Unless it directly affected you or yours, it's easy to forget that there were so many educational institutions who rejected single mothers, denied females admittance entirely, or actively discouraged same (particularly in postgraduate areas). Athletics is a relatively minor part of Title IX, but it's certainly the part that's gotten the press.
Considering there is, I believe, about a 52:48 split between females and males in the general population, the figures quoted for college students aren't radically far off, particularly when you factor in the pendulum swinging from the days when women were, in some cases, excluded. I do hope you were as concerned, its, when the females were at the 45% level.
arizonared makes a good point: "if you "were not held down"...it's probably easy to say that it doesn't matter what did or didn't exist back then", just as it's very easy to say that benefiting one segment of society is unfair because it deprives the segment previously favored....particularly when you yourself are in the 'previously favored' segment. The problem is that budgets, college places, scholarships, and places on athletic teams are in finite supply. Allowing a period of 'catchup' for women isn't fair to men, carefully protecting men (given history) isn't fair to women....now this is a shocker, because we've all taught our children how fair life is
, and how easy it is for both sides of a controversy to recognize "fair" for the other....Our first thought when thinking about the NCAA is baseball; well, it ain't theirs.
And I blame football, too, wis. With more than half of the programs losing money, and another chunk just breaking even, their Preferred Status is pretty much just a side effect of testosterone poisoning in the NCAA.
OK, OK, I can resist neither Title IX threads or Catcher threads. Consider yourselves warned
