I read with interest, and no small degree of consternation, a recent advertisement in the Sierra Sun for Schaffer’s Mill Golf and Lake Club, offering “attractive membership options” to “residents, non-residents, and young executives.”
I find the tripartite division of eligible applicants amusing, but also somewhat discomfiting.
First, I’m not sure how the category “young executives” is not already subsumed under “residents” or “non-residents.” Are there Young Executives out there who are somehow neither residents nor non-residents?
Next, I am mystified by the need to specify “young” executives. Are old executives not eligible for membership? Or are they just not eligible for “attractive” memberships? Is there a category of unattractive membership for which old executives would qualify? Or is the subtle juxtaposition of “attractive” and “young” a subliminal clue as to the type of members they are actually looking for?
Aside from the fundamental inability to grasp basic principles of set theory, this ad is disturbing in its not-so-thinly veiled goal of social engineering and the promotion of an exclusivity that is becoming all too common in the Truckee-Tahoe area.
Why don’t they just come out and say it: “If you are a young and beautiful member or aspiring member of the 1%, we’re the club for you!”
Note to Schaffer’s Mill A/P department: my invoice for this cutting-edge ad copy will be forthcoming.