[the BIG cheese]

http://bailiwick.lib.uiowa.edu/ge/Title_IX.html


All i can say is, it's wrong. The point of title nine is to bring more females into sports and create "equality" and in the process making colleges cut funding for male sports. For example, there used to be about 120 male gymnastic programs around the country but now they are down to 20 programs, because of title nine. many kids who wrestled in highschool and were going to use it to get into college with wrestleing can't, just because they dont have enough female athletes to even out the number of male and female athletes. on (i think) university of arizonas webpage they were asking for women who would like to join the new womens rowing team saying "no previous rowing experience required" and offering scholarships to those who join, just to meet title nine requirements. some guys only way into college was on athletic scholarships, but they are being told no just to meet title nine requirements.

somehow this all doesnt apply to football, just the "lower level sports" like wrestling, swimming, gymnastics ect.

i dunno, i wanted to start a debate, im bored.

 

[LordOpie]

ok, let's debate

first, yes, title 9 hasn't done what it's supposed to have... and I've heard that from women athletes. The disappointing thing is the short-comings of this has been known for years now and nothing's being done.

I'm gonna disagree with you on...

some guys only way into college was on athletic scholarships, but they are being told no just to meet title nine requirements.

How do you back that up? Everyone in the USA can go to school. The people who have the most trouble are the middle class since it's harder for them to get free money and sometimes loans. But if you're poor, you just gotta spend a few hours in the financial aid office. If you're stupid, you can't go to premier schools, but you can still go... many will take any local kid. The biggest problem is parents continuing to claim their kids. If they stop claiming them on their taxes, within a year (or two?), the kid quickly becomes lower class and qualifies for a lot more. There are variables and I don't know 'em all, so I could be wrong.

Originally posted by the BIG cheese
somehow this all doesnt apply to football, just the "lower level sports" like wrestling, swimming, gymnastics ect.

If I'm not mistaken, the schools only have to match the number of male and female athletes, doesn't matter which sport they play. Since football and other premier sports bring money into the schools, they'll of course not cut those sports.

Let's debate this too...

I think athletes should be allowed to receive money from third parties and even be allowed to be compensated by the schools.

:devil:

 

[the BIG cheese]

Originally posted by LordOpie


I'm gonna disagree with you on...

How do you back that up? Everyone in the USA can go to school. The people who have the most trouble are the middle class since it's harder for them to get free money and sometimes loans. But if you're poor, you just gotta spend a few hours in the financial aid office. If you're stupid, you can't go to premier schools, but you can still go... many will take any local kid. The biggest problem is parents continuing to claim their kids. If they stop claiming them on their taxes, within a year (or two?), the kid quickly becomes lower class and qualifies for a lot more. There are variables and I don't know 'em all, so I could be wrong.

well, i saw the interview of a wrestler who was told no because they have to many male athletes. not that he wasnt good enough to make the team, not that they didnt have any positions on the wrestling team but just because the amount of female athletes wasnt equal to the amount of male athletes. This puts them in a very tough position. " do i go to a community college and get an inferior education or do i live the next 10 years of my post-college life struggling to pay off student loans". this is obviouisly not equal opportunity based on gender.

Originally posted by LordOpie

If I'm not mistaken, the schools only have to match the number of male and female athletes, doesn't matter which sport they play. Since football and other premier sports bring money into the schools, they'll of course not cut those sports.

they DO NOT have to match sports. arizona doesnt have a male rowing team, just a womens. rowing teams are fairly inexpensive and easy to maintain. you need a coach, a boat, and alot of people. they werent cutting teams because there were no womens teams to match. schools that have male and female swimming teams will usually have the male team cut. its either that or lower the number of football players. i guess its better to make a few swimmers mad then a few football players mad and their thousands of fans. football does bring in money, but doesnt most of that money go towards the school and the football program. i guess it will take a football team cut to get something done about it.

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

equality is one thing but government regulation usually goes against the grain with anything this day in age.

Conservatism is just another buzzword for backwards logic.

No it isn't going to help or do anything positive or even seek a balance in admissions.

