Round Table Discussion

Title IX
Goal: To understand the law and its applications in daily life. Also to embody the positive
changes and use our skills as developing leaders to learn how to model exemplary presentation
of the new rights and being open-minded to new rights obtainable to all

What feelings come up when you hear it?

What is it? Can someone try to define it?
Do you know what it applies to?
Have you ever considered the law to be plainly bad or good?

Did you know?

Factors:
Sexual assault
Harassment
Pregnancy and Parenting
Discrimination based on sex – in employment, education, sports…
Not just athletics!

Why do we think athletics has taken the spotlight?

Have you seen and felt the results?
Have there been times when you have witnessed an injustice the violated the act?
Would you stand up for what’s right in that case? What would you do? DO you know who to go
to?

Title IX was signed into law by President Nixon on June 23, 1972. In 37 momentous words, it
outlawed gender discrimination in all publicly supported educational programs. Before its
passage, many leading universities did not accept women and law schools and medical schools
often used quotas to limit female enrollment. As for sports, female student athletes were rare
— and received precious little support from college athletic programs. The logic behind Title IX
is the same as that behind all great civil rights legislation: In our democracy, the government
may not play favorites among races or religions or between the sexes. We are all equal before
the law — including students in colleges and universities receiving public funds.

How did that make you feel?

Is this realistic? How are we implementing this? How do you think we can implement this
better?

Title IX applies to all areas of education but is best known for its influence on sports. Women’s
athletics have flourished in recent decades, and Title IX deserves some of the cheers. But
something went wrong in the law’s implementation. The original law was about equality of
opportunity and indeed forbade quotas or reverse discrimination schemes. But over the years,
government officials, college administrators and jurists — spurred on by groups like the
National Women’s Law Center and the Women’s Sports Foundation — transformed a fair-
minded equity law into just such a quota-driven regime, with destructive results.

How did this make you feel?

Do you feel more negatively about the act now?
What destructive results are they referring to?
Workshops. When you go to workshops, do you feel as though you are willing to learn?

Why do you think feelings are changing toward the law?

How do you think this connects to leadership?

Flaw:
According to 2000-2001 figures, men's college programs still maintain significant advantages
over women's in average scholarships (60.5 percent), operating expenses (64.5 percent),
recruiting expenses (68.2 percent) and head coaching salaries (59.5 percent).
Only 44 percent of the head coaches of women's teams are female, an all-time low that
represents less than half the pre-Title IX figure.

Cutting wrestling and swimming for making women’s teams because they do not want to divert
away from profitable men’s teams

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kNG78T9N5c

What are some ways we can bring to law into a positive light again?
How can we be leaders and promote equality? Can we be role models and make Title IX have
the same positive contribution and mentality?

Statistics:

While 400 men's teams have been eliminated, it is worth noting that even more men's teams
have been added in the same span. Soccer has gained well more than 100 programs, and the
big-budget sport of football has seen 39 teams born in the last decade alone. Since 1980, there
have been 1½ men's programs added for every two women's programs added. The new reality,
though, is caps are placed on men's rosters where demand is significantly higher.

Summary: We can be exemplary leaders and make a positive change in society by modeling the
positive implications and demonstrating the mentality of equality