Comments on: Title IX is XL!

By: Bayou Irish

Bayou Irish — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:42:44 +0000

In reply to Squire McGuire. Squire: you're totally right and I have corrected myself. I am sorry.

By: Squire McGuire

Squire McGuire — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:41:26 +0000

40 years, 1972 right? ND football national championships since 1972 – 1973, 1977, 1988…….. three not one by my count.

By: Mark G.

Mark G. — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 14:20:56 +0000

If we view college sports as an extension of the school’s educational mission, then applying Title IX to sports is entirely logical and appropriate. Without Title IX, schools could and in some instances would continue to not offer equal educational opportunities to women – whether in sports or in any other area of education. If you do not like Title IX, then don’t take the federal funding.

If you instead view college sports as an extension of the entertainment industry, then it makes sense to allocate resources to those sports that make the most money or generate the most PR, and to view Title IX as a hurdle to that goal.

Have there been unintented consequences? Sure. But the question is whether Title IX has done more good than harm. I think so.

By: Titus

Titus — Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:51:57 +0000

What a crock: if there were ever a shining example of bloated federal overreach, the law of unintended consequences, and morally neutral results tarted up as the most important thing since the Incarnation, it would be Title IX. It’s a bane, and your daughter, my daughter, the University, and the rest of the world would be better without it.

By: WrestlingFan59

WrestlingFan59 — Sun, 24 Jun 2012 04:28:24 +0000

While I would agree that Title IX has helped give some more women opportunities. It did come with some casualties. Because there had to be equal opportunity for Men and Women, many colleges chose to cut men’s programs, such as wrestling, rather than add women’s programs.