Quoted For Truth.

pilight,

if you can’t see how that penalizes men simply for having different interests than women, then you are beyond the point of reasonable discussion.

One of the major problems is that it’s not the opportunity that isn’t there for women. It’s that TitleIX apparently requires equal participation. The pools from which to pull participants for men’s and women’s programs are vastly different. It’s a fact that a far higher percentage of men are interested in playing sports than women are. That’s where the law is so unfair. Equal opportunity is very different from equal participation.

I’m not nearly self-lothing enough to have a problem with men. Several folks here seem to have problems with women, however.

The ultimate question is whether or not intercolegiate athletics have educational value. If so, women should have as much opportunity to participate as men. If not, universities shouldn’t be involved with it.

You’ve done “tons of research” and you don’t know about the Brown case?

That’s called “the NFL”. But I agree – “Let colleges educate”! STOP TRYING TO CONTROL THEM.

BS, or you wouldn’t be saying what you said.

“Yours apparently stopped at “The man in charge said Title IX was to to blame so it must be true”.”

Since I don’t get most of my information from “the man in charge”, that couldn’t possibly be true. It sounds (from both of your posts) like you have a problm with men, though I admit that’s a bit much to get from two posts.

And the answer to your last question is “Yes.”

“I think the main issue is Football which is the most expensive program most colleges have”

Many schools MAKE money on football.

Got any more ridiculous claims?

I believe L.S.U. lost a Title IX case that went to trial in the 1990s, but I don’t remember the details.

But I didn’t say litigation – I said the threat of litigation. How many Title IX suits are brought? Threatened? Settled? Avoided by eliminating men’s programs?

The easiest (and least expensive) way for a school to comply with Title IX is through the elimination of men’s opportunities.

This is especially easy when “opportunity” is not defined as the number of positions available for women, but rather the number of positions actually filled by women. The “proportionality test” has become the only means by which compliance is measured – and it’s fundamentally flawed.

As for outraged alumni and athletes, how long do you think they’ll keep funding a program? A year? Three? They’ll be expecting the school to take back over before you know it and you’ll be right back where you started.

Title IX litigation? Has any university ever actually lost a Title IX case?