Search Results

Chapter 5 presents a comprehensive and innovative analysis of extracurricular sports for undergraduate women between the 1920s and 1950s. Why did some colleges and universities approve high-level female competition, while others opposed it? Why did like-minded physical educators at similar institutions reach different conclusions about women’s athletics? The chapter argues that both national and local factors played a role. As higher education and student populations changed, each institution’s mission and identity, demographic makeup, donor base, governance structure, and campus culture produced distinctive practices of “difference” along axes of gender, race, and class; these frameworks either facilitated or disallowed women’s athletics. The analysis includes case studies of diverse schools, including Agnes Scott, Milwaukee-Downer, Smith, Bryn Mawr, Stanford, Hampton, Tuskegee, and Spelman.

This chapter examines Title IX's three-part test for measuring equal participation opportunities. It first considers the development of the test, whose overall goal is to increase girls' and women's opportunities in competitive sports, and its three parts: the “substantial proportionality” prong, the “program expansion” prong, and the “full and effective accommodation” prong. It then discusses the legal battle over Title IX's requirements, focusing on the legacy of Cohen v. Brown University with respect to women's sports. It also looks at the application of the three-part test to interscholastic sports and the courts' response to reverse discrimination claims brought by male athletes. The chapter shows that the three-part test has been a success in terms of both its progressive theory of gender equality and its impact on women's participation in sports, citing as evidence the rise in the number of girls and women who play varsity sports in the years since Title IX was passed.

This chapter focuses on Title IX's three-part test for measuring equal participation opportunities. It first examines what counts as a sport for Title IX purposes, with particular emphasis on the case of cheerleading. It then considers whether some sports are more worthy contenders for addition to the women's program than others, and whether Title IX takes (or should take) a position on which sports to prioritize in the push to expand women's opportunities. More specifically, it asks whether Title IX should push harder for contact sports for women. It also discusses the mixed success of Title IX's effort to secure equal sports participation opportunities, noting that women of color remain significantly underrepresented in intercollegiate athletic participation, in part because much of the growth in women's sports in recent years has been in sports that are disproportionately played by white women.

This chapter focuses on Title IX's three-part test for measuring equal participation opportunities. It first examines what counts as a sport for Title IX purposes, with particular emphasis on the case of cheerleading. It then considers whether some sports are more worthy contenders for addition to the women's program than others, and whether Title IX takes (or should take) a position on which sports to prioritize in the push to expand women's opportunities. More specifically, it asks whether Title IX should push harder for contact sports for women. It also discusses the mixed success of Title IX's effort to secure equal sports participation opportunities, noting that women of color remain significantly underrepresented in intercollegiate athletic participation, in part because much of the growth in women's sports in recent years has been in sports that are disproportionately played by white women.

This introductory chapter situates women’s artistic gymnastics in the Cold War. When the sport debuted at the 1952 Olympic Games, it was designed specifically for women. Eastern bloc gymnasts immediately dominated, going on to win nearly every gold medal over the next forty years, bringing names like Olga Korbut and Nadia Comăneci to households around the world. Sixty years later, US gymnasts were all but unbeatable, and the sport had transformed from its balletic origins to dynamic acrobatics. In a conflict defined by the absence of direct military confrontation, women’s artistic gymnastics became part of the cultural battlefield for Cold War supremacy. But gymnastics was also a site of international collaboration, which drove the sport’s development and contributed to its global popularity. This chapter makes the case for why a study of gymnastics is important and what its history can tell us about social values, global governance, and collaboration during the Cold War.

This chapter examines Title IX's three-part test for measuring equal participation opportunities. It first considers the development of the test, whose overall goal is to increase girls' and women's opportunities in competitive sports, and its three parts: the “substantial proportionality” prong, the “program expansion” prong, and the “full and effective accommodation” prong. It then discusses the legal battle over Title IX's requirements, focusing on the legacy of Cohen v. Brown University with respect to women's sports. It also looks at the application of the three-part test to interscholastic sports and the courts' response to reverse discrimination claims brought by male athletes. The chapter shows that the three-part test has been a success in terms of both its progressive theory of gender equality and its impact on women's participation in sports, citing as evidence the rise in the number of girls and women who play varsity sports in the years since Title IX was passed.

