Title IX not to blame for larger problems

BY COLLEEN KINDER

STEVE VALENTI/NEWSMAKERS

Two days and two e-mails after this incident, Yale's offended field hockey starter had a letter of apology from the head of the Department of Athletics. Title IX has brought collegiate athletics a long way—from the days when a female athlete would have encountered this type of injustice every day she hit the field to the present, when such inequality is redressed with sincerity and respect. Gone are the days when an athletic female's best bet at decent treatment was the cheerleading squad. Today, a female athlete who devotes her time and energy to a sport can expect the equipment, facilities, coaching staff, and recognition she deserves.

Unfortunately, since the inception of Title IX, many men's athletic teams have suffered casualities. At Yale alone, three varsity men's athletic teams have been eliminated since 1979, while others have been reduced in size. Across the country, successful sports programs have been shut down so that the ratio of male-female athletes is proportionate to the college's population, as mandated by Title IX. In a gradual backlash against this 30-year-old law, many have claimed that Title IX causes reverse discrimination. They have asked, "Why pump up women's athletics if it means that men's teams have to go by the wayside?"

The inequality that male athletes are now feeling lies not in Title IX, but rather in our culture. Traditional male sports, such as football, baseball, and hockey, have been favorite American pastimes for decades. We make it to every Yale football game—rain or shine, but don't show the least bit of interest in the squash playoffs or the golf team's latest victory. Time-honored sports often push smaller, less popular ones to the sidelines. The fault lies not with the equity demanded by Title IX, but with the colleges that would sooner eliminate an entire men's gymnastics team than think of diminishing the bench of their 100-player football team by 10.

Furthermore, Title IX doesn't mandate cuts; universities choose to make them. Title IX demands the most basic equality—a proportionate ratio. This ratio can be attained by supplementing women's sports rather than by eliminating men's teams. Men's teams don't have to go by the wayside. Cuts are an easy out for colleges that aren't committed to building up women's programs any further. For every male team that is cut or eliminated, a female team could be enhanced or created. If it takes three women's teams to counterbalance football, as appears to be the case at Yale, so be it.

To say that Title IX should be eliminated to end inter-sport preferences is ridiculous. These preferences are an entirely different matter than gender inequality, not to mention a matter that most females have had to deal with in addition to gender inequality. For every injustice a male volleyball player encounters, his female counterpart encounters two. The law attempts to take care of the gender half of things, but it is up to colleges to fix the other.

Until administrations care as much about the female cross-country phenom as they do the baseball pitcher, the law is necessary to ensure the most basic level of equality for female athletes. No one can deny that if Title IX were abolished tomorrow, softball and field hockey teams across the country would be dropped in a heartbeat as colleges rushed to pump up their hockey rosters. Even with the law in effect today, many colleges manipulate their rosters to balance out men's sports. As long as sexism has a place in American culture, Title IX has one as well.

Next time a men's team loses its varsity status, I don't want to hear more rallying cries for the overturning of Title IX. The story of the field hockey starter who wasn't allowed on the bus reminds us of the need for a commitment to the women's sports that often take the backseat to powerhouse male sports. She cannot help but feel the "football only" mentality that is ever-prevalent in the world of American athletics. She can't count on hundreds of spectators at her playoffs, nor a huge ring if she wins the Ivy Championships, but she can at least count on the most fundamental equality—and hopefully a ride to her games.

Back to Opinion...