Jump to content


Close Open
Close Open
Photo

Title IX....the reality of liberalism........


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#21 gator67

gator67

    Senior Gator

  • Members
  • 290 posts

Posted 08 July 2017 - 08:17 AM

My point exactly. While everyone is basking in making a better world, when does that infringe on the rights of mens programs? Thats why enacting rights for minorities they trample on the rights of majorities. Fairness cannot be enacted by rolling over on the rights for everyone else including male sports.

 

The scholies should be even in the other sports, not slanted toward womens programs.

 

If you can't understand this concept, then all this other stuff is fluffy BS. Don't tell me about "the way it was"...........they me why we cannot give out 27 baseball ships? Again, the idiots that make these determinations try to make up for the past by creating unfairness in the present.Hope for new Supreme Court makeup shortly!

 

CASE CLOSED.  (Please no more bleeding hearts that say nothing and do not add to the conversation but disclose you never read my opening statements.)

Name-calling aside, it appears to me that you are accepting the basic premise of Title IX in the second paragraph (equity in the distribution of scholarships between men and women), but you are upset about the fact that the large number of football scholarships has skewed the distribution in the other programs. You apparently want football to be placed in a different category (if I follow your thinking). I can see why someone would be unhappy about the situation, but I do not see the logic of treating football scholarships as if they were somehow not also part of the overall athletic program. The fact that it is the largest money-maker at a school such as UF (for some, it can be a big financial drain) does give it a sort of unique standing, but it is still just one of the university's athletic programs. The concerns and desires of fans, of the athletes, and of the university do not always align.



#22 vulcan_alex

vulcan_alex

    Bull Gator

  • Members
  • 9,560 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 04:31 PM

I will tell you about this law. I went to HS in Alachua County late 60s early 70s.   Our high school had boys teams in football basketball track and field.  We had a girls basketball team when I got there.  My new basketball coach didnt want to share the gym in 1971 so the only girls sports team went away.  We had JV teams for boys in basketball and football, too.  Girls could be cheerleaders.,  That was it.  I knew some great girl athletes back then but they had no opportunities.  Our girls BB team was pretty good before they axed it.  THIS is why title IX came along.  Liberalism my ass. It was about fairness and opportunity.  We all know only football and a few basketball programs pay the bills.  So most of the teams are getting a ride from the football revenue.  MANY MANY young people get an education from their athletic ability and maybe an opportunity to represent the USA on the national stage.   Athletics are a bonding activity for many whether your play or watch.

 

So of course you insist that only the force of the federal government and its regulations could get parents to influence their school boards to have sports for their daughters.  I don't remember any female sports when I went to High School, perhaps I need to review my year book.

 


I am a "Vulcan" and try hard to keep things logical and without emotion. However as a "Vulcan" I have a highly emotional reaction mode for special occasions.
UF 1973 Physics
Miami Carol City
Financial Planning / Quality
Tn

#23 vulcan_alex

vulcan_alex

    Bull Gator

  • Members
  • 9,560 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 04:34 PM

Name-calling aside, it appears to me that you are accepting the basic premise of Title IX in the second paragraph (equity in the distribution of scholarships between men and women), but you are upset about the fact that the large number of football scholarships has skewed the distribution in the other programs. You apparently want football to be placed in a different category (if I follow your thinking). I can see why someone would be unhappy about the situation, but I do not see the logic of treating football scholarships as if they were somehow not also part of the overall athletic program. The fact that it is the largest money-maker at a school such as UF (for some, it can be a big financial drain) does give it a sort of unique standing, but it is still just one of the university's athletic programs. The concerns and desires of fans, of the athletes, and of the university do not always align.

 

The logic is that by applying the numbers across diverse sports you get something that makes similar sports different.  So say basketball, softball / baseball, and any other sports that males and females both have the scollys would be the same.  No comparison to football so no using their large numbers in the calculation.  Typical of regulation, little to no logic, just progressive it must be regulated.
 


I am a "Vulcan" and try hard to keep things logical and without emotion. However as a "Vulcan" I have a highly emotional reaction mode for special occasions.
UF 1973 Physics
Miami Carol City
Financial Planning / Quality
Tn

#24 gator67

gator67

    Senior Gator

  • Members
  • 290 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 07:50 PM

The logic is that by applying the numbers across diverse sports you get something that makes similar sports different.  So say basketball, softball / baseball, and any other sports that males and females both have the scollys would be the same.  No comparison to football so no using their large numbers in the calculation.  Typical of regulation, little to no logic, just progressive it must be regulated.
 

