This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/21/gender-discrimination-westminster-rife

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
David Cameron listens to Sam. Pity he won't give more women jobs David Cameron listens to Sam. Pity he won't give more women jobs
(2 months later)
The Clicking of Cuthbert, one of PG Wodehouse's finest golf stories, counters the current, unfortunate impression of a game that divides the sexes. Last week, a Mr Peter Dawson of the Royal and Ancient, explained, in chilling detail, why golf makes the ideal sport for husbands and wives who hate one another. "On a Sunday morning," he rhapsodised, "the guy, or the lady, gets out of the marital bed, if you like, and plays golf with his chums."The Clicking of Cuthbert, one of PG Wodehouse's finest golf stories, counters the current, unfortunate impression of a game that divides the sexes. Last week, a Mr Peter Dawson of the Royal and Ancient, explained, in chilling detail, why golf makes the ideal sport for husbands and wives who hate one another. "On a Sunday morning," he rhapsodised, "the guy, or the lady, gets out of the marital bed, if you like, and plays golf with his chums."
On the contrary, as emphasised by Wodehouse's Oldest Member, golf can bring the sexes together. Cuthbert, in this story, admires the disdainful Adeline. It emerges – to general astonishment – that her hero, a towering Russian intellectual called Brusiloff, is a fan of Cuthbert and wishes only to talk golf with him. "Let me tell you one vairy funny story about putting. It was one day I play at Nijni-Novgorod with the pro against Lenin and Trotsky, and Trotsky had a two-inch putt for the hole." To cut a short story even shorter, Adeline and Cuthbert marry. "And so," (concluded the Oldest Member), "you see that golf can be of the greatest practical assistance to a man in Life's struggle."On the contrary, as emphasised by Wodehouse's Oldest Member, golf can bring the sexes together. Cuthbert, in this story, admires the disdainful Adeline. It emerges – to general astonishment – that her hero, a towering Russian intellectual called Brusiloff, is a fan of Cuthbert and wishes only to talk golf with him. "Let me tell you one vairy funny story about putting. It was one day I play at Nijni-Novgorod with the pro against Lenin and Trotsky, and Trotsky had a two-inch putt for the hole." To cut a short story even shorter, Adeline and Cuthbert marry. "And so," (concluded the Oldest Member), "you see that golf can be of the greatest practical assistance to a man in Life's struggle."
This simple truth was again confirmed, last week, when a series of politicians who rarely get the chance, otherwise, to advertise their horror of sex discrimination awoke to the arrangements at Muirfield golf course, where women are excluded from membership. Nick Clegg professed himself "just dismayed and incredibly surprised to hear that this still goes on in this day and age". We can't measure his dismay, of course, but it probably approached the level of dismay a person might feel if a respected colleague turned out to be a known groper of women. Or the dismay when a close colleague is seen to mouth – in this day and age – "stupid woman", or when another makes loud growly noises in order to upset a woman speaker wearing leopard-print fabric . For David Cameron, it can be more confidently said, the golfing episode represents an epiphany in Life's struggle. It was not enough, for him, to make known his opinion that single-sex sporting clubs "look more to the past than they do to the future". Scarcely before his audience could frame the thought a) what about the Bullingdon? followed speedily by b) what about White's?, the prime minister's spokesman confirmed that Cameron recoils from all such abominations and has therefore relinquished his membership of White's, a sodality once run by his late father and to which he probably aspired from boyhood.This simple truth was again confirmed, last week, when a series of politicians who rarely get the chance, otherwise, to advertise their horror of sex discrimination awoke to the arrangements at Muirfield golf course, where women are excluded from membership. Nick Clegg professed himself "just dismayed and incredibly surprised to hear that this still goes on in this day and age". We can't measure his dismay, of course, but it probably approached the level of dismay a person might feel if a respected colleague turned out to be a known groper of women. Or the dismay when a close colleague is seen to mouth – in this day and age – "stupid woman", or when another makes loud growly noises in order to upset a woman speaker wearing leopard-print fabric . For David Cameron, it can be more confidently said, the golfing episode represents an epiphany in Life's struggle. It was not enough, for him, to make known his opinion that single-sex sporting clubs "look more to the past than they do to the future". Scarcely before his audience could frame the thought a) what about the Bullingdon? followed speedily by b) what about White's?, the prime minister's spokesman confirmed that Cameron recoils from all such abominations and has therefore relinquished his membership of White's, a sodality once run by his late father and to which he probably aspired from boyhood.
Even when he stood for party leadership, Cameron was still trying to finesse his devotions to women voters with membership of an institution that persists in dealing with women as English gentlemen once dealt with blacks and Jews. "I don't think we have to be politically correct in every aspect of our life," Cameron told Woman's Hour, in 2005. He told the Times: "I don't believe we have to have a country where you can't have independent organisations deciding what they want to be."Even when he stood for party leadership, Cameron was still trying to finesse his devotions to women voters with membership of an institution that persists in dealing with women as English gentlemen once dealt with blacks and Jews. "I don't think we have to be politically correct in every aspect of our life," Cameron told Woman's Hour, in 2005. He told the Times: "I don't believe we have to have a country where you can't have independent organisations deciding what they want to be."
