I wonder what happens next...

[Colby]

Transexxual to play in the Austrailian Women's Open

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Golf/News/2004/03/02/367627-ap.html

[EDSGOLF]

I guess Mandatory Skirt Inspections will be next!

[BC MIST]

There is a report that if Bagger does well in the Ladies' Australian Open this week that she will apply for a sponsor's exemption into the Colonial this year.

VJ has volunteered to be her caddie.

[Colby]

The Legend of Bagger Pants

[LobWedge]

Correct me if I'm wrong but, shouldn't her name be Un-Bagger?

[Kilroy]

shouldn't her name

"her"???? I think the LPGA has a "Must be born a woman" rule. Guess they saw "it" comming :blush At least we won't be seing that on the LPGA.

Now if the PGA put in a "Must be born a man" rule it might turn into the Jerry Springer show!

[foureyedbuzzard]

Q: Can a lost "club" be replaced during a stipulated round?
A: Yeah, but only by a Swedish surgeon...

[broken27]

This is getting ridiculous. I don't care if this thing is a good golfer, but if you're born a man, there's a good chance you have certain physical advantages over women in terms of strength. Be a trans-sexual if you really think it's necessary, but let's not turn every facet of human life into Springer.....

The only way I agree with this is if they charge an instant penalty for losing two balls.

Dan

[BC MIST]

While it is unlikely to change any minds, there is an article in the February 27 edition of "Golf World" magazine, that looks at the situation and the person from a different point of view than has been expressed here.

Most would consider her a "freak" of nature, but if more people had her attitude, this world would be a better place. While I would not have wanted to have been him then, and would not now want to be her now, because of the cruel way people like that get treated, there are those who are willing to provide her with the opportunity to play in a golf tournament and others who have expressed support for her, and for that IMO, they are to be commended.

[foureyedbuzzard]

The opportunity to play in a woman's or men's golf tournament is predicated upon being the specified gender for the format and "qualifying" via golfing ability. Ms. Bagger's DNA is that of a male--no amount of sex reassignment surgery, hormone therapy, or psychology can ever change this simple fact. If Women's Golf Australia chooses to grant her/him an exemption to play, that is their choice, but they do so at the expense of denying entry to another golfer who chose not make radical "lifestyle choices" which carried with them grave and uncertain consequences. You make your bed, then you have to lie in it. If that precludes playing tournament golf professionally, then I have no sympathy for MS Bagger's golf dilemma, she knew it from the beginning. I refuse to see her as a victim.

[broken27]

Most would consider her a "freak" of nature, but if more people had her attitude, this world would be a better place.

Firstly, nature has nothing to do with sex-change operations. Secondly, nobody is condemning this person's choice to have this un-natural procedure performed. Please explain how if more people had his/her attitude the world would be a better place....

there are those who are willing to provide her with the opportunity to play in a golf tournament and others who have expressed support for her, and for that IMO, they are to be commended.

The people willing to give him/her a chance to contravene the standard entry rules for the tournament have their perogative, and I don't think anyone's saying anything to the contrary. But as has been stated unequivocally, this person takes someone else's spot. You seem to focus only on Ms(?) Bagger's side of this, without considering the natural woman who gets bumped from the field. How should SHE feel?? She's a woman from birth and is being denied HER chance.

I would also suggest that there is no need to commend someone for acting in a civilized manner. That's normal behaviour, and there's no need to pat normal people on the back for not being prejudiced.

Of course, this is all my opinion....

Dan

[EDSGOLF]

Is it me or she (or he) cute? I know I'm taking a big chance admitting this

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/SPORT/03....ap/index.html

[Colby]

Is it me or she (or he) cute? I know I'm taking a big chance admitting this

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/SPORT/03....ap/index.html

Compared to some of the other "cuties" on the LPGA?!?

http://www.golfdigest.com/newsandtou...227bagger.html

[broken27]

Is it me or she (or he) cute? I know I'm taking a big chance admitting this

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/SPORT/03....ap/index.html

You can definitely tell that was once a man though... Can't really see it closely enough to tell if he/she is cute....

