by Hannes Wessels
Right now Muirfield Golf Club, rated by some as possibly the best of the Open Courses and home to great champions from Jack Nicklaus to Ernie Els, stands prominently as the pariah of the golfing world and beyond. The members who voted, by a narrow margin, to maintain a no-women policy have attracted global opprobrium and unrelenting criticism and have been trending as some of the most despised men on the planet.
The root of the problem is the ‘old duffers’ who form what is known as the ‘Honourable Company of Edinburgh Golfers’, founded in 1774, are in broad terms, white, conservative and heterosexual, they subscribe to a vaguely Christian ethos and they are law-abiding citizens who take their civic duties seriously and seek to impose themselves on nobody. In a saner world that would paint quite a pretty picture of this little sprinkling of harmless iconoclasts but that’s far from the contemporary reality. In today’s politically-correct dictatorship this makes them synonymous with misogynism, racism, colonialism, slavery and capitalism and a part of the most vilified population group alive today. So why, dare I ask does any decent person of any race, class, ethnicity, gender or ‘trans-gender’, want to be anywhere near so odious a place and so ghastly a group. Surely it would make more sense to ring-fence this house of horrors and warn all good folk to avoid it like the plague. But no, far from it, a call to action has been issued and the feminists and multiple associate groups will now focus their furious energies on attacking and destroying this ugly citadel of masculine insensitivity and bigotry.
The ‘duffers’ will surely be defeated by this brave band of SJW’s (social justice warriors) who will leave no man standing in their quest for ‘social progress’ and their brand of egalitarianism and as always, the blinkers are on. We can certainly expect no explanation as to why women are allowed ladies clubs, why homosexuals are allowed ‘gay clubs’ and why there is no opposition to events like ‘Miss Black America’ which is brazen racism in the purest sense? These all involve people who are not white, heterosexual, male and Christian so the rules don’t apply to them.
The next question one ventures to ask of the SJW’s is when are they going tackle the issue of ‘women’s rights’ (or the lack thereof) within the dogma of Islamic or Sharia Law now so widely practiced in the UK and beyond. If anyone needs reminding Sharia is at times, brutally discriminatory against women, allows men to beat their wives, denies women basic human rights and predicates itself on total male domination. Recent reports indicate there are at least 30 ‘Sharia Councils’ operating ‘independently’ in Britain. Despite protestations from Home Secretary Teresa May, to the contrary, these ‘councils’ are running their own courts and administering their own justice while ignoring the sovereign laws of the land. This is undoubtedly illegal but ignored, just as the Pakistani rapists of Rotherham were allowed to act with impunity in the sexual abuse of 1,600 teenage girls.
In Africa customary law throughout the continent allows the sale of daughters (often prepubescent) by their fathers to the highest bidder to lead loveless lives of abject misery as virtual sex-slaves. Abuse of woman happens on a colossal scale and one recent report indicates over a 100 million women have been subjected to genital mutilation. This all appears to be entirely acceptable to the SJW’s but damnation upon a few old codgers in their tweeds and ties who want to be left alone to quaff a few beers and lament the fact the last time they got laid was in the century just passed. They must be punished by all possible means available.
Sadly what has just happened at Muirfield is a microcosm of what is happening in the world today. Just as the Muirfield Members cannot be left alone, neither can their countrymen; European Christians, cut from roughly the same cloth as the golfers of the ‘Honourable Company’ who founded, developed and governed countries and metropoles (until recently with London under Sadiq Khan being an early but certainly not final exception) that provide the desired home destination of almost the entire populations of the Afro-Islamic world. This fact proffers another perplexing conundrum; why do Africans risk their lives to be in the land of their former ‘colonisers’ and ‘slave-masters’ and why do Muslims regularly run the risk of perishing at sea to be ensconced in the land of the cursed ‘Infidel’ they despise and have sworn to destroy. Why, one may ask, are the Africans not rejoicing in the fruits of their hard won independence which, we are repeatedly told, brought ‘liberation’ and ‘freedom’ from the brutal oppression introduced by the loathsome Europeans who plundered and pillaged a tropical paradise for entirely selfish ends. And if Islam provides all the answers required for Muslims to live and love this life on earth why would they want to be anywhere but in the Islamic heartland and in countries like Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran?
And if this is truly a religion of peace and goodwill then why are those Islamic countries, many incredibly wealthy, so silent and unhelpful when their fellow Islamists are in distress and in need of help? I may be wrong but I have heard of no camps (with the possible exception of Jordan) being set up to help refugees in any Islamic country. President Obama assures us Islam is the ‘religion of peace’. How long, dare I ask, would the ‘old duffers’ from Muirfield last in Saudi if they asked if they could build a golf club in Jeddah for Christian golfers? We know Muslims are entitled to exclusive associations and facilities in the UK and indeed the ‘Western World’ but similar demands in the lands of the Mullahs will almost certainly see the swing of a sharp sword hitting someone’s neck rather than a ‘Big Bertha’ hitting a ‘Titlelist’.
Probably most troubling is whatever happened to that most basic human right that is supposed to guarantee freedom of association and privacy to all mortals regardless of race, religion, ethnicity or class? Muirfield is a private facility that receives no subsidies or assistance in any shape or form from the state or anyone else so the members own it and they have paid for it but in their special case they are forbidden to decide who will use it. But I’m being silly, this is a human right we speak of here and in the perverse eyes of the MSM and the SJW’s who enforce the whims of a dumbed down proletariat it’s not at all clear now that the Muirfield members can be definitively classified as such.