Title IX pays off

[rightwinger]

How long before the women's national team includes a trans player or two?

You applying?

 

[martybegan]

When Title IX, giving women parity in sports funding was passed....There was outrage

Why fund women’s sports?...

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

You applying?

Why are you trolling?

 

[martybegan]

How has our funding of Men’s Soccer paid off?

It's not about the funding for male soccer in the US, it's about the other draws on the talent pool. Baseball, some positions in Football (wideouts, corners/safeties, maybe running backs), and smaller basketball players.

Even hockey in the US probably draws from the soccer talent pool (it definitely does so in Canada)

 

[rightwinger]

When Title IX, giving women parity in sports funding was passed....There was outrage

Why fund women’s sports?...

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

 

[martybegan]

When Title IX, giving women parity in sports funding was passed....There was outrage

Why fund women’s sports?...

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

Sorry, but when government makes a law that forces a schools hand, it is not a decision. They were stuck with cutting revenue making male sports programs or non revenue ones, and they chose non revenue ones.

The only issue with Title X is it is not based on DEMAND, but on enrollment. So the schools either had to cut basketball, or cut 7 other male sports and add female teams even if there wasn't demand for them.

Stop trying to re-write history.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When Title IX, giving women parity in sports funding was passed....There was outrage

Why fund women’s sports?...

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

If you can't recruit enough female athletes, you MUST cut men's programs.

 

[martybegan]

When Title IX, giving women parity in sports funding was passed....There was outrage

Why fund women’s sports?...

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

If you can't recruit enough female athletes, you MUST cut men's programs.

Plus how many women's sports require the funding level for a football team?

 

[rightwinger]

When Title IX, giving women parity in sports funding was passed....There was outrage

Why fund women’s sports?...

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

Sorry, but when government makes a law that forces a schools hand, it is not a decision. They were stuck with cutting revenue making male sports programs or non revenue ones, and they chose non revenue ones.

The only issue with Title X is it is not based on DEMAND, but on enrollment. So the schools either had to cut basketball, or cut 7 other male sports and add female teams even if there wasn't demand for them.

Stop trying to re-write history.

And the result was instead of having 80 percent of scholarship athletes being male, it is now 50/50

Women’s sports were mocked as irrelevant. Now they are showing how relevant they are

 

[rightwinger]

When Title IX, giving women parity in sports funding was passed....There was outrage

Why fund women’s sports?...

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

If you can't recruit enough female athletes, you MUST cut men's programs.

They did recruit female athletes

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

If you can't recruit enough female athletes, you MUST cut men's programs.

They did recruit female athletes

Not enough. Glad you understand.

 

[martybegan]

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

Sorry, but when government makes a law that forces a schools hand, it is not a decision. They were stuck with cutting revenue making male sports programs or non revenue ones, and they chose non revenue ones.

The only issue with Title X is it is not based on DEMAND, but on enrollment. So the schools either had to cut basketball, or cut 7 other male sports and add female teams even if there wasn't demand for them.

Stop trying to re-write history.

And the result was instead of having 80 percent of scholarship athletes being male, it is now 50/50

Women’s sports were mocked as irrelevant. Now they are showing how relevant they are

And all it cost was the athletic careers of thousands of men.

 

[rightwinger]

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

Sorry, but when government makes a law that forces a schools hand, it is not a decision. They were stuck with cutting revenue making male sports programs or non revenue ones, and they chose non revenue ones.

The only issue with Title X is it is not based on DEMAND, but on enrollment. So the schools either had to cut basketball, or cut 7 other male sports and add female teams even if there wasn't demand for them.

Stop trying to re-write history.

And the result was instead of having 80 percent of scholarship athletes being male, it is now 50/50

Women’s sports were mocked as irrelevant. Now they are showing how relevant they are

And all it cost was the athletic careers of thousands of men.

An athletic career is an athletic career regardless of sex

Having athletic scholarships exclusively for men was discriminatory.

<sob>. Men don’t get all the scholarships anymore
Not FAIR
Not FAIR
Not FAIR

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

When Title IX, giving women parity in sports funding was passed....There was outrage

Why fund women’s sports?...

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Not for male athletes sacrificed in the process.

Yea.....Equality is like that

I suggest you look up the definition of equality as you clearly don't know what it means

 

[martybegan]

Yes, it really paid off for all those male wrestlers and male volleyball players who's teams got cut to meet the quotas.

Be happy for something, but don't ignore the consequences.

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

Sorry, but when government makes a law that forces a schools hand, it is not a decision. They were stuck with cutting revenue making male sports programs or non revenue ones, and they chose non revenue ones.

