On today's Letters to the Editor page of the New York Times are some responses to their series on Title IX. Read them here.
To the Sports Editor:
Instead of frowning on colleges eliminating men’s teams to comply with Title IX, perhaps the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights should do something about it.
In 1996, O.C.R. declared Prong 1 of Title IX’s three-part test a “safe harbor” for compliance. Subsequently, Prong 1 became first among equals in the compliance game, as it is the only option that virtually guarantees that colleges won’t be subject to costly litigation if they decide to eliminate teams. When combined with declining male enrollment, the use of gender quotas has resulted in the erosion of athletic opportunities for male athletes in a variety of Olympic sports like gymnastics and volleyball.
The loss of track and field at Delaware, as well as the recent elimination of wrestling programs at Liberty and Nebraska-Omaha, can be directly traced to O.C.R.’s 1996 action. Basic fairness demands that guidance be reversed. Karen Owoc
San Ramon, Calif.
The writer is the executive director of Fairness in Sports Foundation, whose objective is to restore the original intent of Title IX.
Fairness in Sports Foundation: Moms on a Mission to Save Sports
To the Sports Editor:
Instead of frowning on colleges eliminating men’s teams to comply with Title IX, perhaps the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights should do something about it.
In 1996, O.C.R. declared Prong 1 of Title IX’s three-part test a “safe harbor” for compliance. Subsequently, Prong 1 became first among equals in the compliance game, as it is the only option that virtually guarantees that colleges won’t be subject to costly litigation if they decide to eliminate teams. When combined with declining male enrollment, the use of gender quotas has resulted in the erosion of athletic opportunities for male athletes in a variety of Olympic sports like gymnastics and volleyball.
The loss of track and field at Delaware, as well as the recent elimination of wrestling programs at Liberty and Nebraska-Omaha, can be directly traced to O.C.R.’s 1996 action. Basic fairness demands that guidance be reversed. Karen Owoc
San Ramon, Calif.
The writer is the executive director of Fairness in Sports Foundation, whose objective is to restore the original intent of Title IX.
No comments:
Post a Comment