For today's in-class discussion, each group chose a question to answer for the reading entitled, "Title IX in Social and Legislative Context" by Carpenter & Acosta (2005), which was in-large-part about the emergence of AIAW, NCAA, and governance in women's sport overall. The question that our group selected was, "In 2004 intercollegiate competition for women is characterized by full seasons, paid coaches, financial aid, and more similar funding for equipment, uniforms, and travel. Find a few negatives among the positives."
To summarize, our collective response to this question was that negatives of intercollegiate competition for women include various areas of athletic and academic pressure, such as pressure on athletes to perform on a (now) national arena, pressure to bring in additional revenue to the school via athletics, the possiblity for diminished/poorer grades due to increased travel, and even newfound pressure on coaches to, as Derek (DFLO) put it, "perform or get fired," bringing into play a new sense of job security. Finally, we felt that although females are deserving of equality in sport, introducing intercollegiate competition for women may impact males by reducing the amount of scholarship funding that could possibly go to deserving male athletes.
With that being said, my question to the rest of my group (and as well to the rest of the class) is: Can you think of any other negatives that may result from intercollegiate competition for women being introduced? Also, as a follow-up, do you think that the positives outweigh the negatives, and for what reasons?
I look forward to reading your comments!
Neil
Carpenter, L.J., & Acosta, R.V. (2005). Title IX in social and legislative context. In Title IX (pp. 93-114). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Neil you pretty much covered every issue associated with the rise in intercollegiate competition for women. However, I would like to add issues that could come about due to funding, not just with scholarships. A men's sport like swimming or rugby could be cut entirely due to a need for more funding in women's basketball or softball. My point is not only would scholarships be effected on men's teams, but the sport in general is in risk of being cut. Just like here, at BGSU, men's swimming and track had to be cut.
ReplyDeleteComment made by Zach Powell
DeleteFrom a personal experience, while attending California State University-Bakersfield, I noticed how Title IX affected the wrestling, tennis (women) and golf (men and women) programs. CSUB had been a Division II school; however they were beginning to integrate into the Big West Conference. In between this transition they decide to cut the 4 programs due to budgetary constraints. They were set to save a total of $648,305 by cutting these programs. By cutting 2 women programs (accounted for $253,000 of the budget), the University had to cut the same amount from the men programs. Men golf only accounted for $88,000 of the budget, thus they had to cut another men program which was wrestling ($248,000). However the decision to cut these 4 programs has been overturned, largely due to the outburst from the wrestling program. I found this quote to be extremely helpful, “When cuts are applied to athletic teams, male athletes face the disproportionate share of the sacrifice, thanks to Title IX's gender quota. Female athletes have the threat of litigation on their side, but Title IX doesn't afford any such protection to male students.”
ReplyDeleteHere’s a good article, it describes how the wrestling program did everything to save itself. http://www.bakersfield.com/opinion/community/x173373271/CSUB-wrestling-team-has-earned-the-right-to-survive
Neil I believe that you accurately covered all of the major negatives to women competing in intercollegiate sport. There are both negatives to the women as well as the men in this instance. I do believe that the benefits outweigh the negatives. Even though fewer women hold coaching and administrative positions now, the popularity of women sports have increased. More fans are going to or at least following games, and even a few women’s teams are turning profits i.e. Uconn women’s basketball team. This is huge because the more popular women’s sports become the closer to equality they will become.
ReplyDeleteMatt McCarroll
Neil I think that you and your group pointed out the negative aspects of women competing in intercollegiate sports. I think that the pressure to be the best for both men and women competing would be tremendous. I also think that when you are recruited to play intercollegiate sports you know what kind of pressure you are going to be exposed to whether you are male or female. I agree with Matt that the more popular women's sports become the closer to equality men and women sports will become. I have recently started watching more women's college basketball and have found that I like it just as much as men's basketball. I honestly believe that the positives of women competing outweigh the negatives.
ReplyDeleteKaitlin Gauvey
Neil,
ReplyDeleteThis is a really nice entry. I think you covered everything our group had discussed in class. To answer your question, "Do the positives outweigh the negatives" is going to be tricky. I think that the easy response to say is that the positives tremendously outweigh the negatives in light of equality for women and everything that title IX has done in education. However, while I can't disagree with that statement I also have a strong argument siding with the negatives. Once the NCAA took over the governing of woman sports, the nature of woman’s sport was changed. Men took it over and turned it into what it is today. This isn't what the AIAW wanted and even with the evolution of sport I don't believe that woman’s sports would be where it is today if the AIAW was still in charge.
-Derek Flores
DeleteTo all of the above publishers,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate all of the thoughtful responses! I found them to be very informative, and whereas some of you mainly reinforced the negatives discussed in my main post, others of you brought a different perspective into the equation, arguing that it is in fact the exact opposite – the positives of intercollegiate competition for women outweigh the negatives. Although my group and I opted to support the negatives of this topic, I realize that I failed to include my own, personal reflection to the matter in my main post, so here it is:
To all of those who argued that the positives outweigh the negatives, I agree with you! In actuality, I feel as though the effects of Title IX are doing justice to intercollegiate competition as well as females wishing to be a part of it, and, in particular, my opinion relates best to the following statements (as made above): “Even though fewer women hold coaching and administrative positions now, the popularity of women sports have increased… This is huge because the more popular women’s sports become the closer to equality they will become (Matt McCarroll);” “I think that when you are recruited to play intercollegiate sports you know what kind of pressure you are going to be exposed to whether you are male or female (Kaitlin Gauvey);” As well, I agree with the quote that Eddi included at the end of his comment, “’When cuts are applied to athletic teams, male athletes face the disproportionate share of the sacrifice, thanks to Title IX's gender quota. Female athletes have the threat of litigation on their side, but Title IX doesn't afford any such protection to male students.’” In conclusion, my thoughts concerning this topic are that yes, newfound pressure on women would be great; yes, the influx of women sports certainly impacts male sports; and yes, there is increased funding for university administrators; but at the end of the day, gender equality in intercollegiate sports lends a helping hand towards gender equality in the world at large – and that’s just what Title IX is doing, no matter the costs.
Cheers,
Neil Jenkins
I would like to speak to Derek's point that this is not what the AIAW wanted. They had a different philosophy than the NCAA. One that did not necessarily revolved around winning. The AIAW had the best for women in mind because its sole purpose was the betterment of women in collegiate sports. Also from the coaching and administrative standpoint the AIAW had more opportunities for women. There was a huge drop of in the number of women coaches and administrators after the absorption of the AIAW. All-in-all the NCAA may not have been the best thing for all of women in sport; it was just good for the popularity standpoint.
ReplyDeleteMatt McCarroll
This was indeed an excellent consideration of the question you discussed in class. There was something I wanted to add to the discussion since you asked about other negatives that may have resulted from the NCAA taking over governance of women's sports. One of my former professors at the University of Illinois did a big study (over 600 athletes), some of whom played sports before Title IX went into effect, and others who competed after the passage of Title IX. This study did not differentiate between whether programs were governed by the AIAW or the NCAA, but one finding really stood out to me. In describing their experiences in college sports, females who participated prior to Title IX were more likely to say that their experiences were more fun, whereas post-Title IX female athletes did not enjoy their experiences as much.
ReplyDelete