The only issue with Title X is it is not based on DEMAND, but on enrollment. So the schools either had to cut basketball, or cut 7 other male sports and add female teams even if there wasn't demand for them.

Stop trying to re-write history.

And the result was instead of having 80 percent of scholarship athletes being male, it is now 50/50

Women’s sports were mocked as irrelevant. Now they are showing how relevant they are

And all it cost was the athletic careers of thousands of men.

An athletic career is an athletic career regardless of sex

Having athletic scholarships exclusively for men was discriminatory.

<sob>. Men don’t get all the scholarships anymore
Not FAIR
Not FAIR
Not FAIR

So there was no harm done to the men who's teams were cut to allow a balance based on enrollment, not need?

Why can't progressives admit some of their policies harm people while helping others?

 

[rightwinger]

When Title IX, giving women parity in sports funding was passed....There was outrage

Why fund women’s sports?...

That was not the question. The question was "why cut men's sports for the sake of women''s sports that can't field a full team because not enough female students are interested?"

Women's sports are great. Cutting men's sports for a political quota is not.

It was about equality of opportunity, funding, equipment and access to practice facilities

Title IX was mocked.......Today it is paying off

Not for male athletes sacrificed in the process.

Yea.....Equality is like that

I suggest you look up the definition of equality as you clearly don't know what it means

Evidently, you have no idea what it means

They were ordered to provide as many women’s scholarships as men’s.
EQUALITY

 

[rightwinger]

It was the schools decision
They could have just increased funding of women’s programs

As it was, women’s sports has received more funding, better training, better facilities

It is paying dividends

Sorry, but when government makes a law that forces a schools hand, it is not a decision. They were stuck with cutting revenue making male sports programs or non revenue ones, and they chose non revenue ones.

The only issue with Title X is it is not based on DEMAND, but on enrollment. So the schools either had to cut basketball, or cut 7 other male sports and add female teams even if there wasn't demand for them.

Stop trying to re-write history.

And the result was instead of having 80 percent of scholarship athletes being male, it is now 50/50

Women’s sports were mocked as irrelevant. Now they are showing how relevant they are

And all it cost was the athletic careers of thousands of men.

An athletic career is an athletic career regardless of sex

Having athletic scholarships exclusively for men was discriminatory.

<sob>. Men don’t get all the scholarships anymore
Not FAIR
Not FAIR
Not FAIR

So there was no harm done to the men who's teams were cut to allow a balance based on enrollment, not need?

Why can't progressives admit some of their policies harm people while helping others?

They could participate at the club level, just like women were to do before Title IX

 

[Unkotare]

The arrogant SOB democrats worship Diana Moon Glampers.

 

[martybegan]

Sorry, but when government makes a law that forces a schools hand, it is not a decision. They were stuck with cutting revenue making male sports programs or non revenue ones, and they chose non revenue ones.

The only issue with Title X is it is not based on DEMAND, but on enrollment. So the schools either had to cut basketball, or cut 7 other male sports and add female teams even if there wasn't demand for them.

Stop trying to re-write history.

And the result was instead of having 80 percent of scholarship athletes being male, it is now 50/50

Women’s sports were mocked as irrelevant. Now they are showing how relevant they are

And all it cost was the athletic careers of thousands of men.

An athletic career is an athletic career regardless of sex

Having athletic scholarships exclusively for men was discriminatory.

<sob>. Men don’t get all the scholarships anymore
Not FAIR
Not FAIR
Not FAIR

So there was no harm done to the men who's teams were cut to allow a balance based on enrollment, not need?

Why can't progressives admit some of their policies harm people while helping others?

They could participate at the club level, just like women were to do before Title IX

My School didn't keep club levels for wrestling and volleyball. They just cut the teams totally.

So was there harm done to these men or not?

Answer the question.

 

[rightwinger]

And the result was instead of having 80 percent of scholarship athletes being male, it is now 50/50

Women’s sports were mocked as irrelevant. Now they are showing how relevant they are

And all it cost was the athletic careers of thousands of men.

An athletic career is an athletic career regardless of sex

Having athletic scholarships exclusively for men was discriminatory.

<sob>. Men don’t get all the scholarships anymore
Not FAIR
Not FAIR
Not FAIR

So there was no harm done to the men who's teams were cut to allow a balance based on enrollment, not need?

Why can't progressives admit some of their policies harm people while helping others?

They could participate at the club level, just like women were to do before Title IX

My School didn't keep club levels for wrestling and volleyball. They just cut the teams totally.

So was there harm done to these men or not?

Answer the question.

Go to a school that has men’s wrestling and volleyball

Ending a situation where only men can get athletic scholarships does not make me feel sorry for the men