It may not be sexism or misogyny at all -- Van de Velde may just want an extra shot at winning an event with the words "British Open" in the title. As many will recall, Van de Velde needed only a double bogey 6 on the 72nd and final hole of the 1999 British Open at Carnoustie to win. In a "Tin Cup" moment, he decided to try for the green on his second shot instead of laying up. His second shot hit the bleachers and landed in tall grass. His third shot went into a creek, and he took a drop. Lying four, his fifth shot went into a bunker, from whence he chipped and one-putted for a 7. He lost the resulting four-hole playoff by three shots.

Maybe he's just thinking he doubles his chances at redemption if he plays two "British Opens" per year. . .

I agree that taking physical characteristics into account would be an improvement over the current male/female division. But I think that ignores a recurring theme throughout competitive sporting events, even where physical differences don't account at all for performance. In an example I know Vic will like, why in the world do we have women-only tournaments in poker?

Better yet, since chess demands no physical abilities of any sort, let’s combine male and female chess leagues. I haven’t heard feminist outcry against the appalling sex segregation of the current system. If women can do science just like men, why not chess?

Are there really male and female chess leagues? That seems bizarre.

Christine: yeah, there are two leagues. And no woman has ever been able to seriously compete with men at a top level. The Polgar sisters are as good as it gets, and they aren't even close to challenging a sitting champion.

Ms. Hurt--have you ever competed in a sporting event or played golf? Your post is laughable. Why is it a moral imperative that gender must be irrelevant as an explanatory factor for everything. Size and weight are not closely correlated to golfing skill, including at the highest professional levels, while gender plainly is. Gary Player was 5'7", 150 pounds. Sergio Garcia weighs 160 pounds. The few woman who have tried to play a mens event have carefully chosen the venues, choosing weak events with short courses. And they have set their sights low, aiming only to make the cut. And even then, they faied. The best woman's golfer in the world almost certainly could not qualify for the PGA tour, which, crudely defined, includes the top 125 mens players. If men weren't better, there would be no reason for a women's tour.

Gee, sklein11, I sure hope you're just trolling and aren't actually serious.

"The distinction is hard to support without infantilizing women golfers and arguing for their inadequacies."

I don't mean to be cruel, but... Well, DUH!
I'm wondering what kind of mental gymnastics it takes to convince oneself that, when measuring the best women golfers in the world against the best men golfers in the world, the women aren't "inadequate" by comparison.

The best men golfers are nearly universally better than the best women golfers. However, I welcome any and all women who think they've got the skill to take a crack at competing on the PGA Tour. Unsurprisingly, with the money to be made in the LPGA, the best women have chosen to make a decent living competing in their sex-segregated league, rather than plugging away on the PGA Tour chasing the quixotic political goals of the gender-studies crowd.

I fail to see what was offensive in sklein11's post.