Augusta, home of the Masters, did not admit a black man till 1990 & still refuses women.

[Maru Kitteh]

Do you find this fact inadmirable and/or offensive? Let's get a breakdown.

I won't be leaving an option for "I don't care" because really, what's the point? If you don't care, then so be it. DU is a big and wondrous place. :)

[xultar]

1. That is good. Less Poon Tang for leTigre!

[Maru Kitteh]

3. LOL. Didn't consider it from that POV.

:)

[Dreamer Tatum]

2. They can let in whomever they like. Shrug. nt

[Fumesucker]

5. The OP does not dispute that..

It asks whether you think their policies in the matter of race and sex are admirable or not.

[Maru Kitteh]

6. Ok. We'll mark you down for option 1. Thanks.

[DURHAM D]

11. Really? You are in the wrong place. nt

[DURHAM D]

12. Sorry - misunderstood your post. Its not you - its the other guy. nt

[Maru Kitteh]

14. No problem :-)

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. Can They Exclude Jews Or Muslims?

~

[Johonny]

38. I agee

I'm pretty sure I don't have to or want to join there golf club anymore than the KKK. If the racist an bigots want to hang out together, better it's some place I have no interest in going:)

[Berserker]

4. I find

as a white male golfer that beer cart girls are great! Do you mean we have to let them golf too? dear lord.
I think it's VERY offensive to women and offensive to me. I love to golf different courses around the country but with a policy like Augusta has they can kiss my ass.

[harun]

7. They refuse nearly every one. Presidents can't even get a tee time there.

I have no problem with them, isn't like there isn't plenty of alternatives if anyone does have an issue with it.

[Berserker]

9. Yup you are right

But there's nothing you and I can do
You and I are only two
What's right and wrong is hard to say
Forget about it for today
We'll stick our heads into the sand
Just pretend that all is grand
Then hope that everything turns out ok
Steppenwolf

[Incitatus]

33. They do refuse a lot of people.

But to refuse people simply based on their gender is sexist. If they want to refuse someone based on their skill as a golfer, that is different. Personally, I have a problem with racists and sexists. If you don't, well, you're free to your own opinion.

[Rage for Order]

39. "(T)o refuse people simply based on their gender is sexist."

Undoubtedly. When does the picketing and boycotting of http://www.curves.com/">this place begin?

:shrug:

[MilesColtrane]

51. So your local Junior League is sexist?

[slackmaster]

81. Yes, and the Boy Scouts of America, Girl Scouts, and Major League Baseball

All technically sexist.

But calling them out for it distracts from much more important issues of gender discrimination where women often get shorted, like equal pay for equal work.

[KonaKane]

8. I find it amazing there were two votes (so far) for option 1

DU is really starting to surprise me. Not in good ways.

[Cid_B]

10. Looks like 4 now... nt

[DURHAM D]

15. Totally shocking. Well not really.

Lots of total a-holes here lately.

[Maru Kitteh]

16. 6, if you count the visiting white Freeper chicks.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. I'm Loving This Poll. I Am Absolutely Loving This Poll

Hypocrisy amuses me regardless of the source.

Just because you hate Sarah Palin doesn't mean you're a liberal as the results of this poll show.

How can any liberal be ok with discrimination?

[slackmaster]

50. I'm OK with a small private club controlling what people they invite to join

Do you think that being white, male, and a decent golfer are sufficient to get you invited to join?

Their discrimination runs far deeper than the issues addressed in the poll questions, and it is their right to discriminate.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

52. Can They Bar Jews Or Muslims?

How about gays?

[slackmaster]

54. Red herring

In fact they have many Jewish members now.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

59. How Is It A Red Herring?

You said it's ok to ban females. I want to know what other groups you countenance them banning.

[slackmaster]

60. I don't countenance them "banning" anything or anyone because it's none of my business

Is it really that hard to understand?

It's not even an issue of banning anyone - There isn't even a membership application because they decide who they want to INVITE to join. I'm not going to get upset about them not inviting me, and I'm certainly not going to complain that I've been "banned" from their silly boys' club for being one of the world's worst golfers (officially certified!) or not being a billionaire (actually I prefer to be called "chronically sub-rich").

