Washington Golf & Country Club Scandal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know a woman member of a country club out west who fought this battle in court and won because the county owned the land and the club leased it.

Hope the club is fully financially independent of any government support or subsidy if it wants to keep its males only dining.

Recent case law has found that status as a tax exempt organization is considered federal financial assistance.

Hope they read this is rethink their capital improvement plan.

[Anonymous]

I'm more scandalized by the fact that the club pays less in property taxes than their surrounding residential neighbors.

- signed, a WGCC residential neighbor (who would never belong to a country club)

[Anonymous]

It’s weird to me that it’s not a Men’s Grille.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure why people have problems with all men or all women private spaces. I'm a 40 something gay man and I have absolutely no issues with a men's only grill or bar and vice versa for women only spaces. There's no shortage of options so it can hardly be accused of exclusionary. And it's a private club.

Sometimes I like having a gay only space, ya know. Nothing personal. As long as it's private and elective by choice.

Who cares if you are gay? You are still a man benefitting from all your privilege. There are many problems with Washington Golf’s proposal. Let’s start with the fact that the separate spaces are not commensurate. The “women’s spaces” aren’t as good and oh, look let’s give the boys a fully renovated space to hang out in. And your dues are going up to pay for it.

You're upset because people disagree with you. You're not a member of the club, it's not your problem, you're angry because of? Whatever. If you want to be a screeching purple haired progressive harridan ranting about privilege, there's plenty of other sacred pet causes for you to waste your energies on than a private golf club that has no impact on your life.

Or, you know, get off line and go for a nice long walk and embrace this beautiful day. In the real world. Which is not perfect and perhaps you'll learn a thing or two about trying to enforce your petulant bigotry and beliefs on other people.

No, the first PP is correct. The UK has even more severe problems with men-only clubs, but you'd think that the US would lead the way to avoid catering to the already most privileged group on the planet - men, particularly white men.

And to those saying that they're not surprised given the culture of this club, YES, THIS IS WHY THERE NEEDS TO BE A PUBLIC OUTCRY HERE. So that the club drags itself into the 21st century.

NP. You sound ridiculous. It's a private club and having a men's only or women's only place is fine, if they want that. The entire club is not segregated by sex/gender - and this is not the UK.

Also, your stats about the "most privileged group on the planet" need some re-examination. It's not the 80s anymore. Anywhere.

NP here: then they can give up their tax break. The state government should not be subsidizing this.

Why would any of this impact a tax break?

See: Burning Tree Club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The club's lawyers put a racial covenant on the property in 1950....in spite of the Supreme Court ruling in Shelley (1948) that racial covenants were unenforceable.

Sit with that for a bit.

When was the club founded? I thought it was newer than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I recognize a lot of the names on this letter and applaud them. At the same time I’m thinking about the active members I know who chose not to sign. Very telling.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000018f-78cd-d048-a5cf-7cff395b0000

I was surprised to see one person on the list and several who aren’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The club's lawyers put a racial covenant on the property in 1950....in spite of the Supreme Court ruling in Shelley (1948) that racial covenants were unenforceable.

Sit with that for a bit.

When was the club founded? I thought it was newer than that.

1894 apparently

[Anonymous]

Scandal? No. Poor judgment? Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:why the f would any man unless gay or 90 wish to go to a male only restaurant.
they are correct to question that insanity

You must not know many gay men, tons of their friends are women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you’ve stepped foot into this club you would already know that it is a sexist and racist place. This is not surprising at all and I think most members will support it.

false. i know many female members and black members, and one who is both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you’ve stepped foot into this club you would already know that it is a sexist and racist place. This is not surprising at all and I think most members will support it.

false. i know many female members and black members, and one who is both.

That doesn’t mean it’s not sexist and racist.

There are absolutely some disgusting racist members.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure why people have problems with all men or all women private spaces. I'm a 40 something gay man and I have absolutely no issues with a men's only grill or bar and vice versa for women only spaces. There's no shortage of options so it can hardly be accused of exclusionary. And it's a private club.

Sometimes I like having a gay only space, ya know. Nothing personal. As long as it's private and elective by choice.

Who cares if you are gay? You are still a man benefitting from all your privilege. There are many problems with Washington Golf’s proposal. Let’s start with the fact that the separate spaces are not commensurate. The “women’s spaces” aren’t as good and oh, look let’s give the boys a fully renovated space to hang out in. And your dues are going up to pay for it.

You're upset because people disagree with you. You're not a member of the club, it's not your problem, you're angry because of? Whatever. If you want to be a screeching purple haired progressive harridan ranting about privilege, there's plenty of other sacred pet causes for you to waste your energies on than a private golf club that has no impact on your life.