I still consider this kind of thing to be a form of sexual profiling and it is wrong. There just aren't enough laws against it and it is never clearly defined enough.

It is just like if a varsity guy wants to get on a varsity team, he has to try and join the womens volleyball team if he is going to be a part of the sport still.

I do strongly believe that today's world leaders are vindictive and overtly judgemental about issues that are 'none of their damn' business.

 

[the BIG cheese]

Originally posted by Drunken_Ninja
equality is one thing but government regulation usually goes against the grain with anything this day in age.

Conservatism is just another buzzword for backwards logic.

No it isn't going to help or do anything positive or even seek a balance in admissions.

I still consider this kind of thing to be a form of sexual profiling and it is wrong. There just aren't enough laws against it and it is never clearly defined enough.

It is just like if a varsity guy wants to get on a varsity team, he has to try and join the womens volleyball team if he is going to be a part of the sport still.

I do strongly believe that today's world leaders are vindictive and overtly judgemental about issues that are 'none of their damn' business.

DN, you actually are right and not totally idiotic this time. some things do not need to be goverment regulated, college sports is one of them.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Oh good,

So i suppose you're all agains affirmative action?

 

[Drunken_Ninja]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Oh good,

So i suppose you're all against affirmative action?

No man, playing your sport of choice is affirmative action.

It is the freedom to chose and think as you are. Rather than to be railroaded into something other than what you succeed and excel at.

I am thinking that

action in this case is extremely discriminatory.

Athletes would be better off without it.

I don't want anyone on my team, that doesn't care to compete.

a persons ability to be a leader is comprimised. You know the desire and ablity to 'take risks and demonstrate vision and passion' for a sport?

 

[the BIG cheese]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Oh good,

So i suppose you're all agains affirmative action?

sorry dude, toatlly different things and problems.

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Oh good,

So i suppose you're all agains affirmative action?

title 9 is a good a idea, just poorly executed.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by the BIG cheese
sorry dude, toatlly different things and problems.

What? How?

Trying to find equality through descrimination yet again. Thats the way i see it.

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
What? How?

Trying to find equality through descrimination yet again. Thats the way i see it.

Kinda sucks being on the side that's discriminated against doesn't it? Guess what? Thats' where women were 30 years ago. When I graduated from high school girls got to play field hockey in the fall, basketball in the winter and softball in the spring. The boys got football, cross country and soccer in the fall; basketball and wrestling in the winter; and track&field, baseball, and golf in the spring. Please point out the equity in that scenario.

Is Title IX perfect? No, but it sure got folks to see some of the inequity in the system in place at the time. If administrators had been doing the right thing in the first place, there wouldn't be a law like Title IX.

The Cheese

 

[golgiaparatus]

Fück title none.

Swimming took a huge hit because of T9 while I was in college. Tons of colleges dropped their Men's swimming programs. It was total BS. The main problem is football... Football has a HUGE budget and it is a male only sport. The other problem is that there are just more male athletes than there are women athletes.

T9 is rediculous.

[edit: oh yeah, also a big factor is that mens sports generate a larger audience because it is faster paced and therefore more exciting. Thats why schools were putting more $$ into the mens sports)

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

The main problem is football... Football has a HUGE budget and it is a male only sport. [/B]

There, you said it. It isn't Title IXs fault, it's the school's. They are the ones who, when faced with making a tough choice, screwed the guys participating in sports like swimming and gymnastics in order to save football.

And do you really mean to tell me that men's swimming or gymnastics is more exciting than women's?

Now, I'm not suggesting that it's right for anyone to get screwed, but we can't go back to the days when girls were only suitable to cheerlead cuz there was no sports for us to play.

The Cheese

 

[LordOpie]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
And do you really mean to tell me that men's swimming or gymnastics is more exciting than women's?

hell no! And it's not cuz I'm heterosexual. One of the few events I watch in the olympics is women's gym... much more exciting than men.

