This seems to be a fair "common sense" definition. Consider the case of
two athletes...Male Athlete X and Female Athlete Y. Male Athlete X has the
right to have his sport eliminated to meet a proportionality quota; whereas
Female Athlete Y has the right not to have her sport eliminated for any
reason whatsoever. Would Female Athlete Y be willing to make that switch?
If not, then by your own definition "equity" does not exist.
In response to:
>The best "common sense" definition I've heard goes something like this:
Gender equity exists when male athletes
>would be willing to trade their benefits with those of female athletes
(and vice versa) and still feel that they
>are being treated equitably.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 20 2000 - 17:59:16 EDT