Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Title IX concerns turn the lights out on night baseball (title nine madness)
Duluth News Tribune (Star & Sickle of the North) ^ | 4-27-05 | TROY YOUNG

Posted on 04/27/2005 2:48:00 PM PDT by Rakkasan1

ROCHESTER, Minn. - The decision to literally turn the lights out on Rochester public high school baseball this spring was not a school district issue nor a city of Rochester issue. It was complying with federal law, specifically Title IX.

That, Rochester school officials say, was the reason all home baseball games for Century, John Marshall and Mayo must be played under natural light exclusively for the first time in years.

A couple of weeks ago Mayo players were the first to experience the baseball blackout when their game was suspended because of darkness. Despite the Mayo Field lights being accessible with a flick of the switch, the teams were forced to postpone the game because of the school district's new policy.

(Excerpt) Read more at duluthsuperior.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 9; baseball; ix; legalistic; lights; mn; nightmare; rochester; title; wacky
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 04/27/2005 2:48:16 PM PDT by Rakkasan1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1

I wonder if they equally fund men's synchonized swimming?


2 posted on 04/27/2005 2:52:10 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paleo Conservative

I smell an ACLU rat in this story


3 posted on 04/27/2005 2:54:31 PM PDT by Rakkasan1 (The MRS wanted to go to an expensive place to eat so I took her to the gas station.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1
Taxpayer funded absurdity and overreach. High school athletes playing under artificial lights is now a civil right according to the DoE. Sure is a shame the Repubs didn't eliminate that department years ago.
4 posted on 04/27/2005 3:00:57 PM PDT by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1

I hope the ACLU parent-rat is happy now. Maybe we should just take it further and get the girls equal athletic support.....just different, of course. Oops, Title IX violation!


5 posted on 04/27/2005 3:12:37 PM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn
once again, misunderstanding about what Title 9 does...and doesn't do....

It does not prevent boys athletic programs, it does not make girls programs more important, and it does not in and of itself, eliminate any boys programs....

it does say that your spending on boys and girls programs should be about equal, which afterall, this iasAmerica, and aren't we supposed to be treated equally...

as long as the population is roughly 50-50 boys to girls, and as long as all of us are tax-payers, then I think our govt dollars should be spent on my dtr as well as my son.......

6 posted on 04/27/2005 3:20:53 PM PDT by cherry (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Jarhead
Sure is a shame the Repubs didn't eliminate that department years ago.

Eliminate it? In 2000 it's spending stood at $38,447,366, but Bush has raised it to $71,478,441 by 2005.

7 posted on 04/27/2005 3:21:50 PM PDT by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn

liberal ideology:
everyone must suffer and suffer equally.


8 posted on 04/27/2005 3:22:23 PM PDT by Rakkasan1 (The MRS wanted to go to an expensive place to eat so I took her to the gas station.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1

Oh, and what about the sacred nightime football games, are they also to be played during the day?


9 posted on 04/27/2005 3:24:53 PM PDT by taxesareforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3
Yea, yea I know. But for a while one of the planks in the national party platform was the elimination of the DoE. If memory serves, it was removed before the 2000 election.
10 posted on 04/27/2005 3:25:54 PM PDT by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1

Stupid, but baseball games shouldn't be played at night, anyway.

Baseball is meant to be played during the day--just sorry they had to get there through Title IX.


11 posted on 04/27/2005 3:29:06 PM PDT by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1

Could a private citizen pony up some $ for electricity, etc, and let the lights be turned on for the boys? They could then say it was private funding, and exempt from this madness.


12 posted on 04/27/2005 3:36:14 PM PDT by boop (Testing the tagline feature!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cherry

As the parent of 3 daughters, and no sons, I have a vested interest in making sure my daughters have every opportunity to pursue their sports dreams just like any boy. They all play, or have played, numerous sports, excelling in some, just enjoying the others.

