Title IX, a law meant to prohibit sex discrimination in our schools, has been twisted into a law that requires proportionality in college athletic programs (if a school has 60% women in its enrollment then 60% of the varsity athletes must be women). The arguments made on behalf of this sex-quota-based Title IX are faulty and misleading. Below are portions from a Women's Sports Foundation email advisory that puts forth three themes that are currently being promoted to the public.

"The current 'arms race' in Division I athletic programs is taking resources away from funding broad sport programs."

With statements like this the gender quota advocates are pointing the finger at the excesses of "Big Time Football and Basketball". The theory is that these sports drying up the budget so that nothing is left. There are three major flaws in this argument:

1) There are many examples of men's Olympic collegiate sports teams being dropped where money was not the issue. The Marquette Wrestling Team was totally funded by alumni and supporters when it was dropped in 2001 for "gender equity" reasons. Boston College dropped its lacrosse, water polo, and wrestling programs, which had part-time coaches and no athletes on scholarship. The programs were so inexpensive the teams could have easily fund raised their budgets - but they were denied that opportunity by the school. In both of these cases these teams were not dropped because of lack of funds - but because the schools had a "gender quota" problem.

2) According to the NCAA research data the average Division IA Football program turned a 3.8 million-dollar profit. The average Division I Basketball program made a profit of 1.1 million dollars.

The profit from these programs were used to cover the average Division I Women's program of loss 2.3 million dollars and the average loss of 1.3 million dollars of the men's sports teams outside of football and basketball. Division I Women's Basketball programs alone average a $630,000 loss (an average loss of $42,000 per athlete on a 15-woman squad).

Schools with "Big Time" football and basketball programs are highly dependent on the millions that are brought in by full stadiums and arenas, and broadcast revenues. Title IX should not create an incentive for dropping other male Olympic sports teams when schools invest in profitable programs that happen to be male.

3) 60% of the male college teams dropped in the 1990's were from Division II and Division III programs - schools that do not have "Big Time" football and basketball and cannot afford to buy their way out of their gender quota problem. Many of the Division I male teams dropped were from schools that had "Small Time" football or, as in the case of Providence Baseball, or Marquette wrestling, had no football team at all.

The football colleges that are singled out for the worse excesses, the "Bowl Coalition Schools" are responsible for only 7% of the dropped male teams in the 1990's.

"The discontinuation of some men's sports is related to institutional budget choices and competitive division status and is not required by Title IX."

There is little or no truth in this statement.

Title IX has been morphed by bureaucrats into a regulation that requires proportionality.

College administrators are making choices based on their realization that those athletic programs, which are not proportional, are in great legal jeopardy.

"A majority of high schools and colleges are not in compliance with the law (Title IX)"

This statement should send chills down every parent's spine. It is the contention of the gender quota advocates that sex discrimination is the only possible explanation for the fact that 1.1 million more boys than girls play high school varsity sports. They offer no explanation for the fact that in virtually every other major extra-curricular activity - band, chorus, dance, debate, theater, student government, etc. - girls enjoy majority status.

This is how the federal bureaucrats have defined the issue in college athletics. If the gender quota advocates have their way, the "gender equity problem" in high schools will be solved the same way it is being solve in colleges - lawsuits and male teams that are either shrunk or dropped to meet the quota.