Critics of Title XI argue that by requiring institutions of higher learning to provide equal funding and equal opportunities for men and women is not valid, because there is less public interest, amongst both men and women, in collegiate sports. But such thinking shows how Title IX "threatens the privileged male culture of athletics by challenging assumptions that activities, money, and fame belong to men. Through Title IX, many women have concluded that they have the right to expect equal treatment in athletics. Assumptions of equality -- when they challenge a privileged world -- inevitably create angst and anger. Universities where discrimination against women athletes is substantially greater...find it exceedingly difficult to state that women athletes are as important as men...To the big athletic schools. Title IX can seem like a challenge to bowl games, March Madness, and alumni enthusiasm." (Lazerson, Marvin & Ursula Wagener, 1996, p.8)
It may indeed be the case that there are some losers because of Title IX, like less popular male varsity sports who have seen their funding cut back, because school funds must be equally distributed, even to less popular female teams. But this is not necessarily the fault of Title IX alone, but also the fault of the university emphasis on a few, large, money 'male' sports like football and basketbal. Moreover, a sports fan base takes more than a generation or two to build, as female athletes of the current generation have only had role models for excellence since the late 20th century. For centuries, women were discouraged from participating in athletics at all, because...
To overcome such long-standing oppression requires strong institutional support, in financial as well as rhetorical terms.
Finally, collegiate sports teams are not supposed to simply be about 'being the best' but provide teaching and instruction as to how to live a good life, even to the best student athletes. What kind of a message is an instution of learning sending by refusing to give male and female teams equal treatment? (Lazerson & Waegener, 1996, p.8) This is why Title IX must continue to mandate equal funding. Without equal funding it will be too easy for colleges and high schools to go back to the old traditions of supporting male sports disproportionately, in comparision to supporting female activities. This is why the United States government must keep Title IX in force as the law of the land.
Works Cited
Conniff, Ruth. "A new day for women's sports - favorable TV images of the Atlanta
Olympics." The Progressive. Sept 1996. [23 Oct 2006] http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1295/is_n9_v60/ai_18610910
Lazerson, Marvin & Ursula Wagener. "Missed opportunities: lessons from the Title IX case at Brown - suit by women athletes against Brown University." July-August
1996. Change. [23 Oct 2006] http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1254/is_n4_v28/ai_18603196
Title IX, Education Amendments of 1972." Title 20 U.S.C. Sections 1681-1688. U.S.
Department of Labor.
23 Oct 2006]. http://www.dol.gov/oasam/regs/statutes/titleix.htm