This chapter discusses how women physical educators began to reevaluate their collective position against intercollegiate, commercial, and hypercompetitive sports for their students. Particular attention is given to a series of National Institutes on Girls' Sports, jointly sponsored by the Division for Girls and Women's Sports (DGWS) and the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) that took place during the 1960s. At these clinics, educators, recreation leaders, and other interested parties learned the necessary tools to teach sport skills to their respective charges and to encourage them to engage in “the right kind of competition.” The emergent groundswell of support was an important antecedent to the subsequent developments in women's sport.

This chapter examines Title IX's equal treatment framework and its progress toward equalizing the treatment and benefits given to male and female athletes, along with its limitations. The biggest success story of Title IX has been the use of its three-part test to add women's sports, which have also made great strides in gaining increased support and resources. As with other aspects of gender equality in sports, however, Title IX's baseline of sex separation affects how the equal treatment standards apply. This chapter discusses the development of Title IX's equal treatment standards, the strong side of its liberal feminism, the requirement for proving intentional discrimination, and Title IX's coverage of privately financed inequality. It also considers Title IX's sensitivity to the harms of discrimination and its coverage of athletic scholarships.

This chapter discusses Title IX, the Civil Rights Restoration Act, and gender equity on college sports. The Education Amendments passed by Congress in 1972 included a provision in its Title IX that “no person in the United States shall on the basis of sex be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” However, many colleges and universities, whose athletic policies were dominated by male coaches and administrators, dithered on making significant commitments to expand female participation in intercollegiate athletics. In 1987, Congress proposed an act “to restore the broad scope of coverage and to clarify the application of Title IX.” The law, named the Civil Rights Restoration Act, which applied to Title IX and three other civil-rights statutes, would require that any organization or entity that receives federal funds, or indirectly benefits from federal assistance, must abide by laws outlawing discriminatory practices based upon race, religion, color, national origin, age, disability, or gender.

This chapter examines Title IX's equal treatment framework and its progress toward equalizing the treatment and benefits given to male and female athletes, along with its limitations. The biggest success story of Title IX has been the use of its three-part test to add women's sports, which have also made great strides in gaining increased support and resources. As with other aspects of gender equality in sports, however, Title IX's baseline of sex separation affects how the equal treatment standards apply. This chapter discusses the development of Title IX's equal treatment standards, the strong side of its liberal feminism, the requirement for proving intentional discrimination, and Title IX's coverage of privately financed inequality. It also considers Title IX's sensitivity to the harms of discrimination and its coverage of athletic scholarships.

This chapter examines how Title IX strikes a balance between accommodating and minimizing sex differences for purposes of team selection. Title IX's allowance for sex separation in sports has facilitated a legal approach that emphasizes results over process and actual opportunities for girls and women over a more formal gender neutrality. However, the law also leaves intact a structure in which women's sports are too often marginalized as secondary to men's games. This chapter first considers what feminist legal scholars refer to as the dilemma of difference and goes on to discuss the development of Title IX's approach to gender equality in sports. It then explores how sex-discrimination law can best secure equality and whether Title IX should take a gender-conscious approach that acknowledges sex differences and makes sure that women have enough opportunities to play sports compared to men. It argues that Title IX does a respectable job overall of addressing the dilemma of difference and settling on a baseline of separation.

This chapter examines how Title IX strikes a balance between accommodating and minimizing sex differences for purposes of team selection. Title IX's allowance for sex separation in sports has facilitated a legal approach that emphasizes results over process and actual opportunities for girls and women over a more formal gender neutrality. However, the law also leaves intact a structure in which women's sports are too often marginalized as secondary to men's games. This chapter first considers what feminist legal scholars refer to as the dilemma of difference and goes on to discuss the development of Title IX's approach to gender equality in sports. It then explores how sex-discrimination law can best secure equality and whether Title IX should take a gender-conscious approach that acknowledges sex differences and makes sure that women have enough opportunities to play sports compared to men. It argues that Title IX does a respectable job overall of addressing the dilemma of difference and settling on a baseline of separation.