This offers one way someone might think about athletic scholarships. But, from another perspective, one might believe that a university has the responsibility to provide roughly an equal opportunity for men and women to participate in intercollegiate athletics, without regard to the sports involved. The focus would be on opportunities to compete, not the nature of the competition. This would seem to call for something akin to the present arrangement. Whether it is "progressive" to think this way is beside the point. The question is which approach one finds most persuasive. For many years now (going back well before Obama's tenure), higher education seems to have been guided by the perspective that I have briefly described.


  • mtn2top likes this

#25 vulcan_alex

vulcan_alex

    Bull Gator

  • Members
  • 9,560 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 07:59 PM

This offers one way someone might think about athletic scholarships. But, from another perspective, one might believe that a university has the responsibility to provide roughly an equal opportunity for men and women to participate in intercollegiate athletics, without regard to the sports involved. The focus would be on opportunities to compete, not the nature of the competition. This would seem to call for something akin to the present arrangement. Whether it is "progressive" to think this way is beside the point. The question is which approach one finds most persuasive. For many years now (going back well before Obama's tenure), higher education seems to have been guided by the perspective that I have briefly described.

 

So lets have female football, it is a professional sport but I bet you would have a difficult time fielding a team nor getting them a league.

 

Now I would accept title nine to get things changed and evened up, then it goes away.  If our legal process needs review the justice department is where that belongs not the education department that really needs to be reduced and combined with health and human services.  Food stamps need to be moved from Ag department as well.  Then most if not all of the managers would be eliminated.  Nice cost reduction, better service, and a slimmer and less intrusive federal government.  States could take up whatever slack they desired.
 


I am a "Vulcan" and try hard to keep things logical and without emotion. However as a "Vulcan" I have a highly emotional reaction mode for special occasions.
UF 1973 Physics
Miami Carol City
Financial Planning / Quality
Tn

#26 vulcan_alex

vulcan_alex

    Bull Gator

  • Members
  • 9,560 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 08:01 PM

And since in our case the AD is separate it really is not an opportunity for students, but mostly a marketing tool.  If say title 9 was sunset which sports would go away.  I bet the answer is none.


I am a "Vulcan" and try hard to keep things logical and without emotion. However as a "Vulcan" I have a highly emotional reaction mode for special occasions.
UF 1973 Physics
Miami Carol City
Financial Planning / Quality
Tn

#27 gator67

gator67

    Senior Gator

  • Members
  • 290 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 08:40 PM

Offering opportunities in a sport without any potential athletes seems fairly problematic. As for what would happen to women's sports if Title IX faded away, I lack your confidence in an answer. If I had to guess, I would say that some institutions would not trim women's sports but others would. I can think of ways in which financial pressures for athletic departments might work against some women's sports. Bottom line is that we seem to have differing perspectives and probably just need to leave it at that.


  • vulcan_alex likes this

#28 vulcan_alex

vulcan_alex

    Bull Gator

  • Members
  • 9,560 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 10:37 PM

Offering opportunities in a sport without any potential athletes seems fairly problematic. As for what would happen to women's sports if Title IX faded away, I lack your confidence in an answer. If I had to guess, I would say that some institutions would not trim women's sports but others would. I can think of ways in which financial pressures for athletic departments might work against some women's sports. Bottom line is that we seem to have differing perspectives and probably just need to leave it at that.

 

Women have been playing football for a long time, I watched some of the most recent, they were pretty entertaining.

 

https://en.wikipedia...erican_football


I am a "Vulcan" and try hard to keep things logical and without emotion. However as a "Vulcan" I have a highly emotional reaction mode for special occasions.
UF 1973 Physics
Miami Carol City
Financial Planning / Quality
Tn

#29 mtn2top

mtn2top

    Bull Gator

  • Members
  • 5,546 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 01:16 AM

It's OK, even though my wife thinks you may be a male chauvinist pig.



#30 GatorUrf10

GatorUrf10

    Heisman Gator

  • Members
  • 1,650 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 05:52 AM

My point exactly. While everyone is basking in making a better world, when does that infringe on the rights of mens programs? Thats why enacting rights for minorities they trample on the rights of majorities. Fairness cannot be enacted by rolling over on the rights for everyone else including male sports.

 

The scholies should be even in the other sports, not slanted toward womens programs.

 

If you can't understand this concept, then all this other stuff is fluffy BS. Don't tell me about "the way it was"...........they me why we cannot give out 27 baseball ships? Again, the idiots that make these determinations try to make up for the past by creating unfairness in the present.Hope for new Supreme Court makeup shortly!

