Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FireKnight
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    The ironic thing is that Title IX is hurting BOTH men's and women's hockey. At most big schools (and many small schools), hockey is a revenue generating sport for the men. I'm not sure if it's revenue generating anywhere on the women's side.

    At Clarkson, the men's program clearly provides revenue to what is quickly becoming a successful women's program. The same is true of virtually every other program in the U.S. The thing limiting growth of women's program at other schools is the inability of a university to start the revenue generating men's program that could support a D-1 hockey facility.

    Looking at the attendance of several of the "big school" ACHA teams, you cannot convince me that D-1 hockey wouldn't be accepted or become a revenue generating sport at many of those institutions.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Runninwiththedogs View Post
    Wow! So glad you chose to harp on how I don't know you while presuming to know me. Die.
    You first...actually dont, continue to belittle the causes you fight for with your whining ignorance.

    BTW I support womens sports...so nevermind DIE!

    Leave a comment:


  • LynahFan
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by BoomGoestheDynamite View Post
    The Crew team got to you after the swim test I assume and you bought their sales pitch?
    Nope - crew is the wrong sport for me. Too short for the big boat (5'10") and too heavy for the lightweights (175). Plus there wasn't any NCAA for crew back then. I went for fencing - I was too short for that, too, but at least I wasn't dragging down a whole boat.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Rube
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Runninwiththedogs View Post
    Jesus Christ, Brent. You are my ****ing friend, and you say this? It wasn't funny when you said it the first time a week ago, and it wasn't funny the six other times you repeated it.

    I'm done with this ****ing thread. I'm sure you'll all rejoice and then go back to rending your garments about the oppression of male athletes.
    I like how you group me in with the "oppression of male athletes" group, when I've done nothing to support that tirade. And I never said it six times. It was three, at best.

    I'm for your cause, I really am, but every time I denounce Title IX for legit reasons (IMO) you still lump me in with the neanderthals. So, I retort in neanderthalic way.

    Leave a comment:


  • Runninwiththedogs
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Brenthoven View Post
    Seriously, what's with the skirt? Know your place, woman.


    Jesus Christ, Brent. You are my ****ing friend, and you say this? It wasn't funny when you said it the first time a week ago, and it wasn't funny the six other times you repeated it.

    I'm done with this ****ing thread. I'm sure you'll all rejoice and then go back to rending your garments about the oppression of male athletes.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Rube
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Runninwiththedogs View Post
    Wow! So glad you chose to harp on how I don't know you while presuming to know me. Die.
    Seriously, what's with the skirt? Know your place, woman.


    Leave a comment:


  • Runninwiththedogs
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    Let me guess...you are one of those whiners that says that the Womens State Hockey Tournament should be played at the X like the Mens is even though they barely sell enough tickets to fill Ridder Arena arent you?

    One day you will realize that people can dislike Title IX and not be Anti-Feminist...of course that would take critical thinking so I wont hold my breathe.

    Now come on tell me that even though I think Title IX is bad I dont support equal rights for women because I am sure you know me so well! LD
    Wow! So glad you chose to harp on how I don't know you while presuming to know me. Die.

    Leave a comment:


  • Handyman
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Runninwiththedogs View Post
    Your initial response was so dismissive that it didn't warrant a real answer.

    Where did I use the word "right" ever? Look back and see. Perhaps respond to what I'm actually saying.



    Stop it, Brent. Seriously. I have had enough of that ****ing joke.
    Let me guess...you are one of those whiners that says that the Womens State Hockey Tournament should be played at the X like the Mens is even though they barely sell enough tickets to fill Ridder Arena arent you? I used to work at the X...we dont like you

    One day you will realize that people can dislike Title IX and not be Anti-Feminist...of course that would take critical thinking so I wont hold my breathe.

    Now come on tell me that even though I think Title IX is bad I dont support equal rights for women because I am sure you know me so well!
    Last edited by Handyman; 06-18-2010, 12:34 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Runninwiththedogs
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Happy View Post
    for all it's fancy language, it has become a court ordered quota, with no chance of any of the other two parts of the three-prong test being allowed to be used. This is bad, because a school that would have a reasonable chance to add a men's revenue producing sport, let us say, like Hockey, usually will not, because the ladies almost never pay their own way.

    then you have this : "How can a law that is supposed to protect us from being denied participation on the basis of our sex cause our university to drop our sport because it's a men's team?" This law is completely PC, because it is clearly OK to discriminate against men, for the benefit of women.
    First of all, it's women's sports, not ladies' sports.

