Michelle Wie To Participate in US Open Qualifier.

Munchkin · 05-24-2006, 10:37 AM

For those of you who do not know, Michelle Wie is a 16 year old golfer. And a pretty darn good one at that. She even has a 300 yard tee shot.

She won a local qualifier in Hawaii, and will now play at Canoe Brook on June 5th to try to qualify for the Open.

A Lot of the men are not happy about that, but it seems that mainly they dont want to deal with the amount of press that will be there at an event that usually has a very low draw. They seem to think that if she is good enough, then go for it, but they dont want to be the one partnered with her.

The reason I started this thread is this. A European tour member names Jean Van de Velde said : "I have no objection to Michelle Wie or any other women playing in our tournaments so long as we are allowed to play in theirs. And, yes, I'm ready to play in a skirt."

I want to know what you all think about this. In fact, Im not even all that sure what I think about it. Im very much into athletics. And I know that If I was really good at a sport, so good that I could consistantly smack down the women, I would want to have a shot at the men so I could improve myself and just see how I fare. Do people have a right to be upset that she is allowed to participate? Is it rediculous to argue that if women are allowed in PGA events that men should be allowed in LPGA events?

I guess we could say that the PGA has no rules against women, but the LPGA, even in name alone, declares it is for women only.

What do you all think?

wolf · 05-24-2006, 11:21 AM

Reverse discrimination is still discrimination, but I don't think that women should be playing in the PGA. Or the NFL. Or at Augusta.

I think that there can be clubs that base their membership on exclusivity. I never saw any white students at the Black Student Union, and I didn't hear anyone bitching about it, either.

And in case you're wondering, I haven't watched the Mummers since they let women march.

Griff · 05-24-2006, 12:12 PM

Assuming golf is really a sport, I like to see folks compete at the highest level they can. My daughter beat 9 or 10 boys and a girl fencing last Sunday so I'd hate to see her competition limited... of course it will be if she continues to fence as an adult. At the college level maybe womens fencing is competitive enough? Men's fencing is getting killed by title 9 or football so that may be less competitive. I do believe that people have the right to descriminate in private enterprises even if it makes for a poorer product/service/competition. I'll feel free to organize a more competitive league. None of this makes much sense so I'm stopping now.

Munchkin · 05-24-2006, 12:47 PM

Wolf: Why not the NFL? I can only alllmost understand with golf because they have a specific professional league for women. Like with basketball... But there is not professional womans footbal league. So say you have this chick, that can consistantly nail 45 yard field goals.... why shouldnt she be allowed to play? That is a totally different situation than the golf one.

Heres an aside... I just did a little research..dont know what made me think of this. The total to be awarded over the 48 official PGA events is more than $240 million dollars (avg $5 million per event). The LPGA total is $45 million over 34 events(avg $1.3 million per event)......

Now theres a reason I think women who are capable of competing with the men should be allowed to...

wolf · 05-24-2006, 01:10 PM

Then feel free to start a new league in which women compete against men. Don't screw up a perfectly good sporting entertainment. Women's attempts at entry into male sports have been amusing, but not terribly successful.

There is, incidentally a Women's Pro Football League. But much like women's basketball and women's soccer, nobody really gives a damn. It's a curiosity, not a "real" spectator sport.

Munchkin · 05-25-2006, 08:00 AM

Wow wolf... okay. While I agree that the vast majority of women can not compete head to head with men in the vast majority of sports due to plain ol biology, I find womens attempts at entry into 'male sports' exciting rather than 'amusing.'

As for nobody giving a damn, I totally disagree there. The WNBA may not be nearly as successful as the NBA, people give a damn about it. It encourages young girls to work hard at a sport they love. It encourages them to get out there and be active, and shows them that if they excel, maybe they can play after college. And that they wouldnt have to go to a european league to do that. Heck, my brother enjoys watching wnba sometimes because its a bit more about fine tuned skill and finesse rather than slam dunking.

I also dont understand why a woman participating in a primarily male sporting event would screw anything up. If she is good enough that if you cut off her hair and put on a tight sports bra, you wouldnt be able to tell the difference between her and the others out on the playing field, why should it matter that she has overies instead of testicles?

I think when I started this thread I was hoping to get some insight into why some people think that women shouldnt be allowed to participate in PGA tour events, or even a good argument for why men should or should not be allowed to enter LPGA events (besides the fact that the name itself lends to the conclusion that its for ladies only) but it seems that the only reason presented for not wanting chicks to participate really is just the fact that they dont have nuts.

wolf · 05-25-2006, 01:29 PM

If women were meant to compete directly against men in golf, there wouldn't be ladies tees. QED.

BigV · 05-25-2006, 01:59 PM

I reckon that when women are competing directly against men in golf, the same set of tees is used.

Clodfobble · 05-25-2006, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Munchkin

...it seems that the only reason presented for not wanting chicks to participate really is just the fact that they dont have nuts.

The main reason most people are unhappy about it is that the same people who want women allowed in the PGA don't want men allowed in the LPGA. Personally I think it ought to be more like a varsity vs. junior-varsity thing. If you're good enough, you get to move up to the better competition, which happens at this point to be mostly male, but there's the wussy competition for the lightweights too. I bet there's some amateur CEOs who would get a kick out of competing in the LPGA.