So, I don't make my comments frivolously with regard to Title IX. And I'm not a supporter of sacrificing boy's sports, and eliminating them, just so a school district, or college can afford to offer scholarships for my daughters, either. This is an enforced social experiment, governmentally imposed, and not the result of a upswelling of public interest.

As a result, you get bureaucratic inanities like this one. No lights on boy's games! Sheer idiocy!

Some aspects of Title IX are positive, others are onerous, and still others are ridiculous.

Typical governmental solution to a perceived problem.


13 posted on 04/27/2005 3:36:47 PM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1
(rest of the article)

...A couple of weeks ago Mayo players were the first to experience the baseball blackout when their game was suspended because of darkness. Despite the Mayo Field lights being accessible with a flick of the switch, the teams were forced to postpone the game because of the school district's new policy.

Just more than two years ago, a Century High School parent accused the district of not complying with Title IX, the federal law that requires equal treatment of male and female students in school districts. He said the district wasn't expanding girls sports to meet students' needs and alleged that girls' athletics facilities and equipment were inferior.

As a result, the district invited the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights to examine Rochester's athletics program to determine if the district was complying with Title IX. The Office of Civil Rights found insufficient evidence to support two of the three allegations leveled by the Century parent.

But the Office of Civil Rights did find Rochester was violating Title IX on a variety of facility issues. The district remedied the situation regarding equal ice time. It also improved the gymnastics equipment concerns. The Office of Civil Rights gave the district a deadline of last month to improve softball facility guidelines.

While the Mayo softball team's facility matched that for the boys, John Marshall and Century had softball facilities that were inferior to the boys', the office ruled. Concerns were raised regarding scoreboards, lights, public address systems, concession stands and press boxes.

"By March 1, we put in place press boxes at all three softball fields, batting cages and sound systems, and we have bleachers at each field," said Mark Kuisle, Rochester's interim supervisor of athletics. "We could not afford lights, so we notified (the Office of Civil Rights) that we would not be playing any baseball games under the lights for 2005."

The district did refute the office's comparison of baseball and softball, saying the two activities weren't parallel sports. School district attorney Nancy Vollertsen stated her case to the Office of Civil Rights, to no avail.

"She argued that not only are (baseball and softball) different games, but some conditions can be different," Rochester Superintendent Jerry Williams said. "What OCR came back and said is they understand the game is different, but what they make sure of is that females and males have the same opportunities to play the games. The OCR isn't trying to argue with us about baseball fields being different from softball fields, but the opportunity that males and females have to play under the lights was their issue."

The Rochester school district has received complaints regarding the blackout for baseball this spring, Kuisle said, but the district must comply with Title IX or face a potential lawsuit. Win or lose, cases are too costly for a district, Williams said.

"When we make these kinds of decisions, we cannot put the district in financial harm or projected harm," Williams said.

The Rochester baseball teams can play under lights so long as they are the visiting teams. For instance, Mayo could play a night game at Mankato or Austin or Northfield. But the only lights at Mayo Field, Rochester's premier baseball park, will be for VFW, American Legion, amateur and college wood bat games.

Rochester high school teams must play under the sun. Baseball players and coaches are frustrated they can't play under lights.

"Of course there's frustration on the coaches' part," Kuisle said. "We have a great facility in Mayo Field. Why is Rochester being held to a different standard than other communities? Basically, they have not had the thorough exam (by the Office of Human Rights) that we have had."

The softball issue isn't totally resolved.

With a city the size of Rochester, it isn't out of the realm of possibility, some say, for a softball complex to exist that serves youth, high school, and adult leagues.

Park and Recreation supervisor Roy Sutherland said the line that separates the idea of a general softball complex between a dream and reality is a fine one.

"We've already got them," Sutherland said. "I would love to sit down with the school district and the youth softball association and look at bringing that together. So much of the infrastructure is in place at Soldiers Field. We could create a (softball) complex like (baseball) at Mayo Field.

"But the issue is, would the varsity teams be happy having to play their games at Soldiers Field versus their own high schools?"

