Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
OK...things ARE slow. My poll got deleted. I'm bored. I see common sense again doesn't seem too common. S000oooo......I'll throw my 2 cents in:
First of all, to those who have suggested men playing in women's events....as fairness or fair retribution...or whatever....
Are you for real?
That's scary, if serious.
Please don't tell me you also base your take and opinion on "God's word".
Now, I must admit that I do think there are some sports that women should not seriously consider being involved in. Yes, we all possess the same hormones, just to greater or lesser degrees. But the simple fact is there ARE fundamental physical differences between men and women. I enjoy those differences. It is my belief that the "Way" is for all to celebrate that. We have our similarities...celebrate those as well. We all are human.
To me the epitome of Womanhood....is just that. Being the ultimate "Woman".
I don't want to see a woman who has to justify her self worth by excelling in Male traits. Just as I don't want to see a man who has to justify his self worth trying to act like a female.
Sure I would always prefer to look at a pysically fit person rather than a fat slob regardless of sex.
But a Woman who can show me an arm flex with granite biceps, etc, etc, is a freak to me.
I don't care what sex you are....be a first rate YOU, not a second rate someone else.
If a woman want to try to do something as a human. Fine. Any one should have the right to do or be anything they want (as long as it does not harm others) no matter how ignorant or stupid it may be.
But neither do I think that justifies condoning some things on a major scale.
I personally (and I certainly don't seem alone on this) don't care much for women's basketball. Not only does the general lack of physical talent not excite me, I also get turned off by the fact that so many of the women in, of, and around the sport are dykes.
And I'm not just talking about the masuline traits displayed necessary for success at the game...but dykes - not in the homosexual physical sphere- but the mental...."I hate men" catagory and yet try and act like them as their "replacements".
Again, personally I think Annika hasn't sacrificed any of her femininity to excel in her sport. She IS good at what she does. Very Good. So what if a few "rules" get bent for her to play in the Colonial? She's earned it. Can she compete with men?
Can her finesse over come her lack of pure physical strength?
The odds say probably no. Maybe some moderate success at best. but neither do I think she will make a fool out of herself by trying...and for that....we all should always have the right.
What's really the big deal?
Why does her participating under the circumstances she is become such an issue in the first place?
.....I say because common sense is not indeed too common.
And to use that as a justification for men competing in women's sport is just plain ignorant.
...so now I have come full circle. Just like the topic....a bunch of dizzying circles.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
Last edited by Tangodnzr; May 14th, 2003 at 02:45 PM.
Originally posted by kerouac9 What does this prove?
It was originally in response to this post by Brews:
Originally posted by brews
The issue that the other golfers have is that she circumvented the normal route to get into the tournament. If she really wanted to "deserve the chance" she would have gone to the Monday qualifiers, just like all the others who weren't qualified to play based on their past play.
To show that other golfers use the same route to get into tournaments. I used the Tiger example because he is the best player in the world, but he never went to a Monday qualifer, etc.
Originally posted by SECTION 11 When was Sorrenstam ever complaining about discrimination?
She was invited, she accepted.
Why don't people have anything out against the Colonial Itself for this? It's the Colonial's publicity stunt, not Sorrenstam's.
Vijay needs to stop cheating on his scorecards.
I don't think she ever did. The outrage over Vijay Singh's comments invariably get women coming out and saying it's unfair to not allow women on the PGA tour, which is why I was complaining.
This morning on KGO tv in the bay area the sports guy brought up the hubbub and Elizabeth Bermudez, co-anchor, said "I don't get it men can't play on the women's tour why are women complaining about discrimination?" You could see the look of relief on the guys' face that he wasn't going to have to argue with her.
Originally posted by Jersey Girl Cards Fan Russ, the reason a lot of women's leagues started in the first place is because women weren't allowed to play in the men's leagues. So, saying that the LPGA is discriminating against men is kinda weird since the LPGA formed out of discrimation against women.
If she makes it, people will follow her every move. That can't be fun ... unless you're a narcissist.
I'm not sure that's true I have never checked but I seriously doubt the PGA has a rule against women. A lot of the clubs they played tournaments at probably did(just as they barred blacks) and I certainly don't agree with that.
however the point still stands, if I were a borderline PGA player unable to make the tour, I would not be allowed to just join the LPGA, for one reason, I'm a man.
