Originally intended to give both genders equal opportunities in education, Title IX has greatly affected the sports world.
Passed in 1972, Title IX states that “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex… be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” A prominent interpretation of this law concerns athletics, especially on the college level.
The interpretation, given in 1979, details three different ways a collegiate athletic program can satisfy the law: programs could provide athletic opportunities proportionate to the student body, show it is expanding the opportunities of the underrepresented gender, or fully accommodate the interests of the underrepresented gender.
This interpretation has caused to controversy: critics charge colleges with taking away the opportunities of male athletes participating in certain sports, such as cross country, crew, gymnastics and wrestling, in an effort to bring themselves in compliance with Title IX.
Over the past five years, two distinct sides have formed in the debate over the law’s usefulness. This debate has distracted the public away from Title IX’s successes. One side claims the law hurts men’s sports, the other side claims female athletes are discriminated against. Both sides want Title IX revised. Both sides are guilty of escalating this problem unnecessarily.
Each side has strengthened its cause with the support of special interest groups. The groups in favor of men’s rights include the Independent Women’s Forum and the College Sports Council.
Women’s rights groups include the National Coalition for Women and Girls in Education and the Women’s Sports Foundation. These names intend to convey credibility, but end up misleading the public. A layman would be unable to identify the Independent Women’s Forum as a male rights group.
These groups are the culprits behind Title IX’s bad reputation. When they attack their opponent’s agenda, neither group mentions Title IX’s key role in gender equality. Women’s division one collegiate athletic programs currently receive 45 percent of total funding. The last five percent is not a legitimate reason for reform.
Both sides manipulate facts, stories and people for their own benefit. Several schools such as Rutgers, Butler and Ohio University claim to have been harmed by Title IX. One university in particular has garnered the attention of interest groups.
Earlier this year, James Madison University (JMU) cut 10 sports teams—seven men’s and three women’s—in order to comply with Title IX in October 2006. Male advocates use this as a prime example of men’s teams eliminated because of Title IX.
The story of male athletes barred from college sports was vital in gaining public support for men’s advocates. The male rights groups failed to mention that several track team members transferred to other schools the following year to keep running. Others stayed at JMU for its educational opportunities.
Women’s rights groups also weighed in. For them, the discontinued men’s teams were proof of how athletic directors blame Title IX instead of the apportionment of the athletic budget. Of the 21.2 million dollars spent on JMU’s athletic program, 4.2 million was spent on football.
The seven men’s teams, on the other hand, accounted for only 550,000 dollars of the school’s athletic budget. The money it would have taken JMU to retain these programs pales in comparison to the funds allocated to the school’s football program.
Both sides used the JMU story to further their own cause and neither side made an effort to fix the problem. If $550,000 were the only difference between those athletic programs surviving or not, these organizations that claim they have athletes’ best interests in mind should have raised the necessary funds themselves. Gender discrimination isn’t a problem in modern athletics: lack of funding is.
Stuyvesant has shown that if funding is available, complying with Title IX poses no problems. Stuyvesant’s predominately male population, about 60 percent, is reflected in the school’s athletic program. There are three more boys varsity teams than girls teams.
When it became clear there was enough interest to support a separate girls fencing team, the school’s co-ed, but predominantly male, team split into separate-sex teams. Both teams were adequately funded and successful. Both teams won their respective 2007 PSAL city championship.
The race to reform Title IX should not tarnish it’s legacy of equal opportunities to athletes of both genders.