Funny how this person is a man trying to be a woman, while a ton of LPGA members are women trying to be men.

Dan

[The Shtick]

Funny how this person is a man trying to be a woman, while a ton of LPGA members are women trying to be men.

Dan[/QUOTE]

How true!

[Kilroy]

Looks to me like this is a man who had surgery playing on a women's tour. If she has never had ovaries, how can she be considered a woman in the professional athletic world? Letting this individual play on a ladies tour at any level is just stupid.

I do not have an issue with his/her lifestyle. It isn't any of my concern. It means nothing to me if people accept her as a woman, even at a public level. Heck, she could be an awesome actress or model, and be accepted as a woman readily. But women's porfessional sports? The world is going mad.

Nice muscular arms. She had better not bulk up any more, it would be un-lady like.

[broken27]

Anti-discrimination is getting out of hand. Soon you won't be allowed to discriminate against murderers when hiring daycare staff and stuff. I agree with you Dan, that what this person does with their life is nobody's business but their own, but in no way should this be considered a woman in the context of PROFESSIONAL SPORTS of any kind, even golf which relies less on pure power than say hockey or football.

Dan

[FlyingElvi]

[QUOTE=EDSGOLF]Is it me or she (or he) cute? I know I'm taking a big chance admitting this


Coming out of the closet ?

[BC MIST]

Firstly, nature has nothing to do with sex-change operations.

It’s obvious that a male viewing the world as a female must have a gender-identity disorder. This is not a choice but a result of a hormonal/chemical or whatever imbalance. Why would anyone choose to be this way? Of course, there are still many “normal” people who think that being gay or lesbian is a choice. Go figure.

Please explain how if more people had his/her attitude the world would be a better place....

I admire the mature, open and honest way in which Mianne Bagger handled the changes in her appearance. “People looked because I started to look androgenous. There was always an uncomfortable tension. I talked to them, let them ask questions, put their mind at ease. Got rid of the tension.”

The people willing to give him/her a chance to contravene the standard entry rules for the tournament have their perogative, and I don't think anyone's saying anything to the contrary.

Women’s Golf Australia does not have a female at birth clause, therefore the “standard entry rules for the tournament’” have not been contravened.

I would also suggest that there is no need to commend someone for acting in a civilized manner. That's normal behaviour, and there's no need to pat normal people on the back for not being prejudiced.

At a mall today I saw a young teenage boy hold a door open for an older person. The adult with him, presumably his father, commended the boy for his action. By the above logic there was no need for the father to compliment the boy for not being inconsiderate. I will also have to have a long talk with my wife. She says "Thank you," when I hold the door open for her.

Anti-discrimination is getting out of hand. Soon you won't be allowed to discriminate against murderers when hiring daycare staff and stuff.

To quote a previous poster from above, this “is plain stupid.” There is an obvious difference between a harmless transsexual who just wants to play golf and a murderer. After all, don't you just want to play golf?

You can definitely tell that was once a man though... Can't really see it closely enough to tell if he/she is cute
Funny how this person is a man trying to be a woman, while a ton of LPGA members are women trying to be men.

Unbelievable!


To those who say that Bagger would have a strength advantage over the other woman, it must be understood that when testosterone is reduced and estrogen increased that muscle mass and strength decline significantly. "Normal testosterone in a male is from 8.5 to 30 nanamoles/L and in a female from 0 to 3.7 nmol/L. Bagger’s is 1.8. For available testosterone the male range is from 60 to 1190, Baggers was 19, in the female range of 0 to 80.” “ She is about as strong as pre-menopausal woman. If anything, she is testosterone deficient. It is simply not true that she has extra strength.” As she only hits the ball about 240 yards, she is hardly a threat to anyone.

Interestingly, the International Olympic Committee approved the eligibility of athletes who have undergone sex-change operations after a specified waiting period, but that is another story.