So it's still hard to take in the scale of his latest U-turn, said to have actually occurred in 2008. If Cameron's repudiation of White's does not quite rank with Shaun Woodward's betrayal of the Tories following a Labour landslide, this life-changing abjuration is certainly up there with Julian the Apostate's. Or to return to Wodehouse, it is as if Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright had permanently quit the Drones, although, admittedly, that would have had fewer implications for the individual's right to freedom of association, where that conflicts with freedom from discrimination.So it's still hard to take in the scale of his latest U-turn, said to have actually occurred in 2008. If Cameron's repudiation of White's does not quite rank with Shaun Woodward's betrayal of the Tories following a Labour landslide, this life-changing abjuration is certainly up there with Julian the Apostate's. Or to return to Wodehouse, it is as if Catsmeat Potter-Pirbright had permanently quit the Drones, although, admittedly, that would have had fewer implications for the individual's right to freedom of association, where that conflicts with freedom from discrimination.
Is Cameron's realisation that he has unwittingly been supporting, via his White's subscriptions, a culture of sexual discrimination that makes the average working-men's club look like the Spare Rib collective of 1972, to remain a source of demi-private regret? Or will he, emulating New York City's human rights reforms of 1984, or our own Lord Lester's brave, but failed campaign of 1992, progress his new thinking into challenging establishments where the impact of sex discrimination is arguably greater than – not for a second to downplay this sporting outrage – decreased female access to golf? The argument for reforming the New York law was, the legislators explained, that "one barrier to the advancement of women and minorities in the business and professional life of the city of New York is the discriminatory practices of certain membership organisations".Is Cameron's realisation that he has unwittingly been supporting, via his White's subscriptions, a culture of sexual discrimination that makes the average working-men's club look like the Spare Rib collective of 1972, to remain a source of demi-private regret? Or will he, emulating New York City's human rights reforms of 1984, or our own Lord Lester's brave, but failed campaign of 1992, progress his new thinking into challenging establishments where the impact of sex discrimination is arguably greater than – not for a second to downplay this sporting outrage – decreased female access to golf? The argument for reforming the New York law was, the legislators explained, that "one barrier to the advancement of women and minorities in the business and professional life of the city of New York is the discriminatory practices of certain membership organisations".
In London, regardless of the indignant waffling of their members, who include some surprising proponents of extreme sex discrimination, the capital's long-established men's clubs, which have no true female equivalents, are still places where professional contacts are made and business is done. As nice as it is to picture, say, the Garrick as a droll, Drones-like venue, in which you might find Andreas Whittam Smith efficiently debagging Hugh Bonneville, the building is merely stuffed full, as Lady Hale, Britain's most senior female judge has pointed out, with the usual great and good suspects – judges, lawyers, MPs, editors, peers – of whom some like to advertise their woman problem with club ties. "I regard it as quite shocking," Hale said in 2011, "that so many of my colleagues belong to the Garrick club, but they don't see what all the fuss is about."In London, regardless of the indignant waffling of their members, who include some surprising proponents of extreme sex discrimination, the capital's long-established men's clubs, which have no true female equivalents, are still places where professional contacts are made and business is done. As nice as it is to picture, say, the Garrick as a droll, Drones-like venue, in which you might find Andreas Whittam Smith efficiently debagging Hugh Bonneville, the building is merely stuffed full, as Lady Hale, Britain's most senior female judge has pointed out, with the usual great and good suspects – judges, lawyers, MPs, editors, peers – of whom some like to advertise their woman problem with club ties. "I regard it as quite shocking," Hale said in 2011, "that so many of my colleagues belong to the Garrick club, but they don't see what all the fuss is about."
So long as public appointments can be shared out privately among friends (as recently illustrated by Lord Patten's appointment of Lord Hall as his DG), the exclusion of women from clubs in which contenders meet patrons, out of sight of civilians, should probably make their composition as much a matter of public interest as the occasional gender segregation at Muslim events in public places.So long as public appointments can be shared out privately among friends (as recently illustrated by Lord Patten's appointment of Lord Hall as his DG), the exclusion of women from clubs in which contenders meet patrons, out of sight of civilians, should probably make their composition as much a matter of public interest as the occasional gender segregation at Muslim events in public places.
In fact, the revelation of Cameron's late-onset interest in men's clubs might have been tremendous news had it not coincided with his failure to reshuffle his government as expected before the recess, so as to improve on the female ministerial contingent of 23 out of 121.In fact, the revelation of Cameron's late-onset interest in men's clubs might have been tremendous news had it not coincided with his failure to reshuffle his government as expected before the recess, so as to improve on the female ministerial contingent of 23 out of 121.
That the prime minister can boast, as well as a mother-in-law with a furniture shop, a wife who divides her time between upscale handbag design and neocon interventionism, is hugely impressive, of course. But this may still not compensate, whatever her champions say, for his failure to make good a promise to make a third of his ministers women.That the prime minister can boast, as well as a mother-in-law with a furniture shop, a wife who divides her time between upscale handbag design and neocon interventionism, is hugely impressive, of course. But this may still not compensate, whatever her champions say, for his failure to make good a promise to make a third of his ministers women.
It is asking a lot of any woman, even Samantha Cameron, that she should stand in like this, for a missing 17 politicians. In fact, given Cameron's generous choice of elected female candidates, the members of White's, or Muirfield, might reasonably ask which is more unfair, or as Cameron now has it, backward-looking: their own men-only arrangements, or his version of progress – in which women, although technically allowed access to all the facilities, can only ever enjoy associate membership?It is asking a lot of any woman, even Samantha Cameron, that she should stand in like this, for a missing 17 politicians. In fact, given Cameron's generous choice of elected female candidates, the members of White's, or Muirfield, might reasonably ask which is more unfair, or as Cameron now has it, backward-looking: their own men-only arrangements, or his version of progress – in which women, although technically allowed access to all the facilities, can only ever enjoy associate membership?
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.