Good Article On Issues With Title IX

[VolnJC]

Originally passed as part of the Education Amendments of 1972, Title IX was mostly used to increase opportunities for women to participate in sports. It quickly became used as a tool not for gender equity but for gender parity. This has been done through bureaucratic "clarifications" issued by the Department of Education — which are not subject to congressional approval, even though they impose new requirements for federally funded higher learning institutions.

In the early 1990s, Brown University was sued under Title IX because it downgraded two of its women's sports teams. Activists sued, even though Brown actually provided more opportunities for female athletes at the time than for male athletes. Jessica Gavora recently wrote about the case in the Wall Street Journal. The courts were unmoved by Brown's defense that it was providing more opportunities than female interest in sports could sustain.

"The responsibility of the school wasn't to provide equal opportunity to participate in sports — it was to educate women to be interested in sports," Gavora wrote. "In effect the ruling said that Brown women didn't know what they wanted. They only thought they were dancers or actors or musicians. They had to be taught that they were really athletes. They didn't know what was good for them but the government did."

Following that ruling, the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights released a "clarification" that sent the message to colleges that men and women's involvement in sports had to be equal, not just their opportunities to participate. This led to many male athletes being cut from teams in order to pare down men's involvement to match women's.

That clarification paled in comparison to OCR's 2011 "Dear Colleague Letter," which again reinterpreted Title IX to force schools to adjudicate campus sexual assaults. This letter, again, was not approved by Congress, even though it vastly expands the role colleges and universities must play in this area, under threat of losing precious funding.
Title IX needs reform | WashingtonExaminer.com

 

[volroadwarrior]

Originally passed as part of the Education Amendments of 1972, Title IX was mostly used to increase opportunities for women to participate in sports. It quickly became used as a tool not for gender equity but for gender parity. This has been done through bureaucratic "clarifications" issued by the Department of Education — which are not subject to congressional approval, even though they impose new requirements for federally funded higher learning institutions.

In the early 1990s, Brown University was sued under Title IX because it downgraded two of its women's sports teams. Activists sued, even though Brown actually provided more opportunities for female athletes at the time than for male athletes. Jessica Gavora recently wrote about the case in the Wall Street Journal. The courts were unmoved by Brown's defense that it was providing more opportunities than female interest in sports could sustain.

"The responsibility of the school wasn't to provide equal opportunity to participate in sports — it was to educate women to be interested in sports," Gavora wrote. "In effect the ruling said that Brown women didn't know what they wanted. They only thought they were dancers or actors or musicians. They had to be taught that they were really athletes. They didn't know what was good for them but the government did."

Following that ruling, the Education Department's Office for Civil Rights released a "clarification" that sent the message to colleges that men and women's involvement in sports had to be equal, not just their opportunities to participate. This led to many male athletes being cut from teams in order to pare down men's involvement to match women's.

That clarification paled in comparison to OCR's 2011 "Dear Colleague Letter," which again reinterpreted Title IX to force schools to adjudicate campus sexual assaults. This letter, again, was not approved by Congress, even though it vastly expands the role colleges and universities must play in this area, under threat of losing precious funding.
Title IX needs reform | WashingtonExaminer.com

Unintended consequences from politicians pandering to get elected and increasing their power. You can't legislate equality. If you could you would have 5 ft 2 in white guys in the NBA. Big rich universities who bring in enough revenue to subsidize women's sports thrive. Smaller ones penalize the sports people are willing to pay for to support the others.

We are fortunate at UT where the football and BB revenues are such that the "minor" and women's sports can compete. I will pay to see women's basketball and softball because they are competitive and entertaining. If baseball and track were competitive I would pay to see them also. If the university chooses to allocate its resources to support unprofitable programs, then so be it. But government fiat always results in things the do gooders don't intend. (Although sometimes I believe some actually enjoy seeing young men taken down a notch as the ones at Amherst and UVA were even though they were wrongly accused). JMO

 

[allvol123]

Title IX, more government garbage.

 

[armchair]

Title IX, more government garbage.

It has created a lot of opportunities for young women to get into athletics, which is great for mind and body. I realize you'd prefer they sit around getting fat on Big Gulps and cooking apple pies because that's "liberty" but thankfully rubes don't completely run America--just the deep south.

 

[NashVOL93]

It has created a lot of opportunities for young women to get into athletics, which is great for mind and body. I realize you'd prefer they sit around getting fat on Big Gulps and cooking apple pies because that's "liberty" but thankfully rubes don't completely run America--just the deep south.

Get a clue, pal. It may have created those athletic opportunities, but it's also created a space for the federal government to stick its nose where it has absolutely no business doing so. Maybe do some reading sometime and educate yourself.

PS - the "liberty" you don't seem to respect gives you the freedom to freely express your opinion on the Internet. It also gives me the freedom to let you know that your opinion is ignorant garbage.

 

[VolnJC]

It has created a lot of opportunities for young women to get into athletics, which is great for mind and body. I realize you'd prefer they sit around getting fat on Big Gulps and cooking apple pies because that's "liberty" but thankfully rubes don't completely run America--just the deep south.

The original intent may have been well meaning..but after the Brown decision it spiraled out of control to where even if schools offered more opportunities to women than men, they were allowed to shut down a program for any reason.

