Arguing the advisability of unisexual education from the
premise of Title IX is like missing the trees for the forest.
This is Fish House diplomacy, arguing from the status quo.
The status quo was obtained by the false premise that equal
opportunity stems from equal need or, in this case, the
nation's perceived need for sexual equality. This was not a
need; it was and remains a luxury.
The VMI case, which you cite so smugly, is exemplary. The
unisexual status of VMI was premised on the assumption of
an equal right to die for one's country, an opportunity
long denied to women, equally by both men and women.
Richard Dey
ihi@tiac.net