Summary Of Title IX And Its Effects On College Sports

In the articles “40 Years Later, Title IX Is Still Fighting Perception It Hurt Men’s Sports” by Goodale and “Title IX Under Fire As Colleges Cut Teams” by Marbella and Wells, the authors discuss Title IX and the effects it has on sports. Both Miller and Marbella and Wells mention Title IX as a law put in place to protect young women’s dreams of sports in college by forcing colleges to have their sports’ teams gender proportionality match their school’s gender proportionality. As the law came into effect, women’s teams in colleges were set up and flourished to meet women’s interests and the law’s requirements (Marbella and Wells). Over the years, colleges cut back on men’s sports instead of adding more women’s teams. Colleges blamed the reason

For instance, Title IX makes the ratios of proportionality on gender admittance to the school instead of both genders’ interests in college sports. There is an unequal balance between women’s admittance and their interest in sports when the author states, “women increasingly outnumber men in enrollment- even as the reverse often is the case when it comes to athletic participation” (Marbella and Wells). Furthermore, colleges do not have the money in their budget to support Title IX requirements. The authors explain Title IX limits the choice for colleges when it comes to adding, maintaining, or cutting teams because the law forces colleges with tight budgets to cut only men’s teams rather than adding women’s teams (Marbella and Wells). In addition, Title IX does not promote equality because it is a law against men’s sports. Marbella and Wells establish that due to the interest and the number of members on sports teams, men’s sports have to be cut when “schools… have football teams, with dozens of players and no comparable team for women.” As a result, Title IX does not need to be a law because the law does not encourage equality in

In fact, critics assert Title IX pushes for what women’s sports deserve. Vicki Staton a former college coach of basketball and volleyball clarifies, “Title IX as a way to push for what we deserved” and without it women‘s sports would not be where they are today (qtd. in Goodale). Supporters of Title IX think Title IX is not a law against men’s sports. Goodale argues that colleges make the choice to cut men’s teams because of the revenue each team brings in instead of Title IX. When the author justifies, “non-revenue men’s sports are often cut to provide more funds for two big revenue sports,” he supports his claim that Title IX is not a law punishing men or causing men’s teams to be cut (Goodale). Another point critics support is Title IX is not a bad law people just do not understand it. Goodale proves Title IX stands for equality, and it forces colleges to make choices to equal out their sports teams, but people blame the law for the sports cuts. In reality, people do not understand that colleges do not want to invest in low revenue sports, so they cut teams by citing Title IX. In conclusion, supporters of Title IX argue Title IX should remain a law because it supports women’s and men’s