|
| |
WOMEN IN COLLEGE & PRO SPORTS.
Term Paper ID:22960
|
|
|
Essay Subject:
Evolution of women's participation, gender discrimination, cultural attitudes, laws & court decisions, economics, coaches & administrators.... More...
|
9 Pages / 2025 Words
29 sources, 38 Citations,
TURABIAN Format
$36.00
Return to List of Papers
|
Paper Abstract:
Evolution of women's participation, gender discrimination, cultural attitudes, laws & court decisions, economics, coaches & administrators.
Paper Introduction:
GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN COLLEGE AND PROFESSIONAL SPORTS
This research paper discusses gender or sex discrimination
in college and professional sports. In the 1970s and 1980s, female athletes made substantial progress toward achieving equal rights in collegiate athletics through litigation and the threat of litigation. Women coaches made less progress. The entire movement suffered some loss of momentum after the late 1980s because of more restrictive court rulings, funding problems and other factors. Female athletes have hardly made a dent in professional sports, except in certain non-contact sports such as tennis, golf and track.
Dainty Things
Until the broader womens movement began to assert itself in the 1960s, little progress was made toward securing equal rights
Text of the Paper:
The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper.
1475 (S.D. The first women's marathon inOlympic track did not occur until 1984 at the Los Angeles Olympics. of Education, 472 F. Landy, 9. Ronald Tune, "The Rehnquist Court and Title VII DisparateImpact Theory: Atonio's Burden Allocation and the Retreat fromGriggs." 16 Ohio Northern University L. The EqualPay Act is at 29 U.S.C. Price Waterhouse v. Joseph P. Sharle A. Pa. Beck, 245. "Scorecard The Third Sex." Sports Illustrated, 6 February 1995, 15.Wong, Glen M. "The Rehnquist Court and Title VII Disparate impact Theory: Atonio's Burden and the Retreat from Griggs." Ohio Northern University Law Review, 16 (Winter, 1989): 139-172.42 U.S.C. Tune says that in Watson v. Supp. David Roach, "No Competition," Washington Post, 17 November1995, B22. Beck says that"professional sports remain an area where women have had difficultyentering and achieving equality."[xxxii] In tennis and in golf, womenprofessional athletes have achieved recognition and earningsparity.[xxxiii] Lipsyte suggest that the recent decline in theprofitability of women's professional tennis is because "contemporaryfemale stars, brokered by greedy dads, male agents and multinationalorganizations no longer work together to mold their own sport."[xxxiv] In baseball, the highest level a woman player (Chris Wren 1975-1979career) has achieved is Class A. Duke Power Co., 4 1 U.S. Cheryl Miller, the star of anAmerican gold medal winning Olympic basketball team said: "Without TitleIX, I wouldn't be here."[iv] Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972provides that: "No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex,be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or besubjected to discrimination under any education program or activityreceiving Federal financial assistance."[v] Prior to the enactment of TitleIX, the principal legal weapon available to plaintiffs seeking relief fromdiscrimination against women in college athletic programs was the EqualProtection Clause of the Constitution. Washington State University." Journal of College and University Law, 14 (Spring, 1988): 575-589.Grove City v. Her male counterpart was paid $78,5 plus was given free use of acar.[xxii] The federal courts and many state courts have been making itmore difficult for female coaches and women athletic administrators to winTitle VII suits. Jonathan S. Supp. Asthey pursue other careers which are open to them, they tend to be less thanfully supportive of the efforts of women athletes. 1982).Graff, Doralice McEuen, Kathleen M. sections 2 e-2 e-17.29 U.S.C. Supp. "Discrimination in Professional Sports: A Survey of the Literature." Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 44 (April, 1991): 395-418.Landy, Jonathan S. Tyler,"Blair v. Alexander Wolff and Richard O'Brien (eds.), "Scorecard TheThird Sex," Sports Illustrated, 6 February 1995, 15. Bill Byrne, sportsentrepreneur, who has tried unsuccessfully to start a womens professionalbasketball league, says that women corporate executives have been reluctantto support women's athletics.[iii] Progress Toward Equal Rights for Women in College Athletics Since the early 197 s, significant progress has been made in thelowering the barriers to greater participation by women in collegeathletics, largely because of legal changes. Williams, 644,said that by 1994 13 , women were competing in collegiatesports, as compared with 32, in 1972. Rev. (June 1986): 347. 