Central Library
Think About It: If Girls Were Subjected to the Same Rules as Boys
RECEIVED Tue., Dec. 6, 2005
Dear Editor,
A bill currently in the House Education and Workplace Committee (U.S. Congress) will target boys for not being girls. This bill extends Title IX to high schools, but only boys would be required to comply.
Title IX was created in 1972 to ensure equal opportunities for both men and women in academic programs receiving federal assistance, but the good intent of this law was perverted in 1980 when the Department of Education reinterpreted Title IX to be a “gender-equity” law.
Colleges nationwide struggle to get women interested in collegiate sports in the same numbers as men, but in the 30-plus years of Title IX, no college has ever been able to raise that kind of interest from women, so instead, opportunities for men have been cut or restricted to the number of women participating.
If Title IX is enforced the same in high schools as it has been in colleges, then high schools may have to sacrifice their football programs or eliminate enough boys' sports programs (i.e., soccer, baseball, wrestling) to cut down boys' participation to equal that of girls.
Ignoring "interest" and "inherent gender differences" to blindly enforce "gender-equity" is unfair enough, but it's compounded even more when only programs for which boys show more interest are targeted for gender-equity. Girls dominate almost all other academic programs from student government to advanced-placement programs; however, the new bill specifically targets a program where boys show more interest, athletics – thus leaving all programs dominated by girls legally protected.
Enforcing “gender-equity” only on programs where boys show more interest demonstrates a warped sense of equality forced on boys for decades. If girls were to be subjected to the same rules as boys under Title IX's gender equity, then maybe common sense would prevail, and "interest," not "gender-equity," would play a bigger role.
A bill currently in the House Education and Workplace Committee (U.S. Congress) will target boys for not being girls. This bill extends Title IX to high schools, but only boys would be required to comply.
Title IX was created in 1972 to ensure equal opportunities for both men and women in academic programs receiving federal assistance, but the good intent of this law was perverted in 1980 when the Department of Education reinterpreted Title IX to be a “gender-equity” law.
Colleges nationwide struggle to get women interested in collegiate sports in the same numbers as men, but in the 30-plus years of Title IX, no college has ever been able to raise that kind of interest from women, so instead, opportunities for men have been cut or restricted to the number of women participating.
If Title IX is enforced the same in high schools as it has been in colleges, then high schools may have to sacrifice their football programs or eliminate enough boys' sports programs (i.e., soccer, baseball, wrestling) to cut down boys' participation to equal that of girls.
Ignoring "interest" and "inherent gender differences" to blindly enforce "gender-equity" is unfair enough, but it's compounded even more when only programs for which boys show more interest are targeted for gender-equity. Girls dominate almost all other academic programs from student government to advanced-placement programs; however, the new bill specifically targets a program where boys show more interest, athletics – thus leaving all programs dominated by girls legally protected.
Enforcing “gender-equity” only on programs where boys show more interest demonstrates a warped sense of equality forced on boys for decades. If girls were to be subjected to the same rules as boys under Title IX's gender equity, then maybe common sense would prevail, and "interest," not "gender-equity," would play a bigger role.
Matt Ramos