Considering that my parents were ultra-conservative, I don’t know where I got my open minded, liberal, anti-discriminatory, anti-macho attitude. I must have a genetic disorder.

"8 posts." I can feel myself getting smarter every day.

[NoBack]

Welcome to OG Forum BC MIST

We all are getting smarter. Good thing it's now when we cant play. Just wait till get outside on the course and become stupid again.

[broken27]

To those who say that Bagger would have a strength advantage over the other woman, it must be understood that when testosterone is reduced and estrogen increased that muscle mass and strength decline significantly. "Normal testosterone in a male is from 8.5 to 30 nanamoles/L and in a female from 0 to 3.7 nmol/L. Bagger’s is 1.8. For available testosterone the male range is from 60 to 1190, Baggers was 19, in the female range of 0 to 80.” “ She is about as strong as pre-menopausal woman. If anything, she is testosterone deficient. It is simply not true that she has extra strength.” As she only hits the ball about 240 yards, she is hardly a threat to anyone.

My point was more of a generality than a medical testimonial about this particular individual. As far as my own opinion is concerned, I wouldn't allow this. I am personally very fed up with this "tolerate everything" attitude that is prevalent in today's society. I don't deny people their freedom of choice, but there are some places that tolerance can not exist. One place that I would say the latter is applicable is in professional sports.

What would you say if this person was a male golfer, trying to make the Nationwide or PGA, and failed, then decided to have a sex-change because he was good enough to make the LPGA? Is it the same thing, or is it different?

I'm not asking you to agree with me BC MIST, but just as you would have people respect your opinion on the subject, you should respect the opinions of others. I would be willing to bet that you're in the minority in this case.

I know I won't watch this event (or wouldn't if it were televised here in Ottawa), simply because this extreme liberalism makes me worry about the state of our society.

Furthermore, your point that having a sex-change is "natural" is not at all correct. It is "natural" to perhaps have a hormonal inclination to DESIRE a sex-change, but you need an "un-natural" procedure to accomplish the actual conversion.

Anyways, welcome to the OG Forums, and I hope my opinion (and of course, intended humour about the LPGA) haven't lowered your outlook on this wonderful online community.

Cheers,
Dan

[Rough Stuff]

Is it me or she (or he) cute? I know I'm taking a big chance admitting this

LMAO.

Now that takes balls.

[Rough Stuff]

"8 posts." I can feel myself getting smarter every day.

Good for you. I like someone who posts against the tide. Its a tough crowd, believe me.

[mpare]

Good for you. I like someone who posts against the tide. Its a tough crowd, believe me.

This is a tough crowd. If you get too controversial, you are banned. Of course, defining what is controversial is quite another matter. As for the Australian player in question, she certainly does not appear to be enjoying any physical advantage. The other players are bombing it past her.

[broken27]

This is a tough crowd. If you get too controversial, you are banned. Of course, defining what is controversial is quite another matter.

Is that a warning? I certainly didn't mean to cross any lines. Just a free exchange of ideas...

Dan

[mpare]

Is that a warning? I certainly didn't mean to cross any lines. Just a free exchange of ideas...

Dan

Good Lord, no, it was not a warning. I spoke in jest.

[Rough Stuff]

I would be willing to bet that you're in the minority in this case....I know I won't watch this event (or wouldn't if it were televised here in Ottawa), simply because this extreme liberalism makes me worry about the state of our society.

Well, I'm in BC's corner...he expressed some valid points with sound arguing. Who cares if he/she does this? Why does it matter so much to us? What is black and white? Where is my medication? All valid questions.

As far as liberalism, there are a few things that scare me more.

1) A rationalization of reasoning because more people agree with the points. ex: "you're in the minority in this case". So were people who refused to goosestep. So are people who don't go to MacDonalds. The worlds a better place in both cases.

2) People who decide what others can do, because it offends their sense of normality. ex: abortion, same-sex marriage, playing golf in certain leagues, etc.

3) People who force religion on others.

4) Big hairy spiders at cottages.

