|
CounterPunch
March 18,
2003
Title IX Commission
Let
Women Compete
by MARK DONHAM
I first heard the term "Robin Hood in reverse"
in reference to then Republican president of the U.S. Ronald
Reagan. He got that term from his tax cuts and other policies
in which it appeared that he was taxing lower income people of
the country to give financial breaks to the rich and large corporations.
Robbing from the poor to give to rich, I believe was the concept.
The current administration is not only repeating this apparently
Republican modus operandi, but is taking to new heights--or is
that depths? While this administration is of course taxing the
lower income brackets to pay for massive tax cuts for his rich
friends, it also has it out for any threats to the dominance
of the white male of the nation and world, including attacking
the increasing excellence of women in fields that have "traditionally"
been the exclusive domain of the white male.
I am focusing this particular discussion
on the administration's commission reviewing the Title IX regulations.
Apparently this administration thinks that white male domination
is being threatened by this law, which, as will be discussed
below, is largely responsible for the progress that women have
made in the past several decades in equaling or surpassing men's
performances in common sports such as basketball, tennis, golf,
soccer, track, and other sports. It appears that there is a
plan to reverse this progress and thereby insuring that the white
male continues to dominate overall these fields. But isn't this
swimming against the current?
Recently an African-American woman from
Tennessee Statue University, the athletic director, a woman named
Teresa Phillips, had to coach her men's basketball team because
her male head coach had been suspended for a game. Ms. Phillips
was the first woman to coach a men's university basketball team.
The next day I noticed that Annika Sorenstam, unquestionably
the best female golfer alive, was going to compete in a PGA tournament,
and probably compete well, placing above many of the men. This
summer a woman tried a place kick in a men's college football
game. These are huge hurdles overcome, and they certainly could
be seen as "threats" to the domination of primarily
white male domains.
However, there are countercurrents running
which the administration is quietly trying to tap into to. Perhaps,
as previously mentioned, the most important is the Bush administration's
commission to review and change the rules for administering the
Title IX requirements--the landmark requirement that public school
funds be spent relatively equally between men and women's sports.
This law is undoubtedly more responsible for the advancement
of women's sport's accomplishments than any other single factor.
However, according to the February 26, 2003 "USA Today,"
the commission will issue a report that, according to critics,
"is too much about men's lost opportunities and not enough
about continuing discrimination against women." Men's lost
opportunities? Say what?
The second issue running countercurrent
to the progress that women are making in sports surrounds the
Augusta national golf club--the home of the most famous golf
tournament in the U.S.--the Masters. This club will not admit
females as members, and it has become a bit of an albatross for
the PGA, as most major women's organizations are protesting this
clearly sexist policy and threatening boycotts and the such.
This issue is a strange brew of politics,
society, competitiveness, pride, and trivial pursuits. As a
child I thought that women were inherently physically inferior
to men, but I no longer believe that. However, I do believe
that this administration wants to maintain that view among what
might be loosely called "mainstream middle America,"
or perhaps, the "Reagan Democrats." Sure, this is
a generalization, but come on, there are millions of middle aged
white males with a great love of sports and probably some experience
in them in their youth but now sporting a gut over their belt
and an incapability of performing at any kind of athletic level,
but still see themselves as "above" women.
It's a combination of male greed, jealousy,
and pride that keep pushing against women's accomplishments,
like swimming against the current of a large river like the Mississippi
at flood stage, which is still resulting in a general perception
in our society that women are not as competent as men. Sports
is a key factor in those perceptions. Womens' world records are
generally less accomplished than those set by men in the same
sport. Men get paid more for participating in the same sport.
Men and women generally do not compete together at the highest
levels of excellence in a sport. Frankly, I don't think men
want women to get as good as them and that is a long term problem
that needs to be addressed. What isn't mentioned is that the
best women athletes can out compete 99% of men, but hey, that's
a minor detail isn't it? Personally, I think men would
be better off if they just accepted that women have the potential
to be as good or better than men in sports, and that they have
the same right as men to pursue their interest. Anyone who doubts
that just look at the Williams sisters. They are my heroines.
Sure, they may be a few men out there that could consistently
beat them, but very few. And how many men could have overcome
the obstacles that they did to achieve their level of skill?
And we will see where Ms. Sorenstam places
when she golfs against the men. I can almost guarantee that
she won't come in last.
There's too much resistance against this,
no doubt. But at the same time, I do have some understanding
about how this certain section of the white male middle-section
hates this. Conquerors are loathe to give up their spoils,
regardless of the justice issues involved. But we're supposedly
the world's example of a fair democracy, where everyone is equal
and has equal opportunity. Our leaders are supposed to be leading
us to the fulfillment of our ideals. So when I see the current
administration exploiting this flaw to gain cheap political support
rather than lead reform toward equality so that this type of
prejudice is eliminated, it is a justifiable source of outrage.
Let me explain.
I remember when I was in grade school.
We're not talking 200 years ago--we're taking 30--40 years ago.
On occasion, and not on too many occasions because of a safety
factor, we would have "boys vs. girls" games in PE
class. I can remember boys vs. girls kickball, boys vs. girls
softball, and a few other boys vs. girls games. There was never
any question that the boys would dominate, and we considered
more or less a joke to compete against the girls. In sports
like basketball and baseball there was no way that girls could
even hope to compete with the boys. Girls were cheerleaders.
Boys were athletes. If you are 50 or older, that's what you
think--it is ingrained deep in your being. And these men are,
for better or worse, the core of America in so many ways.
They build our buildings, drive our trucks, buy many of our products,
and set the mood for the country. They see themselves as powerful
and they like to be on top.
