A Step Backwards For Golf

I hope it comes as no surprise when I admit that golf doesn't have the best reputation for being equally open for everybody to enjoy. In fact, just recently there were a whole series of articles published on this very matter, claiming golf is geared far too much towards the wealthy; the expensive golf clothing, ridiculous prices and exclusive memberships didn't help the sport's case here.

When golf was introduced to the Olympics a short while back, I thought things might start to change for the better. A larger level of interest in the sport should lead to a larger base of grassroots talent which, in turn, should lead to increased provision of golf for everybody - not just the wealthy. The more people know about a subject, the less room there is for unjust prejudices and negative stereotypes; if lots more people get into golf, hopefully the sport can do away with its bad imagine.

However, just as things were looking up for golf, the Irish Supreme Court has managed to infuriate golfers and rational human beings worldwide by ruling that Portmarnock Golf Club can continue to prevent women applying for memberships! In this, the twenty-first century, the club can continue to disallow female members because its "principal purpose is to cater only for the needs of persons of a particular gender".

Forgive me if I'm asking a ridiculous question here, but how on earth can a golf club possibly be catering to the needs of a particular gender? For one thing, it doesn't seem like golf is genuinely needed by any person - no matter what their gender! Despite this, even if we assume golf is a fundamental human requirement; how can a court conceivable rule that the sport is ‘needed' more by men than women? It's a well known fact that more men play golf than women, but that seems to be completely irrelevant as far as this case goes. In fact, I'm fairly sure that, if any person needs to have access to a golf course, somebody like Lorena Ochoa probably has a much stronger case than your average pot-bellied business executive!

If this was a testicular cancer support group, I could understand a case for denying women membership on the grounds that the organisation is catering for something of a male requirement. However, golf is not a gender specific sport, nor is playing golf a gender-specific hobby or requirement; golf is (and should be respected as) a sport that can be played by anybody, no matter what age, gender or whether or not they can afford Nike golf clothing! Don't get me wrong; I fully understand the reasoning behind exclusive memberships and actually agree with some people being denied membership for some reason or another. However, to deny anybody membership based purely on their gender is atrocious! That the Supreme Court ruled in favour of it is nothing short of bewildering.

If golf is to shed its restrictive and prejudiced reputation, events like this cannot be allowed to reoccur. In fact, people should speak out against it now, lest a court take it even further next time and rule that golf clubs are catering only for the needs of persons of particular age, race and income! It wouldn't be any more ridiculous, that's for sure.