What we talked about today in class

by Dex on Feb 2, 2006 12:04 AM PST in News

Today, at school, we talked about Title IX and women in sports. So far, this particular class has covered a range of topics. I'm talking topics you wouldn't normally think a graduate level class would cover. The commentary is rather insightful. Here are things I've learned so far.

By some accounts, a full 75% of girls softball players in college are lesbians
That 75% of lesbians girls softball players is actually due mostly to "College Curiosity".
Girls + College Curiosity = Crazy Sexy
Guys + College Curiosity = White Shirt Frat Guy
If you are foolish enough to gather a group of English guys in a small area, they will be extremely prone to drink a ton of beer and then tip over shit while breaking windows of small businesses. This is what causes hooliganism in European soccer.
Male haidressers are very likely to be gay.
Children who come from poor families are more likely to participate in sports where they can physically assault other kids. I can only assume that this is because their days are usually f__ked because they're poor and so they're looking to try to f__k up everybody else's day as well.
Skating is still the bomb, but snowboarding is for the wack folk.
The ultimate goal of Title IX is to find that magical sport that chicks can naturally smoke dudes at while at the same time draw television ratings and billionaire sponsors.
The LPGA is so successful with male viewers right now because they've somehow managed a near perfect mix of hot Asian teenagers, latent homosexuality and golf.

I may or may not have gotten my info right as once again I'm writing my entry at midnight. Still, I believe my notes to be accurate. Good night everybody. Baseball dreams for all.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Class

Please tell me this is a bad dream, or you have the stupidest classmates known to academia (or you are just having fun). Withdraw from this class now, get what money you can back and spend it at a sports bar that has the best Pads coverage -- or better yet use it towards season tickets.

by Jacojre on Feb 2, 2006 5:45 AM PST reply actions

My own conclusions

Don't worry. My classmates are all very bright people and aren't afraid to speak their minds. The professor for the class is very laid back and a progressive thinker. Sports is a very male dominated, homophobic enterprise.

If you were to combine those things and happen to walk in at a random point during the discussion, you'd easily get something like those bullet points, which are all hopelessly taken out of context (and a couple made up, though I am pretty sure that male college curiosity is what leads to fraternities.)

I'm flattered though that you're concerned for my academic well being. It's comforting.

by Dex on Feb 2, 2006 7:19 AM PST up reply actions

Your conclusions

I guess I understand some of this is inevitable but I would hope for better from graduate students. What it shows is that some people's undergraduate education isn't what it should have been (either their fault, their university's or both).

It seems that some of your classmates get their only information about life from the Jim Rome show. (Too bad Jim Everett didn't finish the job ;)

I guess one other thing that worries me is where this discussion is at (and maybe the professor was just trying to get all the dumb comments out in the first session). Title IX is such a difficult issue, that requires a lot of careful examination (of the history of collegiate athletics, the economics of sports, the educational goals of universities, the obligations we have towards all members of society), that if people aren't prepared to do hard work, it can be a waste of time. That is, people don't end up learning anything other than reinforcing whatever prejudices they had coming into the debate. It's also one of those topics where somebody looks like they'll have to pay a significant price regardless of what "solution" is given.

by Jacojre on Feb 3, 2006 8:15 AM PST up reply actions

Again...

...do we need games , or what???

by San Diego Smooth Jazz Man on Feb 2, 2006 11:17 AM PST reply actions

Hey we're doing just fine

I'm half thinking a year of this kind of stuff doesn't sound so bad.

by Dex on Feb 2, 2006 12:50 PM PST up reply actions

Title 9

I hate title 9...what a crock.

by thenerdhater on Feb 2, 2006 12:32 PM PST reply actions

Why?

What's wrong with title IX? I know it isn't fun, but is there a better solution?

by Jacojre on Feb 3, 2006 8:18 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Why?

Title IX states "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."

There was also a provision: "Nothing [in the law] shall be interpreted to require any educational institution to grant preferential or disparate treatment to the members of one sex on account of an imbalance which may exist with respect to the total number or percentage of persons of that sex participating in or receiving the benefits of any federally supported program or activity, in comparison with the total number or percentage of persons of that sex in any community, State, section, or other area."

As it was written, there's really nothing wrong with it. It just forbids discrimination against women and also quotas.

What's wrong is really more recent. During the Cinton administration, the Education Department added to the Title IX law that sports programs be "proportional." For it to make sense men and women would ahve to have identical athletic interests and have equal enthusiasm. They don't. It's an abomination. It was meant to ban discrimination against women, instead it merely discriminates against men.

That's what's wrong. Better solution: get rid of the "proportional system" because it's idiotic.

Future Friars

Friar Faithful

by Richard Wade on Feb 3, 2006 3:28 PM PST up reply actions

Intelligent Post

Hooray! Someone who has actually thought about this! Not to say no one else on this list has, but most people I encounter don't. Maybe that's because I'm generally not in the company of people of good taste and breeding (i.e. Padre fans) -- well at least the good taste part.

Title IX, with its proportionality requirement, tends only to be a problem at places that have men's football programs [though that's probably a majority of schools now]. All those spots for male atheles are gobbled up that could be given to wrestlers, men's swimming and diving, etc. And note also, football programs by far and away are the most costly (most places that claim that the football program creates profits are either lying or deluded -- though there have been some notable exception: see, e.g., Murray Sperber's Beer and Circus and the studies he references, especially). So, at least in theory, athletic programs (especially at NAIA programs, NCAA division II, III that aren't very good) could drop their football programs and invest their men's slots more wisely. And wealthy private schools could just stop accepting federal aid and say nuts to Title IX.

With the interest argument involved in proportionality I don't think it's entirely fair to say this early in the game that women's interests in being involved in sports couldn't become equally to men -- though I would agree that it doesn't seem right now that the level of interest is the same (though it has certainly jumped by a great deal in the last 15 years). This is what is unfortunate about Title IX and other federal programs designed to correct for past discrimination: in order to level the playing field someone has to pay costs which are not completely fair, though are as fair as you're probably going to get.

So at present I would defend Title IX. However, if in another 20 years (or less) we don't see much of a change, then it's time to be honest that the interest just hasn't been demonstrated. Still we need a time to make a considered judgement. Remember women didn't have anything like comparable facilities, coaching, or competitive opportunities at most major universities until the late 1980's. And as we saw with the civil rights movement, the effects of discrimination take awhile to correct. Though I really do feel bad for wrestling programs (and other men's sports programs) that have taken a big hit.

by Jacojre on Feb 3, 2006 5:21 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Title 9

I agree.

Future Friars

Friar Faithful

by Richard Wade on Feb 3, 2006 3:28 PM PST up reply actions

I used to like to

challenge my female friends at basketball when I was in high school. I would spot them 9 points and we would play to 10. I never lost and I gloated about how I'm better b/c I'm a guy. They'd get furious, it was so cute.

Man, I'm a horrible person.

by gophersw @ Gaslamp Ball on Feb 2, 2006 3:01 PM PST reply actions