George Will On Title IX

Below is a link to this weeks Newsweek column by George Will on Title IX (essentially the series of laws establishing greater funding for women’s sports in colleges). I found it interesting and provocative. Enjoy.

I thought this was a pretty poor effort from Will. I usually like what he says, but this was a thinly reasoned attack. His real target is elsewhere, and I might agree with him on some of his positions on that. But he shows a lot of intellectual inconsistency here, at least if he claims he is a conservative. He does not address the problem of tax dollars going to fund college athletics. I am, of course, against a single tax dollar going to athletics. Because our tax dollars are going to athletics, it is even more immoral to parcel out educational opportunity based on gender. Bad enough we spread tax dollars based on vertical leap and time in the 40, but to further decide on gender is horrible. UCLA could have limited football scholarships to 47 (a full NFL roster), but they chose to get rid of swimming or whatever. Who cares? They shouldn't have a professional sports system at a public university. And before people attack my position by saying mens' football and basketball fund the other sports, I pay taxes in a state where we have 3 Division I schools. Guess how much profit Idaho State, Boise State, and University of Idaho make from their athletic programs? And single moms paying for their educations have to fund it out of after-tax dollars for "student fees". It is only right that such a system has to fund womens' crew. I love Title IX. Will should have done better on this one.

All right, my two conservative friends (with emphasis on the word "friends"), my response is sort of the same as it is when that used car salesman who currently "runs" major league baseball tells me that 6 to 8 teams may go bankrupt: So what? Let 'em go bankrupt. Why should I worry about 6 to 8 billionaires who will lose some write-offs and 150 to 200 millionaires who spend most of their money, if the ex Mrs. Rose, the soon to be ex Mrs. Finley, and Mr. Canseco are to be believed, on booze, drugs, women and steroids.


So 1,000 boys want to play some sport and 100 girls want to and 900 boys end up not being able to play. Tough nuggies. Let 'em learn to read and write instead. Let 'em join some semi-pro team or a league or club outside of the school environment.


As for the "pretty poor effort from Will," I didn't think he did as badly as he does every week on ABC. He's a sham. Practices debating with Reagan then criticizes the other guy. Takes political positions that will increase the money in his wife's pocket. When asked if the Secretary of State should resign, cryptically replies, "not yet." How sagacious.


And speaking of the Secretary of State, his comments about all the noise about affirmative action remind me of Will's whining about Title IX. General Powell says he can see no great harm, and a lot of good, coming from a few thousand black kids being able to go to college that otherwise might not have had that opportunity. I see no great harm from a few thousand males not having the opportunity to play lacrosse or try to swim faster than another guy, so that a few hundred women, who might otherwise have not had that opportunity, have it.


I'm ashamed of my race and sex every time I hear a white male complain about how white men are getting the shaft (no pun intended) in the United States. I mean really, give me a break. Shouldn't we be worried about more important things, like, for example, (A) the medieval thinking of the current Attorney General of the United States, or (B) the badly thought out plans of the other medievalists in the administration plotting our invasion of Iraq, or (C) the fact that the leader of the opposition party apparently gets his political thoughts from listening to Katie Couric, or (D) the fact that Tommy Angelo sometimes cold-calls a 3-bet from the button with pocket deuces; or (E) the fact that some of our elected "leaders" are worried that civilization as we know it will come to an end if a few men want to marry a few other men, and that stopping this abomination requires a Constitutional Amendment?


There, that should be enough to get a few responses.


Best regards to you both, Rick and HDPM,

Andy

"...the medieval thinking of the current Attorney General of the United States..."


You may not know this, but Ashcroft lost an election to a dead guy. I think that's kind of medieval. I mean, Monte Python could do a pretty good skit set in medieval times where an autonomous collective has an election between a buffoon and a dead guy. They could drag the dead guy around in a cart and have him give speeches and stuff. Yeah, that could work.

Andy,


I'm curious as to your opinion of Jackie Gleason's music (see post above).


Regards,


Rick /images/biggrin.gif

*Takes deep breath*


OK, I don't normally get involved in political discussions. I am decidedly all over the map when it comes to the major issues, but I am in the camp that thinks Title IX is a good idea poorly executed.


Why do we assume that both sexes have equal interest in every conceivable activity? This is obviously incorrect. Like it or not, men are far more likely to be interested in sports and athletic activities. Do we need to reprogram men to entice more of them to become elementary school teachers? Of course not. Women are more inclined to pursue that career and there's nothing wrong with that. Women are just as able to enroll in the military, so why is enlistment overwhelmingly male? Why are there so many more "gentlemen's clubs" than "ladies lounges"? There are undeniable differences between the sexes that have nothing to do with our upbringing.


Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I am remembering why I don't get involved in these debates.


OK, I'm going to cut this short. But ask yourself this. Couldn't we have found a better way to add 5,800 female athletes in the last ten years than to cut 21,000 male athletes? (Those are Division I numbers). I think the answer is clearly yes.


All that this system does is create the illusion that both sexes have equal interest in sports, and it destroys more opportunities for young people than it creates.


OK, I'm done with this.


Respectfully,


Clark

Very good article in a recent New Yorker on Mr. Ashcroft. I'm a computer illiterate, so don't know how to post a link, but it was probably 3-4 editions ago, I think I still have it and can fax or send it to you if you haven't seen it, can't find it, or are otherwise are interested, I know he's a particular favorite of yours. Email me if you want it.


Regards,

Andy

Andy,


I tried to find it but the New Yorker only has a few selected archives and the most recent (or perhaps the second most recent) issue online.


To link just find the page you want using another window in your browser, copy the url (web address) using the right mouse, then paste it into the "Optional Link URL" box below (after getting rid of the "http://" 2+2 supplies - this would duplicate it when you paste a full url in). After type in a title under "Optional Link Title". I jput in a sample link below.


Believe me, you are "geekier" than you think.


Regards,


Rick

"So 1,000 boys want to play some sport and 100 girls want to and 900 boys end up not being able to play. Tough nuggies."


Well by that reasoning we might as well screw the girls (no pun intended) and let all the 1,000 boys play and none of the 100 girls. I mean who really cares if the girls play sports or not. they are never going to be able to make a decent living from it anyways. They can just learn to read and write. Maybe cook also. Who cares if the girls want to play sports, tough nuggies for them.


I'm glad more women play sports. I don't fully support Title IX because I think there are better ways of promoting female athletic participation. I think an attempt should be made by governemnt and educational institutions to treat EVERYONE in a fair manner and by everyone I mean both sexes. I think that there are methods of encouraging female participation in athletics that are more fair to both sexes than the regulations imposed by Title IX.

"you are "geekier" than you think"


You have no idea. . .


Thanks for the help. I'll try linking something particularly outrageous sometime soon.


Regards,

Andy

Rick,


So, have you tried the virtual bubble wrap yet?


John