Title IX opinion piece in today's USA today

[mr. pony]

By Tamika Catchings

Growing up, one of my greatest thrills was dribbling a basketball with my father and siblings. No other pastime could compare with the challenge of the game and the exhilaration of competition. By the seventh grade, I had decided I would one day play in the NBA.

My family made me believe that I could excel at basketball. And like so many other young women, I had opportunities to play sports because of Title IX, the landmark law that passed 34 years ago requiring schools from elementary to college to provide equal athletic opportunities for boys and girls.

Largely as a result of Title IX, women's participation in athletics has increased more than 400% at the college level and more than 800% in high schools since 1972. Title IX has given women the same opportunities as our brothers got to shoot a basketball, kick a soccer ball or hit a softball. And for many young women, it has meant that colleges would recruit us and offer us scholarships to pay for our education. In addition, professional teams would draft us.

The NCAA is celebrating its 25th year of women's sports, and its women's basketball tournament exists and is a success thanks in part to Title IX. We have the WNBA, which is celebrating its 10-year anniversary, and more women compete in Olympic sports.

But this march forward has reached a potential roadblock. About 15 months ago, the Department of Education quietly issued a new Title IX policy that lowers the bar for what schools must do to provide equal sports opportunities for women. Schools now can show compliance with the law simply by sending all female students an e-mail survey gauging their athletic interests. Schools can claim that any failure to respond indicates a lack of interest in additional opportunities.

Boys and men have never had, nor should they be asked, to prove their interest in sports. Women shouldn't be held to this unreasonable standard either. Advocates for equality have rightfully criticized this policy. The NCAA passed a resolution last year urging the Education Department to withdraw the change to Title IX. It's too early to tell what impact this policy will have on women's sports, but it has the potential to do great damage. For instance, a college could rely on this new survey as a justification for limiting athletic opportunities for women.

Every girl should be allowed to pursue her dream, whether it is to be a rocket scientist, a doctor or an NBA player. Title IX has enabled female athletes to do just that, and the next generation deserves no less. The Education Department should reverse this policy. Preserving Title IX is simply the right thing to do.

Tamika Catchings plays for the Indiana Fever in the WNBA.

[The PonyGrad]

While this change may or may not be the answer it has been know for a long time that the level of interest in sports vs. opportunity has become very biased toward women since Title IX. Some means of reflecting that ratio is a good thing instead of operating under the premise that boys and girls are the same.

[mr. pony]

Agreed.

[SMUballboy]

I think title IX is a load of crap, i'm not sexist it's just that men's sports bring in way more $$$ than women's sports do

[Water Pony]

As a father of a daughter (Vanderbilt Equestrian) and son (SMU Men's Lacrosse), who did Club Sports in college, I am absolutely in favor of encouraging and promoting women in college sports, varsity, club and recreational. Since I graduated from SMU in the Sixities, I am pleased that women sports as expanded so dramatically.

However, the promotion of women sports should not and doesn't have to be at the expense of Men's participation in Varsity sports. SMU's elimination of Men's Track & Field/Cross Country, as one example, is a real disappointment. By insisting that football with its large team size as well as it's revenue be counted in the Title IX debate, you find that the only way to meet Title IX mandates is to eliminate Men's teams. That makes no sense.

To create equality at the expense of Men's participation reduces the overall value of that college sports delivers for all students. Equality does have not to be interpeted as identical outcomes. I believe Women athletes would also agree.

[EastStang]

When you start having to add women's sports which are getting to the fringes (equestrian, shooting, bowling) in order to comply with Title IX and you have to cut men's opportunties in sports like Olympic sports like track and wrestling, then it begins to go from being an opportunity to being a noose around people's necks. With the exception of football, if you have a men's sport, then you ought to have a comparitive women's sport: tennis, golf, swimming, baskeball, lacrosse, cross country, baseball/softball, gymnastics, track. Have you noticed that since SMU dropped men's track and women's team has gone down in the rankings precipitously? If you have wrestling then you need to add another women's sport like volleyball. If you had a football exception, I think you would find a much healthier overall athletics program for men and women.

[BUS]

Title IX also includes things like dancing and other activites. If you looked into it we should be comparing male dancers to female dancers and the percentage of participation.

Title IX is more than just sports from what I have heard.

[Sam I Am]

S. F. Austin U. in Nacogdoches only has a women's tennis team these days. Guess why.