Sabertooth,
I'm completely down with your point about having a discussion or respectful debate about Title IX. What made my blood boil is that the column seemed to be set up do to exactly the opposit of that.
Personal digression only intended to explain how I feel, and not make any general political points: I am politcally progressive, church-going, career Naval Officer. I am get just a little tired listening to conservative commentators who don't go to church and never served in the military call me "Godless" or a "Traitor" because of my political views. The lead in sentence of the column dragged up a bit of personal baggage.
Turning to the substance of this discussion, you would like to sanitize the issue of Title IX with an analogy to "alphas" and "betas." I don't think that is helpful. We have a history in this country of dissimilar treatment of mens and womens sports that simply can't be ignored or addressed by everyone agreeing to suddenly be gender-neutral from here on out. As Craig pointed out, nothing really changes if the people in charge refuse to change their mind-set, and sometimes you need a really big hammer and a dramatic change in the rules to get people's attention.
Having said that, I'm open to a conversation about Title IX that tries to address particular circumstances, such as the fact that football has no comparable female sport, and in Div I & II those programs consume a whole lot of scholarships for male athletes. I would like to shift the focus so that eliminating a men's varsity sport is NOT seen as "progress" under Title IX. However, I don't think you need to make sweeping generalizations about women "not needing" sports as much as men. I'm fairly surpised that proposition has not drawn any fire so far.
Matt S
Sabertooth,
I'm completely down with your point about having a discussion or respectful debate about Title IX. What made my blood boil is that the column seemed to be set up do to exactly the opposit of that.
Personal digression only intended to explain how I feel, and not make any general political points: I am politcally progressive, church-going, career Naval Officer. I am get just a little tired listening to conservative commentators who don't go to church and never served in the military call me "Godless" or a "Traitor" because of my political views. The lead in sentence of the column dragged up a bit of personal baggage.
Turning to the substance of this discussion, you would like to sanitize the issue of Title IX with an analogy to "alphas" and "betas." I don't think that is helpful. We have a history in this country of dissimilar treatment of mens and womens sports that simply can't be ignored or addressed by everyone agreeing to suddenly be gender-neutral from here on out. As Craig pointed out, nothing really changes if the people in charge refuse to change their mind-set, and sometimes you need a really big hammer and a dramatic change in the rules to get people's attention.
Having said that, I'm open to a conversation about Title IX that tries to address particular circumstances, such as the fact that football has no comparable female sport, and in Div I & II those programs consume a whole lot of scholarships for male athletes. I would like to shift the focus so that eliminating a men's varsity sport is NOT seen as "progress" under Title IX. However, I don't think you need to make sweeping generalizations about women "not needing" sports as much as men. I'm fairly surpised that proposition has not drawn any fire so far.
Matt S
