PGA Tour: Beside the Seaside Course: Notes from the Ballwasher

First topic message reminder :

1).Chapter 3 of the 2014/2015 season sees the Tour head to Georgia's Golden Isles, and the lovely Seaside Course on Sea Island, for "The McGladrey Classic". Originally a 1920's Colt/Allison collaboration, the course was redone by Tom Fazio and looks as aesthetically gorgeous as all but one or two on Tour. The Tour has hit the jackpot with its weather for the early season trips to Silverado and Las Vegas, and four days of promised sunshine should only enhance the Seaside Course as we enjoy the action from our armchairs.

2).Several of the PGA Tour's frat boys live in this most attractive area, Love, Kuchar, ZJohnson, English and a bunch of lesser lights, and others have instructors based locally.
Almost twenty of the field went to university in Georgia, including Chris Kirk who won here last year, and several others are from the nearby Carolinas, including Bill Haas and Webb Simpson who are paired together this week - in a rare flash of wry humour from the PGA Tour.

3).Speaking of which, the Ryder Cup just won't go away, what with Poulter's riposte to Faldo's snipe at Garcia, and His Highness Jack Nicklaus coming out in Tom Watson's corner as the Gleneagles post-mortems continue.

'Course, Saint Jack has also come out in support of a talented young College Quarterback who, in any other society would probably be serving time right now. Think Balotelli's stupidity and throw in shoplifting and several allegations about sexual assault, mixed in with police neglect (possible corruption?) and you'll get the picture.
Not sure Captain Tom would like to be bracketed with this particular thug, but that's the way St.Jack moves these days.

4).Russell Knox and Martin Laird will be in the field for the third straight week and they've hit the ground running this month. Knox steadied his ship to finish third in Las Vegas, but he needs to straighten his back and lift his head up if he's to be taken seriously as a tournament contender. His body language after his first nine holes last Sunday was terrible, shoulders slumped and head shaking. Not good enough.

5).No surprise to see Ben Martin win on Tour; I mentioned him seven months ago that he "looked as if he may have the 'right stuff'" to win soon - I just didn't expect it to be the week after he dragged his sorry arse in second-to-last place at Silverado with rounds of 78 & 79.

6).Some of the Tour's leading lights are starting to return to action with a slimline (relatively speaking) Jason Dufner teeing it up in Perth. He looks as if he's lost a stone or two, and that's just from around his neck.
Duf doesn't give the gallery much love on the golf course but I love watching his swing routine, plenty of waggles and such a smooth swing. Plus no-one is more adept at slipping golfballs to unwitting children in the crowd.

7).The World Golf Hall of Fame made a couple of good choices in their "Class of 2015" by electing Laura Davies and AW Tillinghast (designer of Bethpage Black, Winged Foot, Ridgewood, Quaker Ridge, Baltusrol, etc etc - and Philadelphia Cricket Club, 22 yards of pitch and a pleasant ring of willows around the boundary edge?). What kept them out all these years?

8).But the choices of David Graham and Mark O'Meara to be "enshrined" with them seem a little more marginal.
1979 US Amateur Champ O'Meara was a top-level, never great, PGA Tour Pro, who won two Majors out of the blue in 1998, then spent the rest of his Tour career as mentor to Tiger.
King of the Pebble Beach Pro-Am (won 5 of 'em) and owner of an atrocious Ryder Cup record, he was also Tiger's spokesman in the pay-for-play row that marred the run-up to the 1999 action in Boston and thereafter terminally indignant as to whether that marred his chances of:
Ryder Cup Captaincy: "To be honest, I was a little disappointed I didn't even get considered."
Hall of Fame Election: Perhaps I'll get in: "When I stop playing? When I'm six feet under? When there's no-one left to put in?"
Get over it Mark, looks like Tiger put in a good word for you.

