My question is sincere. There are plenty of ways to make transportation safer. Seatbelts are popular because they are cheap and provide easily measurable benefits, both economic and societal. That isn't comparable to the current implementation of Title IX at the collegiate level, which is extraordinarily expensive and whose benefits are mostly limited to upper-class whites.
First, this is not true unless you post numbers. Second, suspending reality and assuming it is true, it is only because access to higher learning as a whole is still more in the hands of upper-class whites than non-whites. Third, whether or not it is extraordinarily expensive is irrelevant. Title IX, regardless of cost, remains a worthwhile venture. One that may or may not need to be perfected, but still a worthwhile venture nonetheless.
The silence is deafening. We go to Dakar and other places lecturing Africa how horrible it is when only 43 per cent of the students are female. Our own record is much worse. Are you interested in gender equity? I am sure there are men's rowing teams in high school. The article I cited pointed out that a university was spending a fortune for a women's crew team (to meet The Quota) when there wasn't a single female high school crew team in the state. Thousands of women are induced to compete. Remember the front page Wall Steet Journal article where colleges were throwing money at women's bowling and emailing all over the place, begging women to take the scholarship money? How about the "Title IX stalkers" who approach women on campus and try to recruit them to participate? They must know there are teams at this point but they have other interests. Meanwhile, the men want to play and they are not given the opportunity.
1. I have posted numbers in the past, showing that a large fraction of female athletes come from private high schools, and showing that a disproportionate number of female athletes are white. And by disproportionate, I mean relative to the general population of college students. Plenty of poor kids make it to college, but they don't get there on women's golf scholarships, and they never will. This is a problem in men's golf, too, but fortunately, the majority of men's scholarships are not in exclusionary sports. 2. It frightens me when people say that something is worthwhile regardless of cost.
http://www.kstatecollegian.com/issues/v099b/su/n156/spt-rowing-janney-copy.html http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/sports/articles/18equity.htm http://www.irow.com/default.cfm?doc_id=137
And once I again I say you have no clue! You sit in your Chicago office and read articles that may or may not be true, that may or may not be biased and claim to have supreme knowledge of the issue. Are you a current or recent (say within the last 7 or 8 years) college athlete? Have you or are you coaching college athletics? Have you or are you currently working in a college athletic department? Have you or are you involved with starting a new womens' sport at a college? If you can answer yes to any of these then maybe you have an idea of what is really going on, if not then shut up. You have absolutely no idea of what is going on. You are just someone who doesn't want females to play sports.
Good thing no one said that, then. The point was whether Title IX was worth the cost. Your hypo was $500 per student. My response: "it's a deal." Yours: "too much." TF: "In Dakar we make women pay $500 to row crew and they don't talk about it at lunch."
Once again! Two articles, that mention Title IX as hurting mens' sports, big whoop! I just did a quick google search and found something like 12 pages of articles discussing how good Title IX has been. The third article is the best, you took an article (no wait it's actually an ad!) discussing the booming growth of Crew at the college level and saying how teams are scrambling to find rowers...so use our College Recruiting Clearinghouse (which costs money)! It also says: " Also supporting the recruiting effort is the Women's Sports Foundation (WSF). WSF developed an on-line College Athletic Scholarship Database that allows potential collegiate rowers to obtain details about institutions offering financial packages to women rowers." I can see how this would support your case. Do you try to prove that you have no clue?
Roehl Sybing: If you ever observe TOS and stop the insults, I would be pleased to respond to your posts. Until that time I will continue to ignore them. The silence is deafening. We go to Dakar and other places lecturing Africa how horrible it is when only 43 per cent of the students are female. Our own record is much worse. Are you interested in gender equity?
And continue to lie. It's in your interest to respond, because not doing so makes you look foolish and stupid. Especially stupid. Be a man. Grow up.
John, I responded to you on the previous page, in essense, saying: how can you say it's a bargain without measurable benfits? My comment was in response to Roehl's, "Title IX, regardless of cost, remains a worthwhile venture." I don't think my paraphrase was inaccurate. Roehl subsequently alluded to Hitler, and I'll use that as my excuse to declare victory and back out (too busy to continue right now).
If you do a Google search you see almost the exact same article in paper after paper. Why? The Women's Sports Foundation has faxed another press release and the PC press prints it without question. You sure don't see many articles about discrimination against males and how they are falling behind in school do you? But they are falling behind. At least Gabon and Chad acknowledge the inequity towards females and try to do something about it.
I love how you avoid talking about the ways I shot you down. No comment on your involvment on campus? No comment on the fact that it was an ad? Keep avoiding the reality that doesn't suit your ideas.
