Philadelphia private swim club forces out black children
(Image from wikimedia.org)
NBC reports that more than 60 African-American campers from Northeast Philadelphia were turned away from a private swim club because – according to John Duesler, President of The Valley Swim Club — “there was concern that a lot of kids would change the complexion … and the atmosphere of the club.”
It may surprise some Americans to learn that not only do certain private clubs still refuse to admit African-Americans, women, and gay people, but that this kind of enrollment discrimination is considered perfectly legal.
While the total number of private clubs is unknown, there are around at least 4,000 private golf clubs, according to Golf Digest. Of course, since these clubs are private, their exact enrollment standards aren’t part of the public record, so there is no way to know for sure if they discriminate against ethnic minorities, women, or homosexuals. Furthermore, even if they do adopt official “white males only” policies, these practices are considered “legal” in some jurisdictions, though many clubs have been sued for discrimination.
Because of the shroud of secrecy surrounding enrollment at private clubs, these discriminatory practices usually only come to light when the media catches a prominent politician on the fairway. Katon Dawson, South Carolina GOP chairman and former candidate for the RNC chair, was forced to resign from the Forest Lake Club after members made public the fact that the club has a whites-only restriction and no black members. Then there was Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), who hosted a golf fundraiser at a whites-only club back in 2000 along with then-lawmakers Bob Ney and Tom DeLay.
Back in 1992, Bill Clinton was accused of attending an all-white private golf club, though Mark Grobmeyer, the Little Rock lawyer who played at the club with Clinton, denied there was a “no blacks” policy. Why were there no black players then? Mr. Grobmeyer replied, “None have applied.”
President Kennedy was once challenged by future Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg, over his membership at the Links Country Club because the club excluded Jews from membership. President Kennedy reportedly chuckled and replied, “Hell, Arthur, they don’t even allow Catholics.”
This recent case of discrimination at the Philadelphia club is merely a continuation of discriminatory admission standards. Such official bans on non-Anglo Saxon men may seem superfluous considering outrageous membership fees are usually enough deterrence to keep non-white people off the golf courses and out of the pools, but when The Creative Steps Day Camp managed to pay the $1900 for their young campers to enter The Valley Swim Club, the staff resorted to drastic measures.
“When the minority children got in the pool all of the Caucasian children immediately exited the pool,” Horace Gibson, parent of a day camp child, wrote in an email. “The pool attendants came and told the black children that they did not allow minorities in the club and needed the children to leave immediately.”
Remarks like that make it difficult to remember that it’s 2009. According to attorney Benjamin Leedy, another shameful episode occured a little over a decade ago when Hall Thompson, founder of the all-white Shoal Creek club in Birmingham, AL (site of the 1990 PGA Championship,) declared that his club would not be pressured into accepting African-American members. “This is our home, and we pick and choose who we want,” he said.
Leedy cites another recent example in 2003 at the Augusta National Golf Club, home of the Masters, where Martha Burke, head of the National Council of Women’s Organizations, demanded that the club allow women to become members. Hootie Johnson chairman of Augusta National, responded “There may well come a day when women will be invited to join our membership, but that timetable will be ours and not at the point of a bayonet.”
In 2001, Birgit Koebke and Kendall French, a lesbian couple registered as domestic partners under the California Domestic Partner Rights and Responsibilities Act of 2003, sued Bernardo Heights Country Club alleging that the club discriminated against them on the basis of sexual orientation. The club’s membership privileges were only available to members’ spouses and children, but not to members’ domestic partners. In 2005, the California Supreme Court concluded “that since, under California law, registered domestic partners have rights equivalent to legal spouses, the question of whether the club’s practice of granting playing privileges to members’ spouses but not to members’ registered domestic partners constituted unlawful discrimination under California’s anti-discrimination law must be left to a jury decide.”
This most recent case of discrimination in Philadelphia is particularly sinister because it involves banishing children. “I heard this lady, she was like, ‘Uh, what are all these black kids doing here?’ She’s like, ‘I’m scared they might do something to my child,’” said camper Dymire Baylor.