9).Talking of good words, what about David Graham, similarly a two-time Major Champion?
Seems like golfing mates and Preston Trail buddies Trevino and (possibly?) G.W.Bush put in a good word for him.
Graham went one further than Tom Watson when Presidents Cup Captain in that the insurrection against him occurred BEFORE the event! So much so that Peter Thomson had to be brought in to deputise!!
But if the WGHOF has been renamed the Hall of the Very Good with Couples and Montgomerie, Graham and O'Meara, it doesn't diminish the quality of Graham's signature (US Open) win at Merion, described by Hogan as the "greatest round of golf I've ever witnessed".

10).Back to The McGladrey then.
European presence is confined to the usuals, but given the number of Europeans living so close to Sea Island it's a shame that guys like Donald and McDowell (both with good records up the coast at Hilton Head) don't show up to kick-start their season in advance of HSBC Champions play.
The star of the TV broadcasts will undoubtedly be the Seaside course, and I'm expecting a relatively local lad to win the trophy, perhaps another first-time winner. Hudson Swafford maybe, recently a Top 25 machine, while my shilling each-way will be on Scott Brown, but the course should suit Knox, not to mention Bill Haas and Kirk; and Webb Simpson who fumbled his way to a play-off loss to Ben Crane a few years ago and has a great record here.
But I'd love to be a fly on the golf-bag of Haas or Simpson when they discuss Captain Watson and Text-gate.

Scott Hend is in position to win two in row on the Asian Tour.  Hong Kong last week, Macau this week.

He has a two shot lead over Anibar Lahiri.

Koumei Oda is has a 3 shot lead in the Bridgestone Open on the Japanese Tour. He could get close to a top 50 ranking with a win. Snedeker was playing but withdrew in Round 3 but according to Rotoworld, no reason has been given.

GPB wrote:

Laird, Davis, and Gonzo are the only Euros to make the cut.

Big MDF Cut coming up tomorrow.

Looks like Laird, Davis and Gonzo are all missing the Saturday cut. Laird has a ray of hope.

O'Hair, on the other hand, has a heck of a round today!

Kwini

Have even you heard of that guy?

Robert Streb was ranked inside the Top 200 and finished 2nd in the Zurich Classic this year (to SY Noh).

'Morning Mac,
Have I even heard of who?

Sounds like a very popular win for Robert Streb, especially for his preggie wife who looked to have urgently carnal intentions on the 17th green as she embraced him!

Streb was the geographical outlier as play-off victims were Carolina boys (raised or resident) and three University of Georgia golfers tied for fourth.

Good weekend for Shotrock's O'Hair . . . . .

The long awaited publication of this week's BMW field has actually been posted:

http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/season=2014/tournamentid=2014086/teetimes/index.html

Predictable end for Bishop of the PGA. More of a lifetime achievement award than just his last-straw spat with Poulter wouldn't you think?

Kwini

'Morning Mac,
Have I even heard of who?

Robert Streb (as Gpb alluded to)


I chose not to further the debate on Bishops comments as it was clear I would get little support on here for the idea that they were so harmful he was right to loose his position. So whether a final straw or not in the eyes of the PGA, I would argue that he should have gone regardless of what went before.

Out of interest what about his history are you referring to above?

Mac - This is a great Monday morning read. As you can see, Bishop has a history of turning people off ...

http://www.globalgolfpost.com/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Global%20Golf%20Post%20Must-Read%20Monday&utm_campaign=GAP%2010-27-2014

Yup, Streb's been around for a while, good player but surprised this was the time and the place.
for his coming out party.

As for Bishop, this doesn't answer your question exactly but is a good account of how the axe came down:

http://www.golfworldmonday.com/golfworldmonday/20141027?sub_id=m6YFz2X7vbcH#pg20

Turned out the CIMB had to go to #142 Will Wilcox in last year's FE Cup rankings to fill it's 60 spots...

Stupid comments by Bishop and I totally get that he had to go... but the overblown politically correct mass hysteria over the "perceived sexism" angle of this (which falls FAR, FAR, FAR below the bar as qualifying as REAL sexism) is beyond ridiculous.

robopz wrote:Stupid comments by Bishop and he had to go... but the overblown politically correct mass hysteria over the "sexism" angle of this (which falls FAR, FAR, FAR below the bar as qualifying as REAL sexism) is beyond ridiculous.  

