Title IX Violations

Title IX is a piece of legislation that will have immense impacts on future generations of females. It has fought for females to be seen as equitable in the eyes of public institutions. This has transferred into the realm of athletics as well. Title IX has become a vehicle for many young women to infiltrate sport and be allowed to have the opportunity to participate. However, when we see institutions violating this equitable law, it is a clear indication of how far we still need to come as a society in terms of equitable gendered treatment. Females have historically been at a disadvantage in society in general and from an athletic participation standpoint as well. In this specific incident, 16 former and current Yale students have filed a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights claiming that the “hostile sexual environment” present at Yale is in clear violation of T IX. According to T IX, “no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”(Title IX-Education Amendments of 1972, p.321)

Yale was clearly creating a hostile sexual environment by having chants saying, “no means yes, yes means anal”, “we love Yale sluts”, and the 2009 “Preseason Scouting Report,” an email ranking freshman women based on their attractiveness, as well as personal instances of rape and sexual assault. These three instances right here clearly show how this environment is one that does not support an equitable climate or promote positive gendered ideologies. This is disturbing somewhat due to the discomfort of female students. "In my immediate circle of friends, I know six or seven women who've been raped," says Alexandra Brodsky, a junior. "I think it's hard to go through Yale and not have a roommate, a friend, a girlfriend, experience some sort of serious harassment."( http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-04-02/title-ix-complaint-against-yale-women-allege-a-culture-of-silence-on-campus/#) Another notable Ivy League school, Harvard law, is also under investigation as they have a “running out the clock” policy pertaining to sexual assaults reported on campus. The time taken to actually interview theses cases takes so long that many get dropped. Athletically, Ivy League schools have been only in compliance with the first of the three prongs in the T IX prong test meaning that they usually have not been proportionally equivalent in opportunities provided or been showing a history of progress. These instances show how T IX has helped to push for equitable treatment of females and punish institutions not adhering to these policies. However what has the impact of this legislation had on the males involved?

T IX is equitable and pushing for women’s participation, but in a way it has hindered the male side of sports. Powerhouse sports such as football and basketball are never usually threatened to be cut by schools because they are such large revenue earners for institutions. However T IX has impacted and somewhat hurt the presence of smaller sports for male athletes. Wrestling and men’s gymnastics are two sports that have seen significant decreases since the institution of T IX. Due to their lack of popularity compared to the “big” sports, they became the first programs cut. In one example, University of California Berkeley needed to cut 5 sports. In order to be in compliance with T IX, they re-instated women’s gymnastics (ranked 50) and still left the men’s gymnastics cut (ranked 3)[http://andersonissues.com/2011/04/02/title-ix-good-or-bad/]. It doesn’t seem fair that in order to pass tests, schools are cutting sports without giving significant analysis to the issue. This was similar to the findings of George Will, showing that between 1992 and 1997, 3.4 men’s positions on college teams were cut for every woman’s spot created (A Trainwreck called Title IX, pg. 348). This does not seem like equitable treatment to me. I am not saying that I am in not in favor of T IX. I think it is equitable legislation giving females the opportunities and policies they deserve to know that institutions are treating them fairly. In the cases presented earlier, T IX allows for institutions to be punished for their mistreatment, which I believe it truly good. From the standpoint of male athletics however, I think further discussion needs to be done to make sure that we truly are being equitable to both sides and not beginning to reverse discriminate.