So this is why a woman coaching a men's
college basketball team is such a big deal. That is why having
a woman golf in a PGA tournament is such a big deal. That is
why even a woman who tried to do some place kicking in a men'
s college football game last season was a big deal. Women have
gone from athletic laughing stock to a series threat to men's
pride in just a couple decades. This is worrisome to a lot of
men. It threatens their position on top. But cost of this top
position for the men has been a stifling of the ability of women
to achieve. This is in direct contravention of the main principles
of our country. This is why the administration's Title IX commission
and the Augusta country club issues amount to low level pandering
to insecure beer and McDonald's guts to get some cheap votes
and is not aspiring to our nation's highest ideals. It is
not leadership and the country should reject it soundly.
This administration has regulation rewrite
fever. It is rewriting all the regulations it can, and it is
doing it as fast as it can. The ethics of its procedures for
doing this are another story. The substance of these regulations
are almost exclusively regressive. The Title IX regulations
can be put in a folder with tax cuts for the rich and those regulations
relaxing environmental laws, labor laws, consumer protection
laws, etc etc. But I guess my point is that rewriting the Title
IX regulations is not going to stop the momentum of what is going
on. Women are here to stay in regard to their skill levels in
traditionally male activities. I say let women compete against
men, starting in tennis, golf, and other such sports. Sure,
the best men will currently beat the best women most of the time,
but competition makes the lesser talents better. If we keep
supporting women's athletics and let them start competing against
men, it is only a matter of time before they start competing
seriously with the men. The time will come when we have world
champion women, not just a woman's champion. This is a real
test of our constitution.
Are we for equality for everyone, of
is that just a pipe dream to which we pay lip service?
Mark Donham
lives in Brookport, Illlinois. He can be reached at: markkris@earthlink.net.
Yesterday's
Features
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream (Interview)
Jason Leopold
Rumsfeld and Bush Sr. Opposed 1989 UN Investigation of Saddam
for Human Rights Violations
Josh Ruebner
An
Open Letter to My Former Dean, Paul Wolfowitz (and Other "Court"
Jews)
Mitchel Cohen
The
Gulf War 12 Years Later: Why Class Matters
Carlos Fuentes
The Insulting Insinuations of the Bush Regime
Fareed Marjaee
The Road to Jerusalem Goes Through Baghdad
Rick Giombetti
The Savagely Soft Underbelly
of the Anti-War Movement: Misquided Faith in the UN
Rich Procter
Rove Memo: How to Launch a War
Ritt Goldstein
Oil
War: the Smoking Guns
Website of the Day
Give
War a Chance: the Anti-Peace Anthem
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
CounterPunch Available Exclusively
to Subscribers:
- Turkish Delights: a Pre-War Diary by Tariq Ali;
- The Plot to Frame the
Zapatistas: Talkers
and Cowards;
- Drugging Kids: The Plague of Neuroleptics;
- The Case of Mumia Abu-Jamal:
a New Investigation.
Remember, the CounterPunch website is
supported exclusively by subscribers to our newsletter. Our worldwide
web audience is soaring , with about seven million hits a month
now. This is inspiring, but the work involved also compels us
to remind you more urgently than ever to subscribe and/or make
a (tax deductible) donation if you can afford it. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe
Now!
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|
Take a Bite Out of Phil Knight's Bottom Line: Buy No Sweat Apparel!
March 8 /
9, 2003
Edward Said
Who's
In Charge?
Bruce Jackson
Elegy
for Two Giraffes and a Zebra
Perry Anderson
The Casuistries of Peace and
War
Joanne Mariner
Patriot
Act II's Attack on Punishment
William Lind
A Warning from Clausewitz on 4th Generation Warfare
Sam Husseini
Why
So Long for Iraq to Comply? Follow the Policy
Forrest Hylton
Business as Usual in Bolivia?
David Lindorff
Race and the Death Penalty in Pennsylvania
Ben Tripp
Is There
a Eurologist in the House?
Anthony Gancarski
W's Personal Jesus
Jon Elmer
An Interview with William Blum
Douglas Valentine
The Clash of the Icons
Norman Madarasz
Radical Politics and the Writer:
Maurice Blanchot
Gordon Solberg
There's
Got to be a Better Way
Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Engel, Bernard
Weekend Website
The
White House
February 28,
2003
Alexander
Cockburn
Meet
the New Yorker's Chief Hack: Jeffrey Goldberg
Saul Landau
Now
It's Personal
Michael Neumann
A Plea for Hysteria
Karima Bennoume
The UN: Tool for Peace or War?
The Black
Commentator
The Rev. Sharpton and the Soul of the Democrats
Jennifer Loewenstein
Don't Turn Off the War
Richard Levins
Cuba's Biological Weapons: Why the World Needs More of Them
M. Shahid Alam
Is This a Clash of Civilizations?
Clay Conrad
Juries
and Judges: What's Relevant?
Ben Tripp
Speaking in Tongues: a Guide to Gibberish in the Age of Bush
Eliot Katz
To Declare Preemptive War is to Declare a Bankrupt Imagination
Kurt Nimmo
Paying Through the Nose to Kill Iraqi Kids
Matt Vidal
George W. Bonaparte
Mark Zepezauer
Why the Right Hates America
Mickey Z.
The Anti----War Talk I Never Gave
Jerry Kroth
Jung and the Space Shuttle Revisited
Shyam Oberoi
Chronicle of a War Foretold
Ron Jacobs
What If the Firebombing of Baghdad Were a Nightclub Fire?
Poets' Basement
Eliot Katz and Jim Cohn
Website of
the Weekend
Defense
Tech
Read
Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
|