Exactly Robo, Seems people are too willing to look deeply into comments. Calling someone a little girl is akin to calling them childish or immature, it isn't really sexism as far as I can see and I think it's a bit harsh on Bishop.
I really doubt that anyone felt offence over the comment.

It was perceived as sexism because it was sexist. Is that really all that difficult for people to understand?

(PS, could people research the meaning and need for PC before making the usual bone head generalizations)

I'm with Mac on this one. I fail to see how calling someone "little girl" as an insult can be construed as anything other than sexist. It may not have been deliberately so, and indeed there are worse levels of sexism out there, but it's undoubtedly sexist. As President of the PGA of America, such comments are clearly unacceptable, so he had to go.

Interesting that it is being speculated that Suzy Whaley (she is a Connecticut-based PGA Pro who qualified for "Hartford" eleven years ago and has been outspoken about Bishop's sermon) may be in line for a senior position within PGA hierarchy . . . .

1 - It was a sexist comment (the degree of which is certainly up for opinion). Love how some people suggest since he has daughters he really didn't mean it in a derogatory way. Right, so having daughters automatically gives you a free pass.

2 - Did the punishment fit the crime? Again, open to opinion, but the powers that be at the PGA evidently didn't take too long to think that over.

What if he'd call him a "little child"? Would he still have been sacked?
Is it any worse than saying someone "throws like a girl?"

I can imagine it's a barrel of laughs around at Mac Cholmondley Warner's house.

"would you pass the salt please darling?"
"how dare you?".

super_realist wrote:What if he'd call him a "little child"? Would he still have been sacked?

Maybe, but I'd like to think not. Calling someone "little girl" is sexist, "little child" isn't. It would then have been merely expressing an opinion. Whether you think as President of the PGA of America he should be insulting golfers in the first place is obviously another debate...

super_realist wrote:
Is it any worse than saying someone "throws like a girl?"

Probably not. Still sexist though...

McLaren wrote:It was perceived as sexism because it was sexist.  Is that really all that difficult for people to understand?

(PS, could people research the meaning and need for PC before making the usual bone head generalizations)

Total BS...

If that's sexist then we're ALL sexist.. you included. And as a sexist, none of us have ANY standing whatsoever to criticize somebody else as being sexist. And to prove it... Answer these questions for me.

In the course of playing golf with your friends.. and when one of them hit a particularity weak shot or left a putt woefully short... did you ever wise crack: "Nice putt Alice" or "Does you husband play too". Do they play "Fort Worth" rules over in the UK (or whatever you might call it)... you know... where we embarrass the heck out of our friends by not hitting it past the "ladies" tee... Or did you ever crack or laugh at "he hits, throws or runs like a girl" ? If you have every said ANY of these things... YOU displayed every bit the "sexism" as Bishop did. Don't argue that because YES you did. Do YOU deserve to be shunned and booted from your club and social circles and chastised at every turn?

I raised 5 kids. 3 boys and 2 girls. If you had the same opportunity I did...

When your young daughters were throwing overly traumatized emotional fits and the slightest little thing... what did YOU do about it? Were you like me in thinking "well she's just a little girl" and let your wife handle it... or did you handle it when my boys would do the same thing and I'd deal with it by telling them to "man up" or "take it like a man". If you ever did any of those things... that makes YOU just as sexist as you must think I am.

Bottom line: IMO.... characterizing some ridiculous offhand NO MALICE INTENDED (albeit stupid) remark by Bishop as an example of the evils of sexism in society DIMINISHES the efforts to deal with the REAL aspects of sexism that exist in society... Bishop's firing is NOT a victory for "gender equality"... It's a victory for those who believe some kind of warped Orwellian NEWSPEAK society is what we should aspire to embrace.

robopz wrote:Stupid comments by Bishop and I totally get that he had to go... but the overblown politically correct mass hysteria over the "perceived sexism" angle of this (which falls FAR, FAR, FAR below the bar as qualifying as REAL sexism) is beyond ridiculous.

