Imagine a club that excludes people with a stammer as members. Or left-handers, or teachers. Or anyone born in Munster, or in a council house. Or anybody shorter and fatter than an agreed standard.

Imagine a club which excludes women as members. Actually, we don't have to imagine that -- we have two of them, both golf clubs in the Dublin area: Portmarnock and the Royal Dublin.

Portmarnock Golf Club has just won the final courtroom battle to keep its membership exclusively male, but it is paying a steep price for a victory which exposes members as out of step, out of touch and out of order. And yet not out of bounds, thanks to the Supreme Court's backing.

Those golfers must now consider their position. They can redeem themselves if they choose; they can vote for internal change -- a move that would signal their understanding of the difference between what is legal and what is right. And between what is accepted and what is acceptable.

There is honour in admitting a policy is mistaken, divisive and really rather uncivilised, and in choosing to overturn it. It demonstrates both flexibility and maturity.

The law says the club is entitled to remain a male-only enclave. As Mr Bumble pointed out in 'Oliver Twist': ". . .the law is a [sic] ass -- a idiot. If that's the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor."

Those 660 or so men with full membership of Portmarnock Golf Club are not all bachelors, even though some of them presumably might wish they were. Nor do they operate in a solely male universe, even though some of them presumably might wish they did.

It's a safe bet most have wives, daughters, sisters, nieces and girlfriends, as well as female work colleagues and neighbours. In clinging to a 19th Century custom associated with the club's origins, these members are treating disrespectfully all the women in their lives. And they are inviting others to do likewise, in situations where they can get away with it.

To persist with tradition for its own sake is blinkered behaviour -- wisdom lies in knowing when to discard practices that have nothing to recommend them.

Citing the weight of history and tradition is not an acceptable reason to maintain something which does not just jar or appear anachronistic, but is fundamentally wrong. We ought to be selective about our traditions.

How about the tradition that only landowners were entitled to vote? The tradition that the children of affluent parents went to school, while the children of the poor went to work? The tradition of corporal punishment in the classroom and capital punishment in the courts? Anyone miss those dodos?

If the status quo is never confronted, progress cannot be made. The gender rule in clubs was crying out to be challenged, and I believe the Equality Authority was right to pursue the case. It exposes inadequacies in our equality laws which will have to be addressed. Preferably by our own legislators, rather than our default mode of waiting for Europe to do the necessary.

Meanwhile, clubs have an opportunity to remedy the situation. I suspect the majority of golfers teeing off at Portmarnock and the Royal Dublin know in their hearts they are in the wrong; I doubt if they feel particularly consoled by three Supreme Court judges assuring them they are in the right.

Perhaps members felt obliged to sit tight during the seven years this case has inched through the legal swamp. But the men who play golf there have a chance now to stand up and show their true worth.

Portmarnock is often described as one of the best golf courses in the world, and has been the venue for major tournaments. Consequently, we can presume high standards have been set there -- standards which should be matched by its members.

They must put their house in order before they forfeit sponsors and future tournaments. Before they lose new members unwilling to be associated with intolerance. Before some of the women currently paying green fees have second thoughts.

Any form of discrimination is inherently objectionable, and exclusively female clubs are as offensive as exclusively male ones. Discrimination should be protested against in every form it takes -- including discrimination against men, which happens particularly in family law.

Portmarnock is an important case because it is not simply a men-only club but a privileged men-only club -- judges, politicians and senior business figures play there. Networking undeniably occurs in such circles.

But if clubs have the law on their side in keeping out women, they can block people on other grounds -- for not being past pupils of particular schools, or for not living in certain desirable catchment areas. They can add more bolts to their gates and perpetuate the advantages.

In Ireland this week we have witnessed law rather than justice in action, and the continued protection of privilege. There is nothing here for any of us to feel good about: neither men nor women.

mdevlin@independent.ie

- Martina Devlin

Irish Independent