Copyright 2002 The Christian Science Publishing Society Christian Science Monitor (Boston, MA)
May 31, 2002, Friday
SECTION: EDITORIAL; Pg. 10
LENGTH: 316 words
HEADLINE:
Fairness on the Playing Fields
BODY: Advocates of expanded athletic opportunities for women are breathing a
little easier. They had worried that the Bush administration would weaken
enforcement of a 30-year-old law prohibiting gender discrimination at US schools
and colleges that receive federal funds.
But
this week, the Bush Justice Department chose to oppose a lawsuit challenging the
law, known as Title IX. That was the right decision. The law's impact in opening
doors for underserved women athletes is undeniable (see story, page 1).
There is another side to the story, however, as the
suit being brought by the National Wrestling Coaches Association and other
groups illustrates. They contend that enforcement of Title IX
has resulted in reverse discrimination against male athletes. Indisputably, the
law has caused the demise of many men's programs in such sports as wrestling,
gymnastics, and swimming.
The engine behind these
changes is Title IX's "proportionality rule," which states that one way schools
can comply with the law is to have approximate parity between the percentage of
women in a student body and the percentage engaged in varsity sports.
As women's teams have been added, men's teams are
often dropped because of budget constraints. Critics of Title IX say this is a
quota system that works against gender equality.
That's too harsh a judgment. The law has simply forced schools to
rethink their athletic programs. Sadly, adjusting the balance to provide more
fairness for women has inevitably swung some resources away from so-called "low
profile" men's sports.
One way to free up some
resources and provide more fairness all around would be to deemphasize the
ultra-high-profile men's sports - notably football - that eat up the lion's
share of funding at many schools.
Document 46 of 67. 