"REAL sexism"? Is that like the difference between "r@pe" and "r@pe r@pe"? Sorry if I'm being flippant, but how do we set the bar at what construes sexism?

Not just one sexist comment but two.
He was a Norman Stanley Fletcher - an habitual offender. Or a Lee Catermole if you prefer.
The speed with which the PGA acted almost confirms this, as if they were ready for one final transgression. Which he supplied on a silver platter.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

robopz wrote:Stupid comments by Bishop and I totally get that he had to go... but the overblown politically correct mass hysteria over the "perceived sexism" angle of this (which falls FAR, FAR, FAR below the bar as qualifying as REAL sexism) is beyond ridiculous.

"REAL sexism"? Is that like the difference between "r@pe" and "r@pe r@pe"? Sorry if I'm being flippant, but how do we set the bar at what construes sexism?

I don't know how to set a bar Mad... but that's not the point. My point is Bishop made some comments that he (and I) had NO ideal would be construed with the "sexism" vein in which they were... because they weren't delivered with any sexism malice.

So what it SHOULD have been was an opportunity to learn... WOW, saying stuff like that can be construed as sexism and cause REAL hurt and concern to some. WHO KNEW? I'll admit I certainly didn't. So OK... lets learn from it and move on... He (and I) will do better next time... But to vilify ANYBODY to the extent Bishop has been vilified over this is complete and Total BS.

Robo wrote:If that's sexist then we're ALL sexist..

I happen to think that all men are sexist to some degree. We are all raised in a patriarchal system where we are fed (not always consciously) the idea that men are superior to women. It might be worth considering your comment as true, and then thinking about what that means?

I have no idea what your point about having daughters is all about. It probably just means you are guaranteed to have seriously affected someone with sexist behavior. At least if you are single with no daughters then the reach of your (by your, I mean any man) sexism is diminished in some way.


mad for chelsea

Very good point.

and robo, yes, telling someone to "man up", or that he/she "throws like a girl" is sexist, and I can honestly say I've never done any of the things you describe (OK, I don't have kids, so can't comment on the second part of the post).

Can I honestly say I've never done or said anything sexist in my life? No, probably not (though I don't recall anything off-hand). In any case, I'm not the President of the PGA of America, and no one's interested in what I have to say in general. Ok the odd mathmematician might read the odd paper I publish, but I try very hard not to be racist/sexist or any other kind of -ist in those - hard as it is to avoid describing the Abelian Sandpile Model as "really just a sorry girlish excuse for its much more interesting Stochastic extension the SSM"...

As President of the PGA, Bishop had a responsibility, among other things, not to appear sexist (surely we can all agree on that?). He failed, not just once, but according to kwini several times, and lost his position as a consequence.

Chelsea,
Not "according to" me! But just repeating assertions made by others more knowledgeable than I, though haven't seen sexist comments reported amongst his "previous".

robopz wrote:saying stuff like that can be construed as sexism and cause REAL hurt and concern to some.

I would argue that the harm it does is in re-inforcing the age-old wrongful stereotype of "men=strong, women=weak". People think: if someone in such a position feels this way it's fine for me to feel the same way. My view is Bishop should have known better: when you're in a position of power and public visibility you (should) know that you have to be careful and not just say and write anything that pops into your head.

robopz wrote:But to vilify ANYBODY to the extent Bishop has been vilified over this is complete and Total BS.  

