Since Suzy Whaley, an LPGA Pro golfer, is going to be allowed to play in a PGA tournament this year, why not allow Tiger Woods to play in a LPGA tournament?

If we are going for a gender neutral society, let's go at it full tilt.

Sleeper

because regardless of how well women may be able to play, tiger woods, or any man for that matter is probably much better then them, or at least stronger, which would result in an unfair advantage. suzy whally can compete with the men and probably feels she has an unfair advantage in the LPGA, or wants a challange. it's akin to saying "so and so of the WNBA can play as well as most of the men, so why shouldn't jordan be ale to play in the WNBA?"

I've never immersed myself too deep in the idea of "gender neutrality," but I don't think allowing Suzy Whaley to play in the PGA is on par with allowing Tiger Woods to play in the LPGA.

I think it fair that Suzy Whaley, playing a level of golf inferior to that of the PGA, should be allowed to compete in a PGA tournament. I think it would be unfair to allow Tiger Woods to take skills honed at a superior level to expectedly dominate (more so than he already does) his every competitor.

I see the issue to be one not so much of equality between men and women (as we might see in an office space) but rather as an issue of what's fair in competition. Throughout human history it has been looked down upon for a dominant power to impose itself on smaller powers clearly unable to compete. The same applies in sports.

And while I suppose some larger power could complain about the double standard of allowing a lesser power to rise up to his or her level, the jump doesn't seem to violate any attempts at creating, or maintaining, a fair and level playing field for the competition between the two.

If a wheel chair basketball player wishes to challenge a NBA player I see this as acceptable. On the other hand, I see it unacceptable for the NBA player to challenge a wheel chair basketball player (outside of charity or perhaps a friendly pick-up game). When the handicapped player challenges the NBA player, the advantage clearly still lies with the NBA player. BUT the difference is that the NBA player (the greater power in this scenario) is not imposing itself upon the handicapped (our smaller power).

I guess the best I could try summing it up is that while it is the right of a competitor to seek to compete, it is not the right of a competitor to seek to dominate and impose their ability over identifiably weaker opponents.

It is called the PGA not the MPGA. The reason there is a LPGA is the women can't play as well. If Tiger Woods played in the LPGA he would win everything.

Tiger Woods in the L.P.G.A.? The only person that would get anything meaningful out of the whole fiasco would be his caddy, Because if tiger played in the LPGA, He would only need his driver,5 iron, sand-wedge, and putter. Would be a pretty light bag to tote around for 54 holes.

I can see it now: Here we are at the Womens U.S. open.(announcer):Well dave Tiger has just teed off another monster drive off the 17th tee, ball landed just shy of the green, probably going to find the cup for another birdie putting him at yet another L.P.G.A. tournament record at 48 under par, while he is coming up the fairway lets go ahead to 18 where Annika Sorenstam and Carrie Webb are currently battling for second place, both tied at 11 under par, this should be a great hole for both of them, While we have a second our affiliate has just sent us word that Martha Burke has been seen in the clubhouse protesting that Tiger Woods has an unfair advantage over the rest of the women,. in the fact he is the only one that doesnt have to wear a sports bra." Oh boy will it ever end?

The only reason women golfers wouldn't be as good as the men is upper body strength, leaving them at a disadvantage in how far they can drive the ball. But if a particular woman golfer is good enough to compete in the PGA, then I say let her do it. The converse does not hold true, since someone like Tiger would obviously dominate. I suppose letting a weaker male golfer play in the LPGA might be ok? He'd be laughed at though, and few men's egos would allow them to do it.

I take issue with that. Money is a motivating factor--a male golfer who could be relatively assured of kicking some *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** on the LPGA might consider the blow to the ego a small price to pay for making a damned good living on the Ladies' tour.

As for the upper body strength being the only difference between male and female golfers--on what do you base that? Not saying you're wrong, just saying men and women are built differently. It may be that physiological differences necessarily eliminate the possibility of a level playing field between men and women, which is reason enough to segregate male and female golfers. The system works fine, I don't see why we have to screw with it.

I don't play golf, Cyclone, nor have I researched it, so that theory was just a guess. If someone has a better one I'm all ears. So far as messing with the game of golf, I don't care one way or the other, just tossing out some thoughts. I would hope people who do care about golf wouldn't make any decisions on the basis of such idle idea-batting.