Title IX and its Rhetorical Farce

     In 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law the Civil Rights Act, which eliminated segregation and discrimination in many areas of life, although mainly intended for African-Americans in this country.  Titles IV and VII are inherently known for their failure to address sex discrimination in the academic environment, even though Title VII did add ‘sex’ to its vernacular when discriminated against in the workplace.  These two provisions and their possible oversight of sex discrimination in schools led to the passing of The Higher Education Act of 1972: most notably Section 1681.  The general wording of what came to be known as Title IX leaves no doubt that Congress was aiming to prevent sex discrimination and exclusion of women within any institution that receives Federal financial aid.  The Title IX provision was a vague outlet that gave women the opportunity for acceptance and equal rights in all aspects of their education.  Section 1681 of the Educational Amendments is a law that has been carefully, and expertly, interpreted by women, even though it does not promote gender equality in any sport, let alone college sports; in reality, nothing is farther than the truth.
     Where the Civil Rights Act of 1964 failed to desegregate the sexes, the Title IX provision accomplishes this goal by clearly (or maybe not so clearly) stating, “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance." ).  This simply worded law, so generally applied to education, has, because of two words, changed the landscape of women’s intercollegiate sports.  ‘Program or activity’, as clarified in Section 1687, incurs all operations of colleges, universities, and other institutions, and reiterates compliance with Section 1681.  The law aimed to end sex discrimination in college admissions and academic subjects, yet actually defined sports as a sex-specific activity, without naming the term.  It is in this interpretation that all colleges and universities must offer equal sports options for women that are in proportion with enrollment in the school and men’s programs.

      The words, educational program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance, turned out to be the proverbial goose that laid the golden egg for women’s sports across the nation.  Congress left that opening to interpret at a later time if the situation were to arise, as in athletics.  Fortunately for women, they not only challenged, but won the right to include sports as part of Title IX when the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, in 1975, put regulations into law to expand Section 1681 in regards to athletics and their departments.  

     Title IX advocates never considered the questions and issues that would arise from the possibility of women’s sports interpreted as an educational program or activity.  While no language in the original Section 1681 declares gender equality in college sports specifically, Title IX has become a useful tool towards securing equal rights for women to have the same opportunities as men in all areas of education.  The rhetorical farce that was the issue of sports in the 1970’s clearly did not want to change the landscape of its college athletic programs, therefore, when Title IX was pushed into law, sports was not mentioned in the text.  Yet, for those two simple words, women had the ability to interpret and present their version of what the law did not intend to promote; gender equality in college sports.  It was merely up to women to broaden the scope of language, define its meaning, and fight for inclusion into an arena that was once closed because of sex.  

     Forty years later, the arguments over whether college sports have improved because of Title IX can 

forever be debated.  It is a known fact that men’s collegiate football carries most of the financial 

responsibility for college athletic departments.  Women’s basketball has made strides into supporting their 

athletic programs, but it is still not enough.  College sports would have thrived with or without Title IX and its later regulations on sex equality in sports.  Yes, the women’s softball, soccer, and basketball teams have produced some of the best players in the world in their respective sports, but it can never be proven if women’s inclusion in college sports via Title IX has made college athletics any better.  This remains an individual assessment based on personal views of those who want to challenge the question. But applause is necessary for those women who had the foresight to not only challenge the law and its hidden meaning, but to manipulate it and utilize it for generations to come.