They've "banned" everyone on the planet except about 300 very wealthy, connected people. It's not my problem, and I really don't care. They have NO legal or moral obligation to try to make their private club representative of the general population.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

61. "Is It Really Hard To Understand " That All Discrimination Is Invidious Regardless Of Its Target

There were 'people who said "it was none of their business" when similar organizations banned African Americans and Jews. Dr. King spoke about them:


"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."

[slackmaster]

78. They don't admit anyone except a few individuals they have chosen to invite

They won't deny your membership application because of your race, gender, level of affluence, or golf handicap, because they don't accept applications from anyone. If you call them and ask for a membership application, I'll bet they'll simply tell you that membership is by invitation only, and they'll keep repeating that like a broken record no matter what you say. They're certainly not going to ask you to state your race or religion. You don't seek them. They come looking for you.

They practice a discrimination of selective inclusion of individuals, not of selective exclusion of groups of individuals.


There were 'people who said "it was none of their business" when similar organizations banned African Americans and Jews. Dr. King spoke about them:


"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."

Let's assume that you are correct in saying that Dr. King's reference included the kind of club we're talking about.

How many people are adversely affected by the problem?
In what way does not getting invited to join that particular club harm them?
What remedy would you propose to make them whole?

[dorkulon]

13. Option 2, but I should add that I would probably play golf there for a whole bunch of money.

Just sayin'. :shrug:

[Maru Kitteh]

17. What if you already had more money than any 20 regular families will ever see in their lifetime?

Would that alter the equation?

I'm not going to sit here and lie and say I wouldn't play there for that kind of money, (I've got these silly little ovaries and some boobs so I'm not really welcome) but that's only because I have very little savings, I'd like to take better care of my Mom, and I don't want to work until I'm 80.

If my house were paid, my mom was set up and I had some $$ in the bank I'm quite sure I would tell them to kiss it.

[dorkulon]

18. That's a good point, actually.

But if we're talking about Tiger (and I'm guessing we are), right now is probably not a good time for him to portray himself as a beacon of moral decency. The hypocrisy factor would be off the charts.

Still, you're right. If I were already millionaire, I'd probably skip it.

[JonLP24]

22. Minus the money factor

It is 1 of 4 tour championships so does that affect what you would do differently?

[dorkulon]

24. I hear that

but the only kinds of golf I ever played were mini and frisbee. And I watched pro golf once for about thirty seconds. So I really have no idea what you're talking about. I can see how playing a pro sport that requires your participation at a males-only course to succeed, you'd be kind of locked into it.

[AngryAmish]

It is not a tour champtionship

It is a Major. Majors are determined by tradition and agreed upon by everyone. THere is no formal group whih says what is a Major and what is not. US Amateur used to be a major and now it is not, the Western Open was almost a major and now does not exist (dammit). If there was no PGA Tour the Masters would continue to be held. It is a championship put on by the membership of Augusta National Golf Club with the proceeds going to charity.

The other majors are: US Open (again, not a PGA TOur event, put on by the US Golf assoc.), The Open Championship (put on by the ...I forget the name... but the British Golf Association - but the name is wrong.) and the PGA Championship which indeed is put on by the us Professional Golfers Association of America.

[Maru Kitteh]

27. My thoughts were certainly not limited to Woods. If all the top names said no,

Augusta would change it's bigoted policies in a jiff.

[AngryAmish]

45. No they would not.

Bill Gates tried to join for years. They would not let him in and he is the richest guy in the world.

They would tell the biggest names to kiss their ass.

[tammywammy]

92. I believe he's a member now. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

19. I so agree with your point.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8112984

[Maru Kitteh]

23. yup! n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

20. Why is this thread underwater?

I guess our resident racists and misogynists take issue with calling out that bastion of rich white.

[Incitatus]

32. Yes, it's sad when the seem to outnumber

[slackmaster]

55. I Unrec'd it because the poll questions don't reflect their current policies

They do invite black members, and it's not actually clear that they ever had an official policy barring black people. They admit having a male-only policy. That makes it a boys' club for rich men.

There still aren't a lot of wealthy, connected black people who are also excellent golfers. How many Fortune 500 companies have black CEOs?