What a terrible lesson to teach two children — one white and one black. The white child learns to fear those who are different from them. The black child learns there is something “wrong” and “dirty” about their very existence. Hopefully, another more enlightened swim club will welcome the campers from The Creative Steps Day Camp, who are now looking for a place to keep cool during the summer.
Update: The public email and phone number for The Valley Swim Club is 215-947-0700 and info@thevalleyclub.com. The President of the club is John Duesler.
Updated at 9PM: The staff at Girard College, a private Philadelphia boarding school for children who live in low-income and single parent homes, have stepped in and offered their pool to the campers.
Updated on July 9: The Michael Smerconish Program interviewed an eyewitness named “Jan,” who is a member of The Valley Swim Club. Jan says the children from The Creative Steps Day Camp were very well-behaved, and the camp supervisors were highly attentive. This puts a dent in the argument that, perhaps, the children were behaving in an overly rowdy fashion, which is why they were ejected.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
[...] from Allison Kilkenny’s blog. Also available on Facebook and [...]
There must be something wrong here.
Obama is President and there is no racism in America. It’s true, reported by Fox News, we no longer need affirmative action (quotas) the voting rights act (bring your birth certificate and three picture IDs and speak english please)nor that pesky civil rights act (it had nuthing to do with queers and wet backs) and finally equal employment (don’t mean we haveta pay shit).
See there is no race problem anymore. Them people can grow watermelons anywhere and can afford their own pool now like the jews at Goldman so lets leave my private club out of it…heil.
In a situation like this, I always wonder if the white parents know what they are doing to their own children. I mean, do they really want their kids, in 20 or 30 years to be really uncomfortable when “swimming” around blacks and Jews, but not know why?
I really hope one of these white kids has real swimming talent, and the best Olympic-level swimming coach in all of Philadelphia is an Ethiopian Jew. Maybe that would break mommy and daddy out of their antebellum cocoon.
A good point. I feel terribly for the black children, but I also feel sorry for the white kids whose parents are teaching them such terrible lessons in intolerance.
In response to another comment. See in context »Of course if one is going to write a piece about White clubs and Men’s clubs they should also take the time to mention the myriad Women’s clubs (Belizean Grove anyone?) and Women’s gyms, and Women’s colleges, etc…
Similarly they should probably mention Black clubs, and historically Black colleges and universities, etc…
Discrimination is a two way street. But this is a free country, and private discrimination, while we may personally find it distasteful, is permissible.
Sincerely,
Sammich
President of the No Girls with Cooties Named Allison Because this is a Free Country Club.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Women%27s_organizations_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Jewish_clubs_and_societies
and so on…
Oh, please. The famous “white male repression” argument. Show me the proof of institutional racism toward white men and I’ll start playing the world’s tiniest violin.
Private clubs have the right to ban whomever they want, and I have the right to publish their public phone numbers so the citizens of their communities can tell them what they think of their club’s policies.
In response to another comment. See in context »“there was concern that a lot of kids would change the complexion … and the atmosphere of the club.”
You seriously gotta wonder just how stupid someone has to be to have said something like that. Regardless of his own feelings, the fact that he said it is just staggering to me.
Seriously. It’s so mind-bogglingly stupid that it’s difficult to believe it was just a foot-in-mouth moment.
In response to another comment. See in context »It is hard to believe that this still happens. So ridiculous. Situations like these always pull me in different directions. I absolutely agree that those kinds of policies set a terrible example for our youth. They also reek of racism and ethnocentrism which is bad for society. However, there is something to be said for private ownership and being able to choose who can and who cannot join a club.
I like how you have left it at “Private clubs have the right to ban whomever they want, and I have the right to publish their public phone numbers so the citizens of their communities can tell them what they think of their club’s policies.”
Very well said and I commend you for your criticism of those policies.
