Quote:
Originally posted by MagiK:
You are showing a blind eye to men who cannot qualify for the PGA but still might qualify for the LPGA....why is it fair to exclude them from the LPGA where they may be able to compete? The only answer I can think of is, is that men do not deserve the same rights as women....if a woman can compete in the mens arena...she gains the right to do so...but if a man can compete with the women but not the men..he has no recourse...double standard....ahh well as long as YOU feel it is right and just there is no problem I guess.
|
[img]smile.gif[/img] Blind eye huh [img]smile.gif[/img] - well there are two of us here who think we have both eyes open, but surely that couldn't be right if we were in disagreement - could it [img]smile.gif[/img] .
I have made no bones about the fact that the two tours are split on gender grounds for perfectly valid strength reasons. Women cannot regularly hope to compete against the men on an equal footing because of it. You only have to note the manner in which the strongest men (Woods, Mickelson, Els, Singh et al)and the strongest women (Sorenstam, Webb) tend to dominate the respective tours. Sure they don't in all the time and the shorter hitters bob up here and there, but a good long player will average a lot mre success than a good short player. So answering your question (you must think this is a change for me [img]smile.gif[/img] ), it is not fair that men who aren't capable of qualifying for the PGA tour go play on the LPGA tour, because they maintain the gender strength bias. Being lesser male players does nothing to remove that bias - if they are not good enough for the PGA then there is the NIKE tour - if theya re old eneough then they can go onto the LEGENDS tour - the weaker ladies have none of these options I would hasten to point out (in the interest of fairness [img]smile.gif[/img] ).
How my support for "fairness" over "bias" leads you to the conclusion that I believe men do not deserve the same rights as women I am not quite sure - that is a fuzzy brand of logic at best. The rest of your post goes on to accuse of double standards et al and "As long as I feel it is right" - nothing to respond to here, because they are just emotive statements thrown in as if to suggest to the world that you had already proven your point, and could now take the time to drive it home.
Case dismissed.