Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Supreme Court says no women need apply to Golf Club. Mod warning post 119

Options
1…8910111214»

Comments

  • Options
    #392
    drkpower
    Registered Users Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    fergalr wrote: »
    For a more concrete example, imagine I own a big company,
    Or another example might be that if I have a job that requires physical labour
    Can I just stick 'men only' on the job advertisement? Or is it ok to just discard the CVs with female names?

    And its exactly the same argument that shows its not reasonable to discriminate against all male gym goers,

    Its just wrong to discriminate based on sex/race/creed.
    .

    Thats a very long post but I would merely point out that the provisions for membership of a private club is a seperate issue to discriminating re: employment. There is a constitutionally protected right to association and rightly so.


  • Options
    #393
    fergalr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭fergalr


    drkpower wrote: »
    Thats a very long post
    Its hard to deal with these issues both comprehensively and succinctly, without miscommunication. Maybe I'm not as good a writer as I could be :-)
    drkpower wrote: »
    but I would merely point out that the provisions for membership of a private club is a seperate issue to discriminating re: employment.

    Its certainly a separate issue legally. I acknowledged that earlier in another post, and I wouldn't argue a point of law with the supreme court.
    drkpower wrote: »
    There is a constitutionally protected right to association and rightly so.

    My post was more so about whether its right or wrong that its different; and on what grounds. For example, why a private club should or shouldn't be different from a private limited company.

    I'm still interested in whether it should be legal - care to expand on your point about why a right to association (or lack of association) is right? (Why should this apply to a private club, and not, for example, a small private company? Should it apply to a whites only gym?)

    But I've been posting more about whether such discrimination is right or wrong, rather than whether it should be legal or not - they are separate but related issues, as I see it.


  • Options
    #394
    thebman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,012 ✭✭✭✭thebman


    fergalr wrote: »
    Why should this apply to a private club, and not, for example, a small private company? Should it apply to a whites only gym?

    Well I would argue that everyone has to work to live and everyone should at least be able to apply for a job and be refused on merit than because of gender.

    For clubs, it is a persons personal time and they can spend it how they wish and in the company of who they want to. So I think its fine to have clubs with rules that say men/female only etc...

    I just think arguing one case for one gender and another in another case is hypocritical. One rule for everyone is all I ask for.

    Personally I wouldn't join a male only club if the sole basis was so they could hang out together afterwards without women as the things that would probably be said, I wouldn't agree with. I will say that I think they have the right to do this though and people should have the right to have a club without black people if they want to as long as it isn't meeting to propose or arrange violent or discriminatory behavior against that group (which is why those groups usually end up being illegal because they just can't hid their racism forever).

    If these guys playing golf are arranging to beat up their wifes and discuss tactics then I would have an issue with the club. If they are just a bunch of guys that don't like the company of women when socialising then I don't have a problem with it but don't get it and don't want to be part of it.


  • Options
    #395
    drkpower
    Registered Users Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    fergalr wrote: »
    My post was more so about whether its right or wrong that its different; and on what grounds. For example, why a private club should or shouldn't be different from a private limited company.

    I'm still interested in whether it should be legal - care to expand on your point about why a right to association (or lack of association) is right? (Why should this apply to a private club, and not, for example, a small private company? Should it apply to a whites only gym?)

    Any group of individuals should have the right to set up their own group for whatever shared reasons (gay mans club, women's knitting group, mens golf club etc..).

    Personally, my own view is that when that group provides good and services to the public generally (rather than just for their members), then they should not be entitled to discriminate.


  • Options
    #396
    Burial
    Registered Users Posts: 817 ✭✭✭Burial


    When I was starting to write this post I was in support for Portmarnock, but now I'm not. If membership was blocked by sexual orientation/race/ethnic background I wouldn't agree and I doubt alot of people would agree either.

    I've always been against "positive discrimination" and "ladies" night in nightclubs and other such "lady" only events. There is no such thing as positive discrimination. Your still preferring/rewarding someone by gender and not skill. Anyway, that rant aside, if I can't accept male excluding events, I really can't accept female excluding events.

    Anyone who is in support of Portmarnock Golf Club read this: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=134812


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #397
    drkpower
    Registered Users Posts: 5,475 ✭✭✭drkpower


    Burial wrote: »
    When I was starting to write this post I was in support for Portmarnock, but now I'm not. If membership was blocked by sexual orientation/race/ethnic background I wouldn't agree and I doubt alot of people would agree either.

    I've always been against "positive discrimination" and "ladies" night in nightclubs and other such "lady" only events. There is no such thing as positive discrimination. Your still preferring/rewarding someone by gender and not skill. Anyway, that rant aside, if I can't accept male excluding events, I really can't accept female excluding events.

    So if the 12 Ecuadorians in Ireland decide to set up a private club for themselves, I should be able to join their club? Im not Ecuadorian by the way?


  • Options
    #398
    norrie rugger
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,656 ✭✭✭norrie rugger


    WindSock wrote: »
    Minorities have their own corners, otherwise the mainstream will engulf them. Look at tLL for example. How come there has to be a single forum on this site dedicated to 50 percent of the population (granted that's not boards.ie population) But there still has to be sections where people of certain groups are allowed their voices to evolve without mainstream hinderance.

    What I don't understand is why they are allowed play but not join? Is there some sort of exclusive access to members    ?

    I am only reading through this thread now, so please forgive me if someone has given a better answer. I imagine that it is to combat the effect of "business meetings" occuring on the course. If there is a busines outing then the ladies, of the office, are also allowed to play and, therefore, not being excluded from the networking.

    I would have more of an issue if they were not allowed to play, when there are obvoius advantages, work wise, from doing so


Advertisement