PDA

View Full Version : Good Morning..Womens Organized School Sports Gets a Big Leg-up



Okla-homey
6/23/2009, 06:05 AM
June 23, 1972: Title IX enacted


http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/5179/titlepatsymink.jpg
Congresswoman Patsy T. Mink (1927-2002) wrote the law as an outgrowth of adversities she faced in obtaining her undergraduate degrees at the University of Hawaiʻi and University of Nebraska.

Thirty-six years ago on this day in 1972, Title IX of the education amendments of 1972 is enacted into law. Title IX prohibits federally funded educational institutions from discriminating against students or employees based on sex. It begins:
"No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

As a result of Title IX, any school that receives any federal money from the elementary to university level--in short, nearly all schools--must provide fair and equal treatment of the sexes in all areas, including athletics.

http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/4008/titvolleyballdigkb7.jpg

Before Title IX, few opportunities existed for female athletes. The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), which was created in 1906 to format and enforce rules in men’s football but had become the ruling body of college athletics, offered no athletic scholarships for women and held no championships for women’s teams.

Furthermore, facilities, supplies and funding were lacking. As a result, in 1972 there were just 30,000 women participating in NCAA sports, as opposed to 170,000 men.

http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/6128/titt9nu5.jpg

Title IX was designed to correct those imbalances. Although it did not require that women’s athletics receive the same amount of money as men’s athletics, it was designed to enforce equal access and quality. Women’s and men’s programs were required to devote the same resources to locker rooms, medical treatment, training, coaching, practice times, travel and per diem allowances, equipment, practice facilities, tutoring and recruitment.

Scholarship money was to be budgeted on a commensurate basis, so that if 40 percent of a school’s athletic scholarships were awarded to women, 40 percent of the scholarship budget was also earmarked for women.

It also applies to non-sport activities such as school bands, cheerleaders, and clubs; however, social fraternities and sororities, gender-specific youth clubs such as Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts, and Girls State and Boys State are specifically exempt from Title IX requirements.

Since the enactment of Title IX, women’s participation in sports has grown exponentially. In high school, the number of girl athletes has increased from just 295,000 in 1972 to more than 2.6 million.

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/8363/22018011.png

In college, the number has grown from 30,000 to more than 150,000. In addition, Title IX is credited with decreasing the dropout rate of girls from high school and increasing the number of women who pursue higher education and complete college degrees.

Despite these advancements, Title IX has not been without controversy.

Critics point out that while it may be helping female athletes, it can hurt male athletes when smaller schools are forced to cancel men’s programs to meet the strictures of the law. For example, here in Oklahoma, the University of Tulsa eliminated its mens baseball team in the mid-1980's, despite two earlier college world series appearances and a wealth of baseball talent in eastern Oklahoma.

http://img75.imageshack.us/img75/5553/tittranrowingtd6.jpg

Some groups claim that it has caused some schools to spend less money on non-revenue-generating men's sports programs such as wrestling, cross country, swimming, gymnastics, fencing and volleyball. This means that it is harder for men to get into large, Division I schools for small sports due to their over emphasis on football and other money making sports.

http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/9783/title224293266584acf22d.jpg

Veritas
6/23/2009, 07:33 AM
So is this the reason the abomination known as women's basketball exists?

TUSooner
6/23/2009, 08:20 AM
http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/8363/22018011.png

Oh.
Dear.



That brunette in the middle has a sail on her head; that probably added a full second to her time.

Oh by the way --- as the father of 2 daughters, and as someone who knows a few female athletes who got to college thanks to Title IX - I like it.

badger
6/23/2009, 10:30 AM
I feel bad that Title IX took away opportunities for some male athletes, but the overall number of people participating in sports has increased as a result of Title IX. I think opening programs to men of all racial backgrounds after the Civil Rights movement also had the same effect - that perhaps not as many white, male athletes were participating in sports, but more people overall participated in sports.

swardboy
6/23/2009, 11:33 AM
Thus Bear Bryant lost the ability to stack his sidelines with players who could have been playing for the competition......Oh the agony!

jneworld
6/23/2009, 01:23 PM
I was adamantly opposed to Title IX as a high school athlete in the 70s. Now that I have a daughter on a D1 basketball scholarship, I'm whistling a different tune.

badger
6/23/2009, 01:32 PM
I can see how eyebrows would raise when all the money generated by football and basketball... mostly men, sometimes the women's version of basketball... supports so many sports that do not generate revenue, both men's and women's. Perhaps the athletic departments just aren't marketing the non-rev sports as they should? Hell, if I knew one of our gymnasts would be the star of the Olympics for the USA, I would have LOVED to see him in Crimson and Cream!

Scott D
6/23/2009, 01:59 PM
Title IX being the reason schools are cutting other programs is a cop out. You'll find in some cases *cough*Rutgers*cough* the cancelling of athletic program X is in direct relation to increase of budget to revenue sport A (*cough*football*cough*), then they try to spin it to the angry families of said canceled sport as being because of Title IX.

jkjsooner
6/24/2009, 01:31 PM
Title IX being the reason schools are cutting other programs is a cop out. You'll find in some cases *cough*Rutgers*cough* the cancelling of athletic program X is in direct relation to increase of budget to revenue sport A (*cough*football*cough*), then they try to spin it to the angry families of said canceled sport as being because of Title IX.

