Phillip Whitten is trying to say that there were as much womens programs in swimming than men's programs in the 1970's and early 1980's. I disagree for one, many women that are just a few years older than me didn't swim in college. For starters top swimmers like Laurie Val in her early 50's didn't swim in colllege. There were a lot less programs for women than the male swimmers and only a few women got scholorships to swim in college. Also, I swam at the Community College level and a year before I started they just added 100 yard swims for women in back, fly and ***. They the California JR's still don't have the 200 yard distances but the women voted to keep the 50 distances instead. The male swimmers at the community college had two practices a day during their prime workout season while the women had one when I swam back in the 1970's. The male swimmers had state while the women's program added state after I left. I understand Mr Whitten being upset about elminating men's programs but that doesn't excuse him for changing history and stating that women had as many programs as the men did by 1981.
No, I mean WHERE did you read this? I don't mean for you to summarize what you think he said. I want to read what he said. I don't remember reading this in SWIM or on SwimInfo. I would like to read for myself what Phil said, to see if maybe he is being unclear.
Meg
Gareth,
Thanks for pointing out what may be the article in question. However, I didn’t see any quotes or opinions from Phil Whitten in any of the text of the Swiminfo.com article.
Cindy, do you have another source for your allegations against Mr. Whitten?
As a college student in the 70’s I had the opportunity to walk-on to an average mid-western Division 1 swim team and while I was never a great swimmer, I was able to compete and make a number of life long friends. College swimming was also a springboard for me getting into masters swimming.
I readily admit that in the mid-70’s this opportunity was not equal for men and women. However, I have met very few people who feel that men’s programs today should pay a penalty for past inequalities. I assume, most people would prefer the opportunities we had in the 70’s should still be available today, for men and women alike. This is not the case, at least for men’s swimming. My son, currently a high school junior and a much better swimmer then I ever was in high school, has little to no chance of swimming on a Division 1 team (with or without a scholarship).
Now we can’t turn back the clock and give Laura Val a college scholarship, she seems to be doing OK without it. But we can work to make our sport better for men and women alike, by fighting to keep existing programs, reopening those programs that have been cut, and looking for opportunities to expand into new areas. This is not only true for college swimming, but age group, high school and Masters.
My concern is not as much for the Aaron Peirsol’s, swimming a 1:39 200 backstrokes, as it is for the middle of the pack to top end high school swimmer who loves the sport and wants to be able continue swimming in college. For most of these kids scholarships are not the primary concern. Many are just looking to participate as non-scholarship student athletes.
To Cynthia’s comment “what the male swimmers today face isn't as worst as the women faced in the past.” Should it be?
I would rather hope that we would be able to consistently improve both men’s and women’s programs. This is not the case. Women’s swimming opportunities increase while men’s decreases. I would love to see growth in both, not just one. I would assume if a Donna Devonna, Laura Val, June Krauser, or any of hundreds of other great swimming women were in college today they would be provide an opportunity to compete and many would have scholarships.
He states that the report fails to consider women sports already in existed by 1981 under the old AIAW system. These sports might be things like volleyball and softball. It still doesn't mean swimming was equal by 1981. But it might have been more equal compared to 1971.
I don't know the details on this whole issue, but i did read this article on swim info and this could be the source for Cinc310's info.
The link is: www.swiminfo.com/.../5866.asp
Might be just my reading of it, but Phil Whitten did not seem to voice any opinions. The article seems to be a straight reporting of what others have said.
College sports council sues GAO over inaccurate Title IX report in swim info,Sept 16. He was stating that the report just include those under NCAA's for women instead of the older AIAW and there were 900 programs in different sports by 1983 for women.
I don't think guys should pay for the past. But what the male swimmers today face isn't as worst as the women faced in the past. Donna Devonna couldn't even get a scholorship. But Aaron Perisol didn't have problems even with the cutback with the men programs. Should your son swim in college, it depends upon where he goes to school at. It depends upon what state he wants to go to school at. Arizona doesn't have as much opportunites as nearby California at the college level for more moderate level swimmers.
Well, we talk about it before. For good swimmers that don't make senior nationals and even more average swimmers as teenagers such as I was depends upon different factors. First, there's the football and basketball programs preferred over swimming and track and field. How many of these programs should remain? The communter colleges where the student body works full time and is more likely to have students over 30 doesn't have the problem as much as the more traditonal colleges that swimmers attend which are more elite and are into the traditonal big three:Football, Basketball, and Baseball. Two, large states such as California have more opportunities for different level swimmers than small states such as Maine. There's no way to eqaulized this since large states are going to have a lot more colleges. Males attend college slightly less than do females and in some minority groups such as blacks, women hold a big majority going to college. Even with many good paying blue collar jobs going overseas, males can still earn more than a female without a college degree. So, Colleges think less men students;therefore, the sports programs should be geared toward the women.l
Where does he say this, Cynthia? I don't remember reading this. All I remember him saying is that Title IX was supposed to add women's programs, not take away men's programs to achieve equality.
Matt,
Excellent advice on Division II and III opportunities.
But, swimming in Chicago in February!! Were you crazy! Getting out of morning practice and walking to your first class, in 30 below weather, with your hair frozen. Brings back the memories, doesn’t it? It sure does for me.;)
