>>However- and this is my point to Tamar - it was his overwhelming victory that allowed us to enjoy all the other goodies.
>>
>>A lousy golfer who is black, female or whatever, is still just- a lousy golfer.
>
>You seem to be using Tiger Woods as an analogy quite often.

Yes. Golf is an important part of the upper and upper-middle class social fabric around the world.

There are still golf clubs in the US and Europe where- not only can Tiger not tee it up- he can't get a job as a caddy.
There are still clubs where only WASP's can play.
I might be able to work there as a programmer- I doubt that I'd interested- but I'd never be able to tee it up.

Before Tiger came along, those places weren't the exception. They were the rule.
In the post-Tiger golf world, we look at those places and shake our heads in disbelief.
So, yes, I mention Tiger often because I think that he has had an impact on the basic social fabric around the world that exceeds his profound impact on the game of golf.

Sometimes, though, we stretch too far, I think.
Periodically The Gay Men's Chorus gives concerts in Princeton.
How did you think it would go over with the diversity police in Princeton if the The Straight Men's Chorus showed up?
I love the Harlem Globetrotters, but how do you think the diversity police would look at a team of blonde guys called the Texas WASP'S?