05-24-2006, 10:37 AM	#1
Munchkin Colloquialist Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New Jersey Posts: 76	Michelle Wie To Participate in US Open Qualifier. For those of you who do not know, Michelle Wie is a 16 year old golfer. And a pretty darn good one at that. She even has a 300 yard tee shot. She won a local qualifier in Hawaii, and will now play at Canoe Brook on June 5th to try to qualify for the Open. A Lot of the men are not happy about that, but it seems that mainly they dont want to deal with the amount of press that will be there at an event that usually has a very low draw. They seem to think that if she is good enough, then go for it, but they dont want to be the one partnered with her. The reason I started this thread is this. A European tour member names Jean Van de Velde said : "I have no objection to Michelle Wie or any other women playing in our tournaments so long as we are allowed to play in theirs. And, yes, I'm ready to play in a skirt." I want to know what you all think about this. In fact, Im not even all that sure what I think about it. Im very much into athletics. And I know that If I was really good at a sport, so good that I could consistantly smack down the women, I would want to have a shot at the men so I could improve myself and just see how I fare. Do people have a right to be upset that she is allowed to participate? Is it rediculous to argue that if women are allowed in PGA events that men should be allowed in LPGA events? I guess we could say that the PGA has no rules against women, but the LPGA, even in name alone, declares it is for women only. What do you all think?

05-24-2006, 11:21 AM	#2
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	Reverse discrimination is still discrimination, but I don't think that women should be playing in the PGA. Or the NFL. Or at Augusta. I think that there can be clubs that base their membership on exclusivity. I never saw any white students at the Black Student Union, and I didn't hear anyone bitching about it, either. And in case you're wondering, I haven't watched the Mummers since they let women march. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

05-24-2006, 12:12 PM	#3
Griff still says videotape Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 26,813	Assuming golf is really a sport, I like to see folks compete at the highest level they can. My daughter beat 9 or 10 boys and a girl fencing last Sunday so I'd hate to see her competition limited... of course it will be if she continues to fence as an adult. At the college level maybe womens fencing is competitive enough? Men's fencing is getting killed by title 9 or football so that may be less competitive. I do believe that people have the right to descriminate in private enterprises even if it makes for a poorer product/service/competition. I'll feel free to organize a more competitive league. None of this makes much sense so I'm stopping now. __________________ If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you. - Louis D. Brandeis

05-24-2006, 12:47 PM	#4
Munchkin Colloquialist Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New Jersey Posts: 76	Wolf: Why not the NFL? I can only alllmost understand with golf because they have a specific professional league for women. Like with basketball... But there is not professional womans footbal league. So say you have this chick, that can consistantly nail 45 yard field goals.... why shouldnt she be allowed to play? That is a totally different situation than the golf one. Heres an aside... I just did a little research..dont know what made me think of this. The total to be awarded over the 48 official PGA events is more than $240 million dollars (avg $5 million per event). The LPGA total is $45 million over 34 events(avg $1.3 million per event)...... Now theres a reason I think women who are capable of competing with the men should be allowed to... Last edited by Munchkin; 05-24-2006 at 12:51 PM.

05-24-2006, 01:10 PM	#5
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	Then feel free to start a new league in which women compete against men. Don't screw up a perfectly good sporting entertainment. Women's attempts at entry into male sports have been amusing, but not terribly successful. There is, incidentally a Women's Pro Football League. But much like women's basketball and women's soccer, nobody really gives a damn. It's a curiosity, not a "real" spectator sport. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis Last edited by wolf; 05-24-2006 at 01:13 PM.

05-25-2006, 08:00 AM	#6
Munchkin Colloquialist Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: New Jersey Posts: 76	Wow wolf... okay. While I agree that the vast majority of women can not compete head to head with men in the vast majority of sports due to plain ol biology, I find womens attempts at entry into 'male sports' exciting rather than 'amusing.' As for nobody giving a damn, I totally disagree there. The WNBA may not be nearly as successful as the NBA, people give a damn about it. It encourages young girls to work hard at a sport they love. It encourages them to get out there and be active, and shows them that if they excel, maybe they can play after college. And that they wouldnt have to go to a european league to do that. Heck, my brother enjoys watching wnba sometimes because its a bit more about fine tuned skill and finesse rather than slam dunking. I also dont understand why a woman participating in a primarily male sporting event would screw anything up. If she is good enough that if you cut off her hair and put on a tight sports bra, you wouldnt be able to tell the difference between her and the others out on the playing field, why should it matter that she has overies instead of testicles? I think when I started this thread I was hoping to get some insight into why some people think that women shouldnt be allowed to participate in PGA tour events, or even a good argument for why men should or should not be allowed to enter LPGA events (besides the fact that the name itself lends to the conclusion that its for ladies only) but it seems that the only reason presented for not wanting chicks to participate really is just the fact that they dont have nuts.

05-25-2006, 01:29 PM	#7
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	If women were meant to compete directly against men in golf, there wouldn't be ladies tees. QED. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

05-25-2006, 01:59 PM	#8
BigV Goon Squad Leader Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,063	I reckon that when women are competing directly against men in golf, the same set of tees is used. __________________ Be Just and Fear Not.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)