Hi all! I hope everyone had a splendid Christmas and a wonderful New Year!
The world didn't end and the computer still works, so I guess I'm doing
I have a question regarding Title IX as applied to school athletics that
Linda or Dempsey or any of the other experts on this group may be able to
help me with. The question is this:
Reasonable people are not against the intent or the letter of Title IX,
which prima facie requires equal opportunity. We are against the Office of
Civil [Wrong]s' policy interpretation of Title IX as requiring numeric
proportionality in the participation numbers. Most have been arguing from
the perspective that it causes wide-scale demolition of boys' sports, which
is true, but could it not be argued from the perspective that
proportionality limits girls' opportunities as well?
For example, the other two prongs of Title IX enforcement require equal
opportunity. The prong called Proportionality which is being enforced by
the OC[W] simply requires that the numbers come out proportional to
enrollment. This is like saying "College, it would really, REEEEEALLY be
nice if you could add girls' teams and increase girls' opportunities, but
if you don't want to all you need to do is cut boys' teams and destroy
boys' opportunities until the numbers come out proportional."
So the question is: Who wins by using the proportionality standard? Boys
lose a great deal, so far over 20,000 opportunties. Girls' opportunities
are ALSO LIMITED by proportionality. What motivation does the college have
to increase their opportunities if all they need to do is cut the boys'
opportunities until the numbers come out proportional? So boys lose and
girls lose through the enforcement of Title IX in terms of numeric
proportionality. The question is, who wins?
I hope someone can help answer this one
Amber V. DeWine
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 31 2000 - 12:51:33 EST