VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

05/17/24 9:07:59pmLogin ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]
Subject: Re: the title IX


Author:
Odd Job
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 10:39:28 08/12/21 Thu
In reply to: jean the frenchie 's message, "the title IX" on 05:52:38 07/28/21 Wed

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.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-7
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.