Sports
Does a Real
Solution Exist?
Gender equity may sound simple on
paper, but it means painful choices
for collegiate athletics.
Although Carrie Taylor ami Brian Winkler
have never met, they’ve become rivals.
Hull) want to wear the maize anil blue ol the l ot Michigan. Hut In-cause ul
something called gender equity, only l ay lor will He able to plat
l he two Have been caught up in the same high stakes shuttle that is being plated
out at colleges and universities across the countn Gender equity, mandated In
I i tie IX ot the I ducat ion \ u lend me lit s ot 1 ‘>”2, asks athletic departments to create
equal op|M>rtumties tor female athletes
More than 20 years later, gender equity has put athletic departments in a state ot
panic, prompted lawsuits Irum Ixith men’s and women’s non revenue teams, and,
as it threatens to cut into football programs, fueled I s vcar-old rumblings among
the football powers almut breaking away from the \'( VV
\s lav lor and Winkler have discovered, equal opportunity is not a simple Issue
when budgets are tight.
\s a small step toward equity in March, Mu lligan elevated women’s soccet from
a club activity to a varsity sport. Hut to pay for the soccer program, the university
axed men’s gymnastics beginning in IW-4-Vs Now W inkler, a junior star on the
gymnastu s team, is wondering it he chose the wrung school.
"I was numb I couldn’t work out, 1 couldn't do anything,” Winkler says ot his
reaction to the decision. "I vias pretty upset and pissed ott I was |ust realizing that
after this year I wouldn’t be able to compete in l’SGI- |l S Gymnastics
Foundation!.”
l aylor, on the other hand, is so excited alxiut the prospect ol playing on a varsity
squad, she's talking .iImiiiI delaying graduation to try out tor the new six'icr team
Hut her excitement is diluted In resentment. "I tecl like the men's gymnastics
team hates women’s soccer," she says "Were ecstatic about the tact that were
going varsity, but we can’t show how happy we are trecause it would look like we re
happy lie-cause ot their misfortune.”
Doing the Right Thing
When Congress enacted I itlc IX, toss could have toreseen the haviM that would
Ik- wrought on athletic departments. \t the time, it |ust seemed like the hest was ot
ending gender discrimination.
Public and private sihools from the elementary to the |><»st graduate level were
given until IV7H to make all programs from admissions to housing to sjxirts
teams equally available to men and women.
But l'>78 came and went, along with most of the ’80s, without I itle IX affecting
athletic departments in part because ot a Supreme Court case which exempted
them from the law
I hen, in 1988, Congress enacted the (. i v 11 Rights Restoration \ct, which
required universities to ensure all of their departments were in compliance with
Title IX, regardless of whether the departments themselves received federal funds
To comply, athletic departments had to show pro[>ortionalin in participation and
funding for male and female athletes, a history of increasing opportunities tor
female athletes, and accommodation of the interests and abilities of their athletes.
That's when the law Ivecatne a painful reality tor collegiate athletics. In the past
five years, women athletes have tiled lawsuits at Colorado State l , the l of
1 exas, Cornell k and scores ot others \t Colorado State, tor example, women
softball players who had their team cut filed suit under 1 itle IX and got softball
reinstated No case tried in court has vet been lost because ot invalid argument,
Ii( football protrama IUu tho U of Georgia • make It hard for univorcltm to enforce tender equity
says I- lien Vargas of ilic Women's I ass I oundat ion in \\ ashington, i > *
(tender equils seems like .1 net essary as enue <>l redress, et inside ring the results nl
.t I'^ll \'( . \ \ Studs 1 he studs showed tli.it men, on asetage, eonstituted almost
'(I 1 screen! ol sarsits athletes, even though thi s made up mils s() pereent id under
graduate enrollment
"I loss ean you etlm alls sas sou're not m favor ol gender equity ss hen the under
graduate population of males and females is close to 'll 'll- asks l of Michigan
Vssoeiate \thletie Director IVggs lii.ulles Doppes, voicing the tentr.il argument
lor gender equity
Losing the Financial Lottery
Hut it’s pros ing hard to enh>rce gender equity and he lair to es ery i me
\thletic departments need mones to pas lor these changes, anti in the financial
lottery that ensues, men’s sports particularly non revenue sports often are the
losers.
lit 11 Relies, a senior at the l ol Illinois, knows ss hat it’s like to lose oppot t unities
his sw imming and diving team ss as 1 ut in M as, along ss it h the fencing team and
the women’s diving team, because of a budget shortfall. I he tails affected only
three female athletes, hut 4» male athletes were left without teams
Relies and Ins teammates decided to turn the tables on 1 1 tie IV tiling suit
against the university lor gentler discrimination. 1 he suit ssas dismissed by a teller
al court m \ugust, but Relies still says his team ssas cut liecause they were male
“We were excluded because of our gentler anti that’s what (the law| prohibits,”
savs Relies , a senior. Similar eases have been tiled or have been settled out of court
at the l of \rkansas and Drake l \t \rkansas, the men’s swimming team
regained sarsits status until all ol the team’s athletes had finished their eligibility .
“(tender equity is a tsso edged sword,” sass l ol (icorgia head football coach
kas (ioff. \t (icorgia. (toll sass, the proportion ol male to female athletes is
skewed mostly because of the football program. “You don't want to eliminate
contlmitd on pa& IS