Repeal Title IX. Now.
Last week, Katie Thomas of the New York Times ran a breathless expose of the devious actions that many colleges have taken to escape the mandate of gender equality under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act. The gist of her complaint, which I address in this article, is contained in the article’s headline: "College Teams, Relying on Deception, Undermine Gender Equity."
Her article then details how various colleges have in effect packed their women’s teams with nonparticipating female athletes in order to increase the available spots for men who participate for real. Thomas led with the University of South Florida, where more than half of the 71 women on the cross-country team had never participated in any race for a team that some of them did not know they were on. Not to be outdone, such elite institutions as Cornell, Duke, and Texas A&M take advantage of a "loophole" to Title IX that counts as women the men who work out with female athletes in training.
To both Thomas, and an indignant follow up New York Times editorial, the entire episode reveals the length to which established institutions block the advancement of women’s rights. To the Times writers, it is an unalloyed good that, by their reckoning, Title IX has increased the number of women participating in intercollegiate sports from about 30,000 in 1972 to about 186,000 today. And they lament that the efforts to undermine Title IX have only intensified now that women constitute over 57 percent of all college students, which makes Title IX’s requirement of proportionate representation of women in intercollegiate sports ever harder to achieve. The number of spots of women’s teams does not increase with enrollment, just as the number of spots on men’s teams does not decline as their enrollment decreases. So extra places have to be manufactured for female athletes to keep the same number of men in intercollegiate sports. Untroubled by these brute arithmetical facts, the New York Times has called upon Congress to close this dreaded loophole.
But Congress should do just the opposite. Congress should repeal Title IX as soon as possible. I explain why in my weekly column for Defining Ideas, which you can read here.
- Comment (23)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
My daughter has fine grades and sat scores but has been waitlisted at some colleges. Perhaps she is being discriminated against for not being an athelete.
Dec '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
I think Title IX has been an excellent path for our girls to learn teamwork skills that boys have always known. Sports skills, toughening up, taking coaching, etc. I took my daughter to practices and games in a huge variety of sports all her life. Now she is in college and has made a mob of friends organizing and playing on intramural teams.
That said, I do think Title IX could be revised because it does warp the athletic landscape. First, granted that people really like the football programs all over the country, those programs could be split off from Title IX and organized to stand alone. I know it isn't PC or feminist enough to say it, but there it is. All the other sports could be run under Title IX... There would be enough girls and women to field many teams or to join co-ed teams.... it really does benefit all of us for women to have these team skills. I wish someone could look at the military, for example, to see whether women's participation in sports growing up makes a difference in the way the co-ed military has progressed. They're fabulous.
Sep '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
I had to look up the data points offered in your post, 30,000 and 186,000 girls in athletics in 1972 and today. Using the census data for all females in college that means that in 1972, 0.8% of women were in sports and in 2009 about 1.7% of women were in sports. The gain is a little more substantial if you assume women over 25 are unlikely to be in sports but I don't know how the calculation is done.
My primary gripe is that the system of title IX presumes guilt at all times and it is up to a school to show its innocence by one of 3 ways whenever sued by a student. The acceptance of a presumption of guilt is an unaceptable price to pay for a gain of 1% of female student athelets.
Beyond that, this seems to me a wasteful and hamfisted way to achieve little. It is not enough (for me) to say that any improvement in female participation is worth it. It is clear that in addition to increasing female participation this has destroyed male participation. On balance I worry it is no good.
Aug '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
Do the guys know they're being counted as girls when they do this? But then, perhaps gender is just a state of mind.
Aug '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
Dr Epstein,
I noticed in your article that you said, "Surely anyone but the sourest egalitarian would prefer a system in which 1000 men and 600 women participate in intercollegiate sports to one that carries only 700 men and 550 women."
And I thought to myself, "I know folks besides sour egalitarians who would prefer a system in which only 700 men and 550 women participated." They're the folks that worry that college is becoming too sports-oriented.
Many non-athletic college students and several professors I've met feel this way. They feel that too many intercollegiate athletes on campus distract from academics, or that these sports are superficial competitions and therefore immoral, or whatever.
So there are people pleased when Title IX forces cuts in athletics. Weird but true.
Sep '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
Thanks for your perspective, I would also settle for reform.
However, in the last 20 years huge changes have taken place in the local/volunteer sports that have little or nothing to do with Title IX (as far as I know). Colleges have more opportunities for women IMHO because more girls have been participating at the younger levels. I.E. the population of girls who play team sports and then feed the colleges is much larger than it used to be. I would have expected gains at the college level even if Title IX had never been enacted.
I could be wrong but in my view sports for girls good, bureaucratic and legalistic frameworks for egalitarianism bad.
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
When I read the word gender, I reach for my gun.
