PAGE
5: Men Call Time-Out
Since
the very beginning, Title IX has been controversial. "The
minute that Title IX passed, bills were written in both
the Senate and the House trying to exempt the athletics
provision," said Turco, the Dartmouth professor.
Interpretation of the legislation has changed since its
passage, too, namely with 1984’s Grove City College v. Bell,
which held that Title IX applied only to programs that directly
receive or benefit from federal financial assistance. Thus,
other programs, such as intercollegiate sports programs
that do not receive federal funds are not subject to these
laws. That decision was essentially overthrown by the Civil
Rights Restoration Act of 1987, which restored institution-wide
jurisdiction for applying civil rights laws.
Turco said the time has come to better enforce the laws
that are in place. "The regulations have been debated for
29 years. We need better enforcement of them," she said.
Between
1982 (the earliest year for which records are available)
and 1998, some 5,227 complaints related to Title IX at postsecondary
schools were filed. The Office of Civil Rights can recommend
schools involved in the most severe cases be
| "It’s
about both men and women having the opportunity to participate
in a sport."
|
prohibited
from receiving federal funding or it can refer such cases
to the Department
of Justice for prosecution. But since the law’s enactment,
neither of these punishments have occurred. "The OCR and
the NCAA have pretty much relied on voluntary compliance,"
said Turco. But most colleges, Turco said, have not yet
reached compliance.
"We’re not at 100 percent compliance by a long shot," noted
McCune, who helped write Title IX.
While many women have been enjoying the effects of increased
funding of women’s athletics because of Title IX, not everyone
is a fan of the legislation. The debate over the legitimacy
of Title IX has been growing in the last few years, especially
as the number of men’s athletic programs continues to dwindle.
Data gathered by the Independent Women’s Forum, a conservative
women’s group that opposes the proportionality prong of
Title IX, shows that 349 men’s intercollegiate teams were
dropped or announced their impending elimination between
1993 and 1999.
The IWF says its analysis of NCAA statistics shows that
between 1992 and 1997, four male athletes were dropped for
each new female position added.
"Title IX has had an influence in the dropping of men’s
sports," admits Kohl-Welles, the Washington lawmaker. "I
don’t know that those necessarily had to occur, but a lot
of this is a budget issue and Title IX is made a scapegoat
even though there is a relationship there."
The Office of Civil Rights, the division of the Department
of Education that oversees Title IX compliance, says it
is a misperception that Title IX is responsible for declines
in the number of men’s sports opportunities. "OCR’s policy
guidance makes clear that Title IX does not require the
cutting of men’s teams," a statement from the office reads.
"Substantial proportionality between the numbers of male
and female athletes and their respective enrollments is
only one of three ways in which schools may demonstrate
compliance with Title IX. Furthermore, a school’s compliance
with Title IX under substantial proportionality rather than
the two other available means of compliance does not require
the cutting of men’s teams.
"It’s not about taking away someone’s sweat suit or
cutting a men’s team," said Mary Mazzio, a filmmaker who
directed "A Hero for Daisy," a documentary about the effects
of Title IX which features the Yale rower, Chris Ernst.
"It’s about both men and women having the opportunity to
participate in a sport."
Two victims of men’s team drops are twin brothers Tim and
John Aron, whose swim team was cut at Georgia Southern University.
Their father, Bruce, was so upset about the cut that he
helped organize parents to fight to save the program. It
didn’t work.
"They used Title IX as an excuse rather than trying to find
a way to keep the team," he said. "The university had some
options that they chose to ignore." Stephen Reynolds, 21,
started out his college education at Syracuse University
four years ago, excited about his freshman year on the gymnastics
team. But on the bus ride home from the team’s conference
championships, Reynold’s coach told them Syracuse was cutting
the team because of Title IX.
"I felt so betrayed," Reynolds said. "I’ve always supported
the original Title IX. I’ve always disagreed with the interpretation
that’s been made."
After the team was dropped, Reynolds decided to transfer
to James Madison University, where he could be a member
of their gymnastics team. This season, the university unveiled
a plan to cut five men’s and three women’s teams, including
gymnastics.
"Give me a break," Reynolds said. "I thought I was just
bad luck."
Reynolds organized a group at James Madison called SOS:
Save our Sports, and ultimately helped save the university’s
gymnastics program. The compromise: all athletic scholarship
money for the team has been cut. The university said the
reason for the cuts was primarily Title IX compliance, with
budgeting also a factor.
"Colleges use Title IX as a scapegoat," said LeSher of Iowans
Against Quotas. Often, he said, the issue is really simply
the bottom line.
Whether or not it is the fault of universities or this decades-old
legislation remains a hot item for debate. But most agree
– Title IX has at least indirectly resulted in reducing
rosters or dropping men’s teams altogether.
NEXT:
SIDELINES WITH A NEW LOOK >>
|
