Replies

There's a key in what you're saying. It's my understanding that there are multiple criteria in Title IX to evaluate whether a school is in conformance with it. If I remember correctly, one is to simply make the number of available athletic slots proportional to the level of a school's student body make up, and another is to make them proportional to the level of student interest. I've seen where it's been said that schools are using the former because it's an easier practice to defend legally, whereas the latter format, which would take into account your assertion that women just aren't as interested in sports, would cause less disruption of existing programs.

My daughter has played sports that are traditionally "female": tennis and softball (as well as soccer in HS). She also played a non-"female" sport in high school, ice hockey, and felt ripped off because you weren't allowed to check in women's hockey. Not that she didn't get her hits in; one of her personal precepts was that if she didn't have a penalty by the third period, she'd go out and get one. She'd go out and find someone who'd annoyed her during the first two periods, take them out, and be half-way to the penalty box by the time the ref blew the whistle. Not a dirty hit, but a hard one.

It's my understanding that there are multiple criteria in Title IX to evaluate whether a school is in conformance with it.

Read the posted article carefully. Proportional representation is the safe harbor assurance of compliance with Title IX. The only concrete (lawsuit proof) way to prove you are not discriminating is numerical quotas linked to student body make-up. If Farleigh Dickinson coeds are not interested in sports, then the men will suffer. And the Womens Law Center and other lobby groups will sue your pants off if you try to evade the "law". The last thing these groups want to do is quantify student interest (again, read the article).

BTW, Mia Hamm and all these female soccer players benefited from Title IX before there were numerical quotas, not after. So all this bunk about how women will suffer if they stop cutting wrestling programs is really...bunk.