The Title IX debate – get informed

It seems that when there is any mention of the addition of a collegiate sports team for women, a line or two about Title IX is sure to follow. The thing is, most people have no idea what they are talking about when they refer to this piece of legislation.

Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 was originally enacted to combat gender discrimination at federally funded educational institutions. In fact, it was patterned after the language of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title IX affects gender equality in the college admissions and sexual harassment grievance procedures – not just athletic programs (although this is the area in which it is usually debated). In fact, Title IX’s hotly-contested “proportionality requirement” didn’t even come to be until 1979.

An interesting “SMU twist” to this whole debate occurred in 1975 when Dr. Willis Tate, a former President of SMU, actually testified about Title IX before a U.S. Senate subcommittee. He was speaking about a concern that many university administrators voiced – that Title IX took money away from the teams that brought in revenues (football) and gave money to fund new teams (women’s teams) that would decrease the quality of the athletic department as a whole.

At the end of the presentation, a U.S. senator on the subcommittee read a letter from a female, SMU student-athlete who wrote to let the subcommittee know that, despite the outstanding achievements of the women’s swimming and tennis teams, the athletic opportunities, equipment and facilities for female athletes were not even close to the athletic opportunities for male athletes. For example, she wrote, the women’s tennis squad had placed in the top 20 for the past two years but was forced to practice on the “slick and hazardous” intramural courts, while the men’s team practiced on the new men’s varsity courts.

Dr. Tate responded with the following remark: “While I cannot agree with all the things that the young lady complains about, I have to admit that we do not have the facilities we need, and we are busy getting them.”

I am glad to know that SMU is still “busy” getting into compliance with Title IX – a mere three-decades later.

The critics say that Title IX is about filling a quota requirement. I think that Mia Hamm, Sheryl Swoopes and the new SMU women’s equestrian team will tell you that Title IX not about quotas. It’s about equal opportunity.