As long as college football is minor leagues for NFL, nothing will change. So it's the NFL's fault. And as long as we don't support WFL, Arena Football, CFL, etc. -- which support has been growing -- then the NFL will continue to use college as the proving ground... since we don't support alt. football leagues, it's our fault

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
Kinda sucks being on the side that's discriminated against doesn't it?

\

Its nothing new for me. Affirmative action does the same thing.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
\

Its nothing new for me.

Yeah, it's a tough life, I know...

Does someone need a hug?

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by ohio
Yeah, it's a tough life, I know...

Does someone need a hug?

No, I need a new F***ing bike, becuase this Foes Sh** is giving me hell. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
There, you said it. It isn't Title IXs fault, it's the school's. They are the ones who, when faced with making a tough choice, screwed the guys participating in sports like swimming and gymnastics in order to save football.

And do you really mean to tell me that men's swimming or gymnastics is more exciting than women's?

Now, I'm not suggesting that it's right for anyone to get screwed, but we can't go back to the days when girls were only suitable to cheerlead cuz there was no sports for us to play.

The Cheese

Please , you are using your vision of past female oppression to affect your view. No one wants to see women going back to being just cheerleaders.

Still, you have to see what is really going on. See past your resentfulness and notice that running a college is like running a business, and a college (just like a business) needs money, thats just a fact.

If you want to lay blame on someone, blame every person that buys a ticket for a football or a mens basketball match and then does not attend any womens sports. If womens sports made more $$ then colleges would have had more women's sports and title nine wouldnt have been issued because of bitter women unsatisfied with the equality of college athletics. Think about it. Colleges didnt really add any women's programs (which is what the bitter women wanted), they just cut men's programs inorder to make it balance out.

What effect did this have other than screwing millions of recently graduated HS kids and active college kids out of scholarships, and making men that went to schools that cut their programs have to change schools mid stream because their sport was cut. I knew hundreds of swimmers (some of them good friends) that had to drop their lives and change schools at the end of the junior year. Now THAT is unfair.

 

[golgiaparatus]

OK I TRIED TO RESIST THIS THREAD BECAUSE OF THE ANIMOSITY I HAVE TOWARD T9 BUT I CAN NO LONGER RESIST!!!!!

Originally posted by LordOpie
ok, let's debate

first, yes, title 9 hasn't done what it's supposed to have... and I've heard that from women athletes. The disappointing thing is the short-comings of this has been known for years now and nothing's being done.

I'm gonna disagree with you on...

How do you back that up?

Ill back that up. I couldnt afford college. That is one of the reasons that (all through HS) I busted my ass every day twice a day starting at 5:00 AM inorder to get a full scholarship so I could go to school and not be in debt for the first half of my life.

T9 stole this from millions of kids with the same hope. It almost wiped out my swim team as well after the season ended in 96. So, my summer, instead of relaxing from the books and doing some off season training, I had to go looking for a new school that would accept all my credits AND still give me a full ride while promising not to drop their program.

I was lucky and they only cut our funding in half instead of cutting the team. They also cut my coaches salary, making him have to get a second job and eventually quit as head coach. My swimming career ended 1 year early because of that and I blame T9. Actually I blame the bitter fücking women that thought they had gotten their way when really all they did was screw over a bunch of boys. What did they change for women... NOTHING!

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

And you accuse me of being resentful and bitter? Please support your claim that Title IX did nothing to further women's athletics.

The Cheese

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
And you accuse me of being resentful and bitter? Please support your claim that Title IX did nothing to further women's athletics.

The Cheese

Hell yeah I am! And for good reason, wouldnt you agree?

Oh yes, T9 did very little for women's athletics. T9 used an arguement of "equality" in an attempt to create an opportunity for more women to play in college athletic programs. "Equality" was achieved through T9, but not by adding programs to bring the number of women athletes up, instead it cut mens programs to bring the number of men down. So now instead of having a lot more women athletes, colleges just have fewer athletes overall.

Explain to ME how that did anything for women's athletics?

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
Hell yeah I am! And for good reason, wouldnt you agree?

