Every weekend, I get on a bus, early in the morning, and
travel to a Track & Field meet. The past couple of meets, I have walked in
on conversations of Title IX. Each conversation referring to the same subtopic
within Title IX, how men are put at a disadvantage because of Title IX. Keep in
mind the people having this conversation were self identified men and did not
completely disagree with Title IX. Their only complaint was in regards to the
multiple men collegiate athletic programs dissolving because the number female
athletes is not proportionate with the overall female student body, thus
creating unequal opportunity for women in athletics. I will be discussing the
specific situation at University of Delaware with their men’s Track & Field
team. Further, how is the equal proportion clause creating unequal opportunity
for both women and men? Why is it
important to keep women from integrating men sports? How does it affect
men/boys when women/girls are integrated?
In Getting
in the Game: Title IX and the Women’s Sports Revolution by Deborah L.
Brake, section “The Critique of Separation: Reinforcing Sex Difference and
Gender Hierarchy (pages twenty-nine to thirty-four) claims “separating women
from men athletic competition sends the message that men are better athletes”
(Brake 29). The separation of men and women in athletic competition fosters the
“stereotype of women as passive and weak” (Tokarz qtd. in Brake 29). This is
where the term “throwing like a girl” originates from; because girls are
“weak,” they lack power to throw accurately and powerful. They hold back from
putting their full weight into to the throw, which would make the object go
farther and would mostly likely be caught by the target. A girl is expected to
“throw like a girl,” however, when a girl “throws well,” she confronts the
women stereotype because a good throw is aggressive and powerful, words usually
associated with men and masculinity (Brake 30). A girl/women cannot throw well because she is a girl; she has to
be displayed as having masculine qualities.
In high school physical education class, the
activities are coed. I have heard boys/men say if they play too rough with
girls/women, his friends will judge him for being too competitive and for
potentially injuring a woman/girl or if they play too easy and simple, he risks
losing, therefore his friends will taunt him for losing to a girl. I never
really understood why losing to a girl was absolutely horrible. If a girl/woman
has the same capability and skills as a boy/man, whichever one loses should
know they lost because they were in good competition. It should not be believed
a boy/man should beat a girl/woman because of his gender therefore creating the
assumption if he does lose the girl/woman has superhuman powers, or some other
reason for being a outstanding athlete. Pre-Title IX, judges were concerned of
keeping a man’s/boy’s masculinity intact. This “reflects anxiety about a loss
in status and about the ability of sports to confer that status if male
athletes have to compete with girls” (Brake 30). Not every boy/man believes
this nor does he allow this to stand in his way of being a part of a sport. Do
men/boys find women/girls a threat to their masculinity if girls/women
participant in sports with them?
With that
said, even though girls/women can contain the same skills as boys/men,
girls/women are unable to participant them because of their bodies. There has
to be different rules because physically they are different and can cause an
unfair advantage over the other. For example, women have “higher percentage of
body fat” which “helps them in endurance events” (Brake 34). In contact sports,
men may have the upper hand because usually they are taller and more muscular.
This would be an unfair advantage in sports such as lacrosse or soccer.
Title IX
has established men and women should be separately in regards to athletics.
Title IX used separation “as a starting point for measuring equaling
opportunity” (Brake 34). Katie Thomas, of The New York Times, covered
the story at the University of Delaware, reporting there are one of three ways
to comply with Title IX: “by showing that the number of female athletes is
proportionate to the share of overall female enrollment, by demonstrating a
continuing history of expanding sports for women, or by proving that the
athletic interests and abilities of the female student body are being met.” In
2011, University of Delaware cut the men’s Track & Field program instead of
creating a women’s golf team, which they had originally planned. Thomas states
universities or colleges often chose to cut a program because more money is
spent when expanding sport programs. It is an easy way out to take care of a
difficult situation, while also meeting Title IX’s requirements. Some members
on the men’s Track & Field team filed a compliant “alleging the Delaware is
discriminating against its male athletes” (Thomas). The co-captain, Corey Wall,
states, “we’re not fighting Title IX at all; we’re just fighting the misuse of
it.” The athletes believe, in this case, Title IX is not benefiting women, in
terms that the university is not expanding their athletics, and Title IX is not
benefiting men, in terms that their getting their programs cut.
 |
| "Courtesy of Corey Wall" (Thomas) |
Bibliography
Brake, Deborah L. Getting in the Game: Title IX and the
Women’s Sports Revolution. New York:
New York
University Press, 2010. Print.
Thomas, Katie. “Colleges Cut Men’s Programs to Satisfy Title
IX.” The New York Times. n.p.,
1 May. 2011.
Web. 7 April 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment