You don't actually believe that do you? If that really was the case, do you really think there would still be all-white country clubs and other private clubs? That really is a rather naive sentiment you have expressed there. Business doesn't always flounder for businesses that discriminate against blacks. And there are people who don't mind being associated with that. Billy Graham was a member of an all-white country club for years. Clearly he had no problem with it.

I have never heard of anyone using the phrase "changing the complexion" as a way of referring to a change in tone or atmosphere.

Example: http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/...your-business/

I'm assuming the club is smart enough to know not to make public racist statements but not swift enough to think that "change the complexion" has a different meaning when referencing minorities at a white club. Misspeaking is a common error that people of all races make when they aren't thinking on their toes. Not to be confused with WHY the club felt these kids would change the complexion of the club.

To be clear, being a member of an all-white establishment does not mean that all of the members know that nonwhites are intentionally and formally excluded.

I really don't have a problem with all-white country clubs. If I played golf, I might even belong to one. Diversity wouldn't be on my list of things I care about either way. I'm more interested in the facilities and the membership.

Membership requirements for those clubs vary. Usually, you have to get a sponsor, usually, the shareholders have to vote and typically, the vote requirement is very high... at least that's the case for country clubs with any sort of prestige attached to them. The view at these sorts of places is pretty simple -- they don't discriminate based upon race, they just haven't had a subjectively qualified person of color apply. That might sound like a fiction to you, but really, do you think minorities are even applying?

You might have a case if Colin Powell gets turned down for membership somewhere, but that hasn't happened.

There are highly selective black organizations out there such as Jack and Jill. They don't admit whites (as far as I know) and that's just fine with everyone. Their racial requirements are express, unlike country clubs where you have a circumstantial case at best for racially based exclusions. And in J&J's case, you don't have whites banging down the door for admission either.

Now, when one of these organizations admits a black person and then turns around and boots them because they're "changing the complexion," we'd have a serious problem. I suppose the difference is superficial, but real. People will belong to these organizations so long as the organizations help these people to achieve what they want to achieve.

As the significant other of an avid golfer (who is Black, as am I), this has definitely been our experience. Many of the clubs that were once exclusively white, including those that intentionally excluded nonwhites, now have Black members. These Black members were mostly sponsored by white members and are professionals who are of the upper social class designation of the existing members.

In general, minorities aren't flooding the gates however it is not true that none of these clubs intentionally discriminated based on race. More clubs are allowing sprinkles of nonwhites but there is still a racial tipping point in some of these clubs as there is in predominantly white neigbhorhoods.

Maybe I come from a very different environment, but I personally would have issues with country clubs which admit only one race. I don't know about where you're from, Kevin, but there are a lot of non-whites up here who'd be wonderful candidates at exclusive clubs. Many are already members. Say you're a wealthy businessperson from Singapore. You've had a foreign education since middle school (prep school in the US, followed by two degrees, each from an Ivy). You go home to work a few years, establish yourself and then go to the US...permanently. You're an avid golfer. You'd like to join the club in your town, and your accomplishments, connections, etc would make you a likely candidate....except for one thing....you're Asian.

Kevin, have you met someone like this? And what about someone from Asia who belongs to a recipricol club?

The ignorance behind this statement is...staggering.

Yes, minorities are applying. We just don't often hear about them getting turned away because they may not be well known.

We only would hear about Colin Powell because he is famous.

With all the minorities in America, why does it have to go international? LOL

It isn't surprising that you have no problem with all-white clubs. I would expect that. That's pretty much a given.

As for Jack and Jill, I'm not even sure why you brought that into the discussion. Furthermore, it is absurd when whites counter comments about all-white country clubs with this type of statement. The reason Jack and Jill and other such groups were started was to create a network for black children. The racism going on then and now resulted in blacks forming such groups because they were excluded from groups that were predominately white...among other things.

Don't know how true that is. Because there are plenty of multi-racial people involved in J&J in my region and as a former member, while growing up, several of my age-group fellow J&Jillers were multi-racial. But that's purely a West Coast phenomena.

In other areas, so I have heard and seen how there is exclusivity dividing along racial/ethnic lines. Let's just say that is getting old and a lame excuse for not choosing to treat people with human dignity and respect.

What he's essentially saying is that those relatively few Blacks who are turned away could be turned away on a legit basis. They could be in the same boat as the whites who are turned away, since there are more whites who are turned away to mirror the larger proportion of whites who apply.

This is why this type of thing is difficult to "prove" so it gets swept under the rug. Suffice it to say that there are clubs that have had discriminatory rules on the books and discriminatory practices that aren't on the books. I believe some of these rules and practices have been documented years ago.