Dec '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
Well, like everything else, there is no perfect answer. One of the main reasons that parents of girls (especially the ones who are really good at sports) are willing to spend the massive hours driving, coaching, organizing, travelling to tournaments, etc. is the idea they get that their daughters might be able to get a scholarship for college. Now I never thought that because I myself went to a college where intramurals were the center of the universe because, as pre-meds, the state champion level athletes were afraid their grades would suffer if they had to travel for the main team. So everybody was wild about the on-campus competition. Very fun and beneficial in citizen building. All of this (I believe) would be alleviated by making the football programs (with the cheer people, the bands, etc.) stand-alone programs, and then splitting the sports budget between the girls and the boys (OMG but what about all the other identity groups!!!! ugh...) Or, if it doesn't go far enough, have a lottery for the budget like they do with charter school entries. Try for simplicity.
Apr '11
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
I believe Title IX is a threat to liberty. It prevents colleges and universities from choosing how to spend their money and run their college and creates more opportunities for girls only at the expense of boys. I agree it should be gotten rid of immediately. Let the market decide. If girls want to play sports in college, then colleges will respond accordingly to avoid losing business.
May '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
Let us appreciate Title IX for what it is - a money grab. Increasingly, the NCAA (and state high school associations) use Title IX as a club to extort money and coverage from the television networks that desire the men's games.
Well, you can drag the horse to the television but you can't make him watch. Compare these numbers from this year's basketball championships:
Men (CBS) Butler vs Connecticut 11.7 Rating
Women (ESPN) Notre Dame vs Texas A&M 2.3 Rating
Aug '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
I don't know that Title IX had any positive affect on women's athletics. Yes, in the years since Title IX more women participate in sports, but is this due to Title IX or due to the dynamic, talented, and charismatic power of a number of woman athletes? Women's tennis probably did more to increase interest in women's athletics, by itself, than Title IX.
Has Title IX made sports less "sexist?"
We still live in a world where a young girl who pitches a perfect game in the Little League World Series is relegated to playing Softball -- instead of Baseball -- for the remainder of her athletic career.
Why do we have Softball? Why aren't young women playing Baseball? Young women play Basketball and Tennis without significant rules changes. They play Hockey for goodness' sake.
My daughter will play sports and go as far as their talents, desires, and my ability to provide them with sufficiently quality training, allow.
Mar '11
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
My alma mater (Point Loma Nazarene University; Point Loma College when I went there) just had to drop boys track because they lost their softball field and couldn't continue to offer girls softball. (The field overlooks the ocean and the environmentalists of the city of San Diego took it away) Because of Title IX, this tragedy didn't stop with girl's softball, but had to hit the boys equally as well, That is just wrong!
May '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
But they're not allowed to check.
Aug '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
If that's your reaction to "gender" as a noun, I'd hate to see what happens when you see it used as a past-tense passive voice transitive verb, as in "Children's toys are highly gendered" or "From birth childhood socialization is highly gendered."
Edited on May 4, 2011 at 3:30pmJun '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
Title IX and unions have a great deal in common. Both served noble purposes, protecting the underdog who faced terrible treatment with no recourse. Both need to be retired, as they have morphed into bloated, corrupt power centers that do more harm than good.
Edited on May 4, 2011 at 4:34pmRe: Repeal Title IX. Now.
StickerShock: Title IX and unions have a great deal in common. Both served noble purposes, protecting the underdog who faced terrible treatment with no recourse. Both need to be retired, as they have morphed into bloated, corrupt power centers that do more harm than good. · May 4 at 4:32pm
Edited on May 04 at 04:34 pm
Nice analogy. I wonder if it applies to affirmative action, too?
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
anon_academic
If that's your reaction to "gender" as a noun, I'd hate to see what happens when you see it used as a past-tense passive voice transitive verb, as in "Children's toys are highly gendered" or "From birth childhood socialization is highly gendered." · May 4 at 3:25pm
Edited on May 04 at 03:30 pm
I just had a flashback to a "critical literary studies"---or something---course I had to take in college.
Dec '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
I would agree that the rigid aspect of Title IX could be eliminated. But if it is, I would want it to go to a lottery type system for budgeting, not the boys' teams funded first and then, if there is anything left, the girls can play. And I still think that if they were to put the big football programs as a separate item, the rest of the sports programs would probably balance out pretty well. In cases where sports are funded with public money, I disagree that having girls/womens' teams does more harm than good.
May '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
Can't we just let people alone to pursue their own interests and put the bean-counting aside? (Heavy sigh.)
Jun '10
Re: Repeal Title IX. Now.
"I would want it to go to a lottery type system for budgeting, not the boys' teams funded first and then, if there is anything left, the girls can play."
Sunlight, that would never happen in today's world. Never. It would be as unlikely as a college funding clubs for whites and then throwing a few leftover $$ to clubs for blacks & other minorities.
Title IX opened doors for women. Not just for sports, but allowing them access to once forbidden courses and majors and traditionally male-dominated activities. Now it's well past the time we can, as KervinLee states, "let people alone to pursue their own interests and put the bean-counting aside."
Men absolutely are harmed by Title IX. The bean counters have been eliminating their sports for years.
Emily -- I would absolutely love to see Affirmative Action eliminated as well.