We know Arizona has been in the news lately for it's "hunt-'em-down-and-make-'em-show-their-papers" law aimed at brown people, most of them also poor. Discrimination at its rawest.
Members of the genteel country club set are no doubt holding their noses and trying to ignore the stink the state's action has created around the country. Meanwhile, discrimination of another stripe continues on those hallowed golf greens. Both the Tucson Country Club and the Phoenix Country Club, sites of U.S. Open qualifying rounds this week and next, continue to discriminate against women in tee times and use of club facilities, some 60% of which are reserved for men only.
Yeah, I know they can't actually deport women, so many would say there's no comparison with the racial profiling that's bound to occur with the new anti-immigrant law. But women have been openly gender-profiled, and publicly declared second class citizens by both clubs. And by continuing to discriminate against women and telling the world "we do it because we can," as a former Tucson Country Club president said recently, they send a message that sex discrimination doesn't matter.
So what? It's only a game of golf, after all.
Well, not exactly. The PCC and TCC boards are populated by some of Arizona's most prominent citizens and business leaders, including Henry Boice, President of the Northern Trust bank of Tucson and the president-elect of Tucson Country Club, and Thomas Zlaket, the former chief justice of the Arizona Supreme Court.
These guys would never have the gall to make such a statement if the subject was race. Nobody would brag about allowing non-white men to join their club and then restrict their activities - and make them eat and drink in separate facilities -- based on skin color.
Not so with gender.
The Arizona Attorney General's office has been through this before with Phoenix. The club agreed last year to stop discriminating and mend their ways, but gee, when nobody was looking they backslid got sued again in March. And the AG is now investigating two more complaints, this time against Tucson.
The United States Golf Association , co-sponsor of the qualifying tourneys, is not blameless here either. In direct violation of their own rules, they chose the Tuscon and Phoenix Country Clubs as venues, even though both clubs proudly and publicly discriminate. USGA Commissioner David Fay is passing the buck to protect the boys. Despite the clear prohibition of sanctioning events at clubs that discriminate, the USGA is "await[ing] the outcome of the Attorney General's investigation with interest." God forbid they should speak out in favor of fair treatment.
When powerful people send the message that sex discrimination is no big deal, even at a golf club, it's a short leap to the idea that a little pay discrimination is ok too, not to mention a pat on the butt at work. After all, it's just the girls. They shouldn't be so sensitive about these things.
Politics is also in the mix. The Attorney General, Terry Goddard, on whose desk the complaints have landed, is running for governor. His opponent, Tucson Country Club member John Munger, has painted those who don't like the club's policies as disgruntled harpies.
Those disgruntled harpies -- Arizona women, just happen to be the majority of voters in the state. Let's hope they will remember Munger's disdain in November.
Steven P. Croley: Arizona's Immigration Statute: Another Devil in the Details
In all the debate surrounding Arizona's controversial new immigration statute, one provision has escaped the scrutiny it deserves.
Pamela Weymouth Bass: Telephone Mamas: Separating Families to Serve Our Own
I have known women who mother their children from afar: by check, or Western Union, or bills tucked into letters. They mother by telephone or cards sent through a mail service.
Italian-American Club
Finish American Club
Irish American Gaelic Society
German Heritage Club
The Danish Club
I could go on…..
“……The answer cannot be determined from a mere examination of an organization’s current membership rolls but rather depends on how the organization selects members and other relevant factors, such as that the organization is dedicated to the preservation of religious, ethnic or cultural values of legitimate common interest to its members....â€
The Chamber of Commerce is very activist, but you seem to ignore that activism. Yet, you condemn the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, for their support of their membership and activism. If you don’t like them then boycott their member businesses. That is how the wonderful system of free enterprise works, and I prefer it over all others.
As for the subjugation of women, I have witnessed first hand the treatment of many country club women; I was appalled. The only people I've met who seem to fully understand the dynamics at some of these places are those who have worked with abused spouses. Modern day Neanderthals do not pull hair, they withdraw financial and emotional support, and impose humiliation for acts of insubordination. When that doesn’t work to silence some of the more persistent, they threaten their families’ livelihoods.
What do group dynamics, spousal abuse and subjugation have to do with allowing women to play golf at a private course? Nothing, that's what.
How does the "German Heritage Club" compare in its activities to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce? Explain that please, so we can all know it's a valid comparison. Do they work to support illegal immigration, or tell German immigrants to shop only at German-owned businesses? If not, why did you bring them up? No reason again?
As for the rest of the screed, I will not address that which is undeserving of note.
Well, on one site dedicated to this issue it is argued that “discrimination should never be ignored and the effects of it are communitywide. Many of the same people who believe that segregated dining and the denial of equal access to women is acceptable are many of the same people who employ and determine the wages of many, including females. It is reasonable to assume that their segregated dining policies reflect their view and value of women.â€
“The deliberate subjugation of women is simply unacceptable anywhere at any time. Avoid the trap of blaming the victims. For too many it is easy to ignore or trivialize the plight of a few fortunate women. Realize as you marginalize them that you marginalize every person who is the victim of discrimination and the economic ripple effects of the clubs' discriminatory practices and the discrimination it fosters throughout communities.â€
For more information go to http://tucsoncountryclubdiscriminates.blogspot.com/
But subjugation? Subjugation is a very different thing (with a very different definition) than discrimination. An all-male golf club is a far cry from subjugation. As a white male I certainly don't feel subjugated by the Tuskeegee Institute or Vassar (why doesn't someone straighten them out, by the way, for being discriminatory?). If I club a woman over the head and drag her back to my cave by her hair, that's subjugation. Having a men's club is not even close to subjugation.