2d 611 (6th Cir. Lawrence M. 1982), cert.denied, 464 U.S. 2d 1379 (1987), theWashington Supreme Court ruled that football programs were not excludedfrom their holding that Washington State could not maintain sex-basedathletic programs under that state's equal rights law, but ruled that "anindividual sports program could use all the revenue generated by thatparticular program without violating" the law.[xv] Womens rights advocatesargue that there is no reason to give football programs special treatmentand point out that most of them lose money. News & World Report, 11 April 1994, 51-53.Tune, Ronald. Tune, 163. In the major leagues, 22 percent of all employees in 1994 werewomen, mostly in lower level jobs.[xxxviii] The situation is much the same(or worse) in professional football, basketball and ice hockey. Bell, 465 U.S. Independent School District, 477 F. Supp. Schroff, 52. 555 (1984).Haffer v. ." [because they are] "based on businessnecessity."[xxiii] This rule has been successfully used to defend pay andother practices relating to the higher business generating capacity of somesports in which male coaches participate and the additional duties andresponsibilities placed on such coaches. Williams, 685. 2d 1126 (9th Cir. Ron Scherer, "Women's Sports Are Scoring Despite A TiltedPlaying Field," Christian Science Monitor, 12 November 1993, 11. Dist. Health, Education and Welfare Department regulation 86.41, 45C.F.R. Landy, 1. Temple Univ., a class action brought on behalf ofcollege students under Title IX resulted in a settlement under which Templeagreed to allocate more of the athletic budget and financial aid to womensteams and women athletes.[x] The cause of equal rights for women received asetback in 1985 when the Supreme Court ruled in Grove City v. Women in Professional Sports Women have made comparatively little progress in enteringprofessional sports, except in non contact sports. In 1972, 9 percent ofwomen's teams were coached by women. She had been paid $44, a year. In at least one federal case, Rabidue v. Ensor, "Sex Discrimination inAthletics: A Review of Two Decades of Accomplishments andDefeats." 21 Gonzaga L. 1981). Ill.), a former coach himself, argues that theproportionality rule is flawed in that "it fails to account for a lowerinterest in sports among women that makes it difficult for a school toensure their participation at the same level as their percentage of thestudent body."[xvii] David Roach, the Director of Athletics at Brown saysthat "Title IX has been hijacked, diverted from its original promise ofeliminating gender-based discrimination and fashioned into a handy weaponto enforce a de facto quota system."[xviii] Roach says that at somecolleges, athletic departments which are hard pressed for funds havedropped men's teams in sports such as wrestling, swimming and diving andtennis because they had to in order to meet their numerical targets underTitle IX. Women remainan insignificant factor in the most lucrative professional sports. Osceola Refining Co., a non-sports case, the 6th Circuit suggested that "women enter male-dominatedemployment at their risk."[xxvii] The overall picture in colleges is mixed. Females who pursued athleticcareersseriously were largely regarded as unladylike, lesbian or otherwiseatypical deviations from the stereotyped gender roles assigned to them,such as cheerleaders, Baseball Annies or groupies, team moms and footballwidows. 23,545 F. 2d 12 1(6th Cir. 1992).Price Waterhouse v. Kuhn, 461 F. The Fourteenth Amendment appliesonly when state action deprives someone of their constitutional rights,making it an imperfect vehicle for attacking discrimination in privatecolleges and universities. Wong and Ensor, 357. . Ill. of Education, 472 F. Bill Plaschke, "In the Minors It's Lonely At the Top," LosAngeles Times, 24 July 1995, A1, A8.----------------------- 1 Procedurally, a plaintiff must first file a claim with theEqual Opportunity Commission and if she prevails but the employer fails tosettle, she then obtains a right to sue letter from the EEOC. Polly S. Wong and Richard J. Michigan State Bd. . 2 U.S.C. rather than athleticskills."[i] Feminist Carol McKinnon explained the aversion of many women toparticipating in athletics at college and professional levels as follows:"the pervasive message that they are physically incapable negates thedesire to be involved."[ii] Those women who do become involved at thecollege level have very limited post-graduate opportunities to compete. Endnotes BibliographyBeck, Melissa M. 2d 1292 (8th Cir.1973), Morris v. Meyers and John E. "Lower Pay for Women's Coaches: Refuting Some Common Justifications." Journal of College and University Law, 21 (Spring, 1995): 643-689.Wolff, Alexander and Richard O'Brien (eds.). Landy says that "women still getshortchanged when it comes to sports funding;" and Williams says thatwomen's teams often "receive inferior equipment and facilities, and lessdesirable competition and practice times, travel modes, andaccommodation."