Oh yes, T9 did very little for women's athletics. T9 used an arguement of "equality" in an attempt to create an opportunity for more women to play in college athletic programs. "Equality" was achieved through T9, but not by adding programs to bring the number of women athletes up, instead it cut mens programs to bring the number of men down. So now instead of having a lot more women athletes, colleges just have fewer athletes overall.

Explain to ME how that did anything for women's athletics?

Yes, I can see how you can feel this way. It's just that your portrayal of Title IX as having done nothing for women's athletics is way off base. My guess is that many of the women on the US Soccer team, US Hockey team, crew and other world class teams who have directly benfited, might also disagree with you.

Again, it isn't "bitter resentful women" who are responsible it's those administrators who implemented the policy poorly who should be taken to task. You're pissed at the wrong people.

The Cheese

 

[sub6]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus


Explain to ME how that did anything for women's athletics?

Uh, it gave them the satisfaction of knowing that they weren't being treated any less well than the guys?




T9 does help womens' athletics at other schools though, lots of schools have added womens' programs. Particularly rowing, as Opie pointed out. It's easy to get 100 chicks into sports with a crew team. One problem with that though, is that they'll hand out full rides to any chick over 5'10" if she'll row, athletic ability or grades notwithstanding. That's pretty f*ckin' retarded if you ask me.

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
world class teams who have directly benfited, might also disagree with you

Im pissed at the bitter women for pushing for a policy that is unrealistic and wanting equality when they should just accept that mens sports are more popular.

Im pissed at the author of T9 because he didnt cover his bases well enough and left a loophole (i.e. to equalize the athletics programs all the schools had to do was cut mens programs and not add any womens programs, instead of what it was suppose to do which was increase women's programs).

Im pissed at the school administrators for exploiting the loophole at the expense of the male athletes.

Im also kinda pissed (not really) that you havent told your side. How has T9 benefitted women? You say that women's college programs were affected in a positive manner... In what way? You say it has benefitted pro women's programs... how?

[edit: BTW, everything I say is a direct result of what I whitnessed when T9 was first put into action. My school and all the schools around me started cutting mens programs and they didnt really do anything for the women's programs except for roll a little buget over into them from the ex-mens programs. And dont think that they didnt roll the majority of that buget into the top men's programs like football and basketball]

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
Think about it. Colleges didnt really add any women's programs (which is what the bitter women wanted), they just cut men's programs inorder to make it balance out.

I understand your position, but you're on crack if you think the above statement is true.

Didn't add women's programs? Women's participation in sports went up roughly 12 times depending on how you work your stats. It has remained roughly level for men (which IS actually a drop when you account for population growth). That's 1200%. Yes, some men's sports were hurt... and maybe now (30 years after it was enacted) there is room for reform, but don't try to deny what title IX has done for women in this country.

 

[shocktower]

I think all college sports Blow ,the Idea for a UNI is supposed to be Education not making money ,this country has great institutions ,but they are there for profits only :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry:

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
Im pissed at the bitter women for pushing for a policy that is unrealistic and wanting equality when they should just accept that mens sports are more popular.

So we should have just kept quiet and remained second class citizens so that the big strong boys could have it all? What a crock!!! I guess if we'd all stayed playing with our dolls and grown up to be mommies none of this would have happened, huh? Then you probably could have picked all the good jobs,too!

[edit: BTW, everything I say is a direct result of what I whitnessed when T9 was first put into action. My school and all the schools around me started cutting mens programs and they didnt really do anything for the women's programs except for roll a little buget over into them from the ex-mens programs. And dont think that they didnt roll the majority of that buget into the top men's programs like football and basketball]

So, you were in college in 1972 when Title IX was first instituted? You use your first hand experience, I'll use mine. The first year I played on the basketball team we had to eat in the dining halls with everyone else. After Title IX we had the same training table as the men's team. We also had some girls who finally got scholarships on a par with what equivalent men got and attendance rose as we improved because we got better coaches, trainers and gear. At that time there were no teams eliminated from the school and women eventually added water polo and rowing.