Now that we are clear about discrimination and subjugation, you are free to call out the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and the Congressional Black Caucus, both racially-biased and exclusive groups which I'm sure you'll find even more offensive and blatantly biased than any golf club.
Go ahead. I'll wait.
I await your complaints about, and your morally correct vilification of, this vile group of racists operating in our midst.
You then write, "...(women) for some reason seem incapable of getting enough money together to start a nice golf club of their own." As a matter of fact, a few years ago a few men in AZ decided to develop a legitimately private club (unlike TCC and PCC which appear to be public accomodations) and allow only male members. It failed. They discovered that they could not survive on male golfer revenue alone. Clubs like TCC know that they need female members to survive but do not want to give them full service for their money.
What is politically correct about expecting any organization to follow the law; especially ones that are tax exempt like Tucson Country Club?
You are wrong about the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. In my community they are very activist, often writing letters to the editor urging illegal aliens to "stand up for their rights" (but strangely unable to ever list exactly which rights they are talking about when asked) and the organization is completely uninterested in helping any non-Hispanic businesses--that's not what they were formed to do, after all. Their mission statement clearly says that they intend to assist and promote ONLY Hispanic-owned businesses.
So I ask again: where is your outrage about this? Why is nobody taking them to task? Is racial preference okay when it's employed by Hispanics but evil when others do it? That's the way it seems from the posts I see around here. Prove me wrong--complain about the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and its explicitly racial policies and motives. You're either against racism in all its forms or you're not. Man up.
So, does this mean that TCC has indiscriminate discrimination?
The real question is why would the USGA be so stupid as to hold their event at a Club (TCC or PCC) that so proudly discriminates? Why would a judge (or a lawyer) risk the perception of impropriety by belonging to a club that so proudly discriminates? Why would an Area President of a banking concern that has such a proud history of corporate social responsibility (Northern Trust - with 5 women on their nation Board of Directors) ruin the hard won image of that business by serving as President of a club that so proudly discriminates? Maybe they're not quite as smart as they think they are!
BTW, the lawsuits against PCC were won by the plaintiff's after the AG's findings...that takes them out of the frivolous (without basis) arena! PCC, as I understand it, agreed to the anti-discrimination "sanctions" and then turned around and indiscriminately violated them.
As for the 60+% tee time figures, they are more than accurate and the figure is based upon availability...not slots used.
This is aimed at "illegals" of any color, race, nationality, country or planet of origin. Doesnt matter where they are from or what color they are, if they are illegal, then they are "illegal" and should face the penalty. What other criminal would you allow to publicly protest, and ask the police to turn their heads and allow the crime to continue? I am from the northeast. Grew up there went to college at a prestigious New York University. The people that label Arizonans as predjudiced or ignorant hicks or any of those colorful cliches are doing the exactly what they are condemning. I beleive that the word hypocrite fits. those people. Unless you live with a problem and have experienced it or spent some time(not ten minutes) learning about the situation and its; affects on the local population, then you really do not know what you are talking about. There is a serious illegal immigration problem. It is not in DC, it is in the border states. It is easy to criticize and condemn something, but if you do so, then also offer up a better solution. if you do not have a better solution, then go work on one and get back to us but dont tell us you are going to do something then let us wait for years while nothing happens but the problem grows
The law says Illegal immigrants, no mention of any specific group. is It is ridiculous that this even had to be signed. It is a law that says the police are able to enforce an existing law. Does anyone see the absurdity in that? If the law were in a northern state, how would it be "aimed"? If other states adopt this or a similar law then what will you say? Will it still be aimed at brown people, or will you come up with some other way to publish a criticism of a problem that you do not deal with and have not had to experience. It is incredible how many poeple can tell us( that live here in Arizona and deal with the problems every day) that they do not have a problem with illegal imigrants and that we should not pass laws to do something about it. Even better is that most of those people have not read the bill, and they do not offer anty alternative
Papers? How about a drivers license. Oh no, I forgot, there was a group protesting a while back because Illegal Immigrants could not get drivers licenses. How dare the state of Arizona to not grant someone who is in the country illegally a drivers license, how totally rude and predjudice of us. We built shelters for the illegal dayworkers so they can wait in the shade to go work for someone who is also breaking the law by giving them a job and paying uder the table. Hmm that seems contrdictory to the law. If they are illegal then shouldnt thwey be arrested like other illegal criminals?
How is this a law aimed at brown people? It is aimed at Illegals, not race, gender or nationality specific. You, like many others, have decided that is who it is aimed at, not Arizona. Itr is aimed at illegal immigrants,. In Arizona a large percentage are of hispanic/mexican heritage/origin. That is not our decision or choice, that is merely a fact. The media has taken that fact and twisted it into the lawa being aimed at that group of people when in fact the law is aimed at a larger group of people and the Hispanic/mexican group was singled out by the critics.
> 'In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in
good
> faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated
on an
> exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate
against any
> such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated
upon the
> person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an
American...There can
> be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but
something else
> also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American
flag... We
> have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. And we
have
> room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.'
> Theodore Roosevelt 1907
>
> Every American citizen needs to read this!
You can create any man only club you want to, but if you take one penny from a woman to support it, you should be shut down. The truth of the matter is that the economic realities do not support men only country clubs any more. You just can't afford your clubhouse without the help of girls, darn it! When you keep the girls and their money out, you can't keep the lights on.