Explaining Outcomes of Title IX Quota Enforcement
On the blog, Ask Coach Wolff, Rick Wolff tells the familiar tale of boys competing on girls teams, and girls competing on boys teams in high school. He then recounts that a boy recently broke a girls’ swim record and wants to know, “is that right? Was that the intent of Title IX?”
When answering this question, it’s important to backtrack to see how we ended up with combined teams as a result of terminated opportunities for male athletes. As we’ve said before, Title IX was created to prevent gender discrimination among both sexes. Unfortunately, at the expense of many athletes and entire sports programs, activists have strongly encouraged schools to implement the law by using gender quotas and proportionality measures to create what they deem “gender equity.” As a result of this zealousness, schools have actually violated Title IX by denying opportunities based on gender to achieve a strict number balance among boys and girls.
That’s where we are today, and that’s why many parents, like the ones who have read and responded to Rick Wolff’s post, are confused that boys participate on girls’ teams. Yet the real outrage is why that’s actually happened, as described above. So, if those parents are that unhappy with the perverse unintended consequences of the application of Title IX to high school and college athletics, they should ask why it’s taken so long to reform Title IX to restore its original purpose and ensure that all students have the opportunities to pursue their interests. Changing tactics — by using means other than strict gender quotas to evaluate opportunities — would ensure that schools allow the original spirit of Title IX to reach those individuals most affected unintended outcomes.