One thing to note about private swim clubs in Philadelphia is that the city has frequently closed the public pools, the ones run by the city, due to budget cuts. Private pools stay open due to membership fees. The Valley swim club has open admission and anyone can join if they pay the fees, which the kids from this day camp did. So it’s not exactly like they were told they couldn’t come because they’re black. They were told they COULD come, then when they showed up and they were told to leave because whites complained.
It’s fucked up.
True, even the other pool that eventually took the kids in is another private pool.
However, when the president of the pool club says the kids were removed so they wouldn’t change the “complexion” of the place, it starts to sounds less like the staff was just accommodating the other guests and more like there’s a formal “no black people” policy.
In response to another comment. See in context »Personally, I’m inclined to support a law that bans this kind of discrimination, even if it is a private club. This isn’t the kind of society I want to live in and I think Mr. Duesler and co. should be held responsible for the damage they’ve caused. Thank you for posting the contact information.
The Valley Swim Club is in a part of the city (the burbs really) full of white, mostly Irish families who feel aggrieved inside their circled wagons and can’t hear anything over the din of Rush and O’Reilly and remember the good ol’ days when they didn’t have to put up with this kind of bullshit. They moved there to get away from blacks, and here they are following them to their pool. It’s actually not that surprising this happened.
Also, the pool that has agreed to take the kids, the one at Girard College, is indeed a private pool, but the school is now all black (despite Stephen Girard’s last wishes) and one of the best high schools in the region. And again, I want to point out that Philadelphia does not have very many public pools, so there just aren’t other options.
[...] from Allison Kilkenny’s blog. Also available on Facebook and [...]
[...] Kilkenny blogged about it here, and Afi Scruggs [...]
[...] to Allison Kilkenny for letting us know about [...]
Learning to live together is vital for a healthy society. However, people in a our country have a right to privacy, a right to free association and therefore a right to have private social clubs. It is the city or the county’s responsibility to provide public swimming for everyone. For those in private clubs, well they will be paying for those public swimming pools with their tax dollars.
Certainly, and I have the right to publish a publicly-listed phone number so residents of Philadelphia can let the president of the pool club know how they feel about the policies of a club which resides in their community.
In response to another comment. See in context »Hey Work.life, how would you like it if they made a law telling you that you MUST let inside anyone who comes to your house? Would you stand for that? We must protect private ownership. Government cannot tell us who we may and who we may not associate with. That is our choice. We may not like it, but Democracy is not a utopia.
Nobody is telling you that you can’t post that number. Simply saying that it is extremely important to protect private ownership. I commend you for posting that number, but I also think that they have the right to maintain those policies. It is their club, so they can do whatever they want regardless of whether or not we like it.
MSNBC is running this story today.
“Certainly, and I have the right to publish a publicly-listed phone number”
Yes you certainly have the right to do so Allison, but I’m not sure it’s the wisest thing for anyone to do. After all we on the left don’t like it when the personal contact info of judges and doctors who perform abortions is published.
Anti-choice activists publish the private info of judges and doctors with the explicit intent of threatening them.
Publishing a public phone number that was listed on the pool club’s public website is not the same thing. Those that contacted me to say they have written the president wrote courteous objections to the president’s bigoted statement.
In response to another comment. See in context »That is an interesting point in regards to the possible dangers of posting such information.
Allison as you well know I’m definitely in agreement with you regarding this issue. But you have no way of know what anyone does with the info once you put it out there. I just don’t think it’s very prudent to be publishing people’s personal info, even if they’ve already done so. I happen to believe regardless of our feeling on any given issue we are entitled to be free of harassment in our own homes. The fact that this guy is a scum bag doesn’t alter my feelings on that score.
Brian – Once again, this isn’t personal info. It’s found on a public website. You might as well say, “I don’t think you should give out the President’s name because that too could be used by some diabolical, anonymous person.” Citizens have the right to know certain information, and that includes the email and phone # of a club that was already published on a public website for anyone to find.
In response to another comment. See in context »True, it is already out there for people to access, you are just encouraging people to express their points of view on this issue. I have no problem with that.
