OK, so I read an article which ill quote and ill put a link at the bottom..
Basically this Title IX thing goes like this:
"The proportionality rule says that an academic program's population must parallel the university's student population. So, in other words, if a university has 55 percent female students and 45 percent male students, then every department must also reflect this ratio"
And its lead to this:
"What the universities are doing to compensate for proportionality is that instead of adding female programs, they are cutting male programs. I really don't know if the women athletes out there realize what fighting for Title IX is actually accomplishing. While 5,800 athletic opportunities have been added for women in the past 10 years, more than 350 National Collegiate Athletic Association programs involving about 21,000 male athletes have been terminated since 1991. That's roughly 10 percent of the male athletes participating in that period.
-There are 200,000 male and 125,000 female college athletes in the NCAA. As the present trend continues, proportionality will be achieved with 140,000 male athletes and 140,000 female athletes. This cuts 60,000 more male opportunities"
The main problem is that Title IX does not consider INTEREST...its just that men are usually more interesting in playing sports but to keep up the proportion clause...men sports teams get cut and women's teams get added...in one case there were advertisements for women to try out...well if women were interested why the need to advertise? You don't have to try and advertise men to play football. I think this is a failed attempt at social engineering. I love and respect female athletes but taking away men's sports when men are typically more involved is just wrong. what say you?
link
Basically this Title IX thing goes like this:
"The proportionality rule says that an academic program's population must parallel the university's student population. So, in other words, if a university has 55 percent female students and 45 percent male students, then every department must also reflect this ratio"
And its lead to this:
"What the universities are doing to compensate for proportionality is that instead of adding female programs, they are cutting male programs. I really don't know if the women athletes out there realize what fighting for Title IX is actually accomplishing. While 5,800 athletic opportunities have been added for women in the past 10 years, more than 350 National Collegiate Athletic Association programs involving about 21,000 male athletes have been terminated since 1991. That's roughly 10 percent of the male athletes participating in that period.
-There are 200,000 male and 125,000 female college athletes in the NCAA. As the present trend continues, proportionality will be achieved with 140,000 male athletes and 140,000 female athletes. This cuts 60,000 more male opportunities"
The main problem is that Title IX does not consider INTEREST...its just that men are usually more interesting in playing sports but to keep up the proportion clause...men sports teams get cut and women's teams get added...in one case there were advertisements for women to try out...well if women were interested why the need to advertise? You don't have to try and advertise men to play football. I think this is a failed attempt at social engineering. I love and respect female athletes but taking away men's sports when men are typically more involved is just wrong. what say you?
link
Most Helpful Opinions