[xxix] The opposing point of view is that "so-calledaffirmative action for [women] athletes is jeopardizing budgets for men'steams."[xxx] Scroff is correct when she states that "much of the genderequation comes down to money."[xxxi] Lack of funding has hampered HEW'senforcement efforts. 1986).Roach, David. Most state decisions have been similar, see B.C.Cumberland Regular School District, 22 N.J. In general, separate men'sand women's teams are permitted.[xiii] Federal and state courts have generally held that "boys need not beafforded equal treatment."[xiv] The leading federal case is Clark v.Arizona Interscholastic Ass'n, 695 F. Ill. The entire movement suffered some loss of momentumafter the late 198 s because of more restrictive court rulings, fundingproblems and other factors. Ct.849 (1971) by demonstrating that its policies have "a disproportionateimpact on one gender . Supp. Kuhn, 461 F. 214, 531 A. These cultural attitudes are deeply ingrained in many American womenas well as men. sections 1681-1688.Williams, Joseph P. Temple Univ., 524 F. N.Y. Rep.Dennis Hestert (R. Osceola Refining Co., 8 5 F. 2d 558, 74 P. Williams, 685. 1973).Olson, Wendy. 1986). "Women's Sports Are Scoring Despite A Tilted Playing Field." Christian Science Monitor, 12 November 1993, 11.Schroff, Joanne M. Beck, "Fairness On the Field: Amending Title VII ToFoster Greater Female Participation in Professional Sports." 12Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal (Spring 1994): 244. "In the Minors It's Lonely At the Top." Los Angeles Times, 24 July 1995, A1 and A8.Postema v. 818 (183), which upheld the exclusion of a boy from afemale volleyball team. Supp. Female athletes have hardly made a dent inprofessional sports, except in certain non-contact sports such as tennis,golf and track. . Hestert has been trying, thus far unsuccessfully, to persuadeCongress to modify by legislation the proportionality rule. Rev. (Winter 1989): 156. Olson, 115. Williams, 647. . 86 (S.D. 2d 284 (Mass 1979). Washington State University." 14 Journal of Collegeand University Law (Spring 1988): 581. Michigan State Bd. .sex." Section 2 e-2(a)(1). 313, 318 (1977) that sex-based gender discrimination is constitutionalso long as its purpose is to redress past sex discrimination. 228 (1989). 23, 545 F. "History Needs to Repeat Itself on Court." New York Times, 17 November 1995, B22.Ludke v. Atonio, 1 9 S. Nevertheless, the CollageFootball Association and the American Football Association have beenattempting recently to secure an exemption of college football from thescope of Title IX.[xvi] In recent cases involving Brown and Colgate, the federal courts havebeen employing a strict "proportionality" test in determining whether thoseuniversities were in compliance with Title IX. Ludke v. 86 (S.D. The Rehnquist Court has increasedthe burden of proof on such plaintiffs. the emphasis insports on . According to Olson, "as the 199 s began, society continuedto demand that women athletes prove their femininity . "Fairness on the Field: Amending Title VII to Foster Greater Female Participation in Professional Sports." Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 12 (Spring, 1994): 241-28 .Brenden v. The courts are about evenly split as to whether women must be allowedto play on men's teams involving contact sports. of Sch. National League of Professional Baseball Clubs, 799 F. 2d 12 1 (6th Cir. McEvoy says that "Pamela Postema is suing the National League andothers for denying her a promotion after she served thirteen years as anumpire in the minor leagues working her way up from Single A to TripleA."[xxxv] Postema's case is interesting because she cites numerousinstances of sex harassment which impeded her in the performance of herjob. A series of equal protection cases in the 197 sand early 198 s established the principle that public schools must permitgirls to participate in school athletics, either on existing male teams oron womens teams.[vi] Since, however, almost all universities receive someform of federal financial assistance, Title IX proved to be a potent weaponfor attacking discrimination against women in college athletics. 2d 611 (6th Cir. Super. 8 5 F. Bell, 465 U.S. In Haffer v. A female accountant prevailed in a Title VII suit when she was deniedpromotion by her male superiors, despite her outstanding work, because theysaid she was too aggressive and macho.[xxxvi] Another interesting case is Ludke v. Much of the litigation has centered around money issues, and inparticular whether revenues from college football must be included in thepool of funds which must be shared with womens' teams. and Richard J. Woods, "Boys Muscling In On Girls' Sports." 