Is your charter complaint with Titile ix?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Simmer down. I am a woman and think it needs a rewrite. The proportionality prong of the law is ridiculous. Something used to open doors for women should shut doors for men.

I assume you mean to say Shouldn't shut doors for men?

The issue with title IX at the college level is men's sports. Because football uses so many resources it means a lot of colleges are cutting other men's sports to make sure the men's and women's programs balance. That stinks if you are a boy wrestler, swimmer, runner and even soccer player, as those sports have been the most affected. Vanderbilt has no men's track or soccer. U of Richmond is cutting soccer and another men's sport to make way for lacrosse. UMD cut several sports last year.

but the supreme court said that the schools have the choice on how to be compliant - maybe U of Richmond colud add women's volleyball, softball, or rowing in lieu of cutting soccer?

They could but they don't, since that would cost more money and bring in no revenue.

The University of Richmond has an endowment of $1.88 Billion - and they don't have enough money for both men's soccer and an additional women's team?

[Anonymous]

DCPS is tryng and I use the word vaguely to improve their varsity sports offerings. What is not offered at the public-school level surely can be supplemnted through sports-club offerings. So, don't fret and just drop down and get your eagle on.