a few months ago about women starting to get the power men once had (can't remember title)

It is the apathy of men on these issues that, I feel, is the problem. They may complain about how such and such is unfair but do they actually do anything. Women have been fighting thousands of enshrined discriminates in society and law for over a hundred years. They are good at it. They don't get more support, they have a louder, more organised voice

Originally posted by damnyanks
I do not begrudge women equality. But from what it looks like men cannot fight for these rigshts without it being turned into some form of joke by outside parties.

Womens organisations face that all the time, it is not something to make them throw their hands up and say "well, we tried." Women had to throw themselves under horses to get to vote in Britian, I think some people laughting at men (in my experience it is normally other men laughting at the men) should stop the male organisations.

What exactly is stoping the formation of lobbying groups such as "Male Childcarers Association" or "Male Nurses of Ireland" As far as I can see nothing other than no one gives a sh*t or is prepared to actually fight for something.

The problem as I see it is that men do not understand the lengths women have had to go to organise into groups that can actually change society. Men these days, when they see something they think is unfair (such as low number of male nurses) seem to think that all they have to do is go "er, look at this, please change it" and then sit back. And if it doesn't change the next day they scream bloody murder that everything the feminist want happens and nothing they want ever changes. What they don't realise is that feminist have been doing this for a hundred years with millions of women organised into powerful and structured lobbying and political groups. And they still get ignored on issues. Men need to stop just complaining and expecting others (most, ironically enought, feminists) to fight their battles, and actually do something.

Imposter

I think this ruling is wrong. Yes the private club has a bar licence but so do all the nightclubs in Ireland. They operate on a "Management have the right to refuse admission" policy and often do on grounds of age, sex etc but are allowed to do it.

Wrt the business deals that are done there I don't think that excuse holds much water. After all i'm sure there are many ICA (Irish Countrywomens Association) meetings where business deals are done (possibly not on the same scale though) and afaik no men are allowed. As for the deals themselves surely the participants in the deals could choose to exclude women from them even if the women were given the same rights.

ixoy

Originally posted by Imposter
After all i'm sure there are many ICA (Irish Countrywomens Association) meetings where business deals are done (possibly not on the same scale though) and afaik no men are allowed. As for the deals themselves surely the participants in the deals could choose to exclude women from them even if the women were given the same rights.

With respect to the ICA, they may be allowed get away with it. The Equality Act, it seems, allows for the provision of organisations that specifically cater for specific genders, race, et cetera. These are generally organisations of a more voluntary sort and include support groups and the good old Freemasons. IIRC from the Irish Times, it is Article 9 of the Act that relates to clubs discriminating against one gender more than the other. Women are being seen as "lesser" citizens by Portmarnock club due to their lower stature, so they're in breach of the Act (although, it would seem, the District Court apparently isn't allowd make such interpretations fully).

The Irish Times also pointedly asked the women golfers about the fact there were many women-only organisations. They responded by saying no men had asked to join, although there seemed to be a smidged of cake they had eaten dribbling off their lips when they claimed one morning of the week as solely for female golfers.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Imposter
Wrt the business deals that are done there I don't think that excuse holds much water. After all i'm sure there are many ICA (Irish Countrywomens Association) meetings where business deals are done (possibly not on the same scale though) and afaik no men are allowed.

Read the detailed article Victor posted above:

Section 9 stated that "a club shall not be considered to be a discriminating club by reason only that if its principal purpose is to cater only for the needs of persons of a particular gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, religious belief, age, disability, nationality or ethnic or national origin . . . it refuses membership to other persons."

The ICA is a women's organisation, and as such is explicitly allowed to exclude men. Portmarnock is a golf club, and as such is not. It can't even claim with any validity to be a men's golf club, as women are allowed to play there.

ReefBreak

These gyms are few and far between. The equality acts allow for separate but equal provision to exist, however if the premises is not large enough for this to happen, then they don't need to comply.

Sorry Victor, there are plenty of women's-only gyms around Ireland. Indeed, the Curves chain of gyms are women only.

I see no difference between Portmarnock's men-only policy and a women-only policy in a gym.

Man: I'd like to join your gym.
Gym: Are you a man?
Man: Yes.
Gym: Go away, you can't join.

But the Equality Authority are too afraid to take this issue on because they're too eager to stay on the side of the politically correct "mafia" in this country.

ixoy

Originally posted by ReefBreak
I see no difference between Portmarnock's men-only policy and a women-only policy in a gym.

Man: I'd like to join your gym.
Gym: Are you a man?
Man: Yes.
Gym: Go away, you can't join.

