Title IX needs to be revamped

Discussion in 'Education' started by Big_D, Aug 17, 2012.

  1. Big_D
    Offline

    Big_D Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Messages:
    377
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ratings:
    +34
    Quinnipiac University recently lost a ruling by the Federal Appeals Court as they attempted to count cheerleading as a sport. You see, Quinnipiac is 62% female and as a result, the spending and athletic participation must also be 62% female. Therefore, they need to include cheerleading into the participation for women or else the sport participates would have been less than 62% female and (you probably guessed it) men's sports will have to be cut. Since the ruling, Quinnipiac is cutting men’s golf, and men’s outdoor track and field.

    I am not against title IX 100% but there is no justification for cutting men's sports. Can’t they just omit football and maybe men's basketball from title IX? The problem is that there is no female equivalent for football and therefore the minor men’s sports (swimming and wrestling) need to get cut. The problem is that (dare I say!) men are more interested in playing sports than women.

    Not too long ago Rutgers needed to cut, $175K from one of the men’s program to comply with title ix. The institution responded by getting rid of men’s tennis team. Just like that, those men are probably out of a scholarship. Did this really help one single woman by have these men missing out on the experience of college sports? Then, the National Women’s Law Center responded by stated that Rutgers has spent exactly $175K on hotel rooms for the football team during their home games. Do these people really need to have it explained to them that cutting this expense for the football team is a bad idea?

    You see Rutgers obtain a substantial amount of money from football than it does for any other sport, except probably men’s basketball. In order to keep up its revenue, it has to provide an elite product on the field and they obviously do this by obtaining the top high school graduates. Now, in order to obtain these athletes, the school has go out of its way in providing extra incentives (i.e. hotel rooms) so they do not go to a competing school. The vast majority of the college sports do not bring in the revenue like football so they do not have the privilege of spending the night at a quiet hotel room before games as oppose to a noisy dorm room.

    Something tells me that the National Women’s Law Center knows this and just doesn’t care.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
  3. squeeze berry
    Online

    squeeze berry Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,690
    Thanks Received:
    878
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    virginia
    Ratings:
    +1,459
    years ago when I was into running 5Ks half of the awards and places went to females, yet only 20% of the field were females.

    My question: If one female is on the football team,ususlly kicker, does that make it a female sport?
     
  4. rightwinger
    Offline

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,446
    Thanks Received:
    19,868
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,476
    Title IX is immensely successful

    One only has to look at the last Olympics to see we have the best female athletes in the world
     
  5. Big_D
    Offline

    Big_D Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Messages:
    377
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ratings:
    +34
    It IS successful for women's sports but to get to my point, how successful has it been for minor men's sports such as swimming, gymnastics, wrestling, etc?

    Not too long ago, Arizona State had this issue. Since 52% of the students enrolled at the university were women then 52% of the athletes needed to be women too. The problem is that just 40% of the athletes were female. Now, do you all feel that 12% of the women at the school were attempting to join sports and were denied that opportunity or could it just be that men are more interested in playing sports? Knowing that men's sports could be on the chopping block, Arizona State attempted to create a female rowing team and scholarship money was available for this activity. As you all probably know, that college is in the desert.

    Women make at the majority of the non-sport activities on college campuses. Is it fair that scholarship money should be given to these people who probably have no experience in rowing, just because they're female? Also, since women make up the majority of the activities on campus why don't they cut those and go out of their way to create room for men?
     
  6. rightwinger
    Offline

    rightwinger Paid Messageboard Poster Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    120,446
    Thanks Received:
    19,868
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    NJ & MD
    Ratings:
    +45,476
    The money invested in womens sports is paying off big for the US. Womens rowers were more competitive than the men in London. Yes it is fair that they get scholarship money. Women athletes graduate at a higher rate than the men
     
  7. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    Don't tell that to the girl lost the bronze in a tie, she might wonder what you are smoking.
     
  8. Big_D
    Offline

    Big_D Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Messages:
    377
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ratings:
    +34
    I meant if it was fair that the women in AZ would have an additional scholarship opportunity for a sport they most likely never played before because of their gender. The men would not have this opportunity if AZ State would create such a sport activity on their campus but the women would.

    I will admit that you are right in the fact that title IX has done wonders for women's sports and was needed immensely in the 70's. However, as I asked in my last post, does anyone really feel that the high saturation of the athletes at this school are men because women are denied the opportunity to play sports on the campus? I feel this comes down to supply and demand. If there were more need for women's sports on this campus then they would be created. I have a hard time believing that the campus is refusing to create women's sports if there is a huge need for them because the press would obviously be horrible for the campus. Why should men be punished because there is more demand for their sports?
     

Share This Page