On the other hand, it just seems like there is no point in harassing the proprietors of clubs such as these. They are not going to change their stance because of public pressure and ridicule. Come to think of it, who would want to be a member at a club that does not want them?? There are plenty of other clubs that do not discriminate and there are public facilities that grant everyone access.
Ok, I’m an idiot, I misread and thought you were publishing the man’s home number not the club number. Fully agree you should publish the club’s number, sorry for the misunderstanding.
Ah-ha! Understood, Brian.
And no worries.
In response to another comment. See in context »We should send Malia and Sasha Obama into the swim club as “testers,” then when they get thrown out, sic Daddy on them…
haha. Not a bad idea.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] would “change the complexion” of their club. Quite the appropriate pun, I think. Allison Kilkenny @ trueslant.com, along with NBC, covers well the most apparent angle on this story: It may be 2009, but racism [...]
There is no racism, just people who hold onto the past. When things don’t go there way they scream racist. Lets not forget that there are over 60 black only colleges in America. Is this considered racism?? Do your homework. Why is one thing okay and not the other?
What was the pool capacity? Like with anything Paying customers first, first come first served.
Because one group of people was institutionally discriminated against by the US government for around 200 years. I’ll let you work out which group of people I’m talking about.
PS: Interesting spelling of “freedom.”
In response to another comment. See in context »Improve Everywhere needs to get down there and fill that pool wall-to-wall with ‘colored’-folk.
Surely, we are better than this. I hope Sen. Arlen gets his investigation going.
http://improveverywhere.com
Some points to consider here….
1) It is a PRIVATE swim club. That means that in order for the club to stay in business…members who PAY for the privelage to use the club have a rightful SAY as to whether or not they want to share it with anyone who is NOT a paying member.
2) Perception is reality. Right or wrong, any large group of inner-city youths, regardless of race, are going to destabilize a recreational environment and perceptibly displease the PAYING members. (People PAY to swim at a PRIVATE club along with their families in order to avoid mixing with people whom they perceive as not being like them)Right or wrong… it is their privilage to do so if they can afford it.
3) Have you ever seen what a bunch of riled-up, loud, hyperactive, inner-city black folks do to ruin the relaxing atmosphere at an apartment swimming pool? How about on a Carnival cruise?? Or a restaurant?? or a movie theatre?? SOme people, even well-off African Americans, will PAY good money to seperate themselves from that stuff where they eat, play, live and shop.
4) If one of these little kids gets hurt at the pool, even as a result of his or her own horseplay….do you not think that there will be a civil lawsuit involved? It is not a question of if but when. Trust me, I work in medicine in Houston and I see it every day.
The world is not necessarily a fair place…but a swim club with a dues-paying private membership that does not elect to be overrun by a bunch of inner-city kids (of any race)should not be held out as an example of overt racism.
I’d just like to note, since a commenter above mentioned the Belizean Grove as an example of a club which doesn’t allow men, that the Belizean Grove was formed as a response when women were denied membership to the Bohemian Grove meetings of the all male Bohemian Club.
It reminds me of how tough it was on Southern whites when they weren’t allowed to take literacy tests before voting and were forced to ride in the front of the bus.
Thanks for pointing this out, Matt.
In response to another comment. See in context »texasdave1: It is a private pool, but the kids from the camp paid to be there. That’s why in the news reports you’ll see that the club refunded their admission fees.
It’s not a case of members having a “rightful SAY as to whether or not they want to share it with anyone who is NOT a paying member.” Admission is open to anyone who pays. By virtue of the fact that they paid, they were members and allowed to use the pool.
[...] first heard about this on Thursday afternoon on Twitter. I retweeted the link to a news story by Allison Killkenny at True Slant, which gave out the swim club’s email and phone number. I sent an email to the president of [...]
Allison I think you’ll enjoy this:
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saTCMJVYljU&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fnl3atn8402ncgahndqn8rb6qi2ld2g5a-a-gm-opensocial.googleusercontent.com%2Fgadgets%2Fifr%3Fcontainer%3Dgm%26v%3Db160a58ab833756408d83f5&feature=player_embedded)
I’m sorry but nobody who isn’t wearing a white hood could possibly see this as anything other than racism.