Over the years some men's teams were discontinued, but so were women's. It was because the total athletic budget was cut. Now there is no gymnastics program, no more water polo and except for football, the sports are identical for both men and women. Same number, same sports. That's what Title IX was supposed to do..... make it equal.

I'm sorry your school couldn't figure out how to accomplish compliance without screwing people. I'm sorry you had to scramble to complete your education, but your misogynistic blather is not useful.

The Cheese

 

[RhinofromWA]

They should drop college sports all together.........



Even?

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

Originally posted by RhinofromWA
They should drop college sports all together.........



Even?

Even!

 

[ohio]

From an admittedly biased website (savetitleIX.com):

edit: here's the link... that was too much text. http://www.savetitleix.com/overview.html

 

[the BIG cheese]

cool, i struck a nerve!


suzy, have you seen the ill effects of title IX? there are plenty. for one group to thrive shouldnt have to mean that one is hurt. there would have been better ways to go about doing this all the while maintaining male sports in college. if they wanted to regulate something, regulate football for gods sake!

Write up a new plan, THEN get rid of title IX.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by the BIG cheese
there would have been better ways to go about doing this all the while maintaining male sports in college. if they wanted to regulate something, regulate football for gods sake!

name one.

I can't think of a single governmental initiative that achieved its goal more successfully. Yes, it wasn't perfect for everyone. Boohoo. You know what they say about pleasing all the people all the time...

 

[the BIG cheese]

Originally posted by ohio
name one.

I can't think of a single governmental initiative that achieved its goal more successfully. Yes, it wasn't perfect for everyone. Boohoo. You know what they say about pleasing all the people all the time...

so what your saying is dont even try to make improvements? You dont have to make everyone happy. sounds i idealistic, i know.

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by the BIG cheese
so what your saying is dont even try to make improvements?

yes that's exactly what I'm saying.

read the post again. I said that it made overwhelming improvements and benefited millions, at the expense of the very very few. I'll feel bad for the few, but I'm not going to let it diminish the benefit to the millions.

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
So, you were in college in 1972 when Title IX was first instituted? You use your first hand experience, I'll use mine. The first year I played on the basketball team we had to eat in the dining halls with everyone else. After Title IX we had the same training table as the men's team. We also had some girls who finally got scholarships on a par with what equivalent men got and attendance rose as we improved because we got better coaches, trainers and gear. At that time there were no teams eliminated from the school and women eventually added water polo and rowing.

Over the years some men's teams were discontinued, but so were women's. It was because the total athletic budget was cut. Now there is no gymnastics program, no more water polo and except for football, the sports are identical for both men and women. Same number, same sports. That's what Title IX was supposed to do..... make it equal.

The Cheese

ACK! :angry:
I think my last post was deleted. Maybe because I said something about a crock of excriment when referring to this quote: "So we should have just kept quiet and remained second class citizens so that the big strong boys could have it all? What a crock!!! I guess if we'd all stayed playing with our dolls and grown up to be mommies none of this would have happened, huh? Then you probably could have picked all the good jobs,too!"

Anyway, I never said anything remotely close to this. Sounds to me like you are trying to insinuate that I am sexist because I said that men's sports are more popular and make more money than women's sports (which is what I said, and it is the truth).

It was my understanding that T9 came out in the early-mid 90s. I guess because I had heard nothing about it until all these colleges started dropping their men's swimming programs. Oh and most schools didnt drop their entire waterpolo programs, they dropped only the mens so they could equalize the sports budget for the 2 sexes. I only know this because I played water polo as well.

Anyway, so I cant back up my claim that it did nothing for women's sports (allow me to retract that). I can say accurately, however, that it did nothing to further women's sports while I was in college (which is really what I was trying to say anyway). All I saw it do was destroy mens swimming programs all over the nation. The colleges would keep the women's programs because they helped balance the budget even though the meets didnt draw a crowd. Now the excuse they used for cutting the mens teams was as follows: "Men's swimming doesnt draw enough of a crowd and therefore doesnt raise enough money to be kept". Now THAT is discrimination.

And dont go into the "women have been opressed and discriminated against since the beginning of time" crap, because no one deserves to be discriminated against no matter what.

