SOME of the contributions to your Letters Special of May 21 have left me quite taken aback and genuinely disappointed.
The vote in favour of forbidding female membership of Muirfield Golf Club has attracted unfavourable international attention and the result is a deep embarrassment for those of us who wish to look upon our nation as one which embraces a modern and progressive culture in which equality of opportunity is regarded as a core value.
It is truly appalling to dismiss those who regard the decision as indefensible (which it surely is) as intimidating members of the "PC Brigade" or "Women's Rights Groups".
Surely, in 2016 we have moved beyond this and it is time for such nonsense to be permanently dropped into the long grass.
The preservation of private clubs which are segregated at the whims of their members rather than any genuine social need simply belongs to another era and I am sure I am far from alone in thinking that we should not allow a handful of individuals who fail to move with the times, and who seem to genuinely misunderstand the extent to which they have made a laughing stock of themselves, dominate the social agenda of our country.
David Gray, 2 Caird Drive, Glasgow.
AMID the huffing and the puffing, condemnation and approval, allegations of misogyny and approval for tradition, over the controversial decision by members of Muirfield Golf Club to maintain its ban on women members perhaps it’s fair to point out that 397 (64 per cent) of members voted in favour of change and only 219 (36 per cent) to maintain the ban.
In most organisations and walks of life that is a sizeable majority for change and it is only because of the requirement for a two-thirds majority that this failed to carry.
I admit to some sympathy for 397 Honourable Members.
R Russell Smith, 96 Milton Road, Kilbirnie.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel