Does Equality Mean Special Minority Privilege?
I don't fault Annika Sorenstam for accepting the invitation to play in a PGA tourney. In my view, it's unfair to criticize her for accepting such an invitation. She's a great golfer, and she wants to play at the highest level of golf she can. The real question is only indirectly related to her: should a woman be allowed to play in the PGA?

Actually, this subject has already been covered ad infinitum. When you deal with any sort of minority, should they get special privilege? Women should be considered a "minority" in this instance because we live in a patriarchal society, so to speak. Men are unquestionably physically stronger than women, and have in the past tended to run the show. That has changed somewhat, of course, but women are generally still viewed as the "minority" sex.

Blacks get their own political organization, the NAACP. Women get their own golf organization, the LPGA. Is it fair for these groups to segregate themselves in this manner? I would claim that it's okay for certain minority groups to have their own organizations. Why is that okay? Because of human nature. The majority tends to hold down the minority. The Constitution itself was originally written to be antimajoritarian. It sounds like a liberal idea--and it may very well be--but minority groups deserve the right to have organizations that are segregated and also represent their interests. Majority groups can't really have that privilege. Is there an NAAWP? Is it fair that the majority cannot create such organizations without being labelled racists or sexists? Perhaps, but life isn't fair. The majority traditionally has less prejudicial obstacles to overcome, so the minority deserves some special privileges. (This does not include affirmative action...but I'll touch on that some other time.)

The only reason women haven't traditionally played in men's sports is because they cannot compete. When more superb women golfers crop up like Annika Sorenstam, what's to be done? The heart of the matter could be resolved when this question is adaquately answered: Is the PGA a men's league or an open league? Until now, it was a moot point. It's not anymore.

Vijay Singh's initial gut reaction was that it's a men's league. Does that make him an evil, sexist person? Of course not. Are those that believe it's an open league liberal wacko extremists? Not necessarily. It's certainly a tough issue, and since this is a sport, the PGA should have the final say: not a court. If women are allowed to go club-to-club with the guys from now on, it may change the sport slightly, but the women won't be getting any special privileges. And they shouldn't.

  posted by Stephen @ 5:36 PM

 
Commentary: Spam

If you've had an e-mail address for any length of time, you've gotten SPAM. Nope, it's not the Hormel Foods canned meat, it's Unsolicited Bulk E-mail (UBE), also known as Unsolicited Commercial E-mail (UCE). It's that junk e-mail you didn't ask for: "body part" enlargement adverts, Viagra deals, and pornographic solicitations. Not a pretty picture. People who SPAM don't monitor who they're sending messages to, by the way. Your young child could open his e-mail and see naked women.

Why "SPAM"?

Hormel kindly suggests that the uppercase SPAM should refer to the junk e-mail while the lowercase Spam refers to the canned meat. Fair enough. It truly might seem strange that a canned meat's name would come to refer to junk e-mail, though. How did that happen? Look it up on M-W.com and you'll get this etymology:

"from a skit on the British television series Monty Python's Flying Circus in which chanting of the word Spam (trademark for a canned meat product) overrides the other dialogue"

 
Liberal Student Intolerance
A handful of numbskull students walked out during a graduation speech by Senator Rick Santorum. He recently made headlines and stirred up "controversy" over his non-offensive comments on homosexuality.

My last blog entry was about a failed-cable-tv-show liberal who made some political comments at graduation. Santorum didn't. See the INTOLERANCE of the left? If a liberal hack spoke at my graduation, I wouldn't care. Even if he made political comments, I probably would just sit through them. With liberals, though, agree with their often wacko beliefs or they'll be completely intolerant of you.

No one walked out of Donahue's speech until he started spouting liberal gibberish. I'm gonna coin a term and call it liberalish. Anyway, the numbskulls at Santorum's graduation speech were so deeply and completely offended by the very presence of Santorum that they just had to escape. Here's a nice comment from a mush-headed student:

``Senator Santorum and I are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum,'' said graduate Sara Foglesong, among those who walked out. ``I am not incestuous. I am not a bigamist. I just happen to be bisexual. It offended me.''

 
Phil Who?
Found this story on Drudge. Mr. Phil Donahue, liberal extraordinaire, made some politically-charged comments at a graduation on Saturday. Naturally, he slammed Gulf War II and the President. Some students walked out when he began to turn the speech into a liberal commentary.

Who in the heck invited this guy? He's an okay speaker and probably an okay guy, but do people really want to hear this liberal crapola at graduation? Let's go over some of the stuff he said. First:

What liberals believe, he said, "is that no one in authority should tell you to `shush,' that executing retarded teenagers is wrong, and that unions give workers a deserved place at the bargaining table."