I doubt it'd be a very big deal. I don't have a membership list of Oklahoma City Golf and Country Club (probably the most prestigious in town), but I'd assume just based upon the complexion of the community, it already has quite a few Lebanese (Lebanese are very wealthy and influential minority in OKC). I would think your hypothetical candidate wouldn't have a tough time getting in at all.

The Senior Partner of a law firm my father was a partner in once recruited him to join that Club. Dad didn't pursue it as he's more into fishing than golfing. Dad's boss was an outspoken anti-semite and racist though (despite his life-long business partner being Jewish). He's long dead though. I don't know what that says about the current membership, but at least as recently as the 80's and early 90's, I doubt a minority would have gotten a fair shake at that Club. That's rank speculation on my part though. I'm not around those people anymore and almost certainly wouldn't make the 'cut' to be considered there myself.

Where I come from, non-white country/social club members are either foreign-raised or first generation Canadian-born (and the first generation Canadian-born people are almost all under 40 and many grew up in the club - they would not have seeked membership themselves or have been recruited). Typically, they are East or South Asian.

ETA: You also have to take into consideration WHICH minorities are more likely to seek membership, too.

Why is it staggering? How do you know? You don't.

You simply assume that if a person of color applies to a country club and is rejected, it was because of race. You don't know that to be true. It could be because no one knows the person's family. It could be because of some professional squabble. Could be anything. But for whatever reason, you hone in on race. Not everything is about race.

That is true, but for non-white people, there is the addition of race. I do agree that often, it's because he/she doesn't have the necessary connections.

Beyond this, I'm sure there are some number of clubs that are systematically finding excuses to reject black members. I'm sure there are proportionally more that have a higher bar for black members than white members, or have dabbled in "tokenism" or other similar behavior.

We have simply no idea of how to separate these instances from the larger whole, and the fallback position of the club (essentially, "we make the rules and he's not good enough") is practically unassailable.

But as a person of color, you don't know if is NOT true... How come my family has to be judged to join a recreational facility? How come my career interactions have to come into play when requesting joining? It could be anything and it could be honed into race...

You are right, true, not everything is about race... At the same time, people of color who want to join these locations are not thinking that their race would be a factor in their joining, either...

But something as a blatant disregard to taking nearly ~$2000 of an inner city's organization's money where they find a way swim is not the time to have "hissy fit" about the activity. As, I understand it, if some of the club members felt that way about children, they needed to voice their opinions to the owners well beyond taking the contracted money rather than say it directly to the children...

I have been kicked out of a pool because I was Black in Alabama in the early 1980's. So I actually do know how these kids feel. And for someone like me to enjoy the water like I do, like a fish, it was painful to have to undergo that humiliation as a child.

I don't doubt that either. The same could probably be said for fraternities and sororities at some schools.

And there's no way to fight the practice except to hope it goes away on its own. I think that eventually it will.

Doesn't every family have to go through an application process, including interview and reference letters for most country/yacht/social clubs? I thought that was the normal process???

Why in the United States? I know the ability to pay is questioned because you do have groundkeeping/docking/mooring fees. But as far as references for country/yacht, I am not a member, and I would not want to be a member. But, some people of family are due to their professional statures.

But you don't know that it's not not true. As far as judging your family, career interactions, etc., that's probably not going to happen at a lot of places, but some clubs are only able to keep their membership fees at a certain level and paying members because those members want the prestige of belonging to a highly selective organization. At some of these places, absolutely everything is under the microscope. And typically, belonging will have positive impact on your business opportunities, etc. Other places are just happy to have anyone as a member.

Well, it hasn't even been established that the rejection for these kids was racially motivated. That's an inference you can definitely draw from what was said, but it's hardly the only conclusion you can reach. I'm not giving my blessing to racism by any means. I'm just saying that there's not a hell of a lot that can be done about it when it's not overt and express.

But it's not only about the ability to pay. It's about fit as well. Do you want Britney Spears as a member in a club (well, back in her crazy days, anyway)? Britney may be in the spotlight, but there are people LIKE her who aren't. And yes, someone can write a bad ref letter for you.

Why put myself through the torture in thinking I am never going to be good enough to join a "country club" if that was my measurement of success?

As far as the pool in Philadelphia, the owners probably did not think that. However, they are being judged by the company they keep and "birds of a feather, flock together". That doesn't mean it is fair assessment, but nonetheless, it doesn't mean that the owners are saving face either.

I mean really, they didn't scrub the pool after these kids left, which would have added insult to injury, which often happened after someone Black who plopped a pinky-toe into the pool water...

