RE: Title IX softball case

Date: Wed Apr 26 2000 - 18:02:27 EDT

  • Next message: "FW: Title IX softball case"

    In response to:
    > They don't complain--they
    just say let's count cheerleading and dance/drill
    > team. When approached to add a girls sport it takes an act of Congress
    > threat of lawsuit to get it done--not so for boys.

    I say:
      I have raised the question before on this newsgroup about why not
    consider cheerleading a team, and I would be willing to extend that
    question to cover dance and drill as well. I received no attempt at a
    response from any of the presumably knowledgable people on this group,
    which leads me to the conclusion that there is no reason not to count cheer
    as a team.

      The real reason that I want to count cheer as a team is so that it will
    raise the numbers of female athletes so that the numbers of male athletes
    don't have to be driven down. This is the "participation rate" thing
    again; my original question concerned people begrudging girls equal
    opportunity, not equal result viz. "participation rate."

    In response to:
    > After eleven years of monitoring for Title IX/RCW 28A.640 for the state
    > Washington, I've heard it all. Blair vs. WSU was one of if not the first
    > case to establish the "pariticipation rates" analysis and it has given
    > direction to districts.

    I say:
      Agreed, but is it the RIGHT direction? Should we not be telling schools
    "Give girls equal opportunity" rather than saying "Make sure there is equal

    In response to:
    > In Washington at the high school level there has
    > been no dismantling for boys, in fact their opportunities and
    > have continued to grow as well.

    I say:
      Assuming this is true, and I have no reason to doubt you're telling me
    the truth, then I am very pleased, but it is not the national trend. The
    national trend represents 4 male athletes lost for every female athlete

    In response to:
    > I have seen Title IX Officers loose their jobs when they have told their
    > school districts what Title IX required and the district didn't like it.

    I say:
      That's unfortunate, and it is one of the areas in which the law and its
    enforcement can do some good. Note that it has nothing to do with
    participation rates.

    In response to:
    > There may be two different pictures here--one a collegiate and one a high
    > school. My guess is the colleges are much farther behind in Title IX
    > compliance than the high schools and now someone is saying get into
    > compliance at the collegiate level and they don't like it.

    I say:
      They don't like it, nor do I, when "get into compliance" means "have the
    participation rates of male and female athletes proportional to their


    FindLaw - Free Case Law, Jobs, Library, Community
    Get your FREE @JUSTICE.COM email!

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 26 2000 - 18:06:20 EDT