Originally posted by Dback Jon It was originally in response to this post by Brews:
To show that other golfers use the same route to get into tournaments. I used the Tiger example because he is the best player in the world, but he never went to a Monday qualifer, etc.
Yes, but he was an established PGA player the minute he made his first step on the Tour. He followed a generally accepted procedure for getting onto a Tour event, not some cheap stunt.
We'll find out in a few days, when she doesn't make the cut, that she didn't deserve to be out there.
Originally posted by Jersey Girl Cards Fan
Russ, the reason a lot of women's leagues started in the first place is because women weren't allowed to play in the men's leagues. So, saying that the LPGA is discriminating against men is kinda weird since the LPGA formed out of discrimation against women.
If she makes it, people will follow her every move. That can't be fun ... unless you're a narcissist.
I don't think that is true, I believe a woman golfer in the 40's Qualified for a PGA tournament and played in it.
Key word, qualified. I'm all for that, if Sorenstam is honestly good enough to qualify for the tournament then more power to her.
Tango while I admit I personally wouldn't want to play on the women's tour the point is you can't demand equality and then have your own "league" that doesn't allow men, it's hypocrisy.
Am I the only one who remembers Renee Richards the pro womens tennis player who had to sue to get on the tour because she had a sex change and used to be a man?
I seriously doubt Tiger wants to play on the womens tour but Joe blow who can't make the PGA tour probably wouldn't mind making
millions on the LPGA if he were allowed to.
I have no objection to Sorenstam competing, I just object to all the women(and men) now coming out and saying Singh's comments are an example of discrimination. Ignorant maybe, sexist maybe, but not discriminatory because he's not the one playing in an association that doesn't allow a certain gender to compete in it, SHE is.
Originally posted by brews Yes, but he was an established PGA player the minute he made his first step on the Tour. He followed a generally accepted procedure for getting onto a Tour event, not some cheap stunt.
We'll find out in a few days, when she doesn't make the cut, that she didn't deserve to be out there.
Huh?
The generally accepted procedure is to go to Q-school and/or the Nike(Hooters) Tour to earn card. Tiger is probably the only golfer who qualified solely thru exemptions.
And saying he was an established PGA player the moment he stepped on the course is like saying Carson Palmer is an established NFL player when he lines up for his for snap..
I understand your point Russ. But I only agree with it to a certain degree.
You can indeed say women banning men from a sport while women playing in mens is allowed is not equality. But so what?
Some things don't need to be "equal" or "fair" in that respect in sports.
In life, maybe yes. Sports. I don't think so.
Is is unfair or unjust to limit children as far as age groups in competition?......not allowing older children to compete against younger, smaller ones?
Yet if a talented, extra-ordinary younger player can and want's to play with the older ones, be allowed too?
Yeah, I agree, it does seem hypocritical that whoever the people making the noise...... are......
....ah well, not only their hypocrisy gets unveiled, but their ignorance too.
Last edited by Tangodnzr; May 14th, 2003 at 03:33 PM.
The generally accepted procedure is to go to Q-school and/or the Nike(Hooters) Tour to earn card. Tiger is probably the only golfer who qualified solely thru exemptions.
And saying he was an established PGA player the moment he stepped on the course is like saying Carson Palmer is an established NFL player when he lines up for his for snap..
Matt Kuchar tried to do the same thing, there's also the UofA alum who did the same thing on the Euro Tour, and maybe even Michelson. It's different now with these guys coming out of college (and even HS) already established.
As to the second point, Tiger was a factor from day 1 on the Tour. Are you saying Carson Palmer is?
Originally posted by Tangodnzr I understand your point Russ. But I only agree with it to a certain degree.
You can indeed say women banning men from a sport while women playing in mens is allowed is not equality. But so what?
Some things don't need to be "equal" or "fair" in that respect in sports.
In life, maybe yes. Sports. I don't think so.
Is is unfair or unjust to limit children as far as age groups in competition?......not allowing older children to compete against younger, smaller ones?
Yet if a talented, extra-ordinary younger player can and want's to play with the older ones, be allowed too?
Yeah, I agree, it does seem hypocritical that whoever the people making the noise...... are......
....ah well, not only their hypocrisy gets unveiled, but their ignorance too.