5) Hanifi on a rant about Falcon Ridge.


I'd go on, but I've found my meds.

[broken27]

Well, I'm in BC's corner...he expressed some valid points with sound arguing. Who cares if he/she does this? Why does it matter so much to us? What is black and white? Where is my medication? All valid questions.

As far as liberalism, there are a few things that scare me more.

1) A rationalization of reasoning because more people agree with the points. ex: "you're in the minority in this case". So were people who refused to goosestep. So are people who don't go to MacDonalds. The worlds a better place in both cases.

2) People who decide what others can do, because it offends their sense of normality. ex: abortion, same-sex marriage, playing golf in certain leagues, etc.

3) People who force religion on others.

4) Big hairy spiders at cottages.

5) Hanifi on a rant about Falcon Ridge.


I'd go on, but I've found my meds.

I'm not saying I disagree with peoples' freedom to change their sex, have gay marriages or whatever. I'm saying I think that some things can't possibly be tolerant to the absolute. I don't care that this person had a sex-change operation, and to an extent I applaud his/her conviction to their "cause". But I think that it would not be appropriate to change the rules to allow this person to participate on the grounds that to forbid it would be discriminatory. Since this person has been allowed to play by the golf association in question, there's no problem with it in my books. Doesn't mean I have to support it/like it/applaud it. I accept it, and that's as far as I'm willing to go. Still won't watch it.

My concerns about extreme liberalism stem from working in a federal government department that believes in quota hiring, rather than in quality hiring. I want the best person for the job, not the best person of "minority group x" for the job. If it's an absolute tie between two people, only then do I think it's prudent to base the decision on race/sex/religion/disability.

As far as the points about McDonalds and whatnot, I don't eat there, but it's not a political statement. It's because I feel sick after two bites of it.

But as far as point 2 goes, I guess you'd support Tiger if he wanted to go on the LPGA and destroy the field in pretty much every event? I doubt that very much. There are men's and women's leagues at the moment because (IMHO) there is a disparity in the amount of time that women have been actively seeking professional sports opportunities en mass. I can't stand women's hockey as a viewer sport, but I think it's great that they play. Give it enough time and the women will be on par with the men. I can't for the life of me figure out why there's a men's and women's dart league though......

Again, to each their own, but "lectures" on morality are pretty similar to forcing religion on someone. Just replace the word "religion" with "social philosophy" and it's the same concept.

I'm 31, and a fairly old-school, traditional guy. I love Archie Bunker (all in the family) because it's not bound to the laws of extreme political correctness. If there's freedom of choice, why can't I choose not like something? If people can voice their opinions "pro" something, should I not be able to voice my opinions "con" the same thing? Nature works on balance, and without conflict there would be no progress. If I have to tolerate someone's belief system, shouldn't they have to tolerate mine (assuming neither infringes on the other or tries to stifle the other)? Certainly doesn't feel that way...

Imagine if you tried to start an able-bodied, young, white male pride parade..... Instantly you'd be accused of being a racist/sexist/homophobe/anti-disability redneck. Funny, but I have to tolerate the Pride parade which marches down Bank Street and contains outright graphic and lewd behaviour and costumes....

I'm going to stop before I get in trouble.....

Dan

[Rough Stuff]

Wow...

There's not much point in arguing, but as long as I have to read your point of view, I'm going to give mine...


Ok...point by point...

But I think that it would not be appropriate to change the rules to allow this person to participate on the grounds that to forbid it would be discriminatory.

I don't quite understand your point here. EVERY thing changes because its determined to be discrimatory, a society that is flexible IS the thing we should be aiming for. Forbidding black people on the front of the bus WAS a rule. NOT JUST TEN YEARS AGO, I went to courses that forbid women and jews. I've also been in the south where they "unofficially" forbid black people.

...believes in quota hiring, rather than in quality hiring. I want the best person for the job, not the best person of "minority group x" for the job.