 

[Slydell]

Get a clue, pal. It may have created those athletic opportunities, but it's also created a space for the federal government to stick its nose where it has absolutely no business doing so. Maybe do some reading sometime and educate yourself.

PS - the "liberty" you don't seem to respect gives you the freedom to freely express your opinion on the Internet. It also gives me the freedom to let you know that your opinion is ignorant garbage.

The original intent may have been well meaning..but after the Brown decision it spiraled out of control to where even if schools offered more opportunities to women than men, they were allowed to shut down a program for any reason.

So, you're OK with sex discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual violence? That is pretty much why Title IX was passed.

 

[allvol123]

It has created a lot of opportunities for young women to get into athletics, which is great for mind and body. I realize you'd prefer they sit around getting fat on Big Gulps and cooking apple pies because that's "liberty" but thankfully rubes don't completely run America--just the deep south.

You speak of ignorance, I'm sure it is a life long habit.

It does nothing but further this culture of unicorns and rainbows that you live in.

This "rube" you speak of has multiple degrees from UT as does my wife. We also have 2 daughters that we are responsible for and we give them opportunities and the ones we dont give, they need to earn.

You keep playing in fairyland.

 

[VolnJC]

So, you're OK with sex discrimination, sexual harassment and sexual violence? That is pretty much why Title IX was passed.

I said the original intent was fine

 

[Daloth]

You speak of ignorance, I'm sure it is a life long habit.

It does nothing but further this culture of unicorns and rainbows that you live in.

This "rube" you speak of has multiple degrees from UT as does my wife. We also have 2 daughters that we are responsible for and we give them opportunities and the ones we dont give, they need to earn

You keep playing in fairyland.

What exactly does any of this have to do with sexual discrimination or equal rights? I personally don't think one sport or division of a business should pay for another (though Microsoft, Sony, etc. do it constantly), but to act as if Title IX isn't one of the reasons your wife has a degree, and your daughters can do so much more in life, is lunacy. Have some facts and figures:

In 1973, 43% of female high school graduates were enrolled in college. This grew to 63% in 1994.
In 1971, 18% of young women and 26% of young men had completed four years or more of college; in 1994, 27% of both men and women had earned bachelor's degrees.
In 1972, women received 9% of medical degrees but by 1994 that number had moved up to 38%; 1% of dental degrees grew to 38% in 1994; and the percentage of law degrees earned by women had moved from 7% in 1971 to 43% in 1994

Certainly not all of this is 100% tied to title IX. Causation =/= correlation after all. But to say it didn't have an enormous effect on it? Well that's no different than living in your own fantasy land (Which I am hoping you meant instead of "fairyland," as that would make no sense because a degree holder certainly wouldn't make such a careless mistake on a cliche' to try and invent their own.)

 

[ReadR00ster]

Unintended consequences from politicians pandering to get elected and increasing their power. You can't legislate equality. If you could you would have 5 ft 2 in white guys in the NBA. Big rich universities who bring in enough revenue to subsidize women's sports thrive. Smaller ones penalize the sports people are willing to pay for to support the others.

We are fortunate at UT where the football and BB revenues are such that the "minor" and women's sports can compete. I will pay to see women's basketball and softball because they are competitive and entertaining. If baseball and track were competitive I would pay to see them also. If the university chooses to allocate its resources to support unprofitable programs, then so be it. But government fiat always results in things the do gooders don't intend. (Although sometimes I believe some actually enjoy seeing young men taken down a notch as the ones at Amherst and UVA were even though they were wrongly accused). JMO

One day a 5'2 white guy will be good enough to play in the NBA. So you can't say that.

 

[ReadR00ster]

Unintended consequences from politicians pandering to get elected and increasing their power. You can't legislate equality. If you could you would have 5 ft 2 in white guys in the NBA. Big rich universities who bring in enough revenue to subsidize women's sports thrive. Smaller ones penalize the sports people are willing to pay for to support the others.

We are fortunate at UT where the football and BB revenues are such that the "minor" and women's sports can compete. I will pay to see women's basketball and softball because they are competitive and entertaining. If baseball and track were competitive I would pay to see them also. If the university chooses to allocate its resources to support unprofitable programs, then so be it. But government fiat always results in things the do gooders don't intend. (Although sometimes I believe some actually enjoy seeing young men taken down a notch as the ones at Amherst and UVA were even though they were wrongly accused). JMO

One day a 5'2 white guy will be good enough to play in the NBA. So you can't say that. Don't discourage 5'2 white guys okay.

 

[UCMiami]

Just to be clear - the federal government is 'sticking its nose in' where it has a lot of business being - this all ties into federal monies going to these schools, and if they are paying in money they very much have a say in how that school is allocating money and a responsibility to make sure it is not being disproportionally spent to support white males.

Are there instances of abuse - I am sure there are, as there are with just about every rule in our society, but is the end result a fairer situation for the population as a whole? I would say title IX and its clarifications have been an overwhelming success.

 

[Slydell]

I don't see any big issue with Title IX other than it being another law that had to be enacted in order to officially give rights that others enjoy to a group of people who had been denied those rights. The issue that I see is that legislation has to be passed to give equal rights to those that should have had them already.