[JonLP24]

21. Regarding post #7

I know the male PGA tours don't have any females so is The Masters the only game that goes on during the year? I ask if they would reverse their policy would it matter?

Personally I don't understand why they resist. I do know they are very private and have strict rules as it is. Golfing video games only have similar copies rather than the actual copies. Like NFL games don't have Belichick, it's "NE Coach".

[Berserker]

25. It's not that

the PGA tours don't have any females they have tried. They just can't make the cut. They can try like Michelle Wee has but they simply can not play with the men. YET!

[JonLP24]

26. I know they have tried

Sorenstam(spelling?). I seen her play against the men but failed to make the cut. I'm sure there may have been other attempts but I don't know of them. I was saying AFAIK that they don't have any now and was asking if this is the only game year round meaning would it make any difference if they had an open policy.

Again-if I was them I wouldn't make any big deal about this and have an open policy. I don't see any reason not to.

[hughee99]

34. Which policy?

Augusta National allows women to play the course, they just don't have any female members. As I understand it, almost no PGA tour players are actually members. If a woman qualified for the tournament, I'd bet they would let her play.

I remember Bryant Gumbel had Martha Burk on a few years ago, where they had a discussion about Augusta National. They managed to get through the whole interview without discussing Burning Tree Club in Maryland, a course that not only had no female members, but didn't even allow women on the grounds at the time (they now allow wives in the pro shop weekdays from 9-11 by appointment only). A wife would have to drop her husband off at the front gate. Gumbel was a member. They normally extended membership to supreme court members, until O'Connor was confirmed.

[JonLP24]

53. Thanks

I have a lot to learn about this.

[provis99]

28. Of course I find it offensive.

but then again, I also find it offensive that the Klan doesn't allow black members (that they know of). Cue your Dave Chappelle reference here.

[Maru Kitteh]

30. Yes. I too found Clayton Bigsby's divorce sad and shocking.

[hughee99]

37. Or that the Congressional Black Caucus doesn't allow white members? n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

64. I Don't Get It

~

[hughee99]

65. If the poster finds it offensive that any group would discriminate

on such grounds, even to the point that it bothers him/her that the KKK won't allow black members (even though I can't imagine a scenario in which that would ever come up), does it also bother him/her that the CBC won't allow white members?

It's easy to knock the KKK for being discriminatory, because I already don't like them, it's harder to knock a group that I already like for being discriminatory, like the CBC.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

69. I threw Out A Line

I threw out a line and look what I caught. (WINK)


"t's easy to knock the KKK for being discriminatory, because I already don't like them, it's harder to knock a group that I already like for being discriminatory, like the CBC."

First we will dispose of the phony moral equivalence between the Ku Klux Klan, a group started for the sole reason to intimidate the freed man (African American folks) from asserting their rights though they did "hate on " them papists (Roman Catholics) and Jews too and the Congressional Black Caucus, an organization that was started to assert the rights of the very people the Klan was out persecuting.

We also have the United Negro College Fund, the American Indian College Fund, Miss Black America,et cetera. There are historical reasons for these organizations to exist with those reasons primarily being the legacy of racism and discrimination.

What are the reasons for the Klan's continued existence?

The furtherance of racism and discrimination.

[hughee99]

72. And look what I caught...

We're not talking about the organization's purpose here, we're talking about discrimination. I'd be thrilled if the KKK and like organizations disappeared forever, HOWEVER, if the poster I was responding to was so against this sort of discrimination that they willing to consider the KKK's "admittance policy" as opposed to simply dismissing them as racist and ignoring them, would they also be willing to overlook all of the positive characteristics of the CBC and call basing membership on such factors discrimination as well?

Yes, the CBC is a great group, and the KKK is just about as bad as you can get. Both are private groups, and are free to set their membership standards as they want to. For EITHER group to deny a willing applicant based on their ethnic background is discrimination. You can say there's a good reason for it, you can try to justify it anyway you want, but it is still discrimination.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

73. That's A A Difference Without A Distinction

You have traditionally African American and Native American institutions that were born out of the battles against racism and colonialism and still exist today because the battles are not over. Such institutions include the Congressional Black Caucus, the American Indian College Fund, the United Negro College Fund, Miss Black America, the traditionalally African American Universities such as Furman and Fiske, et cetera. There are legitimate reasons for their existence.

