"Thirty years ago, being pretty or sexy was resented, as though it made you something less as an athlete. The attitudes are even more Victorian today. My scorecard was and is blind to the fact I was blonde and wore lipstick. Various parties on the LPGA Tour knew it, however, and didn't like it. It's everyone's loss"..."I found that I played just as well wearing lipstick as I did without it. There's no downside to trying to look as attractive as you can.."
http://www.golfdigest.com/magazine/myshot_gd0401?currentPage=1
The LPGA has/had sizzlers with sex appeal, at least going back to Laura Baugh's days. Before Laura, I dunno who handled that. Don't agree with Laura's assessment of today's Victoian standards. IMO, LPGA knows the importance of having women looking like women.
Today, Natalie carries the torch although there are some other pretty nice looking women on tour. Natalie may or may not be hot, but the proof is in the pudding. I don't think there's anyone who comes romotely close to her sexual appeal as evidenced by her endorsements, television show, calendars, and camera time she receives even when she's not in the hunt.
The argument of distance is no doubt a huge advantage to men. Add in pin placement, putting surface with its undulations and speed, the rough a little rougher,,,basically, course conditions are tougher as mentioned by others. Instead of dropping the women back to the men's tees, bring the men into women's elements. We may see a more competitive situation.
On the men's tour, the hottie is not Adam Scott nor the Camillo. It is judged quite differently. Honors go to...