- JB

P.S. You've burnt a bra or 2 in your time havent you?

:runs and hides:

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

What drew my response was :"Im pissed at the bitter women for pushing for a policy that is unrealistic and wanting equality when they should just accept that mens sports are more popular. "

I reacted to strongly since I interpreted this to suggest that if women had just kept quiet and maintained the stauts quo, which at the time was not even close to the number of men's opportunities, then the double edged sword of budget cuts and Title IX compliance would not have affected you. It wasn't until athletic budgets, minus football of course, were dramatically reduced that Title IX became problematic for ADs everywhere.

"Oh and most schools didnt drop their entire waterpolo programs, "

If you go back and re-read my response you'll note that instead of making blanket statements, I used my alma mater as an example. UMass eliminated both water polo programs.

It's your impression that Title IX did nothing to further women's athletics during your college career, but it has been very effective overall in the advance of women's sports in America. Evidence can be found in the basketball programs at UConn, Tennessee and Old Dominion where the women's teams draw as well or better than the men's. Even at UMass it's very difficult to get tickets to the women's home games.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that no one should be discriminated against. I also don't buy into the idea "I've been oppressed because women everywhere have been oppressed through the centuries.". However, I now fight back when a hard fought gain is threatened.

No, I never was a "bra burner". I was too busy first getting my degree in physics (one of the only women in the program at the time), playing varsity basketball, then raising 2 kids while getting my PhD in Physical Chemistry, etc. to afford the luxury of activism. But now.......:devil: Bwwwwwwwahahahahahahah!!!!!

The Cheese

 

[golgiaparatus]

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
What drew my response was :"Im pissed at the bitter women for pushing for a policy that is unrealistic and wanting equality when they should just accept that mens sports are more popular.

Yeah, that was uncalled for. basically what I was getting at was that the policy of complete athletic equality is unrealistic because mens sports (as a whole) draw more cash for the schools.

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
It wasn't until athletic budgets, minus football of course, were dramatically reduced that Title IX became problematic for ADs everywhere.

This is exactly what I was ranting about. The buget cuts were bad enough. Even worse was that because of T9 the cuts affected the less popular men's sports and not the womens.

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
I wholeheartedly agree with you that no one should be discriminated against. I also don't buy into the idea "I've been oppressed because women everywhere have been oppressed through the centuries."

Good for you
However my mother was a huge women's lib nut. I was just padding my last respnse so I was prepared for one of her type of comments because, yes, you were sounding like my mother when you went off about "staying at home, making babies, yada yada yada"

Originally posted by SuzyCreamcheese
No, I never was a "bra burner". I was too busy first getting my degree in physics (one of the only women in the program at the time), playing varsity basketball, then raising 2 kids while getting my PhD in Physical Chemistry, etc. to afford the luxury of activism. But now.......:devil: Bwwwwwwwahahahahahahah!!!!!

I'm impressed, can you make me some acid (chemestry) so I can put it in my bosses coffee?

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
It was my understanding that T9 came out in the early-mid 90s.

The original Title 9(federal funding for highschools) was in 72/73, the NCAA instituted it in the 90s.

 

[ohio]

Just an FYI here: T9 is NOT a strict policy. It's actually very easy to meet its requirements.


A school can meet this requirement if it can demonstrate any one of the following:

* that the percentages of male and female athletes are substantially proportionate to the percentages of male and female students enrolled; or
* that it has a history and continuing practice of expanding athletic opportunities for the underrepresented sex ; or
* that its athletics program fully and effectively accommodates the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex

Note that the wording actually allows for the policy to work both ways, and does not require strict quotas in terms of allocation of athletes or money. I suspect the Suzy is correct that you were feeling the brunt of budget cuts and NOT title IX. My alma mater recently tried to cut the swimming program due to exactly that. Alumni and student backlash saved the team.

 

[SuzyCreamcheese]

Originally posted by golgiaparatus
I'm impressed, can you make me some acid (chemestry) so I can put it in my bosses coffee? [/B]

No, but I work with guys who could!

The Cheese