A version of the quip by Groucho Marx - that he would not want to be in a club with someone like him as a member - might well be applied to Portmarnock Golf Club.
Why, it should be asked, would any self-respecting woman want to be a member of a club which evidently handicaps her as a birdie? Why would a woman want to play golf, or rub shoulders afterwards in the 19th, with men who stubbornly insist she should be satisfied with a status inferior to their own?
The Equality Authority was quite correct when it argued in court it was a logical absurdity for Portmarnock to hold, as it did, that its raison d'être was golf for men, while at the same time allowing women to play but not as equal members. In court, the club contended that its "principal purpose" - a phrase taken from Section 9 of the Equal Status Act - was to provide for golfing for men. Were this the case, the club would have been able to argue successfully that as a club established for such a specific purpose (to cater for the needs of a particular gender), it was allowed, under the Act, to discriminate in favour of men. But Portmarnock does not operate in this way. It is content to allow women play golf but not to be full, voting members. As Judge Mary Collins of the District Court sensibly put it: "The principal purpose of the club, I believe, is to play golf."
Judge Collins, in finding against the club, has yet to impose a sanction, pending the outcome of a separate action by the club. One option open to her would be to revoke for 30 days the club's certificate of registration - the effect of which would be to ban it from selling alcohol. Such a course would likely concentrate minds - especially if repeat offending led to repeat sanction - removing as it would in one fell swoop both a valuable source of revenue for the club and its social forum, away from the fairway, on the 19th.
The fact that one, albeit prominent, golf club in suburban Dublin discriminates against women is not one of the greater injustices in Irish society today. However, as Mr Niall Crowley noted after yesterday's verdict, it is a case that "holds up a mirror to society". If women can be discriminated against in a golf club, then why not in more important walks of life?
Portmarnock seeks to challenge the constitutionality of the Equal Status Act so that it can continue to discriminate against women. As a result of yesterday's judgment (and pending the outcome of the High Court hearing on Portmarnock's action) it has set its face against the norm in society today. It is sad to see grown men driving such a principle.