Title IX was passed into law in 1972. President Richard Nixon sold the bill by emphasizing the desegregation of busing not the expansion of educational access for women. Initially the bill focused on universities that received direct funding from the government.
In 1988 the jurisdiction of the law encompassed every university that received direct or indirect funding even students loans. This law, like the recently passed Obamacare bill, increased in scope as the regulations were written and implemented.
The federal government has used Title IX as an instrument to transform and control the functioning of the public universities and now even our private ones. On a positive note, it has increased the number of female collegiate athletes from 30,000 to 90,000. The number of female science and math college teachers has doubled since its inception. There have been other undesirable changes, which are due to this law.
A consequence of Title IX in higher education, either intended or unintended, has been that presently 60 percent of all students at our universities are female and only 40 percnet are male. Currently males are the new minority. They are continuing to decrease in number partially because males are sitting ducks in a hostile university environment.
Previously sports were a major means of attracting and maintaining male students in the university community. Under the Title IX proportional criteria there has to be the same percentage of student athletes as the percentage that comprises the student population. For example if 60 percent of the students are female, 60 percent of the athletes in the university sports programs have to be female.
Males, not females, are presently the ones being discriminated against. By arbitrarily forcing males and females to have parity in sports and not in other extra curricular activities, an unattractive and hostile environment for males in higher education communities has been created. Not only are the contact sports teams, that are part of the male DNA dwindling, young college men are vulnerable to persecution under Title IX even with consensual sexual partners.
In the recent past these sexual encounters have not been considered sexual assault. These sexual encounters between college students on campus were usually not prosecuted by the local criminal system because they were "he said, she said" incidents where the rights of both parties have to be protected. After initial university and/or police investigation found probable cause that a possible sexual assault took place, it was turned over to the courts for prosecution.
Presently the same type of college assault cases are not turned over to local prosecution but according to Title IX federal guidelines anyone can make a complaint to the Department of Education Office of Civil Rights (OCR), where the male has no legal right to due process. The burden of proof falls on the male who appears to be guilty until proven innocent.
Feminist groups using the OCR to file questionable sexual complaints have exploited this federal mandate. The power of the OCR comes from the enforcement by the DOJ or an administrative judge who have the ability to terminate federal funding including federal student loans to the university.
This threat of being sued by itself is so frightening that the universities are dismissing the "abusive" male student before he has a fair hearing. This intimidation is the cause of an explosion of males being expelled. From the university's perspective, it is better to discriminate against males than to risk their financial survival fighting the unlimited resources of the feds.
The Duke University Lacrosse fiasco was only prevented from convicting student athletes by their dedicated and affluent parents who fought for the freedom of their college student sons with no help from the judicial system. The root cause for this egregious incident has not lessened but in fact may be stronger. Females have been given permission not to be responsible for their own actions.
Women's studies continue to lambaste males for their previous dominance in higher education. Many radical feminists have used their energies to point out every defect in man's behavior demonizing men to the extent they appear to be sub-human. The current view is that men are evil, violent, rape prone and dangerous people.
On too many campuses Women's Study programs have produced activist campaigns such as the "Clothesline Project" and "Womym Tea" that have spread incendiary propaganda. There are feminists who proudly wear T-shirts that say, "All Men are Rapists."
They believe that all women have a right to their bodies and should not be responsible for their sexual behavior, while men are 100 percent accountable for any sexual encounter. A male student must question the female throughout the sexual encounter to see if the female is still consenting. Every individual should be responsible for his or her own actions.
The federal government's Title IX social engineering has reversed the dynamics of discrimination issues between males and females not only on college campuses but also in our entire culture. Young male students are currently the impotent gender.
The male's natural sexual assertiveness has been repressed and female sexual repression has been replaced by an artificial belief that their flirtatious behavior should have no impact on the male's behavior. This is unreasonable, illogical and dangerous.
The perversion of Title IX has given females the license to abuse innocent males. The law has removed male's right to due process making them victims while encouraging females to use federal power to punish innocent males for participating in a consensual act. This is not equality of the sexes; it is supremacy of females over males.
Title IX has legitimized the female's ability to ruin young men's lives on a whim. At this juncture where females are the majority in higher education, Title IX should be repealed as it has outlasted its usefulness and has turned destructive.