When I made that statement about Title XI, the first thing out your mouth was to say that I should never have a daughter. I let that go, then you got on me about being a knuckledragger and all this other nonsense --- so yeah, after that I went in on you. I'm not trying to hear all that. I hate when people try to instigate, then when somebody bites back they want to play innocent.
Some people with with different political leanings I don't expect to support these types of programs but, from someone that's a big supporter of AA I find it incredibly hypocritical. Especially since you co-opted the very same arguments used against AA and used it against Title 9. If I took these statements
Its just unreasonable that schools have to spend dollar for dollar on their men/women sporting programs when the two programs are not generating anywhere near the same revenue. If anything it hurts collegiate sports as a whole, because schools cant delegate more resources to their bread winning programs. They're hamstrung.
and changed them around to:
It's just unreasonable that schools be required to admit quota of minority students they just don't perform as well academically as their white counterparts. If anything it hurts colleges because they have to dumb down their course work to suit these students and unable focus on their more successful students. Get upset and pissed all you want but that's just the way I see it.
Really to say that women shouldn't receive the same amount of funding because they are not the breadwinners like the male athletes can easily be construed as a sexist remark. First off you are completely incorrect. There are quite a few women's programs that are very much the breadwinners for their colleges. In the sense that they are always among the top programs in the country I'm talking wins/losses/All-Americans/perform well academically etc.
This whole idea of television revenue is kind of a non-starter. Because the NCAA tournament is not big because of one player or one team so you cannot attribute it to certain programs. Out of the 347 schools in Division I athletics how many teams both men and women are carrying their proverbial weight in generating revenue? Very small percentage so should we eliminate them all?
I'm all for gender equality, but I feel Title XI creates other inequalities and should at least be re-examined. Funny you mention Affirmative-Action --- do you know who the biggest beneficiaries of AA have been? Women, specifically white women. But AA has been given an African-American male face to create more pointed resentment among whites.
We could have a long discussion about AA. But the criticisms are not that shocking because certain people are always going to have a reason why they failed at something.
That's why I am such a big proponent of AA, because it promotes inclusiveness and denies racial stratification for many who are aggrieved, not just Blacks. Concerning Title XI, I think there is a better way to accomplish gender equality. If that makes me a hypocrite, so be it. My opinion, no malice involved.
Should inclusiveness only be afforded to the races and not gender? Also how do you create gender equality because from your comments it seems like funding should be based on the amount of money you bring into a school. So that would eliminate almost every sport that isn't basketball or football and then it would eliminate most women programs. More then likely if Athletic Directors were left up to their own devices they would put money into a ****ty men's program before a successful woman's program because they would think there was more money in having a men's program then a women's.
My thing is this I believe in equality for everyone regardless of your race, gender, religion, sexual orientation. I support programs that help create more diversity in our schools, places of work, etc but that includes all diversity not just between the races, or the genders, or whatever other physical characteristic that separates us.
7/8/2009 10:32 PM