You are hsnging your proverbial hat on the word "discrimination" but in the context you want to employ it makes no sense.

[hughee99]

74. I'm not arguing that there's not a reason for these groups to exist...

however, if I understand you correctly, a group's selection of it's membership based on race (or religion, or gender) is not discriminating if the reason for their group is based in their collective racial (or religious, or gender) identity. If a group was formed as a meeting place for Black congresspeople, for example, then it's okay to discriminate. Is it then okay for a group formed as a meeting place for a few wealthy white people from Georgia (like Augusta National, or hell, the KKK for that matter) to discriminate?

You can try to justify this any way you want, but when you have an applicant that you let attend your meetings, has a significant constituency that is African American, and would normally meet all other criteria, except that he's white so he can't vote, I don't know how you call this anything other than discrimination. Yes, all discrimination is not equal, but let's not pretend it isn't there, just because the group involved is one we like.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

75. The Problems Of The World And Philosophy Can Not Be Put In Neat Little Boxes

I would prefer a world where organizations whose membership is based on such immutable or near immutable factors as race, religion, gender, gender orientaion, etcetera faded away. But we are not there yet. And since we are not there yet I see the need for groups that promote other members of their groups. I don't see a need for groups thst exist or appear to exist to keep members of other groups down or out.

I just don't see how the Klan and the Congressional Black Caucus have anything in common.

[hughee99]

76. Other than basing it's membership, in part, on racial factors

I don't see that they have anything in common either.

When you exclude someone based on race, it's racial discrimination. Sometimes there may be good reasons for doing so, but even if it's a reason that every single person in the world agrees with, it only makes it acceptable, it doesn't mean it's not discrimination.

Edited: I came off a lot more snotty than I had intended, I'm trying to make an argument, not be an a-hole, and if you already read the previous version, I apologize.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

77. Again It's A Difference Without A Distinction

The United Negro College Fund existed and exists because impoverished African Americans didn't and don't have enough access to college education. The traditional black college system existed because African Americans didn't have access to college at all in some states. The Miss Black America pageant existed because African American women were discriminated against in the selection process.

They existed and in some cases still exist to address past or continuing grievances and inequalities.


Now, why did the Klan exist and why does it continue to exist, except now they call themselves Teabaggers?


on edit- If you could demonstrate that males, the majority of whom who are white, have been historically discriminated against in the sport of golf I might join you in your campaign to keep golf courses or certain golf courses all male.

[hughee99]

85. And yet it's all discrimination.

Sometimes it starts with a legitimate reason, sometimes that reason diminishes over the years, and sometimes it doesn't but in any case, if you're going to decide whether something is or is not discrimination at all based on who's doing it and why, then you're already starting off on a slippery slope.

I have no campaign to keep a course all male, all white, or all anything, but I'm not trying to twist logic in knots to call what the CBC does anything other than "acceptable discrimination", either.

You can say that I'm not drawing the distinction between what the CBC is doing and what other organizations are doing, but I am drawing a distinction. One is considered acceptable, and the other is not.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

86. First Of All "The Slippery Slope Argument" Is A Logical Fallacy, Cousin To "The Parade Of Horribles"

It's akin to saying if we legalize sex between a nineteen year old and a seventeen year old which is illegal in some states soon we will soon be legalizing sex between nineteen year olds and seven year olds or if we legalize marriage between people of the same gender we will soon be legalizing marriage of one person to several or to animals as some yahoos suggest, etcetera. It excludes the middle ground.


"In debate or rhetoric, a slippery slope (sometimes misstated as thin edge of the wedge, or the camel's nose) is a classical informal fallacy. A slippery slope argument states that a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact, much like an object given a small push over the edge of a slope sliding all the way to the bottom.<1> The fallacious sense of "slippery slope" is often used synonymously with continuum fallacy, in that it ignores the possibility of middle ground and assumes a discrete transition from category A to category B. Modern usage avoids the fallacy by acknowledging the possibility of this middle ground."

