Task Force Media Notes

VOL. 2, NO. 13 (December 3, 1998)
This is part of a series of regular reports to update, inform, educate and stimulate public discussion

COLLEGE STUDENT-ATHLETE LEADERS ARE AGAINST ROSTER CAPS

One of the destructive methods that colleges employ to attempt to reach gender quotas required by proportionality is to set squad size limits on men's athletic programs. This strategy artificially keeps down the number of men athletes in order to achieve a gender ratio.

In the Nov. 23 issue of the NCAA News, two members of the Univ. of Northern Colorado Student-athlete Advisory Committee, Seth Septer and Robert Sistek, wrote a guest editorial entitled "No athlete benefits from roster capping." The two students helped author a position paper for the council, and did substantial research on the topic. A few of the more compelling arguments follow:

* "We have seen firsthand the possible consequences of interpretations of Title IX. In an attempt to reach proportionality in university athletic programs, caps were put on some male athletic teams. This led to the cutting of 10 wrestlers from our team, all of whom were walk-ons."

* "Walk-on athletes pay their own tuition, room and board, and fees. Universities' costs for walk-ons are minimal. Getting rid of these athletes creates virtually no revenue for female athletes. Also, walk-ons play a critical role on many teams, while receiving many life-long benefits."

* "At this time, there are more men interested in participating in sports at the college level than women. It would seem encouraging and recruiting female athletes to partic-ipate would increase female opportunities more than cutting male athletes to reach a quota. Cutting male athletes to reach these proportionality quotas eliminates many of the positive and educational opportunities that collegiate athletics is based upon."

Based on these facts, the students helped draft a position statement for the athletes on campus. It is about time that university administrators and federal bureaucrats begin listening to the people who are most affected by their actions. The article continues:

* "The Student-athlete Advisory Council at our university suggests that we continue adding women's sports and scholarships where female interest and ability exists, and to refrain from mandating squad limits (team caps) or the elimination of any men's sports. In response to the financial implications of gender equity, we recommended attempting to find creative and improved ways of fundraising, as well as meaningful ways to cut costs."

In conclusion, the authors make a compelling argument against proportionality cuts: * "Cutting men's sports to comply with Title IX just does not appear to have any benefits for female athletes. It only causes resentment and eliminates opportunities for many male athletes."

FINDING WAYS TO ACCOMMODATE MALE INTEREST CAN BE ACHIEVED

In this era of cutbacks in college sports programs, it is always refreshing to see a college athletic department that has the courage and the commitment to provide opportunities for male athletes. These programs provide hope to young student-athletes that there may be future opportunities for athletes of both genders on the college sports scene, in spite of the current push for proportionality.

Juniata College, a Div. III team in Pennsylvania, announced that it would reinstate men's cross country as a varsity sport in the fall of 1999. According to the NCAA News, Juniata had a men's cross country team until 1995-96, when it was changed to club status for gender equity purposes. During the last two years, administrators found a creative way to accommodate this interest in spite of Title IX pressures.

The wrestling community can applaud the efforts of Sacred Heart University in Fairfield, Conn., which started a new wrestling program this year. Sacred Heart, which is coached by Connecticut wrestling leader Brian Reardon, will compete on the Div. II level for a few years, then move up with the entire athletic department to the Div. I level.

Certainly, the interest in wrestling in Connecticut and surrounding New England states has not been met in recent years. This past summer, Southern Connecticut University dropped its Div. II wrestling team. A few years ago, the Univ. of Central Connecticut, the only Div. I team in the state, also eliminated varsity wrestling. In New England, college wrestling has taken a major hit in the past 25 years, with only a handful of Div. I teams still available to the region's best athletes, even though high school interest remains high. The development of the Sacred Heart wrestling program will be a boost to wrestling in New England, and perhaps an example to other college athletic departments.

DATE FOR 1999 NCAA TITLE IX SEMINAR IS SET, BUT CHANGES IN AGENDA ARE STILL POSSIBLE

The NCAA has announced that the 1999 Title IX Seminar has been scheduled for the Westin Hotel in Chicago on May 11-12. This annual meeting provides university leaders an opportunity to share information and opinions about Title IX and its enforcement on campus.

In 1998, the Task Force to Protect Wrestling took exception to the selection of speakers and panelists at the Title IX Seminar. The number of female presenters at the seminar was not in gender-balance, out numbering the male presenters by a lopsided 31-11 margin. Clearly, the enforcement of Title IX affects both female and male athletes. The concept of gender equity, which is intended to give a fair opportunity to all, seems to have been ignored in the selection of leaders for this annual meeting. The viewpoints expressed at this function seemed to be lopsided in one direction.

There may still be time to have an impact on the agenda for the 1999 Seminar. All are encouraged to contact NCAA staff member Janet M. Justus to request a more equitable agenda by calling 913-339-1906.

LESSONS CAN BE LEARNED FROM ARTICLES PROMOTING SPORTS INVOLVEMENT FOR GIRLS

A very positive article entitled "Getting Girls Into the Game" was written by Catherine O'Neill Grace in the Washington Post on Nov. 17. Grace reported on the increase in sports participation for girls in recent years, and the many life-long benefits that sports offer to young women who play sports.