53 OhioState Law Journal (June 1992): 895. Glen M. Joanne M. 531 (E.D. Funding for women'sathletic programs have been substantially increased and the status ofwomen's sports such as soccer, ice hockey, skiing and volleyball have beenupgraded, some like soccer to Olympic standing.[xxviii] For others, theprogress is uneven and insufficient. of Sch. 1978).McEvoy, Sharle. In court, anemployer can justify its employment policies under the Supreme Court'sdisparate impact rule in Griggs v. On the whole, women coaches have not necessarily benefitted from thelitigation over equal rights for women athletes. Kuhn, in which SportsIllustrated reporter Melissa Ludke won her 1978 law suit against theCommissioner of Baseball concerning her right of equal access to the lockerroom of the New York Yankees.[xxxvii] Women have made some inroads on the marketing and administrative sideof professional sports as swportscasters, players' agents, lawyers and inother capacities; however, there are no women general managers or moresenior executives (who are not owners) in baseball and only eight women(and one black) have reached the general manager level in the minorleagues. N.Y. Ct 2115 (1989),which Tune calls "a major victory for employers," Justice Byron White saidthat plaintiffs must show not only prove that a racial or sex imbalanceexists but also that "it is the application of a specific or particularemployment practice that has created the disparate impact on others."[xxv] These developments have not slowed the flood of cases brought bydisgruntled female employees in college athletic programs, such as USC'swomens basketball coach and Oklahoma State's womens golf coach who havefiled gender discrimination suits against their employers.[xxvi] Sexualharassment claims by female college athletes and other employees are on therise. Robert Lipsyte, "History Needs to Repeat Itself on Court," NewYork Times, 17 November 1995, B22. Title VII is at 42 U.S.C. "A sporting chance?" U.S. Pay differentials betweenmale and female coaches have been narrowing because women coaches havebrought a number of suits under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964and the Equal Pay Act of 1983.[xxi] On April 24, 1993, a jury in theDistrict of Columbia Superior Court awarded Sanya Tyler, the head coach ofthe women's basketball team at Howard University $2.4 million in damages,which were later reduced by the judge to $1. 2 6. Title VII prohibits anyoneemploying more than 15 persons to "discriminate against anyindividual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions,or privileges of employment, because of such individual's . feminine characteristics . "Beyond Title IX: Toward An Agenda for Women and Sports in the 199 s." Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 3 (Fall, 199 ): 1 5-151.Plaschke, Bill. Hopkins, 49 U.S. 6 million because it foundthat she had been discriminated against because of her sex under the D.C.Human Rights Act, Title IX and the Equal Pay Act. 1978). The comparable figure in 1994 was 48percent. . Supp. No university has been denied federal funding forTitle IX violations. 2d 1 59(1987), involving a girl's field hockey team. McEvoy, "The Legal Environment of Baseball." 12Journal of Legal Studies Education (Winter/ Spring 1994), 21 .The case, which is still pending, is Postema v. In Blair v.Washington State University, 1 8 Wash. N.Y. Haffer v. 1973).Connor v. sections 1681-1688.Brenden v. Olson saysthat "Title IX and equal protection litigation together did work arevolution of sorts in women's sports in the 197 s."[vii] Under regulations issued by the United States Department of Health,Education and Welfare, colleges and universities were given until 1978 tobring their athletic programs into compliance with Title IX.[viii] Thepercentage of women participating in college athletic programs increasedfrom 15 percent before Title IX to 38.8 percent in 1984, expenditures bycollege athletic departments for womens athletic programs increased from$24.7 million in 1977 to $116 million in 1981 and financial aid to womenathlete students increased thirteenfold between 1973 and 1981.[ix] Thesechanges came about through law suits which were filed by students andothers. 555 (1984). Theonly professional women's baseball team was the All-American Girls Leaguewhich former Chicago Cub owner Phil Wrigley organized in 1943 and whichfolded after men came home from World War II. MassachusettsInterscholastic Athletic Association, Inc., 393 N.E. Tyler. Independent School District, 477 F. National Leagueof Professional Baseball Clubs, 799 F. GENDER DISCRIMINATION IN COLLEGE AND PROFESSIONAL SPORTS This research paper discusses gender or sex discriminationin college and professional sports. News & WorldReport, 11 April 1994, 51. 