This concluding chapter examines how Title IX has been able to navigate and survive the backlash against it. It shows how women's influx into sports has created prime conditions for backlash by challenging the masculinity that sports participation for males has historically cultivated. It also considers the scapegoating of Title IX as the reason why some marginalized men's sports have been cut from university rosters; Title IX's successes and limitations as a law of many feminisms; and Title IX's departure from the liberal feminist model that has been the centerpiece of other sex discrimination laws, as seen in its three-part test for equal participation opportunities. Finally, the chapter looks at prospects for further progress in the future regarding women's sports and gender equality more generally.

This concluding chapter examines how Title IX has been able to navigate and survive the backlash against it. It shows how women's influx into sports has created prime conditions for backlash by challenging the masculinity that sports participation for males has historically cultivated. It also considers the scapegoating of Title IX as the reason why some marginalized men's sports have been cut from university rosters; Title IX's successes and limitations as a law of many feminisms; and Title IX's departure from the liberal feminist model that has been the centerpiece of other sex discrimination laws, as seen in its three-part test for equal participation opportunities. Finally, the chapter looks at prospects for further progress in the future regarding women's sports and gender equality more generally.

This chapter examines the introduction of the commercial sports bra, one of the products that attested to the 1970s revolution in women's sport. Critics charged that breasts, like menstruation, symbolized women's inferior biology and their unsuitability for sport; but the introduction of the “Jogbra” in 1977 proved a material and symbolic landmark. It also signified a niche market for the product, and its popularity grew throughout the 1980s and into the 1990s. Yet it was Brandi Chastain's 1999 celebration, in which she ripped off her uniform top following her game-winning goal in the Women's World Cup, that proved to be the garment's coming-out party. This marked an increase in visibility of both the sports bra and the sports bra-clad body and inspired cultural conversations about the changing feminine corporeal aesthetic.

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sex discrimination in educational institutions that receive federal funds, including in athletic programs. This chapter considers sport's construction of masculinity and the limits and promise of Title IX in disrupting this process. It argues that despite the increasing numbers of female athletes, sport remains a primary site for the construction of masculinity. For all its success in opening up athletic opportunities to women, Title IX has not yet succeeded in transforming sport's function as a masculinizing institution. Nor has it destabilized the hierarchy of masculinity within men's sports, or rectified the harms of male sports culture.

This introductory chapter considers how something as seemingly mundane as a ponytail is actually shot through with substantial and varied cultural significance. Unquestionably, the hairstyle provides a practical solution for dealing with longer hair, but what it comes to mean, how it is taken up in mediated discourse, the ways it becomes synonymous with female athletes, and its relationships to sexuality, age, race, nationality, and culture engender a normative, athletic femininity in the context of U.S. women's sports. At the same time, there are dynamics of power, pleasure, agency, and resistance involved with the everyday act of styling one's hair. It is difficult to imagine women's sport without the ponytail, but the chapter argues that it is precisely because they seem so commonsense and commonplace that they are powerfully connected to gendered ideologies.

This book explores the successes and limitations of Title IX—a federal law banning sex discrimination in federally funded education programs—as a vehicle for social change, especially in the area of women's sports. Using feminist legal theory, the book considers how and why Title IX has been more successful than other sex discrimination laws, at least in certain respects, in getting women into arenas traditionally reserved for men and in changing cultural norms in the process. It also examines the areas where the law has fallen short and the role that it can play in promoting gender equality in sport and in society more generally. As an introduction, this book discusses feminism's neglect of sport, the potential benefits of sport in women's lives, the case for making sex equality in sport a high priority, and Title IX's liberal feminist approach to equality in sports.