Maybe it would be easier if you looked at a group and its policies and asked yourself if there is a rational basis for their policies, i.s. is there a rational basis for the Klan wanting to mess with black, Catholic, and Jewish folks?, is there a rational basis for the American Indian College Fund wanting to help a child from a reservation where alcoholism, drug addiction, and poverty are staples of life?

And could you please answer my question.

The United Negro College Fund and the American Indian College Fund exist to address and correct past and in some cases continuing inequalities. Why does the Klan exist and what grievances and inequalities do they address?

[hughee99]

94. There's always a "rational reason" for a group to exclude someone

in the eyes of it's members. That reason may or may not make sense or be social acceptable to the general public, but to a majority of the members, it makes sense. That's why the rule doesn't get changed from within.

The reason for an organizations existence, for better or worse, is 100% irrelevant with respect to whether it is or is not discriminating, it is ONLY relevant as to whether that discrimination is acceptable.

In a statement from Rep. William Lacy Clay, Jr., D-Mo
"Quite simply, Rep. Cohen will have to accept what the rest of the country will have to accept - there has been an unofficial Congressional White Caucus for over 200 years, and now it's our turn to say who can join 'the club.' He does not, and cannot, meet the membership criteria, unless he can change his skin color. Primarily, we are concerned with the needs and concerns of the black population, and we will not allow white America to infringe on those objectives."

You keep trying to divert me to other organizations other than the CBC, so let me ask you a question. If the CBC is primarily concerned with the needs and concerns of the black population, how does excluding a person who happens to not be black, but represents a district where more than 60% of his constituents are black, "infringe on those objectives"? His philosophy is in line with the group, his constituents are exactly the target audience for the group, but his skin is the wrong color. It's nothing more than that. Call it justified, call it tradition, call it acceptable if you want... it's still discrimination.

In the end, I don't think we are really that far apart. I consider what they are doing to be acceptable, given the current circumstances, but acknowledge that it is still, in fact, discrimination. It's clear that you consider what they're doing to be acceptable as well. Do you believe it is also discrimination?

[waiting]

29. I think it's rather hypocritical

for these bigoted assholes to scold anyone about behavior. Pfft.

[Incitatus]

31. So far 17% of responders find nothing inadmirable or offensive about sexism.

I though that number would be a little lower.

[Octafish]

42. A Golden Star of unlimited devotion next to the DU user name doesn't mean they're really a Democrat.

Come to think of it, Democrats once were big in Dixie.

[LoZoccolo]

43. People probably did it because they don't like being antagonized with polls. n/t

[AngryAmish]

46. at student of human nature, eh?

[LoZoccolo]

49. Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? n/t

[Incitatus]

97. What's so antagonzing if you agree with the OP?

[slackmaster]

48. The Augusta National Golf Club is a private organization. Membership is by invitation only.

Being a good golfer isn't enough. You have to be wealthy and connected to join. Many of the members are CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. 99.9999+% of white men have ZERO chance of ever being admitted. Even if I wanted to join (and I most certainly don't), my prospects would be just as remote as would those of a woman.

If they want to maintain it as a club for men only, that's their prerogative.

To me that's not offensive, it's just kind of silly, like a group of men who meet once a week to play poker and kvetch about their wives. An "adult" version of a boys' clubhouse with a "No Girls Allowed" sign.

[slackmaster]

40. The questions are badly slanted - The race policy is a non-issue now.

The gender policy is the only issue.

[ieoeja]

68. So limit your answer to whether you find sexism inadmirable and./or offensive.

Because the poll doesn't ask whether you think it is their right. Just what you feel about their policy.

[slackmaster]

96. I find it neither inadmirable nor offensive, nor admirable nor inoffensive

I just don't give a flying fuck.

It's a private boys' club for rich weirdos way the fuck out in Georgia. Their selection process for membership is neither my business nor my problem.

They're not doing any demonstrable harm to any race, gender, or ethnic group, or people of any socioeconomic status, religion, etc., or to any other identifiable group or to any individual, by being picky about who they invite to join.