Ironically, the only sign they needed is this one:

"NOTICE OUR 'OOL'--NOTICE THERE'S NO 'P' IN IT! LET'S KEEP IT THAT WAY!!!"

Apples meet Oranges...

I am sorry, I am unable to connect those dots. What does this have to do joining a country/yacht club?

I've already said I am not a member of one. So what can I add to their membership process?

So you're saying that clubs should take anyone, as long as they can pay?

Of course this is ALWAYS the excuse.

I wonder why this excuse is never used when people are accusing blacks of getting into a school based on AA instead of their credentials? How do they KNOW it is AA?

This type of excuse is absurd because you can simply look at the history of the club. If they have NO black members or only one or two, then that's clue right there. Not to mention the fact that you can look at the credentials of the blacks who apply and make a comparison to the credentials of those who are already members. Earl Graves was turned down for membership by an all-white club. Based on my understanding, Earl Graves had credentials that actually surpassed those of some people who were already members. Whether membership is subjective or not, if you have someone who se excellent credentials and who can clearly more than afford to pay any dues, if that person is black and the club doesn't have any other black members, you can pretty much bet the rejection was because they were black.

I would never try to join that type of organization. And sometimes I know they will allow one or two blacks that are considered to be the "good negroes" for purposes of trying to say they aren't racist. Then in many cases they will put severe limits on the membership benefits that can be enjoyed by these members.

You should read "Member of the Club" by Lawrence Otis Graham.

And it just so happens that NO black people "fit?" LMAO right.

LOL! Seriously, you'd think I wrote Holy Biblical scripture with all that inference added!

You don't know that...and what if no black people seek membership?

these are private clubs, correct?

http://thisrecording.com/books/2009/...st-be-new.html

Read the preview. Seems like an intriguing book. Based on what I heard there, assuming I had the social standing to qualify to join that place, I wouldn't choose to cast my lot with them. The behavior of those members and the management of the club was, IMHO, disgraceful.

As to the Earl Graves, Sr. issue, again, even there, we don't know what happened behind closed doors. For all any of us knows, he wasn't selected because he's a Democrat or because his magazine published something someone didn't like. I, like you, don't have a hard time guessing that race was a major factor, but I don't know that for sure.

All I can say is that not all private clubs are the same. If you feel your a token admission, you may be. On the other hand, you could simply be the first well qualified AA person to apply.

The same advice we give to aspirants of our various organizations applies in this scenario as well: Do your research.

Net work ing

Why else would anyone give back nearly $2000 AFTER seeing new faces??? This case is certifiable.

You also have to consider the racial climate of the community in which the club is located. Given the racial climate in SOME parts of PA. (where I currently reside and have most of my life...and in different parts of PA.), assuming that racism played a part is not a stretch of the imagination at all and anyone who's lived for a long time in the burbs of PA. or better yet, in upstate/rural PA. (where racism can be really bad) knows exactly what I mean.

DS, I respectfully disagree in this day and age. Back in the day that was true.

Networking is critical today, but how these days? In the Twitterverse? LOL! ;)

I have read remarks here about private clubs being able to do what they want and that's true but they shouldn't then open their doors to the public. Club management was money hungry obviously and opened its doors to public day camps. You can't expect to keep things exclusive and with a specific atmosphere when you do that and I'm sure management knew where this day camp was located and it was not located in their suburban town. They probably changed their minds only after they received complaints from members (and I'm sure there were complaints); who probably threatened to cancel their memberships if the children stayed. You do not just up and decide to return nearly $2000.

If they wish to keep a certain "atmosphere," they should only take day camps in certain areas (and even then there might be a few black kids since some blacks do live in these communities...although the "tokens" are probably okay) or only allow the children/relatives of club members to swim.

@bolded. Technically, I wonder how much of imminent domain plays a role in this? The club still uses municipalities to serve its needs, as I understand it, the privacy is contingent on the ability of the club to charge fees for grounds maintenance or moorings. And if they have a restaurant, they still have to follow the public health code. They still pay property taxes and if they are non-profit they cannot be classified as fully rejection exclusive, especially to children.

It brings to meaning: "This ain't your granddaddy's country club anymore... Grow up and be in the 21st century!"

What we are witnessing is severe growing pains to human evolution, IMHO...

LOL...and I really don't use twitter...

When I mean networking...it's not always in the conventional sense...some 'clubs' and groups still like to be able to 'self segregate' so they can let their hair down...why not?

I think you're combining different concepts here. As far as emminent domain, I highly doubt that a local government would take over a piece of property because of a private group's allegedly discriminatory practices.

As to the rest, those are tenuous ties to government services; too tenuous, in my opinion, to allow the government to come in and enforce certain regulations.