I know I don’t get involved some political debates because I am one really liberal guy and well…it’s just not my way. I’ve learned that there are three things you generally do not talk about with friends if you still want to have them as friends – sex, religion, and politics. Well, today I’m talking about sexual politics. Yes, I’m hitting two of the three biggies in one big fell swoop.
I recently saw a story on 60 Minutes about Title IX, the federal provision that requires gender equity in high school and college athletics. The story was not about the women complaining about a college’s failure to comply under the statue but the men claiming that it was not adequately protecting men. Personally, I have been waiting for this argument to come for years and now that it’s here…well, it’s odd where my loyalties lie this time. You would think that I would be with the women because I’m such a liberal that I would want the gender equality, etc, etc. You would think that I would be with the men because I’m a man and I play a sport as well. Well you’re right and you’re wrong. I am with the men because I want the fairness of the statute to be upheld.
Recently collegiate wrestling programs and organizations filed a Title IX discrimination suit claiming that their programs were being unfairly targeted for elimination as schools had to meet Title IX rules that required a proportion of the female student body be involved in athletics. In order to meet the ratio, sports such as gymnastics, wrestling, golf, and lacrosse have either been eliminated or had their team rosters capped. Additionally, sports such as women’s crew (aka rowing) have been added to the roster with scholarships attached to a female student’s participation in the sport regardless of any previous experience or ability.
The current proposal that has come out of the Education Department’s commission on Title IX allows for a certain flexibility in the ratio of genders participating in team sports at the high school and collegiate level with a plus/minus ratio that gravitates anywhere from five to nine percent based upon a gender equitable split (i.e., 50/50) of participation in school athletics.
Proponents of this change (and I am, as of right now, a moderate supporter of it) thinks that this will allow some of the smaller, less glamorous sports to maintain some of their membership while others, including Julie Foudy, captain of the U.S. Women’s Soccer Team, state that Title IX is about equality and that sports programs will look towards the lowest threshold for maintaining their Title IX accreditation. But equality for whom, Julie? If there becomes a program with 55% female participation, will the men have the right to plead Title IX discrimination and the women will be forced to cut back on their programs? If you answer no to that, then under the current laws you are wrong.
In my high school district, we had equity for sports. During the football season, there was volleyball for the women. In fact, we had girl football players on some teams and guys who went out for volleyball. Of course a few people blinked an eye at the women playing football and the men on the women’s teams but it was allowed. Men’s and women’s basketball teams. Men’s baseball and women’s softball. Men and women’s soccer. Men and women’s tennis and golf. Men and women’s track and cross country teams. I think the only sport that didn’t have an equal women’s team was the wrestling team and even then, there were women who tried out for the wrestling team in the lower weight brackets (and some of them won). No one ever cried Title IX foul because we were all given the chance to participate.
Now, were there more men playing sports than women? Most likely. Football teams alone account for 70-90 players each year. The women’s volleyball team did not have 70 members on its squad but the point was that no one complained about opportunity because it was there. Maybe I’m bitching about nothing but what I think my real point is as follows: If there is opportunity and no one takes you up on it, then how can you complain?
No comments:
Post a Comment