531 (E.D. . Schroff, "A sporting chance?" U.S. Brown was found not to be incompliance because only 4 percent of undergraduates participated invarsity athletics even though 53 percent of undergraduates are women. sections 2 e to 2 e-17. Dist. 2 6.2 U.S.C. Olson, 125. 2d 1292 (8th Cir. Williams, 667. v. Supp. 376 (N.D. In the 197 s and 198 s, female athletesmade substantial progress toward achieving equal rights in collegiateathletics through litigation and the threat of litigation. However, in a1979 case, Massachusetts held that the exclusion of a boy from a girl'steam violated its equal rights law, Attorney General v. Temple Univ., 524 F. . Ensor. Board of Educ. Grove City v. Conclusion The controversy over the acceptable level of participation of womenathletes in college level athletics has largely abated and substantialprogress has been made by them, if not by their women coaches. 86.41 (a) (1989) prohibits sex discrimination in athleticprograms offered by recipients of federal assistance andrequired that they provide equal athletic opportunity formembers of both sexes. Landy, "Scrimmage Match in Congress Over Money forSports," Christian Science Monitor, 12 May 1995, 1, 9. 1981).Health, Education and Welfare Department Regulation 86.41, 45 C.F.R 86.41(a) (1989).Kahn, Lawrence M. The rationale behind thesedecisions follows the Supreme Court's guidance in Califano v. 228 (1989).Rabidue v. "The Legal Environment of Baseball." Journal of Legal Studies Education, 12 (Winter/Spring, 1994): 197-218.Morris v. Women coaches earn only 59 percent as much as men coaches.[xix]Title IX has made the coaching of women's teams more attractive to men.Williams said in 1995 that "women are becoming a dying breed incoaching."[xx] The picture for women coaches is not all bleak. Women coachesmade less progress. Doralice McEuen Graff, Kathleen M. Athleticswere considered a male preserve, apart from the exploits of a handful ofwomen with exceptional skills in noncontact supports, such as BabeDidrickson Zaharias who won several major golf titles in the 193 s andsimilar achievements by female tennis stars. Ct 2777 (1988), the Court's holding "reduced theemployer's burden from persuasion to production of evidence that itsemployment policies and practices were based on lawful businessreasons."[xxiv] In Wards Cove Packing Co. Bell that thereceipt of federal funds by one school program did not trigger institutionwide coverage under Title IX.[xi] However, Congress rectified thisexclusion by passing the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1988 which hasbeen interpreted by the federal courts in about a half dozen decisions torequire universities to rectify unequal practices in college athleticprograms.[xii] Similar decisions have been made by many state courts understate equal rights laws which have been adopted in at least 14 states. . "Scrimmage Match in Congress Over Money for Sports." Christian Science Monitor, 12 May 1995, 1 and 9.Lipsyte, Robert. Webster, 43 U.S. Dainty Things Until the broader womens movement began to assert itself in the196 s, little progress was made toward securing equal rights for women incollegiate and amateur athletics in the United States because of thetraditional attitudes of most Americans toward women in sports. Meyers and John E. Board of Educ. "No Competition." Washington Post, 17 November 1995, B22.Scherer, Ron. 376 (N.D. There are some woman umpires at variouslevels. "Sex Discrimination in Athletics: A Review of Two Decades of Accomplishments and Defeats." Gonzaga Law Review, 21 (June, 1986): 345-393.Woods, Polly S. N.Y.1992). "Blair v. Pa. 1982), among many others. Melissa M. FortWorth Bank & Trust, 1 8 S. Kahn, "Discrimination in Professional Sports: ASurvey of the Literature." 44 Industrial & Labor RelationsReview (April 1991): 413. Hopkins, 49 U.S. The Equal Pay Act under section 2 6(d) provides that equal pay must be made for equal work,regardless of sex. Williams, "Lower Pay for Women's Coaches: RefutingSome Common Justifications." 21 Journal of College andUniversity Law (Spring 1995): 643. 424, 91 S. 1475 (S.D. Landy, 1 and Williams, 646. "Boys Muscling In On Girls' Sports." Ohio State Law Journal, 53 (June, 1992): 891-9 7.----------------------- Wendy Olson, "Beyond Title IX: Toward an Agenda for Women andSports in the 199 s." 3 Yale Journal of Law and Feminism (Fall199 ): 122. 1973) and Connor v. In 199 , BernadetteLocke became the first woman to coach a male college intercollegiatebasketball team-at the University of Kentucky.
If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again:
or
Click here to request an essay written just for you.
|
|
|