Or, you know, get off line and go for a nice long walk and embrace this beautiful day. In the real world. Which is not perfect and perhaps you'll learn a thing or two about trying to enforce your petulant bigotry and beliefs on other people.

No, the first PP is correct. The UK has even more severe problems with men-only clubs, but you'd think that the US would lead the way to avoid catering to the already most privileged group on the planet - men, particularly white men.

And to those saying that they're not surprised given the culture of this club, YES, THIS IS WHY THERE NEEDS TO BE A PUBLIC OUTCRY HERE. So that the club drags itself into the 21st century.

Except that every club I've belonged to has a men's private area, usually adjacent to
the lockers and changing area so they could relax in robes after hours, smoke a cigar and order food. My current one has private areas for both women and men

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you’ve stepped foot into this club you would already know that it is a sexist and racist place. This is not surprising at all and I think most members will support it.

I live in Arlington and I wasn’t a big fan of the mom clique from there. Acting like it was such a big deal to belong to WGCC. Lol. The course is so small and mediocre. Then my child had to play a match at Washington Golf (my child plays on our CC’s golf team). Two old men were beyond rude to me. You know the type, they fancy themselves “Southern gentlemen.” Entitled *#%. This nonsense raising dues to pay for a new boys club shouldn’t surprise anyone that has been there or knows the families there.

The course is "small and mediocre" because it is old. So is Burning Tree for the same reason. This club cannot create more modern distances (necessitated by today's superior equipment) because it is landlocked by homes. Everyone knows this going into these older clubs. They don't criticise

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure why people have problems with all men or all women private spaces. I'm a 40 something gay man and I have absolutely no issues with a men's only grill or bar and vice versa for women only spaces. There's no shortage of options so it can hardly be accused of exclusionary. And it's a private club.

Sometimes I like having a gay only space, ya know. Nothing personal. As long as it's private and elective by choice.

Who cares if you are gay? You are still a man benefitting from all your privilege. There are many problems with Washington Golf’s proposal. Let’s start with the fact that the separate spaces are not commensurate. The “women’s spaces” aren’t as good and oh, look let’s give the boys a fully renovated space to hang out in. And your dues are going up to pay for it.

You're upset because people disagree with you. You're not a member of the club, it's not your problem, you're angry because of? Whatever. If you want to be a screeching purple haired progressive harridan ranting about privilege, there's plenty of other sacred pet causes for you to waste your energies on than a private golf club that has no impact on your life.

Or, you know, get off line and go for a nice long walk and embrace this beautiful day. In the real world. Which is not perfect and perhaps you'll learn a thing or two about trying to enforce your petulant bigotry and beliefs on other people.

Well said. It's a private club. Not your business. Most clubs have these rooms for men. My last two had themfor both genders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure why people have problems with all men or all women private spaces. I'm a 40 something gay man and I have absolutely no issues with a men's only grill or bar and vice versa for women only spaces. There's no shortage of options so it can hardly be accused of exclusionary. And it's a private club.

Sometimes I like having a gay only space, ya know. Nothing personal. As long as it's private and elective by choice.

Who cares if you are gay? You are still a man benefitting from all your privilege. There are many problems with Washington Golf’s proposal. Let’s start with the fact that the separate spaces are not commensurate. The “women’s spaces” aren’t as good and oh, look let’s give the boys a fully renovated space to hang out in. And your dues are going up to pay for it.

You're upset because people disagree with you. You're not a member of the club, it's not your problem, you're angry because of? Whatever. If you want to be a screeching purple haired progressive harridan ranting about privilege, there's plenty of other sacred pet causes for you to waste your energies on than a private golf club that has no impact on your life.

Or, you know, get off line and go for a nice long walk and embrace this beautiful day. In the real world. Which is not perfect and perhaps you'll learn a thing or two about trying to enforce your petulant bigotry and beliefs on other people.

No, the first PP is correct. The UK has even more severe problems with men-only clubs, but you'd think that the US would lead the way to avoid catering to the already most privileged group on the planet - men, particularly white men.

And to those saying that they're not surprised given the culture of this club, YES, THIS IS WHY THERE NEEDS TO BE A PUBLIC OUTCRY HERE. So that the club drags itself into the 21st century.

NP. You sound ridiculous. It's a private club and having a men's only or women's only place is fine, if they want that. The entire club is not segregated by sex/gender - and this is not the UK.

Also, your stats about the "most privileged group on the planet" need some re-examination. It's not the 80s anymore. Anywhere.

+1. The amount of shrill ignorant virtue-signaling that goes on on this site is amazing. It's a PRIVATE club -you join knowing what you are paying for