For some reason you got me thinking about the Seinfeld episode where Kramer keeps bragging about dominating at "the Dojo" only to find out later he's competing with 11-12 year old kids (-:
All I'm saying is as long as the LPGA doesn't allow men, they can't complain about the PGA tour. If there are women out there who are good enough to play on the PGA tour by all means they should attempt to qualify and play.
I only object to the word discrimination because I don't think the PGA tour does that , with women.
The IGFA established a whole new set of "world records" in fishing when they established a womens section, completely pointless. A world record is established by line class(how strong the fishing line you used was) not anything else. They have had to tweak rules over the years for some ridiculous reasons(one world record "catch" was a guy who happened upon a species of fish trapped in a tidepool, caught it and landed it, so they changed the rules to make that no longer a legit record for example) but a new class for women is nuts. In fact some of the womens records are higher than the mens records, there should be one set of records.
Originally posted by Russ Smith For some reason you got me thinking about the Seinfeld episode where Kramer keeps bragging about dominating at "the Dojo" only to find out later he's competing with 11-12 year old kids (-:
All I'm saying is as long as the LPGA doesn't allow men, they can't complain about the PGA tour. If there are women out there who are good enough to play on the PGA tour by all means they should attempt to qualify and play.
I only object to the word discrimination because I don't think the PGA tour does that , with women.
The IGFA established a whole new set of "world records" in fishing when they established a womens section, completely pointless. A world record is established by line class(how strong the fishing line you used was) not anything else. They have had to tweak rules over the years for some ridiculous reasons(one world record "catch" was a guy who happened upon a species of fish trapped in a tidepool, caught it and landed it, so they changed the rules to make that no longer a legit record for example) but a new class for women is nuts. In fact some of the womens records are higher than the mens records, there should be one set of records.
and on that I do totally agree. Just like in billiards. I don't think there should be any distinctions made between sexes. There are indeed a lot of them that are frivoulous and ignorant.
-I would rather watch women's beach volleyball than men's.
-I would rather watch women's tennis than men's.
-I almost pissed my drawers facing a women's All-American softball pitcher.
-I always try to get a big hitting woman on my 4-some in scramble tourneys.
However:
-I don't think women should be police officers.
-or firefighters.
-or combat soldiers.
-Womens basketball is repulsive.
-With very few exceptions, so is women's golf.
I hate the attempts by people to blur the lines between the sexes. It's been a popular past time for many years now and all we need to do is look around us and see how it's caused many problems in todays society. We have people in positions of responsibility that are not capable of executing the task. While playing golf hardly compares to going into a burning building to save a life, it is another example of the politically correct crowd trying to continue to fuzzy the lines between the sexes.
If, Anika would be able to play, (in this one tourney, that is arguably the shortest on tour) to a level that is average for the the PGA what exactly does that prove? Is there any more value to this accomplishment than that of a chimp that takes a 2nd grade math test and scores in the middle of the class? Is the chimp the equal of the kids on a daily basis or was this more the exception instead of the rule.
We are equal in the eyes of God. We are all equal in the eyes of the ballot box. However, we are not all equal in intellect, income, morals, athletic ability, sexual prowess, opportunities in life or just about any other that involves people as individuals.
On those rare occasions that someone actually goes well beyond what is the norm for their gender or intellect or what ever else, it's fine to appreciate the effort, but we shouldn't forget that it is the exception. Anika would never be able to compete on the PGA regularly. She admits that herself, just as Serena Williams said about men's tennis. So we are basically trying to take a short course, on a single week and use it as some kind of example to further blur the gender lines, and that's the reason I don't like the addition of her to the tourney. Play exhibitions if you want to see if you can compete in a one shot deal.
__________________
Walnuts? I don't remember eating walnuts!
I actually like what Tiger Woods stated, give Annika 4-5 excemptions and see if she really can play on the tour. She could have a bad round in this tournament and it proves nothing. Then after 4-5 tournaments you will really know if she can play at that level or not. Case closed. Either she can or can't. More power to her if she can. This isn't all that different than when the golfer (Casey I think) with the disability wanted to ride in a cart and play on the tour. Where is he now? I don't think he is even on the Nike tour. See all this hoopla goes away after awhile. Too many people get all jacked up about stuff like this when its the media that plays it to sell stories and papers or ad time/space. Everyone needs to sit back relax and see what happens. Root for her or against her and enjoy the ride.
I'm bored. I see common sense again doesn't seem too common. S000oooo......I'll throw my 2 cents in:
Linear Mode