And I don’t think the Valley Swim Club can get away with this legally in Pennsylvania since clubs are only considered private and therefore free to discriminate if they do not let non-members use facilities in any way, such as renting out space for weddings or meetings.
I hope the club is overwhelmed with calls, emails and lawsuits and that the ensuing publicity leads to its demise.
But that won’t be soon enough to stop yet another generation from learning to hate and fear each other.
Mrsmax, I think that we all recognize that this is clearly racism. I think that what is at stake here is the integrity of the private ownership principle. Those people with white hoods have as much of a right to march as anyone else. Just because we do not agree with them does not mean that we can silence them. That is anti-democratic.
[...] Not the kind of bouffed-up hair and checkered shirts: the kind where black people are not invited. Allison Kilkenny reports that a Philadelphia-based private swim club has taken upon itself to kick out over sixty children from its pools, the reason being that they [...]
I understand your point, Brian. But the private ownership principle doesn’t apply under Pennsylvania human rights case law since the club chose to allow access to its facilities to non-members.
If someone is that concerned about swimming with people of a different race, they should put pools in their backyards where they do have every right to say who can use them.
If Horace Gibson’s claim is true, then that’s quite damning, but that’s a parent, writing an email based on what his kid told him, presumably, and not a first-hand account.
As I’ve posted elsewhere, this story is just too easy for everyone to get self-righteous about, and ignores that the most racist clubs in the Philly area certainly never invited any city kids there in the first place!
So the scrum all over the Valley Club has all the hallmarks of “way too easy” and no, I don’t think it’s ethical to call for harassment of a private person, even at his workplace, when one side of the story is given credence and his is simply ignored.
Do I think the Valley Club behaved badly? Probably. But the mob mentality beating up these folks in the press is ugly, and doesn’t follow the standards any of us would want for own private controversies suddenly made public.
Instead of congratulating The Valley Club for their altruistic act of taking more than $1900 from a children’s camp to use their pool, how about we focus on the fact that they then inexplicably rescinded the offer, and the only public explanation for the ejection of 60 campers, who happen to all be of color, was from the pool’s President, who said allowing the children to stay would have changed the “complexion” of the pool.
Since when is reporting on a story, and giving the residents of Philadelphia the right to tell the owner of a pool (which resides in their community,) how they feel about their admission policies, “mob mentality”? Should no one cover any stories of racism, then, since it might result in your subjective labeling of a “mob” reaction? The pool’s president decided to make this a public issue when he spoke to the press and rescinded the invitation to the campers (after they had paid almost $2,000) for the right to use the pool.
In response to another comment. See in context »And, no, NBC News never reported that “60 African-American kids” were involved. There were 60 kids, the majority of whom were black or Hispanic.
Just an example of the “way too easy” sloppiness I see here!
The original story I linked to only made mention of 60 campers and the issue of race itself (http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Pool-Boots-Kids-Who-Might-Change-the-Complexion.html). The fact that some of the campers were Hispanic came out later, but the fact remains that most of the campers are black.
In response to another comment. See in context »“Mob mentality” can be a force for good, such as the people protesting in Iran against a stolen election, or bad, as in lynchings.
But I do not think the uproar over the Valley Swim Club can be described as “mob mentality” except on the part of the club members.
Neither can it be described as a private controversy nor was the club president acting as a private person. He didn’t invite them to his home to swim and then change his mind, he took nearly $2000 from the center to use a facility which the club site says has open membership.
I have absolutely no sympathy for the swim club officials who have taught these children that maybe you can grow up to be president but please don’t expect us to share a swimming pool with you.
I really don’t agree. Considering how awfully the club treated the kids, I’d say the public’s response has been very civil.
In response to another comment. See in context »[...] word yet from yesterday outraged leftists (see, pandagon.net, Jack & Jill Politics, Gawker, Unreported, and Alas, a blog). No doubt, the netroots racial investigators went mum once they found out [...]