Title IX
- This is a preview of the essay.
To view the full text you must login!
Although many critics may believe that Title IX is a statute that is fair for all genders in college athletics, there are also many that think the complete opposite. The implementation of Title IX not only strips males of opportunity, it creates reverse discrimination. This law, enacted in 1972, simply prevents males from pursuing their dreams because there has to be participation proportional to the school's student body among genders in college athletics. Many sports are either being dropped from the roster or having scholarships cut just to fulfill the requirements of Title IX. "Colleges Consider Fairness of Cutting Men's Teams to Comply with Title IX", by Welch Suggs, and "Preferences for Women Hurting Athletic Programs for Males", by Kate O'beirne, are two excerpts that state evidence and explain the unreasonable act that is Title IX.
Suggs's essay, "Colleges Consider Fairness of Cutting Men's Teams to Comply with Title IX", is an in-depth look at how Title IX has effected male athletes that attend Division I schools. He states many examples in backing his claim that the cutting of men's sports is unfair. Wrestlers at California State University will go to court arguing that the university's decision to drop their sport to meet proportionality goals violates their rights under Title IX. Their reason for the lawsuit is that they feel that since more and more colleges are cutting wrestling programs, then their chances for a job after college dwindle because they want to be college coaches. In a similar case, as Suggs explains, a federal court in Illinois dismissed a lawsuit against Illinois State University that had been brought by former soccer and wrestlers whose sports were dropped in order for the university to comply with Title IX's standards...