Essay About Title Ix And Mens College Sports

Title Ix
Essay Preview: Title Ix
Report this essay
In 1972 a policy known as Title IX was written and mandated into
Federal policy. Title IX states “no person..shall, on the basis of
sexÐ….be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or
activity receiving federal financial assistance” (Glenn Sacks, “Title
IX Lawsuits are Endangering Mens College Sports,” p. 3). Many high
schools and colleges have not been able to comply with the Title IX
standards mostly because of money. After more than 30 years since the
beginning of Title IX, there is still no gender equality among men and
women in sports.
Passed in 1972 by United States President Richard Nixon, Title IX was
supposed to open the door for women, but feminists have interpretated
Title IX in a way to help strengthen womens athletics (Sacks 1).
During the Carter and Clinton administrations Title IX was converted
into a weapon to enforce gender quotas, therefore abolishing as many
mens college athletic teams as possible (Phyllis Schlafly, “Supreme
Court wrestles with Title IX,” p. 2). Over the years the words of
Title IX author, former U.S. Republican Edith Green, must have been
forgotten when he stated that the law is “exceedingly explicit so that
the establishment of quotas would be prohibited (Schlafly 2)”. It has
become obvious that quotas are the standard in 2005. Scholarships,
spending and funding must somehow equal the ratio of 57% women – 43%
men enrolled in college. Schools have been offered two options to
meet Title IX Ð- create new womens teams or cut mens teams (Sacks 2).
Has the question really been answered yet? Has Title IX changed
anything? YES. Between 1972 and 1997, 3.6 male athletes were dropped
from their programs. During the same period, female athletes
increased by 5,800 while 20,000 male athletes were cut (Sacks 2).
Womens basketball programs are now allotted 15 scholarships, mens
13.5; women tennis is allotted 8 scholarships, mens 4.5. By April of
2002, over 350 NCAA mens programs had been terminated since 1991,
over 100 wrestling programs had been eliminated overall, and only 26
colleges still had male gymnastic programs (J.P. Hoornstra, “Title IX
sends teams to grave,” p. 2). It seems to me that Title IX was
created with all the good intentions, but it seems that nobody really
ever thought it through.
On the flip side, coaches for an average college womens team earns,
on average, about $33,000 per season, while the coaches of mens teams
earn about $67,000. Athletic programs for men spend an average of
$1.6 million while women receive half that amount. It is obvious
that the quotas are not being followed. At this time though I do not
see this as a problem.
So what is the root of the problem when it comes to equality among men
and women in collegiate sports? Football. Yes, football is the root
of the problem. Football is a money-making giant that happens to
demand money be poured into its program. At the University of
Southern California mens teams Ð- largely football Ð- are responsible
for over 99% of the near $20 million total revenue of the athletic
department (Sacks 2). It is a fact that 70% of Division I-A programs
turn a profit. Due to the fact that schools need footballs revenue
yet must also meet gender quotas, they are forced to cut non-revenue
mens sports. Colleges cannot spend as much on womens sports as
they can on mens sports because there is no womens equivalent for
football (Sacks 3). Seems to me that football should be eliminated
from the equation. If feminists turned a cheek to football and the
money dedicated to its program every year, then maybe