What’s the purpose of scholastic sports, you ask? I guess I’m wondering how you’re using “scholastic” here. There’s nothing to stop any student from forming a club to play hockey, lacrosse, etc. We both know that for many years, there was a UIUC women’s soccer team as well as a softball team on the club level, and eventually those sports became varsity. And for just as many years there’s been men’s hockey, which has no chance of ever becoming varsity, thanks to Title IX. So if the purpose of scholastic sports is to promote sportsmanship, physical fitness, etc. then a club is just as good as a varsity sport. And that means ANY club, men’s or women’s. And the best way to prove interest is to have a thriving club sport IMHO. Right now, I don’t recall too many other women’s club teams at Illinois. Ice Hockey? Maybe, that’s relatively new. But Field Hockey? Lacrosse? AFAIK, no.

How do you propose to generate interest? As noted, we’ve got varsity women’s sports that are absolutely crying for walk-ons. Basketball already gets more schollies for women than for men. Adding more sports? I’m sure you’ve seen the list of sports that Gunther has proposed: they include crew and bowling. Is there really an unfilled need for women’s crew at UIUC? But in the meantime, while you’re trying to create interest in women’s sports you’re denying men the opportunity to compete at varsity. Title IX has created this connection-not only on the number of scholarships, but on the number of participants. To me, this aspect of this law is totally unfair.

Certainly money is a huge factor, no argument. Football and hoops pays the freight. IMHO, anyone who proposes that a school drops football to “free up” scholarship money for women will soon see how shortsighted that view is. I really don’t think that there are more women’s scholarships at DePaul or Marquette than at UIUC or any other Big Ten school. And this gets back to the first point-if you say that “scholastic” sports are part of the curriculum, then get state funding and make it a graduation requirement. But that’s not the way it is in most places.

I’m not trying to kill women’s sports-but OTOH, I think we’ve hit a wall at the present time. I think that until women’s interest (all women, not just the Jennie Finches of the world) catches up to the opportunities that are there presently, the strict enforcement of Title IX should be put on the back burner.

I’m certainly not putting words into your mouth but a lot of sports fans see high school and collegiate sports as football and men’s basketball. I think when it comes to the college level, money comes into play, which is unfortunate, imho.

Girl’s and women’s sports is a relatively new phenomenon. I think it’s too early to sound the deathknell for it.

“Boys and men have never had to prove they are interested in sports to get a chance to play, nor should they be asked to do so.”

Zealot, living near UIUC I’m sure you’re aware that the sports teams have walkon ceilings for mens sports and floors for women’s sports. IMHO, when you have to turn away baseball players, wrestlers, etc. because the women’s basketball/volleyball teams can’t get players to come out for the sport without a schollie-well, that situation is highly unfair. Men prove every day that they’re interested in sports-and the majority of women have shown that they don’t match that level of interest.

While Jennie F. makes some good points, IMHO her life & experience is the exception, not the rule. Title IX is a good theory but its execution is awful. Maybe this email survey idea isn’t perfect, but the status quo isn’t even close to ideal.