The Other Side of Title Ix

“The Other Side of Title IX”

In the essay “The Other Side of Title IX,” by Ira Berkow, a story is being told about the problems that occurred after Title IX was implemented. What is Title IX?

“Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 is the landmark legislation that bans sex discrimination in schools, whether it be in academics or athletics. Title IX states: "No person in the U.S. shall, on the basis of sex be excluded from participation in, or denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving federal aid." (Overview of Title IX)

Title IX generated so that females can have the same benefits, rights and other athletic privileges of their male counter parts.

The Providence College Friars and the Villanova Wildcats were about to go head to head. There are plenty of spectators spread all over the park. The Friars have been playing baseball for over seventy years, and were ranked well in the Northeast, yet there was melancholy in the air. Why would this great team and its fans be in despair? “It is one of the best seasons in school history, and it will be its last.” (Berkow) The schools president announced that baseball, along with other cuts in men’s programs would be cut in order to act in accordance with Title IX. A few angry members of the team transferred because of their absolute love for the game. The president stated, academics come first and that the administrators searched for another way to handle the situation, but no solution better came up. To round out the career of the Friars the team took home a win, and for the last time.

“Title IX requires no such reduction in opportunities for men. The foundation is not in favor of reducing athletic opportunities for men as the preferred method of achieving Title IX

compliance.” (Berkow) “It seemed we’d be taking from Peter to pay Paul, and still falling short. Ultimately I had to make this unfortunate decision.” (Berkow) Here is the inconsistency. No where in the essay stated were there financial problems for the school so the ‘Peter and Paul’ analogy is of no use. “The N.C.A.A insisted on 1 percent gender equity proportionality, meaning that the percentage of female students and the money spent on their sports must be within 1 percent of each other.” (Berkow) The proportionality rule is a good by law, but what about the fact that maybe some females simply do not want to be involved in school through athletics. The female involvement in these programs or lack there of, is causing other programs to be cut from many college campuses. “Nationally, women constitute 53 percent of undergraduates on Division I campuses, but only 40 percent of their athletes.” (Berkow) There is a 13 percent difference between women undergraduates, and the athletes, but eliminating other programs should not occur. If more women wanted to play sports then they probably would, but taking it out on other athletes just isn’t fair. The lack of consideration for the players of the sports is very evident. “Sure, we want women athletes to be treated fairly, but at this expense? I don’t think this is what Title IX was supposed to be about.” (Berkow) I don’t think Title IX was implemented sequentially to put men athletes off of the field. Title IX was designed to allow women to get funding for equipment, provide athletic scholarships, publicity, and facilities, along with other important related issues.

Title IX in the future may cause for a rewrite of the current ruling. The 1 percent rule makes plenty of sense, but should men athletes suffer because of the lack of female athletes. "We're just looking for a more fair and reasonable interpretation that protects women without harming men," Moyer said. (Feller) Should a man who is an athlete suffer because there are not

enough