As a follow up to the GFTG post of February 19th many of you may be interested in reading this article in the locally published Register newspaper (click here for the link to The Register article).
Hmmmm…. the plot thickens. It seems like our golf committee addressed the gender bias issue last year. God bless you, Jim Horvath, for your knowledge and effort. We all know it it not the first time your concerns have not been seriously considered. As sometimes happens, it seems the time line of events with regard to this whole mess is a bit blurred.
It will be interesting to see how the scenario plays out. Frankly, the way I had understood the change in policy it did sound as if men’s and women’s divisions would be implemented, not that members would be allowed to play tournaments in mixed-gender pairings. The “Tournament Information Packet” that was emailed to members last week does not spell out anything gender specific with regard to tournament entries (the emailing of the packet itself was a welcome, new and convenient move by the administration).
Indeed, I did notice the lack of “men’s” or “women’s” titles in the packet but neither were there any flight entry guidelines listed. Referring back to Ms. Joyce’s statement in the Register article that she believed a woman would be allowed entry only if they played with another woman, it is impossible to tell from the Tournament Packet the intent of the actual policy. On another note, if USGA guidelines are currently being following and if that is spelled out in the packet, I must have missed it and I guess Ms. Joyce did as well. Both semantics and timing play a large part in the overall picture.
It certainly seems like there is a great deal of ambiguity on the part of many of the people involved. It would be nice if everyone was willing to forgive and forget and play nice.
Read the packet again, hard to miss one of the first things mentioned for all tournaments. There is no blur to the minutes of the meetings that are public information. Become informed before you speak.
I beg forgiveness. Mr Oman is correct in pointing out that there is, on the top line on the first full page of the packet, the phrase “All tournaments will follow USGA guidelines for participation.” Though I’d love to blame it on the way I stapled the pages of my packet, I have to say it was an oversight on my part and I apologize to the Committee. And I truly thought I could read!
However, based on the Register article, which I was told was researched and written from the actual minutes of Golf Committee meetings, I still think there was some ambiguity with regard to the final decision to allow co-ed tournament play. From what the public can gleen from the various published articles (and, no, I have not pulled the minutes myself and read them in full) the first decision was not to allow Ms. Joyce into men’s tournaments. I still say, then, that based on the history of gender-bias law suits brought (and won) by women at various courses around the country, the current decision was made a little too late. But hindsight is a wonderful thing, is it not?
I for one never believe everything that you read or hear from the media. When there is a lawsuit involved, what and when things are said can be detremental or helpful to the case. The Town is taking this position and in my mind correct in doing so, that is probably why Elaine Joyce now has a PR person on the payroll. Stay TUNED FOLKS!