    You are blaming the female athletes for the cheapness of the administration. Like I said before, add women's hockey. Boom, you've got your equal scholarships.

    The idea that most men's sports pay their way is laughable. I'm sooooooo sure that Gopher men's tennis, golf, swimming & diving, track and cross-country are just rolling in dough.

    Let's talk about hockey and elite opportunities. How many more ****ing hockey teams do you need, really, that you begrudge women's sports so? There are junior hockey teams, ECHL, AHL, NHL, D-1, D-3, IHL, SPHL... I love hockey and I want to grow the sport, but I'm not so desperate for new teams that I need to find scapegoats to explain why more schools don't have hockey. Please. Beyond college, there are little to no opportunities for women to play sports at an elite level. There are multitudes for men. So in this microcosm of the sports worth, college athletics, women actually get a measure of equality, and you have your head so far up your *** that you can't see how pathetically disparate the sporting world is and you demand that women's sports get thrust even further back into the dark ages just so that, what? 5 more D-1 hockey cupcakes can get invited to your pathetic little Dodge Holiday Classic?

    There is a reason Title IX is so absolute. Because if it wasn't, then it wouldn't work at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Happy
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Runninwiththedogs View Post
    Please explain why it is bad. Please enlighten me, O Great Man, for I am a lowly woman and am too stupid to understand.
    for all it's fancy language, it has become a court ordered quota, with no chance of any of the other two parts of the three-prong test being allowed to be used. This is bad, because a school that would have a reasonable chance to add a men's revenue producing sport, let us say, like Hockey, usually will not, because the ladies almost never pay their own way.

    then you have this : "How can a law that is supposed to protect us from being denied participation on the basis of our sex cause our university to drop our sport because it's a men's team?" This law is completely PC, because it is clearly OK to discriminate against men, for the benefit of women.

    Leave a comment:


  • Happy
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Craig P. View Post
    Universities are free to opt their athletic programs out of Title IX by ending the claim that they're part of the educational experience. However, that would open a veritable Pandora's Box involving paying salaries, unemployment, various payroll taxes, benefits, and so on... but that doesn't change the fact that athletic departments choose to be subject to Title IX.
    not a chance. if it were possible, at least one of the hundreds of schools that had to cut men's wrestling, swimming, or baseball would have given it a try.

    Leave a comment:


  • BoomGoestheDynamite
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by LynahFan View Post
    Unfortunately, that thought process doesn't really work in the real world. There is effectively limitless demand for slots on both women's teams and men's teams, especially when there is scholarship money involved. I lettered 2 years in a sport (and even made the round of 16 in the NCAA regional one year) in a sport that I'd never even seen before setting foot on campus, just because the opportunity was there. You can add as many teams as you like, and you'll essentially never find the bottom of the demand well.
    The Crew team got to you after the swim test I assume and you bought their sales pitch?

    Btw, its something of a fallacy that football is always a revenue beast. In many (possibly a majority) of schools at the D-IAA/FCS level and even some lower level IA/FBS programs, football does not generate a profit but is kept around for a number of reasons such as football helps us get noticed! Media attention!

    Even some that break even do so on the backs of taking a beating from an SEC school or three every year for a nice paycheck.

    Leave a comment:


  • Craig P.
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Universities are free to opt their athletic programs out of Title IX by ending the claim that they're part of the educational experience. However, that would open a veritable Pandora's Box involving paying salaries, unemployment, various payroll taxes, benefits, and so on... but that doesn't change the fact that athletic departments choose to be subject to Title IX.

    Leave a comment:


  • cycledown
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Originally posted by Runninwiththedogs View Post
    Title IX is not what makes hockey expensive to start up.

    And really, if you're starting a hockey team, just start a women's team, too.

    I already know that but there are still start up costs for both sides and a annual maintenance budget.

    Leave a comment:


  • Runninwiththedogs
    replied
    Re: Should Title IX be modified or stay in it's present form?

    Title IX is not what makes hockey expensive to start up.

    And really, if you're starting a hockey team, just start a women's team, too.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X