Does the increase in the budget for revenue sport A actually generate more income than the increased expense? I would bet in Rutgers' case the answer would be yes.

The problem is with the 70 whatever scholarships allowed in football. Those have to be made up in other women's sports so outside of football women have a lot more opportunities than men.

The funny thing is that in other extra-curricular areas where women make up a large majority (say dance classes) the courts have found that there is no reason to make adjustments.

I think Title IX has done some great good but the fact is that women, even today, are less interested in participating in sports than men. Intramural participation stats have shown this. Title IX should have provisions that recognize this. Even if the outcome has been pretty positive, I think some of this gets too far into the area of social engineering.

Scott D
6/24/2009, 01:41 PM
Does the increase in the budget for revenue sport A actually generate more income than the increased expense? I would bet in Rutgers' case the answer would be yes.

The problem is with the 70 whatever scholarships allowed in football. Those have to be made up in other women's sports so outside of football women have a lot more opportunities than men.

The funny thing is that in other extra-curricular areas where women make up a large majority (say dance classes) the courts have found that there is no reason to make adjustments.

I think Title IX has done some great good but the fact is that women, even today, are less interested in participating in sports than men. Intramural participation stats have shown this. Title IX should have provisions that recognize this. Even if the outcome has been pretty positive, I think some of this gets too far into the area of social engineering.

I think you misunderstood me. I have no problem with Rutgers increasing it's football budget. Hell it makes sense, the team wins more than it loses (which says a lot for Rutgers) and with increased success should be increased exposure. My problem was with the Athletic Director saying that Title IX was why they were cutting a non revenue mens program, when the truth was that the money used to finance that program was directly moved to a revenue sport budget, and therefore a fully financial decision to increase revenue for the athletic department. Title IX had absolutely nothing to do with that decision, it was the AD's way of deflecting heat from the families of the athletes who learned that the school was no longer financing their chosen sport.

badger
6/24/2009, 01:47 PM
I'm not sure if there really is a lot of penalty per se for violations of Title IX... I mean, OU added women's rowing to get closer to being compliant recently, but were they really penalized before rowing got added?

Dio
6/24/2009, 03:46 PM
http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/8363/22018011.png

Who knew Amy Winehouse ran track?

Collier11
6/24/2009, 04:08 PM
Title 9 and Affirmative Action equally effective...JMHO

royalfan5
6/24/2009, 04:55 PM
My mom played three college sports starting in 1973. She has some fun stories about the early days of women's college athletics. The college she played for didn't even add women's locker rooms until after she graduated.

Taxman71
6/25/2009, 06:27 AM
Who knew Amy Winehouse ran track?

I am pretty sure that is Peggy Hill.

yermom
6/25/2009, 10:54 AM
Title 9 and Affirmative Action equally effective...JMHO

that's not a very glowing recommendation

Collier11
6/25/2009, 11:06 AM
Dont get me wrong, they were both created with the best of intentions, they like many other government mandated actions have been skewed and no longer serve the purpose that they were supposed to

Collier11
6/25/2009, 11:07 AM
“Preferential affirmative action patronizes American blacks, women, and others by presuming that they cannot succeed on their own. Preferential affirmative action does not advance civil rights in this country.”
Alan Keyes quotes

yermom
6/25/2009, 11:23 AM
okay, we are on the same page then :D

i just think quotas get the priorities out of whack and breeds contempt

Collier11
6/25/2009, 11:55 AM
yep

badger
6/25/2009, 12:33 PM
Title 9 and Affirmative Action equally effective...JMHO

Often depends on who enforces it. With Title IX, the federal government backs it, thus the NCAA does. Affirmative action? There's no federal mandate on that (yet) so it's just a case-by-case scenario. The NFL's Rooney Rule, for example.

Collier11
6/25/2009, 12:46 PM
In a country where all men and women are supposed to be equal, neither of these allow for equality

yermom
6/25/2009, 01:16 PM
i think it waters down female athletes. it seems they are begging girls to come play sports so average girls can get scholarships, but that makes boys have to me more exceptional to make the cut

maybe my perception is off, but doesn't anyone know the percentage of female high school athletes that get scholarships vs. males?

if they want more women in athletics, then mandated that they spend more money. why does it have to punish men's sports in the process?

Scott D
6/25/2009, 02:49 PM
because despite what government spending says, money is finite.

badger
6/25/2009, 02:53 PM
i think it waters down female athletes. it seems they are begging girls to come play sports so average girls can get scholarships, but that makes boys have to me more exceptional to make the cut

maybe my perception is off, but doesn't anyone know the percentage of female high school athletes that get scholarships vs. males?

if they want more women in athletics, then mandated that they spend more money. why does it have to punish men's sports in the process?

The number of female athletes just exploded after Title IX. However, I think there's no argument that while our population is roughly 50-50 when it comes to men and women, men definitely participate in sports more often than women, if there is an equal opportunity for women to participate.

Even so, a scholarship is a highly-sought honor and you have to be outstanding at your sport to even get a fraction of a scholly (full scholarships are even more rare), whether you pee standing up or not. ;)