I'm not to argue pro or con quota hiring. THE REASONING behind it, which I'm sure you know, is to balance out inequalities that currently exist. IF THE BEST MAN is there for the job, I'm to assume that ONLY white males are the BEST candidate, if I look at the makeup of the house of commons. I can't believe this. Instead, I'm more likely to believe that an inherent AND UNRECOGNIZABLE FLAW exists, which is this: ordinary joes like you and me SUBCONSCIOUSLY exercise racism on a daily basis. Thus systems, like quota systems, are there to balance out the inequalities. When I went to University, very few women went, and fewer minorities. Its nice to see that changing, and things like quota systems lead to that.

To say to me "Hey, the most qualified person HAPPENS to be a white male 9/10" strikes me as bull. I think its while males syndrome, aka: racism...but does anyone think of themselves as racist? Only the ones wearing white cloaks. I'm proposing that everyone exercises prejudice, and racism is a pre-judgement.

If it's an absolute tie between two people, only then do I think it's prudent to base the decision on race/sex/religion/disability.

Ridiculous. Whos to judge this fictitious TIE? OH, the white male manager. Give me a break. Its inappropriate to say that a tie is even conceivable. I used to work for the federal government in a human resource and staffing capacity. I can tell you I saw more examples of bending the rules than I saw of fairness. So don't propose theres this inherent fairness in the system, cause they're aint...

But as far as point 2 goes, I guess you'd support Tiger if he wanted to go on the LPGA and destroy the field in pretty much every event?

Yes. If someone at the LPGA says "Hey we can get Tiger...he's willing to play as part of exemption and it will boost attendance by 1000%", then do it. Why not? Would they invite him back each time? No. Can they? Sure, why not.

Again, to each their own, but "lectures" on morality are pretty similar to forcing religion on someone.

Totally agree. But I'm not coming to your door and selling you a bible. I'm responding to an argument that I think is flawed on a public forum. If this ISNT the place to argue, I don't know where is.

I love Archie Bunker (all in the family) because it's not bound to the laws of extreme political correctness.

So do I. Loved the show. But beneath it all, Archie Bunker was actually illustrating the ridiculous nature of bigotry.

If I have to tolerate someone's belief system, shouldn't they have to tolerate mine

For the life of me, I can't see how this man/woman playing infringes on your belief system.

Imagine if you tried to start an able-bodied, young, white male pride parade.....

Oh off. You know why we don't have a able-bodie, young white male pride parade? Because EVERY DAY is able-bodied young white male pride day.


I won't argue some physical differences. There's no doubt in my mind that men are physically capable of doing some things better. But I'm arguing the nature of rules and why they are there. MOST rules are there because they've ALWAYS been there, and no one gives them any thought.

[broken27]

The main thing isn't so much that I agree with or am opposed to "how things are" or "how things should be". My point is that any time you say something that closes a door rather than opens it, you're going to be labeled as "closed-minded".

Do I feel victimized by it? Hell no. Do I care if people think I'm a bigot? Hell no, at least not people in general. Do I believe in equality? Hell YES, but only if it exists for both the current and incumbent benefactors of said equality.

I totally agree with you that there's not really much point to arguing about this here, and I've likely over-stepped some boundaries in my previous posts. All I was setting out to do originally was to have a little fun with a topic that is inately controversial.

As for Archie, I am very much aware that it is essentially a caricature, and that's why I love the show.

My point about the parading (I notice you didn't really address the lewd and sexually graphic nature of the Pride Parade) is that there's a double-standard, regardless of whether you think every day is young white male pride day. I wouldn't want a parade anyways, but I think that if you have no choice in being white/black/gay/straight etc then there's really nothing to be proud of, now is there? You didn't consciously achieve your situation if it wasn't a choice, so what the hell are you proud of?

I'm going to drop this, but if you want to discuss it further, I'm always up for some political discussions. I don't expect one, but if you want to keep at this, send me a private message and I'll explain my rather non-traditional views on stuff like this.

Trust me, I'm one of the more tolerant people in a 1-on-1 situation.

Cheers,
Dan