Remember how colleges will do anything they can to please feminists, including adding women's soccer to pander to Foudy? http://www.coloradoan.com/news/stories/20031031/news/556459.html Colorado State passes on women's soccer because they don't want to spend the cash. Instead, they pick the cheapest sport they can find - water polo. So much for women always getting what they want. Title IX was the impetus for adding the sport, no doubt. But money (which some people refuse to admit plays a role) was the determining factor. Hell, they wouldn't add jack if it weren't for the new regulations designed to weed out schools like this from D-I.
I don't think you're being solemn enough with this news. WHAT ABOUT WHEN DAKAR BEATS THE UNITED STATES IN THE INTERNATIONAL WATER POLO CHAMPIONSHIP, EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T HAVE TITLE IX IN DAKAR?!?!?!!?!? WHAT THEN?!?!?! I would sooner die than see the US Women's Water Polo Team lose to Dakar, and we all know that this outcome is inevitable if we continue to fund women's water polo.
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-gavora061102.asp "The latest offering from the National Women's Law Center (NWLC) is a perfect example of quota creep under Title IX. Last week a NWLC "study" charged high-school vocational and technical programs with "enduring sex discrimination." The evidence offered by the ladies of the NWLC? The shocking fact that girls dominate voc-ed classes like cosmetology and child care while boys form majorities of would-be plumbers, pipe-fitters, and engineers. The Law Center's logic in charging pervasive sex discrimination in vocational education is the same as that which is resulting in widespread destruction of men's athletic programs. Evidence that women are discriminated against cannot be found in the real world of education, where they are ever more successful. So it is found in numbers. A world free of sex discrimination, in the view of the National Women's Law Center, is a world in which participants in any given educational program perfectly match the number of males and females in the school itself. In this androgynous view of human nature, all girls and women and all boys and men are equally interested in and capable of playing lacrosse, excelling in physics, becoming electrical engineers or scoring 1600 on the SAT. Any failure of this perfect equality of interests and abilities to manifest itself in equality of athletic and academic achievement, then, is prima facie proof of illegal discrimination under Title IX. * * * * And it's not hard to predict what remedy will be advocated, once these "investigations" are complete, to correct the sex imbalance in the nation's vocational-education system. When they fail to convince high-school girls, who are a declining share of voc-ed students, to take more classes in welding and auto mechanics, activists will begin to agitate for boys' representation in these classes to be curtailed in order to reach gender parity. What is happening today in collegiate athletic programs will soon be coming to high schools across the country. Boys will lose. No girls will gain. But the law will be complied with. Is this scenario the stuff of fantasy? Asked recently if anyone thought men's sports teams would one day be eliminated because of Title IX, former senator Birch Bayh, the law's original sponsor, said no: "That was not the purpose of Title IX. And that has been a very unfortunate aspect of this. The idea of Title IX was not to give fewer opportunities to men; it was to make more opportunities for women." A look back at the history of Title IX makes the law's 35th anniversary appear ominous."
http://www.academia.org/news/title_IX.php The USSR tried quotas and rigged aprtitiude tests too. Look what happened. "Female athletes today receive more scholarship aid per capita than men, " Gavora points out. Three decades of compliance with Title IX have left male athletes across the country with 60,000 fewer opportunities, Gavora points out. The NCAA records 500 more ladies teams than men's, Gavora says. "There are only 20 gymnastics programs left in U. S. colleges," Gavora says. "College wrestling's been cut in half and baseball has nearly disappeared." Enforced by the U. S. Department of Education, the 1972 law leaves colleges and universities denying scholarship aid to wrestlers, baseball players and gymnasts while scrounging for female athletes. "Athletic directors are trolling campuses looking for tall, broad shouldered women," Gavora reports. Most female teams, in turn, are offering open tryouts with a no cut guarantee. * * * * * The effect on Title IX on college athletics has generated some publicity due to coverage on newspaper sports pages and television networks such as ESPN that do not normally cover federal regulations. Still, the legal provision' s impact stretches beyond stadiums and gymns. "The PSAT has been normed to bring up girls scores," Gavora points out. Precursor to the College Board, the test now features fewer math questions, where, traditionally women's scores ran lower than men's . "If you ask feminists, as I have, if they want proportionality for women in engineering school too, they don't have an answer because it is their goal," Gavora relates. "
I am finally resigned to the fact that Thomas will continue to avoid answering my questions. Apparently I am a little to tough on him. So to those that would like these answers I am sorry, I tried and I failed.
I can't very well respond to a comment like "I shot you down." I also didn't find any reference to my "involvement on campus." I don't know what you are talking about. You have ignored my posts about the hypocrisy of the feminists establishment. They berate Africa for having a 57-43 split while we are doing even worse. Do as I say, not as I do.