I honestly wasn't commenting on that, nor am I aware of it. My point is that what Bishop said is sexist, and he deserved to lose his position for it. You do raise a point about some overly zealous militant feminists, who equate feminism with an excuse for misandry. This is real, but just as the vast majority of men are decent, and respect women as their equalts, so too the vast majority of feminists. On this topic, anyone read Miss Emma Watson's speech to the UN on feminism a few weeks ago? I thought it made some good points, like sexism hurting men too (not being allowed to show their emotions, etc.).

kwinigolfer wrote:Not just one sexist comment but two.
He was a Norman Stanley Fletcher - an habitual offender. Or a Lee Catermole if you prefer.
The speed with which the PGA acted almost confirms this, as if they were ready for one final transgression. Which he supplied on a silver platter.

Could be... but I see it as the same comment... just delivered via two separate mediums. IMO it had more to do with an existing environment set in part by issues like the recent [pi$$ poor] handling by the NFL of the domestic violence situation. Upon the FIRST flinging of the "Sexist" tag on Bishop's comments... I think the PGA of A was hell bent on sending a message... "NOT US". And yeah... Bishop's "up front" personality most likely did rankle some within the PGA of A... and maybe some were laying in wait for him. But as also pointed out in the articles linked above... with the bad of that came the good... one of those "goods" was Bishop being the most vocal leadership voice between the PGAT, USGA or PGA of A advocating "gender inclusive" policies be adopted by the R&A... pretty odd behavior by such a disgusting "sexist"... don't ya think?

robo, well said,

This was not sexist. He just used a common expression for being childish, which happens to include a girl. This is far out. Some people really try to undo reality. Faux offence at its worst.

By the way: Why are the black tees longer than the white with the yellow being shortest? Racial stereotyping?

Where is all the outrage over the Jumbo Grips commercial. I don't know if you get the commercial across the pond, but this commercial gets a lot of play on Golf Channel

http://www.ispot.tv/ad/7IUv/jumbomax-golf-grips-man-in-dress

Its sexist, but it doesn't have any controversy.

Troon has the Open Championship in 2016? Correct?

What are the chances they have admitted women members before then?

pedro wrote:robo, well said,

This was not sexist. He just used a common expression for being childish, which happens to include a girl. This is far out. Some people really try to undo reality. Faux offence at its worst.

By the way: Why are the black tees longer than the white with the yellow being shortest? Racial stereotyping?

"lil girl" mentions gender, and therefore I suppose, by definition is "sexist" .. but in no way do I feel it is a "sexist" comment in the way people are suggesting it is

In fact, the people who are objecting the most to the phrase "lil girl" are probably the most sexist of all as they are in fact implying there is something wrong with being a girl rather than a boy

Mad... But my point is... WHO KNEW that the term "little girl" in the way Bishop used it was viewed by some as the epitome of a sexiest male dominated society that aspires to hold women down? I got to tell you.. until THIS, I didn't have a clue that it connoted any such thing... and again not giving Bishop a pass for being an idiot to respond to Poulter in the first place... obviously neither did he. Read the Golf World article linked above... it never crossed his mind.

I'm ALL for a reasonable discussion of this issue, and I'm glad I now know that something I've been guilty of myself is now considered so wrong by so many... but to vilify anybody over what should be no more than a "teachable moment" is complete and total BS.

See: Sergio's "fried chicken" comments... and Dawson's "colored" comments... as items that absolutely SHOULD have fostered the discussion and the "learning from them" they did... but IMO neither should have cost either THEIR jobs anymore than Bishop's should have cost him his.

People are offended far too easily these days. Grow up you poofs.














...just a joke

Davie wrote:
In fact, the people who are objecting the most to the phrase "lil girl" are probably the most sexist of all as they are in fact implying there is something wrong with being a girl rather than a boy

I don't object to the phrase, I object to its use as an insult, precisely because using it in a derogatory manner implies what you say. If someone said "hello lil girl" when meeting a little girl I wouldn't find that offensive...

GPB wrote:Where is all the outrage over the Jumbo Grips commercial.  I don't know if you get the commercial across the pond, but this commercial gets a lot of play on Golf Channel

http://www.ispot.tv/ad/7IUv/jumbomax-golf-grips-man-in-dress

Its sexist, but it doesn't have any controversy.

EXACTLY!!!

And let's address two from GC that have been so mightily "offended" at Bishop's sexism...

Paige Mackenzie... doesn't seem to have a bit of an issue with the way GC is changing her appearance by "Glamming her up" and having her hit balls at the simulator while wearing her little black dress...

Lauren (Brooke) Thompson... doesn't seem to have a bit of an issue at having graced us with 100's if not 1000's of the finest T&A bikini shots ever known to mankind... (https://i.servimg.com/u/f39/18/25/95/53/71284_11.jpg)

Then to come on and rail against Bishop as being Sexist and holding women down? Sheesh.. give me a break

robopz wrote:Mad...  But my point is... WHO KNEW that the term "little girl" in the way Bishop used it was viewed by some as the epitome of a sexiest male dominated society that aspires to hold women down?   I got to tell you.. until THIS, I didn't have a clue that it connoted any such thing... and again not giving Bishop a pass for being an idiot to respond to Poulter in the first place... obviously neither did he.  Read the Golf World article linked above... it never crossed his mind.  

Maybe I didn't address this clearly in my previous posts, so apologies. I'm saying the Bishop, IN HIS POSITION, SHOULD know that it's a sexist comment. Again, you or I in our daily jobs are unlikely to write or say things that a lot of people are going to listen to or take notice of (well maybe you do, I certainly don't): Bishop however is in a position of power and influence, and as such has to know that such comments are unacceptable (the fact they are is shown by the backlash in response).

As I understand it, your question is "how does one know if what one says is sexist"? I think that's the wrong question: I think Bishop in his position should have been asking himself "can what I'm saying be construed as sexist?" to which the answer is undoubtedly a resounding YES. Harsh, maybe, but "with great power comes great responsibility" as they say...

robopz wrote:

GPB wrote:Where is all the outrage over the Jumbo Grips commercial.  I don't know if you get the commercial across the pond, but this commercial gets a lot of play on Golf Channel

http://www.ispot.tv/ad/7IUv/jumbomax-golf-grips-man-in-dress

Its sexist, but it doesn't have any controversy.

EXACTLY!!!

And let's address two from GC that have been so mightily "offended" at Bishop's sexism...

Paige Mackenzie... doesn't seem to have a bit of an issue with the way GC is changing her appearance by "Glamming her up" and having her hit balls at the simulator while wearing her little black dress...

Lauren (Brooke) Thompson... doesn't seem to have a bit of an issue at having graced us with 100's if not 1000's of the finest T&A bikini shots ever known to mankind...  (https://i.servimg.com/u/f39/18/25/95/53/71284_11.jpg)

Then to come on and rail against Bishop as being Sexist and holding women down?   Sheesh.. give me a break

Well I hadn't seen the commercial, and don't have sound here, but yes, it looks sexist. Then again, a lot (and I mean A LOT) of ads are sexist, but I'm not sure they have as much influence over the world of golf as the words of the President of the PGA...

robopz wrote:

McLaren wrote:It was perceived as sexism because it was sexist.  Is that really all that difficult for people to understand?

(PS, could people research the meaning and need for PC before making the usual bone head generalizations)

Total BS...

If that's sexist then we're ALL sexist.. you included.  And as a sexist, none of us have ANY standing whatsoever to criticize somebody else as being sexist.  And to prove it... Answer these questions for me.

In the course of playing golf with your friends.. and when one of them hit a particularity weak shot or left a putt woefully short... did you ever wise crack: "Nice putt Alice" or "Does you husband play too".  Do they play "Fort Worth" rules over in the UK (or whatever you might call it)... you know... where we embarrass the heck out of our friends by not hitting it past the "ladies" tee...  Or did you ever crack or laugh at  "he hits, throws or runs like a girl" ?    If you have every said ANY of these things... YOU displayed every bit the "sexism" as Bishop did. Don't argue that because YES you did.  Do YOU deserve to be shunned and booted from your club and social circles and chastised at every turn?  

I raised 5 kids.  3 boys and 2 girls.  If you had the same opportunity I did...

When your young daughters were throwing overly traumatized emotional fits and the slightest little thing... what did YOU do about it?  Were you like me in thinking "well she's just a little girl" and let your wife handle it... or did you handle it when my boys would do the same thing and I'd deal with it by telling them to "man up" or "take it like a man".   If you ever did any of those things... that makes YOU just as sexist as you must think I am.

Bottom line:  IMO.... characterizing some ridiculous offhand NO MALICE INTENDED (albeit stupid) remark by Bishop as an example of the evils of sexism in society DIMINISHES the efforts to deal with the REAL aspects of sexism that exist in society...  Bishop's firing is NOT a victory for "gender equality"... It's a victory for those who believe some kind of warped Orwellian NEWSPEAK society is what we should aspire to embrace.

Amen (or some non-deist equivalent) to that!

kwinigolfer wrote:
The long awaited publication of this week's BMW field has actually been posted:

http://www.europeantour.com/europeantour/season=2014/tournamentid=2014086/teetimes/index.html

Stenson was listed as playing on the BMWSports homepage. Mrs Stenson just had a baby this weekend, so I guess he was a late WD.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:As I understand it, your question is "how does one know if what one says is sexist"? I think that's the wrong question: I think Bishop in his position should have been asking himself "can what I'm saying be construed as sexist?" to which the answer is undoubtedly a resounding YES. Harsh, maybe, but "with great power comes great responsibility" as they say...

Sorry... but I just don't get the logic in that... What would drive someone to ask themselves... "is this sexist"... when they have NO earthly idea it could be even construed as sexist to begin with. I think the discussion of race has been prevalent enough in our society that we DO know to ask those questions... but this one is rather obscure IMO... and his usage probably relates as much to what he experienced in raising two daughters as it does anything else. (and after having raised 3 boys and 2 girls, I GET the differences).

Sure it would have been nice if Bishop had known... but I can't necessarily agree that Bishop "should have known", even though that's SO easy to say with 20-20 hindsight isn't it? If you don't know... you just don't know. But the book on this guy and his efforts in "gender inclusion" and standing up for women in this game is extensive and quite clear. So he's obviously been involved with people who understand what barriers and biases prevent women from taking up or flourishing within the game. So he's probably had a LOT more access to these kinds of issues than most any of us have. Do any of us really believe that had "little girl" as being sexist been on the radar in those kinds of discussions... he would have ever made the comments? OK... I think the guy is a tool in a lot of ways... but I don't believe that for a second.

Once more, it's about relative positions for me. If someone in the office next to me insults me by calling me "lil girl" I won't go crying to HR to get him/her sacked for sexism, but if the head of the department made such comments I would consider it hugely unprofessional.

Bishop represents the PGA of America as part of his responsibilites, for me that means he should know what's sexist and what isn't, and in doubt, err on the side of caution. Obviously it's with hindsight, as it always will be in these cases.

The issue is further clouded by the perception of golf as a fairly sexist sport to start with, which means perversely that you can get away with less: then again, the Russian head poncho who made a jibe about the Williams "brothers" has also been sacked (well, technically banned for a year), and tennis is undoubtedly one of the most gender-equal sports out there, so... Maybe it's just an evolution of the times, and mentalities (judging by the fact you have several kids, I'm probably a few years younger than you), I just don't see how Bishop's comments can be found acceptable.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Well I hadn't seen the commercial, and don't have sound here, but yes, it looks sexist. Then again, a lot (and I mean A LOT) of ads are sexist, but I'm not sure they have as much influence over the world of golf as the words of the President of the PGA...

I agree that Bishop is in a position where he never should have addressed the situation between Poulter and Faldo at all.. and even if he felt compelled to do so, he NEVER should have done so with a personal insult attached... IMO it was lowering himself to make it "personal" that was the crime in what he said/did.

But does the punishment fit the crime? In my humble opinion... HAIL NO.

