Title IX - Womens Hockey?

[Blackheart]

Can any of you experts/lawyers out there give me a brief overview of what Title IX really says? I understood that it recommends that men and women have similar opportunities to compete but that it does not necessarily state that it has to be one for one.

The way it is enforced today is that number of scholarships and varsity sports have to be equal for men and women. Was that the true intent of this?

Sorry for bringing this into the hockey forum but I think I'll get a better anwer here.

[U2Bad1]

It means that women should have more opportunity to compete than men

[jimdahl]

Here's what Title IX actually says:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

Whew. How to test for that? The Department of Health, Education and Welfare recommended a three-pronged compliance test for institutions:

1. Demonstrate that the percentage of its female athletes is nearly the same as the percentage of female undergraduate students;

2. Show that it is steadily increasing opportunities for women;

3. Prove that it is meeting the athletics interests and abilities of its female students.

An institution need only meet one test. So, there's no demand that you instantly have equal opportunities if you prove that you're moving in that direction, and so forth.

Funny historical note: when Title IX was implemented, women's activists were pushing for a 50-50 split, but football coaches (who were quite influential) managed to push through the proportional test because it would benefit male sports. In 1974, 60% of college attendees were male. Now, 54% are female. Oops.

There has recently been a proposal on the table to drop the proportion to 50-50 with a 5% leeway. It was shot down, but the efforts to weaken Title IX will undoubtedly continue as institutions blame Title IX for closing down non-revenue men's sports.

ESPN discusses some of the changes to interpretations

Title IX FAQ from Women's Sports Foundation

[Blackheart]

Thanks, that was what I was looking for.....

[sioux fan in phoenix]

It's been both funny & sad at the same time

watching the steady increase in exposure

women's "athletics" has received in the past

30 years.

In the early '70's there was practically zilch as

far as women's sports on tv--the only time you

really saw them "competing" was every 4 years

during the Olympics.

Then ESPN arrived on the scene in '79 or so & even

then they didn't cover much. That changed in

the mid-late '80's & now I can't even put in a good

afternoon of Sat. channel surfing without being

blitzed by women's BB, lacrosse, pool, bowling,

darts, you name it.

I just can't fathom why they get so much airtime.

NBC is under no Title IX umbrella when it comes

to its professional sports so why do they continue

to air such circus shows like the WNBA? So they

don't lose the .005% lesbian market share?

[Goon]

Here's what Title IX actually says:

There has recently been a proposal on the table to drop the proportion to 50-50 with a 5% leeway. It was shot down, but the efforts to weaken Title IX will undoubtedly continue as institutions blame Title IX for closing down non-revenue men's sports.

In a nutshell Title IX is a shake down. Title IX was rammed down colleges and universities throats, this was done under the guise that college sports had to be fair for all, and if they didn't comply there would be lawsuits. The reality is that money making sports like men

[mksioux]

I think taking football out of the equation would really help