But the Equality Authority are too afraid to take this issue on because they're too eager to stay on the side of the politically correct "mafia" in this country.

Well, it's hard to say. There are two issues - firstly, the Equality Act is vague about what constitutes a club and what grounds there are leniency for. The judge made a decision here, but her decision could easily be over ruled when the case goes to the High Court.
Secondly, there is truth in what wicknight has said: How many men have complained about these women-only gyms? If there is a double standard, it's up to the affected men to complain rather than hope someone else does it.

Zombrex

Originally posted by ReefBreak
Sorry Victor, there are plenty of women's-only gyms around Ireland. Indeed, the Curves chain of gyms are women only.

I see no difference between Portmarnock's men-only policy and a women-only policy in a gym.

Man: I'd like to join your gym.
Gym: Are you a man?
Man: Yes.
Gym: Go away, you can't join.

But the Equality Authority are too afraid to take this issue on because they're too eager to stay on the side of the politically correct "mafia" in this country.

Actually that is nothing to do with it.

As has been mentioned before women only or men only clubs are allowed as long as that is the point of the club, that it is part of the definition of the particular club. A good example given on the radio yesterday would be something like a boys church choir. The are male only by definition. Same with women only gyms. They are women only by definition.

The problem is that Portmarnock is not a male only club by definition. They do let women play there. But they restrict what they can do, and when they can play. So they cannot claim to be a male only golf club, but at the same time they restrict and discriminate against women members.

ReefBreak

Originally posted by Wicknight
Actually that is nothing to do with it.

As has been mentioned before women only or men only clubs are allowed as long as that is the point of the club, that it is part of the definition of the particular club. A good example given on the radio yesterday would be something like a boys church choir. The are male only by definition. Same with women only gyms. They are women only by definition.

The problem is that Portmarnock is not a male only club by definition. They do let women play there. But they restrict what they can do, and when they can play. So they cannot claim to be a male only golf club, but at the same time they restrict and discriminate against women members.

Sounds like a cop-out to me. The bottom line is that Portmarnock don't want women members, while Curves don't want male members. In fact, you could argue that, between the two, Curves are the worst offenders. At least Portmarnack allow women to play on the course - women-only gyms don't even let men through the front door (so to speak).

Imposter

Originally posted by Wicknight
The problem is that Portmarnock is not a male only club by definition. They do let women play there. But they restrict what they can do, and when they can play. So they cannot claim to be a male only golf club, but at the same time they restrict and discriminate against women members.

So if they were to have a meeting and decide that from now on it's a Men's Golf Club and women are never allowed to play then it's ok?

ReefBreak

Originally posted by Imposter
So if they were to have a meeting and decide that from now on it's a Men's Golf Club and women are never allowed to play then it's ok?

Exactly, just ban women completely, and that will make it all okay with the Equality Authority.

Note I should say that, as a golfer, I despise Portmarnock Golf Club, their elitism and their men-only policy. But I equally despise the narrow-minded feminist agenda of the Equality Authority.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by ReefBreak
Exactly, just ban women completely, and that will make it all okay with the Equality Authority.

Again, read the report:

The relevant words were "the principal purpose" and "to cater only for", she said. "I think these words are clear. The principal purpose of the club I believe is to play golf, the ordinary words do not ascribe to men's golf, a special need," Judge Collins said.

Women who are uncomfortable working out in front of men could reasonably be described as having a particular need. Men who don't like women on their golf course don't exactly fit into the same category.

I equally despise the narrow-minded feminist agenda of the Equality Authority.

What makes you say their agenda is narrow-minded or feminist? Their role is to uphold the equality legislation which, as has been pointed out, explicitly permits organisations that cater to the needs of a particular sex.

Imposter

Originally posted by oscarBravo
Again, read the report:Women who are uncomfortable working out in front of men could reasonably be described as having a particular need. Men who don't like women on their golf course don't exactly fit into the same category.

How does one qualify as being 'uncomfortable working out in front of men'? Do they have to get a cert from a shrink or something? It's just an excuse. That must be one very uncomfortable gym!

ReefBreak

Well, perhaps Portmarnock could claim that some men are uncomfortable playing golf in front of women...

I mean what does "uncomfortable" mean? Does it only happen to women, and only in a gym?

My point is, you either allow free association or discrimination based on gender or you don't. It does appear to me that Niall Crowley et al are only interested in PC point-scoring.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Imposter
How does one qualify as being 'uncomfortable working out in front of men'?

I don't recall that the act requires anything of individuals, but of organisations.

Do they have to get a cert from a shrink or something?

They don't join mixed-sex gyms.

It's just an excuse.

An excuse for what?

That must be one very uncomfortable gym!

What must be?

Zombrex

Originally posted by ReefBreak
Well, perhaps Portmarnock could claim that some men are uncomfortable playing golf in front of women...

Well that would be a bit stupid considering they let women play on the course.

The point is if Portmarnock allow women to play on the course, they why should the women not have the same rights as the men?

Would someone like to explain that to me.

Imagine if Curves allowed in men, but had a rule that they had to get off a machine if a women wanted to use it.

Imposter

Originally posted by oscarBravo
An excuse for what?

:rolleyes: An excuse for discriminating.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by ReefBreak
Well, perhaps Portmarnock could claim that some men are uncomfortable playing golf in front of women...

Perhaps they could claim whatever the hell they want, but I don't recall hearing about any men refusing to play golf in Portmarnock because there are women there.

I mean what does "uncomfortable" mean? Does it only happen to women, and only in a gym?

If a female friend confided to you that she felt uncomfortable working out with scantily-dressed male strangers around, what would you tell her: to quit her whining and deal with it?

I hope it's obvious that the reason I'm specifically talking about women-only gyms is because they have already been brought up in this thread.

My point is, you either allow free association or discrimination based on gender or you don't. It does appear to me that Niall Crowley et al are only interested in PC point-scoring.

Your point seems to be that you don't care what the legislation says, or whether or not the authority appears to be bound by it - you have issues with the individuals concerned. Correct me if I'm wrong.

ReefBreak

Originally posted by Wicknight
Imagine if Curves allowed in men, but had a rule that they had to get off a machine if a women wanted to use it.

Well, that could happen, if they even allowed male members, but they don't. Men are barred from joining, because they are men.

Imposter

Originally posted by Wicknight
The point is if Portmarnock allow women to play on the course, they why should the women not have the same rights as the men?

Would someone like to explain that to me.

Because it's a private club and it's members should be allowed to make their own rules.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Imposter
:rolleyes: An excuse for discriminating.

If there is a significant number of women who wish to avail of a women-only gym, many of whom wouldn't join a mixed-sex gym, that's a specific need that's being addressed. You can call it an excuse (what's your agenda, I wonder?) but the legislation explicitly defines it as non-discriminatory.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by ReefBreak
Well, that could happen, if they even allowed male members, but they don't. Men are barred from joining, because they are men.

...which is explicitly allowed under the law.

Originally posted by Imposter
Because it's a private club and it's members should be allowed to make their own rules.

...except where those rules are illegal.

ReefBreak

Originally posted by oscarBravo
If there is a significant number of women who wish to avail of a women-only gym, many of whom wouldn't join a mixed-sex gym, that's a specific need that's being addressed. You can call it an excuse (what's your agenda, I wonder?) but the legislation explicitly defines it as non-discriminatory.

Frist of all I have no issue with Niall Crowley, or any individual in the E.A. But I do have a problem with the one-way traffic in terms of their thinking on equality, i.e. it's only counts as discrimination when it's against women.

What if there was "a significant number of" men, "who wish to avail of a" men-only golf club, "many of whom wouldn't join a mixed-sex" golf club. Would that be okay?

ReefBreak

Originally posted by oscarBravo
...which is explicitly allowed under the law....except where those rules are illegal.

Perhaps, but it's one law for women (golf clubs) and another law for men (women-only gyms).

Zombrex

Originally posted by ReefBreak
Well, that could happen, if they even allowed male members, but they don't. Men are barred from joining, because they are men.

Exactly ... just like women can't play for the Man United football team or join a Male choir. It is a women only enviroment, by definition. The purpose is to be a one gender club.

Portmarnock is different, because it is a double gender club, but one gender has less rights than the other. They discrimiate against one gender.

(BTW it couldn't happen, because it would be illegal, just like it is in Portmarnock).

Zombrex

Originally posted by ReefBreak
Perhaps, but it's one law for women (golf clubs) and another law for men (women-only gyms).

sweet mother of god Reef ... they are not the same thing!! if you are going to compare things compare like to like.

Women only gyms - Your local (male) football team

Portmarnock - ?? (an organisation that allows men, but restricts their rights as members)

ReefBreak

Originally posted by Wicknight
(BTW it couldn't happen, because it would be illegal, just like it is in Portmarnock).

Actually, it does happen, there are plenty of women-only gyms in the country.

And I just remembered something:
I know there are some mixed-sex gyms in the country that have women-only periods. I'm pretty sure they don't have a men-only period. Hence, men are allowed join, but they are discriminated against. Try and defend that.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by ReefBreak
What if there was "a significant number of" men, "who wish to avail of a" men-only golf club, "many of whom wouldn't join a mixed-sex" golf club.

