Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!decvax!genrad!wjh12!n44a!ima!inmet!mazur From: mazur@inmet.UUCP Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: BAD USA Supreme Court Decision - (nf) Message-ID: <1015@inmet.UUCP> Date: Wed, 7-Mar-84 06:09:08 EST Article-I.D.: inmet.1015 Posted: Wed Mar 7 06:09:08 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 8-Mar-84 19:41:17 EST Lines: 39 #R:houxu:-32900:inmet:10900057:000:1741 inmet!mazur Mar 6 20:30:00 1984 Pardon me while I scream. Not too much better, but anyways. I played intercollegiate women's ice hockey for four years at Boston University. Women's ice hockey has really developed as a sport, especially in the Northeast. However, ten years after the sport was started at BU, it is still a club sport (it gets no money from the athletic dept) competing against varsity teams. For two seasons while I was there, our locker room was in a "renovated" ladies room (at least we didn't have far to go to the loo). Now the Supreme Court (in their "infinite" wisdom) has decided that the Federal government no longer has to police the colleges and universities for departments that don't get Federal aid. Well, I'll bet there are a hell of alot of athletic directors that are going to be crying all the way to the bank. The bottom line is MONEY. ADs don't want to put money in a program that isn't going to have a positive cash-flow back. That's why they'll virtually clothe and spoon-feed a male football or basketball player (we are talking big television bucks and ticket receipts here). I can understand that from an economic viewpoint. However, by offering an opportunity to a male student that they don't to a female student, they are practicing discrimination. Now everybody hopes that this new ruling won't cause schools to give up on programs that already exist. It seems obvious (to me at least) that those schools who don't have enough (or any) women's programs won't be in any rush to implement them. One note: apparently Massachusetts has a *state* law that has the same interpretation that Title IX used to, so it won't be so easy to let women's programs be cut here. Beth Mazur {ima,harpo,esquire}!inmet!mazur