Ironically, school officials said, there were never any rumblings of facility concerns from girls softball teams to begin with.

"I think the boys should be playing under the lights. They've been doing that forever," John Marshall softball coach Thang Nguyen said. "Our girls don't really care much about playing under the lights or not. I think they care more about not being able to go see the guys play under the lights when they're done practicing or playing."

14 posted on 04/27/2005 3:42:36 PM PDT by yankeedame ("Born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn

The problem is that some sports are more expensive than others. And each sport tends to have an imbalance of interests from boys and girls. Soccer is agreat axample of mass appeal to both boys and girls whereas wrestling doesn't (although boys wouldn't mind if there was a all-girl wrestling team I'm sure.) How about how successful a program is. If a boy's or girl's team goes all the way to the chamionship then the cost of transportation, supplies, etc. make that team's cost for the year a larger proportion than a losing team of another sport/gender. Sports do help create character, leadership skills, teamwork no matter what the gender but there is an underlying need for many parents/students to have a successful team that helps school pride, not to mention a sport that is popular across gender lines.

I don't know the magic formula but I've read too many stories about a high school or college team sport that was a champion multiple times but was cut to creat equality. This mentality eventually leads to cries such as by some of the players in the Women's Professional Soccer League to demand pay/broadcasting time to be equal to the men's. Same with art. Just because someone thinks their art is great or necessary doesn't mean one is guaranteed an audience and hence financial support.


15 posted on 04/27/2005 4:08:48 PM PDT by torchthemummy ("Sober Idealism Equals Pragmatism")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: torchthemummy

Agreed. It's more complicated than just the meat-cleaver approach that the government applies to it.

But, this issue is now almost sacrosanct in political arenas. Untouchable.


16 posted on 04/27/2005 4:23:52 PM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: cherry
once again, misunderstanding about what Title 9 does...and doesn't do....

It does not prevent boys athletic programs, it does not make girls programs more important, and it does not in and of itself, eliminate any boys programs....

it does say that your spending on boys and girls programs should be about equal, which afterall, this iasAmerica, and aren't we supposed to be treated equally...


All of that sounds good in theory (well, actually, it sounds stupid in theory too) but what all of the "good" intentions that went into Title IX failed to take into account was that boys, while representing slightly under 50% of the population, represent the vast majority of students who wish to participate in sports. So, if you have, say, 1000 students who sign up for sports programs, 700 of which are boys, but the school is required to spend 50% of the money on the remaining 300 sports-playing students (girls), what you get is the inanity shown in this article. You also get boys programs necessarily shut down because 50% of the money won't cover 70% (or more) of the sports-playing students, especially if one of those sports is rather expensive, such as football.
18 posted on 04/27/2005 4:45:46 PM PDT by fr_freak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rakkasan1

Boys are more interested in sports therefor should have greater funding for their sports teams. This Title IX law is based on the absurd feminist theory that girls like sports as much as guys do.


19 posted on 04/27/2005 4:55:04 PM PDT by dennisw (2¢ plain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak
All of that sounds good in theory (well, actually, it sounds stupid in theory too) but what all of the "good" intentions that went into Title IX failed to take into account was that boys, while representing slightly under 50% of the population, represent the vast majority of students who wish to participate in sports. So, if you have, say, 1000 students who sign up for sports programs, 700 of which are boys, but the school is required to spend 50% of the money on the remaining 300 sports-playing students (girls), what you get is the inanity shown in this article. You also get boys programs necessarily shut down because 50% of the money won't cover 70% (or more) of the sports-playing students, especially if one of those sports is rather expensive, such as football.

Title IX proponents are perfectly aware of all you have written. They could care less if the boys get screwed and are probably happy when they do get screwed. Chalk this up to feminism gone wild. Though I do admit that Title IX is fairly mainstream today and accepted by the American sheeple

 

20 posted on 04/27/2005 5:00:55 PM PDT by dennisw (2¢ plain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson