Women and the Masters, here we go again

An employee doesn't necessarily have to be told directly that no women are allowed. He/she could just assume that from the culture of the place.

A group of women sued Walmart to the Supreme Court. Not because there were written policies telling men to pay women less or promote men instead of women.

The suit made the Supreme Court because in the culture of Walmart, that happened with regularity.

So if you asked a story manager who told him to pay women less or promote only men. What is Sam Walton who made you do that?

He would say that no one told him that. He was just doing what he thought was right. After all the men had families to take care of, etc. ...

 

Or the employee could have made up her own mind, such as it is.

Women do have their own individual biases on what constitutes "ladylike." I had some ergonomic training about a year ago and the trainer says she sometimes encounters resistance in the South when she tells women they should not sit with their legs pressed tightly together, just spread 'em a little. "I'm afraid I can't do that, ma'am," said one.

For all we know, it may never have crossed this dainty belle's mind that some chick from Jersey ought to be allowed in a room full of bare wieners. Never thought to ask a supervisor -- just simply thought it was taboo in mainstream American culture, such as eating a poodle for breakfast.

 

What I wish is that she would have sought out someone immediately after she was denied access to the locker room. I can understand why she didn't - she wanted to look for someone else connected to McIlroy who might be waiting for him - but I think the appropriate response in that situation is to find someone up the food chain and make your case immediately.

Perhaps you might get an immediate clarification and apology and be let in there while the interview is still going on. Maybe you'll get better evidence that it is some sort of illegal policy on the part of the event organizers. But waiting to complain seems to give the organizers plausible deniability.

It was clearly wrong of the guards to deny her access to the locker room, but given how things played out, it's hard to tie that directly back to the event organizers in some sort of organized effort to deny female reporters access. Should they take responsibility for it? Absolutely - it's their job to make sure the guard knows the correct policy, especially if that runs counter to "the culture of the place". But I also find it difficult to find direct evidence of an overriding conspiracy that stems from ANGC in this incident.

And Liz Mullen's position makes me crazy. Far too militant and one-size-fits-all. The problem with complicated issues like the Ines Sainz' incident is that they're complicated, and trying to reduce that to "support your sisters!" makes me roll my eyes so hard.

 

You guys may be right. But it's not that hard of a job. You simply tell the guards that you have to have the proper credentials to get in -- not the proper plumbing.

 

There's that, and there's this, too: it prevented her from describing anything from the locker room interview that could have made her story better.

 

Your posts in defense of the Holy Grail of Journalism grow weak.

Ace needs knowledge, badly.

 

In what way? They weren't being dickish? She wasn't prevented from doing the job to the best of her ability? Banning women from locker rooms is a wave of the future?

If you are going to snipe at me, fine. Just be better at it.

 

No biggie. I've been called dickish by better.

Defending honor for more than eight hours!

 

Seems to me that the women who've chimed in here have said it's a problem, not just in an isolated way. So to continuously downplay it is to ignore what you hearing from you colleagues is to close your eyes to what this incident says.

Thanks for listening Ace. And Frank, you shouldn't have been kept out of the women's locker room either. It's simple, equal access. It has to be enforced and golf has been spotty on that.

 

I'll take your questions one at a time.

In what way do you need knowledge, badly? Many.

They weren't being dickish? Maybe, maybe not.

She wasn't ...? Of course she was.

Banning women ...? Nothing the Masters does is the wave of the future.

I still don't understand why people like you don't grasp that last part. The Masters is hopelessly behind the times. When things like this happen, how can you be surprised?

 

That's better.

Say what you want about the Masters. I don't care.

But you and Gator were being snide about her tweeting on deadline.

Hell, I'd rather see a lot more tweeting and blogging before, during and after events from most writers -- as long as they made their deadlines.