There was an interesting fact that Grace pointed out in her "Tips for Parents" section. According to the article, "More girls are participating in sports than ever before, but they tend to drop out much more readily than boys." This fact tends to be ignored and even disputed by special interest groups whenever there is a discussion on interests and abilities in the Title IX debate.

Most of the Grace article explained the positive physical, emotional and educational benefits that sports offer to girls. This kind of education is precisely what Title IX is all about. Encouraging women to get involved in sports and reap the positive fruits of athletic activity can only help everybody. If women's special interest groups spent more time and resources encouraging girls to play sports, and less forcing colleges to achieve an artificial gender quota, perhaps the original intent of Title IX would be achieved.

Another important factor must not be overlooked. The benefits of sports that the Grace article points out also apply to boys. We must not forget that sports can be a positive experience for both sons and daughters. In the push for increased sports participation for girls, we should not deny the same the benefits to boys. In the fight for fairness, we can not allow the positive values of sports to slip away for young men.

PHYSICAL EDUCATORS MUST NOT OVERLOOK WRESTLING AS A SPORT FOR YOUNG PEOPLE

An interesting and thought provoking article entitled "P.E. 2000: Climb rocks, not ropes" was written by Steve Rhodes in the Nov. 6-8 issue of USA Weekend magazine. The article explained some of the changes in physical education curriculum which are designed to increase participation in P.E. class and combat student obesity. Some of the new activities used in gym class helped students to learn more about life-long fitness and physiology.

There was a disturbing graphic which accompanied the article. In the segment which was entitled "What's In, What's Out," the first notation by the author was this:

* "OUT Wrestling is down for the count."

The article had no backup information to verify the claim. In fact, with the increased growth of youth wrestling on the club level across the nation, it could be argued that the author is just plain wrong. However, if physical education teachers are choosing to exclude wrestling from their curriculum, it may be time to remind them of the many positive things that wrestling can bring to their classroom.

The first myth that must be exploded is the belief that wrestling is just for boys. The growth in wrestling activity for girls on the youth and high school levels is real and substantial. Excluding girls in wrestling programs in schools would be unfair, denying them the same benefits that boys have enjoyed for many, many years. There are 1,900 girls wrestling on the high school level right now, and it continues to grow annually. Many others compete in youth clubs around the nation. Women's wrestling is here to stay.

Physical education teachers should be reminded that:

* Wrestling is the world's oldest sport, and in many nations, the most prestigious sport in the world. Wrestling has been involved in both the ancient and modern Olympic Games, and has been an important part of every culture in the history of mankind.

* Wrestling is the most natural sport for kids. You can go to playgrounds and living rooms in every community in the nation, and find boys and girls wrestling each other for fun and fitness.

* Wrestling provides many life-long health benefits such as self-discipline, strength, cardio-vascular fitness, coordination, nutrition and weight management, as well as self-confidence.

Perhaps the reason that some physical education professionals are not using wrestling in their curriculum is that they have not been educated about how to make wrestling fun and interesting for young people. This clearly is the responsibility of the wrestling community, to reach out and provide this valuable educational resource to phys-ed teachers in every community. We do not believe wrestling is down for the count, but perhaps it needs a renewed image on the grassroots level.

WASHINGTON STATE PROVES YOU CAN OPPOSE QUOTAS AND STILL SUPPORT WOMEN

Title IX is a very complicated issue, and the debate is often heated. There is a tendency for people to assume that those who oppose proportionality are "anti-woman" and against the principle of equality for all. Not only is this assumption simplistic, but it is also untrue.

The main question is whether a federal law, which was approved in 1972 to provide equal opportunity in education, should be enforced by the federal government and courts as a gender quota.

The recent vote by the citizens of Washington state is an example of how people can be against the use of quotas without being against equality for women. An article by David Frum of the Ottawa Sun takes a close look at the voting patterns in Washington State concerning Proposition 200. A few excerpts:

* "By a decisive 59%-41% majority, Washington's voters banned all forms of reverse discrimination in their state."

* "Now, nobody can accuse Washington state of hostility to women and minorities. It sent a female Democrat, Patty Murray, to the Senate in 1992 and re-elected her this year. The most powerful Republican woman in the House of Representatives, Jennifer Dunn, also represents Washington state. And in 1996, Washington elected the country's first Asian-American governor, Gary Locke. But Washington elected these politicians in the spirit of fair play, not favoritism."

* "And exit polls of state voters gave some insight into why. Men, unsurprisingly, voted overwhelmingly in favor of Proposition 200, 65%-35%. But interestingly enough, women did not oppose it. The female vote divided exactly in half, 50% in favor, 50% against."

Citizens, when given the opportunity, have voted against the use of quotas in their states. If these same voters became educated about the unintended consequences of Title IX, the loss of male opportunities to achieve a gender ratio, it is conceivable that they would vote against that, too. The key is to get people to look beyond all of the rhetoric from special interest groups and help them to understand that you can be against proportionality quotas and still support equal opportunity for all.

Comments & Questions -- info@ncmat.com