IMO the R&A's Peter Dawson's "colored" remarks were FAR more egregious than this, especially considering that we really should be a LOT more educated in the "nuance" of objectionable phrases and words dealing with race than we are with this particular term and sexism. But IMO that situation was handled correctly. There was a BIG blowup about it (as there should have been)... the issue was discussed at length (as there should have been), and we ALL learned something from it (as we all should have, especially Dawson). But Dawson wasn't "executed on the spot" the way Bishop was (and shouldn't have been)

Mad for Chelsea wrote: I just don't see how Bishop's comments can be found acceptable.

Whoa... whoa... whoa... there. Who's saying they're acceptable... certainly not ME. But there's a difference between KNOWING something you're saying is unacceptable and NOT KNOWING. I view those as two entirely different levels of offense.

And I get where you are coming from in that you think he "should have known"... but perhaps because I'm closer to his age than you might be, and have actually raised successful daughters just like he has... that I understand how he most likely didn't.

Robo

You ask who knew the phrase bishop used was sexist, the answer is quite a lot of people, but don't worry if you were unaware of its sexist meaning.  You now know that it is sexist and should not feel any shame in having not known that, as long as you now accept the term as sexist and cease using it. We should be more willing to drop the use of phrases or behaviors once we find out they are inappropriate.

(and bishop continued to defend his use of the term even after its sexist meaning was pointed out)

I still think that, if these comments had been Bishop's only perceived transgression during his papacy, he'd've been allowed to skunk in a corner for his last month in office.

But, as Dottie Pepper told him quite forcibly, his acknowledgements of ill-advised words were belated and he never got out in front of the problem.
Must admit, I kinda like to see career sycophants get their comeuppance, but imagine that if the past two years had been beyond reproach he'd've got away with it. (And in that context, robo, I'd've liked to have seen Dawson made to walk the plank and maybe he has done, don't know, but obviously not in public - though I suspect his words are more insensitive in American than English.)

robopz wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote: I just don't see how Bishop's comments can be found acceptable.

Whoa... whoa... whoa... there.  Who's saying they're acceptable... certainly not ME.   But there's a difference between KNOWING something you're saying is unacceptable and NOT KNOWING.  I view those as two entirely different levels of offense.  

And I get where you are coming from in that you think he "should have known"... but perhaps because I'm closer to his age than you might be, and have actually raised successful daughters just like he has... that I understand how he most likely didn't.  

Wasn't refering to you, for what it's worth I think you've come across very well throughout our debate. I also see where you're coming from, but ultimately I feel that for someone in Bishop's position ignorance is not enough of an excuse. Maybe I'm just too young and idealistic

The thing that is most stupid about this is not the alleged sexism (call me old fashioned, but not much offends me), but Bishop's double standards.
If he's publicly going to have a go at Poulter for simply defending the team in light of crass and idiotic Faldo's remarks then Bishop should also have been castigating Mickelson for his open and unprofessional criticism of Watson.

Did he? No. Seems what he might have been doing was trying to deflect the attention from his bakers dozen of deadbeat losers.

McLaren wrote:Robo

You ask who knew the phrase bishop used was sexist, the answer is quite a lot of people, but don't worry if you were unaware of its sexist meaning.  You now know that it is sexist and should not feel any shame in having not known that, as long as you now accept the term as sexist and cease using it. We should be more willing to drop the use of phrases or behaviors once we find out they are inappropriate.

(and bishop continued to defend his use of the term even after its sexist meaning was pointed out)

Thank you for your comments... but next time somebody in my foursome leaves a 20 foot putt five feet short... I'm still gonna ask "Does your husband play too?" or I'm gonna say "Nice putt Alice" or I'm gonna say, "Did your putter get hung up in your skirt?".  And by the way, that doesn't matter if that "somebody" in my foursome is male or female.  It hasn't stopped me before.. and it's not gonna stop me now.  

Oh!...  and by the way... I'd bet dollars to donuts.. it won't stop YOU either, now will it?