Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

05/17/24 7:28:16pm [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]

Subject: the title IX Author: jean the frenchie [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 05:52:38 07/28/21 Wed I have read with a great interest the message of Spelvin and all links which are mentioned. Thre is one point that I don't understand it is when it is said that title IX of the Education Amendments Act reads is the first reason of the end of the swimming in the nude of boys at school. I don't understand why because when it is mentioned “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.” it did not mean that boys could not swim in the nude ! For me it meaned that it was impossible to refuse that girls joined a swim team or had a swimming lesson with boys but if all had been mixed like it was already at some schools, there was no issue, it was not mentioned that boys might wear a swim suit like girls, boys could be naked and girls wear a swim suit ; as long as they could be together the title IX was respected. The major issue would have been if girls had asked to swimm in the nude and it was refused because of their gender which was a dicrimation based on gender but I presume that it did not happen often. Normally in most relations girls who were in a mixed class or team at school enjoyed to be allowed to wear a swim suit. Of course if boys wanted to wear a swim suit, there could have been also an issue but the solution was to decide that the board of school might be asked for the apply of the rule, and the parents could have been asked what they wanted, at that time boys were minor persons until 21 age, so they had nothing to say and their complaints would have been irrelevant if their parents would have not supported them and voted for the maintain of the rule... I must not be wrong since some schools had maintained the rule of swimming in the nude after the Title IX. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Subject: Re: the title IX Author: Odd Job [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 10:39:28 08/12/21 Thu The primary purpose of Title XI was to insure monetary expenditures on sports activities were equalized between the sexes. But, like most laws, it has to pass through the court system, where judges who feign impartiality apply their own biases to its interpretation. It's been amended over the years, and recently has been used for things like sexual harrassment, reporting rape statistics, all kinds of stuff not originally covered by the law. No, it didn't mean boys couldn't swim nude. Or girls either, for that matter. I seem to remember, and now I can't find the reference, only one case brought under Title IX with reference to nude swimming. If I remember it correctly, it was mid 70s, somewhere on the east coast, and the argument was that girls were being discriminated against because they were required to wear suits, while boys weren't. The school board decided to require boys also wear suits. Problem solved. (I'm going to find this refence and post a link, if one exists.) Title IX would only mandate equal treatment, but still, someone has to sue, using Title IX as a pretext, some school system or YMCA, or some institution for this to happen. I think it's a mistake to presume (although people do it all the time) that there is one explanation for a given phenomenon, instead of considering all the factors at play. Forced male nude swimming was justified by the American Health Association recommendation of 1926, which was rescinded in 1962; it shows how little that actually mattered, since nude swim classes didn't finally disappear until the 80s. Multiple factors converged to end the practice--the feminists demanded equality, but hell, you can break a nail on this equality shit, and sugar and spice and every thing nice wasn't going to bare their asses for swim class, so the boys got suits instead; the rising hysteria surrounding pedophilia; the increased tolerance of gays; new psychological perspectives that included the radical notion young males were actually human, and had nerve endings, and could feel things like humiliation and embarrassement; the end to conscription; the end of Vietnam. You could site hundreds of influences that converged slowly to end nude swimming. It wasn't, by any means, Title IX alone. That was just symbolic of the way the world was changing. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]