Why wouldn't they?

Would that be okay?

Maybe - could they demonstrate a need, as opposed to simple misogyny?

Perhaps, but it's one law for women (golf clubs) and another law for men (women-only gyms).

Nope, it's a question of needs. Allow me to reiterate my question: If a female friend confided to you that she felt uncomfortable working out with scantily-dressed male strangers around, what would you tell her: to quit her whining and deal with it?

ReefBreak

Originally posted by Wicknight
sweet mother of god Reef ... they are not the same thing!! if you are going to compare things compare like to like.

Women only gyms - Your local (male) football team

Portmarnock - ?? (an organisation that allows men, but restricts their rights as members)

I am most certainly comparing like with like. Both are sports clubs that restrict membership based on gender.

And I'll ask you again - if Portmarnock banned women completely, and renamed it Portmarnock Men's golf club, would that make it okay?

Imposter

Originally posted by Wicknight
Exactly ... just like women can't play for the Man United football team or join a Male choir. It is a women only enviroment, by definition. The purpose is to be a one gender club.

Portmarnock is different, because it is a double gender club, but one gender has less rights than the other. They discrimiate against one gender.

But Portmarnock used to be a male-only club and then it changed it's rules to allow women to play (presumably after some form of protest). And now women want full membership.

Oscarbravo, I've no agenda as such. I just don't think it is acceptable that a court should be able to force a private club's members to adopt a rule they don't agree with. Not allowing women to be members is discriminatory but it is not something that affects women's lives as they can choose to ignore the existence of the club completely, without any significant problems to their being.

Other forms of discrimination occur in Ireland every day and is supported by the courts and the government (Insurance and parental rights being examples), which imo have far more of an impact in the affected parties case than whether or not they should be allowed to be full members of a private club.

ReefBreak

Originally posted by oscarBravo
Why wouldn't they? Maybe - could they demonstrate a need, as opposed to simple misogyny? Nope, it's a question of needs. Allow me to reiterate my question: If a female friend confided to you that she felt uncomfortable working out with scantily-dressed male strangers around, what would you tell her: to quit her whining and deal with it?

Yes I would tell her to quit moaning, it's the law. We either allow all sports clubs to allow gender-based membership or we don't. What if another friend confided that he didn't like playing on the same golf course as women, because they were too slow? I would say tough, deal with it.

Hobart

Originally posted by Wicknight
sweet mother of god Reef ... they are not the same thing!! if you are going to compare things compare like to like.

Women only gyms - Your local (male) football team

Portmarnock - ?? (an organisation that allows men, but restricts their rights as members)

Your local (male) soccer team is discriminatory, if that is the way it exists. AFAIK there is no "law" or "understanding" that prevents Women from joining any soccer team. Be that your local soccer team or Manchester United. In fact I seem to recall that an Italian soccer boss was trying to sign a female (German?) soccer player into the senior squad.

Women only gyms are as discriminatory as Portmarnock golf club. This "notion" of somebody being "uncomfortable" working out in a mixed gym is poppycock. If your unconfortable, work out in the privacy of your own home ffs!. Why should men be discriminated against on the whim of an "unconfortable" female?

As for Portmarnock, did you know that they discriminate against men aswell?? Yes they do. You see not every member of Protmarnock golf club has a vote. Only full members. And full members are not allowed carte-blanche in relation to tee-times etc.... There is a system. A system which caters for Members (male and female) and visitors equally. There is no discrimination in relation to use of the course. None. As for the bar licence. WTF? Why should they not have a bar licence, wheter they refuse wemon the voting right or not.

Now has anybody thought about the actual implementation of this ruling? How will it happen? Does the ruling give the EA the "power" to force a number of full women members in portmarnock? Surely they can only inisist that Women are given due consideration for full membership. And then it will be in the lap of the comittee. Words like "hell" and "freezing" jump to mind.

ReefBreak

Other forms of discrimination occur in Ireland every day and is supported by the courts and the government (Insurance and parental rights being examples), which imo have far more of an impact in the affected parties case than whether or not they should be allowed to be full members of a private club.

Here, here, why aren't the EA taking a gender discrimination case against motor insurance companies, or highlighting the discrimination in family law in this country? On both issues, they've said nothing.

Hobart

Originally posted by oscarBravo
Why wouldn't they? Maybe - could they demonstrate a need, as opposed to simple misogyny? Nope, it's a question of needs. Allow me to reiterate my question: If a female friend confided to you that she felt uncomfortable working out with scantily-dressed male strangers around, what would you tell her: to quit her whining and deal with it?

Yes. Or else work out in the privacy of her own home.