I don't have a problem with private groups that limit their membership to men, or to women, or to rich people, or to Democrats, or to people named Jim Smith.

http://www.jimsmithsociety.com/

I mourn for the outrage that is being squandered on this non-issue.

[Octafish]

41. Prescott Bush Sr. once headed the USGA.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[bullwinkle428]

47. The Walker Cup amateur golf competition is named in honor of George

Herbert Walker (grandfather and namesake of the former President of the United States George H. W. Bush and great-grandfather of former President George W. Bush).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walker_Cup

[gratuitous]

44. I voted, here's my qualifier

Augusta is private club. They can do anything they want. What dismays me most is that the golf tournament held there is one of professional golf's "majors." That says a whole lot more about professional golf than it ever could about the racists and sexists in Augusta national. Equally dismaying is the near-pornographic, soft-focus adulatory coverage given this golf tournament by CBS, a major broadcast network. I think that says a whole lot about CBS and the men who run that network.

If you're a woman, know a woman, or are related to a woman, you might let the men at CBS and the PGA know what you think,

[4lbs]

56. I unrec'd it because the poll is set up improperly.

I'm a non-white male. So evidently my only choice is to find nothing wrong with Augusta's policy, since that's the only poll option available.

Which is incorrect.

[slackmaster]

57. Non-white males aren't allowed to have opinions in this poll

;-)

[Echo In Light]

58. G.Carlin: "The only blacks you'll see at country clubs are carrying trays." (Homelessness and Golf)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbSRCjG-VLk

[alp227]

62. I'm a non-white male who has an issue with the racist policy.

Where's my option? :shrug:

[devilgrrl]

63. You couldn't pay me enough money to want to be a member.

:puke:

[slackmaster]

79. Same here. Golf is a game for Village Idiots.

Even rich golfers are all basically Village Idiots.

[Amaya]

66. How surprising

:eyes:

[ieoeja]

67. The odd options (1/3/5) do not say you consider it their "right".

These options say you find nothing inadmirable and/or offensive about their policy.

So if you cast an odd :) vote, you either:

1. find nothing sexist/racist about their policies,
2. find nothing inadmirable/offensive about sexism/racism, or
3. misread the poll.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

83. The Poll Was Awkward

The first thing they teach you in Social Science is to make the questions as straight forward and unambiguous as possible.

I am a white male and approve of Augusta National's policy of excluding females.

I am a white male and disapprove of Augusta National's policy of excluding females.

I am a white female and approve of Augusta National's policy of excluding females.

I am a white female and disapprove of Augusta National's policy of excluding females.


.....

.....

[Lyric]

70. Somehow the results of this poll do not shock me.

[Hosnon]

71. Ahhh - The annual ANGC hatefest...

It's a private club folks.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

80. So Is The Klan

~

[Hosnon]

82. Yep. nt.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

84. Enlightening The World One Person At A Time

That's my mission.

on edit- I don't hate it anymore than the Bohemian Club where a bunch of men, most of them old and out of shape, run around naked.

[yodoobo]

87. why should I care if a bunch of wealthy CEO's can play golf there?

I find it offensive that Augusta exists.

There current admission policy is not the important part.

[KonaKane]

88. 21% pro-discrimination

I've got to tell you, that's the last thing I expected to see on DU.

[JonLP24]

89. 27%

if you count white females and non-white males that find nothing inadmirable/offensive about their policy.

[yodoobo]

90. rich male CEO's discriminating against rich female CEOs

truly the social injustice of the century.

[slackmaster]

95. Yes, the tempest must be almost overflowing its teapot

:nuke:

[aikoaiko]

91. I support the 1st Amendment right to assemble freely.

I don't like that they kept people of color out and currently keep women from full privileges, but it is their right.

[Liberal_in_LA]

93. good poll. kick for more voting

[FunkyLeprechaun]

98. I have a friend who is/was a member of Augusta

Big time golfer, a hobby, and has golfed with the likes of Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods. He loves golfing and trying out the different courses.

His wife is also a big time golfer and she is pissed off that she can't play at Augusta and wants her husband to cancel the membership. It's been a while since we had that conversation so I don't know if he cancelled the membership since.

It's ridiculous that Augusta doesn't admit women.