Title IX

In 1972 a policy known as Title IX was written and mandated into
Federal policy. Title IX states “no person…..shall, on the basis of
sex.be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or
activity receiving federal financial assistance” (Glenn Sacks, “Title
IX Lawsuits are Endangering Men’s College Sports,” p. 3). Many high
schools and colleges have not been able to comply with the Title IX
standards mostly because of money. After more than 30 years since the
beginning of Title IX, there is still no gender equality among men and
women in sports.

Passed in 1972 by United States President Richard Nixon, Title IX was
supposed to open the door for women, but feminists have interpretated
Title IX in a way to help strengthen women’s athletics (Sacks 1).
During the Carter and Clinton administrations Title IX was converted
into a weapon to enforce gender quotas, therefore abolishing as many
men’s college athletic teams as possible (Phyllis Schlafly, “Supreme
Court wrestles with Title IX,” p. 2). Over the years the words of
Title IX author, former U.S. Republican Edith Green, must have been
forgotten when he stated that the law is “exceedingly explicit so that
the establishment of quotas would be prohibited (Schlafly 2)”. It has
become obvious that quotas are the standard in 2005. Scholarships,
spending and funding must somehow equal the ratio of 57% women – 43%
men enrolled in college. Schools have been offered two options to
meet Title IX – create new women’s teams or cut men’s teams (Sacks 2).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Has the question really been answered yet? Has Title IX changed
anything? YES. Between 1972 and 1997, 3.6 male athletes were dropped
from their programs. During the same period, female athletes
increased by 5,800 while 20,000 male athletes were cut (Sacks 2).
Women’s basketball programs are now allotted 15 scholarships, men’s
13.5; women tennis is allotted 8 scholarships, men’s 4.5. By April of
2002, over 350 NCAA men’s programs had been terminated since 1991,
over 100 wrestling programs had been eliminated overall, and only 26
colleges still had male gymnastic programs (J.P. Hoornstra, “Title IX
sends teams to grave,” p. 2). It seems to me that Title IX was
created with all the good intentions, but it seems that nobody really
ever thought it through.

On the flip side, coaches for an average college women’s team earns,
on average, about $33,000 per season, while the coaches of men’s teams
earn about $67,000. Athletic programs for men spend an average of
$1.6 million while women receive half that amount. It is obvious
that the quotas are not being followed. At this time though I do not
see this as a problem.

So what is the root of the problem when it comes to equality among men
and women in collegiate sports? Football. Yes, football is the root
of the problem. Football is a money-making giant that happens to
demand money be poured into its program. At the University of
Southern California men’s teams – largely football – are responsible
for over 99% of the near $20 million total revenue of the athletic
department (Sacks 2). It is a fact that 70% of Division I-A programs
turn a profit. Due to the fact that schools need football’s revenue
yet must also meet gender quotas, they are forced to cut non-revenue
men’s sports. Colleges cannot spend as much on women’s sports as
they can on men’s sports because there is no women’s equivalent for
football (Sacks 3). Seems to me that football should be eliminated
from the equation. If feminists turned a cheek to football and the
money dedicated to its program every year, then maybe there would be
more equality across the board.

No one will ever say that women do not deserve the same rights as men,
but some feminists are fighting a cause that just does not make sense.

Women’s sports just cannot match the revenue power of the men’s
sports. This is not the Universities fault and it is definitely not
the fault of men. Yes, women should be able to have organized teams
and scholarships to field those teams, but forcing men’s sports to
operate on the same budget as women’s sports is ludicrous. Imagine if
the NBA had to operate on the same budget as the WNBA. The WNBA has a
league salary of 12 million dollars.yes, a LEAGUE salary. While
players in the NBA have individual salaries larger than 12 million
dollars. The problem with Title IX is that somebody along the way
decided to translate what was a great policy to insure the rights of
women when it came to education, into a policy about quotas and
equality in competition. There is no reason why women’s sports cannot
thrive on the collegiate level while male sports maintain the
greatness they have had. Gone are the superior men’s gymnastic and
swimming teams from UCLA along with storied football programs from
Northridge and Boston University. Men are being stripped of their
opportunities to compete. Not so that women’s sports can be
createdthose teams could exist also, but these teams are being lost
because feminists push for ridiculous quotas to be strictly followed.
The day will soon come when men’s collegiate sports like volleyball,
wrestling and swimming no longer exist. Despite the idea that Title
IX would help women athletes, the numbers have actually caused the
elimination of traditional women’s teams such as gymnastics in favor
of large-squad sports (Schlafly 2). Was this really what Edith Green
desired when she penned Title IX 30 years ago? I believe Title IX was
penned as an instrument to help fight sex discrimination and is now a
policy mandating it (Sacks 3). “In ridiculing the senselessness of
gender quotas, the University of Kansas college newspaper published
this ironic comment. “College sports for women should be compulsory.
Granted, many women may insist they do not want to play sports, but
after generations of patriarchal oppression, it is not realistic to
think women really know what they want. The goal of perfectly equal
gender ratios is more important than what anybody ‘wants” (Schlafly