 

CASE CLOSED.  (Please no more bleeding hearts that say nothing and do not add to the conversation but disclose you never read my opening statements.)

 

This whole post is idiotic.

 

The reason women's program's even exist is because of Title IX and you've said repeatedly that you like women's sports and would like them more if they were funded properly. If they were funded by other means, THERE WOULD BE NO WOMENS SPORTS.... except at elitist schools like Bolles.

 

And **** you on all the **** you talk about people wanting to make the world a better place. What's the ****ing problem with that????? I'm a Republican but first and foremost I'm an AMERICAN who wants more people to succeed because, holy **** if they did, our country would be a better place.

 

I'm so sorry you have to endure women's sports. Take your snowflake whining somewhere else.

 

BTW, you can't start a topic and then say CASE CLOSED at any point. This is a ****ing message forum where people DISCUSS sports related topics. If you don't like the responses you get, GTFO.


On illegal hits against Danny Wuerffel: "He's like a New Testament person. He gets slapped up side the face, and turns the other cheek and says, 'Lord, forgive them for they know not what they're doing.' I'm probably more of an Old Testament guy. You spear our guy in the earhole, we think we're supposed to spear you in the earhole. That's kind of where we're a little different." - SOS


#31 GatorUrf10

GatorUrf10

    Heisman Gator

  • Members
  • 1,650 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 05:54 AM

Sorry to rant, but it's been a tough morning and I'm tired of bull****.


  • WernerIsTentative likes this

On illegal hits against Danny Wuerffel: "He's like a New Testament person. He gets slapped up side the face, and turns the other cheek and says, 'Lord, forgive them for they know not what they're doing.' I'm probably more of an Old Testament guy. You spear our guy in the earhole, we think we're supposed to spear you in the earhole. That's kind of where we're a little different." - SOS


#32 Jabberdave

Jabberdave

    Snatch Magnet

  • Members
  • 8,404 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 07:06 AM

Time for a uniform thread.


  • vulcan_alex likes this

There's not really an emoticon that says "I'm sorry I honked your boobs, and that you weren't a fan of that."


#33 gator67

gator67

    Senior Gator

  • Members
  • 290 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 07:06 AM

Women have been playing football for a long time, I watched some of the most recent, they were pretty entertaining.

 

https://en.wikipedia...erican_football

No doubt. But I'm unaware of any high school programs with a girls football team. I would think that this is what it would take to feed a college program that handed out scholarships. Otherwise, schools would be granting scholarships on something other than the ability to play the sport. Of greater concern, however, is that this proposed solution shifts the focus to the nature of the sport rather than the more general concern about providing roughly equal opportunities for intercollegiate competition.



#34 gatorhart

gatorhart

    Senior Gator

  • Members
  • 389 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 01:32 PM

This whole post is idiotic.

 

The reason women's program's even exist is because of Title IX and you've said repeatedly that you like women's sports and would like them more if they were funded properly. If they were funded by other means, THERE WOULD BE NO WOMENS SPORTS.... except at elitist schools like Bolles.

 

And **** you on all the **** you talk about people wanting to make the world a better place. What's the ****ing problem with that????? I'm a Republican but first and foremost I'm an AMERICAN who wants more people to succeed because, holy **** if they did, our country would be a better place.

 

I'm so sorry you have to endure women's sports. Take your snowflake whining somewhere else.

 

BTW, you can't start a topic and then say CASE CLOSED at any point. This is a ****ing message forum where people DISCUSS sports related topics. If you don't like the responses you get, GTFO.

Gee, I feel intimidated....... you’re such a bully........

 

Did you write that while you were on the can? Ugggg Maybe you will have better luck on Tuesday....use prunes or some other fruit...you will feel much better.....

 

IF you read my statements, (which you obviously did not or perhaps you have a learning disability) I stated that providing a fair system for schollies was not in the cards because of football, the only sport that produces a real income for most schools and is the only reason we can finance other programs and gives women's sports a real edge in non-income producing sports rosters and that it is as unfair as not having Title IX.

 

Yes, you can still use make up and go see the Ellen Show when it appears in your home town and feel great about yourself. But don't tell me where to go or what to do. I already know you have no ability to understand logic and refuse to read and comprehend. Maybe you can ask your shrink for some pills. You could use them.

 



#35 vulcan_alex

vulcan_alex

    Bull Gator

  • Members
  • 9,560 posts

Posted 10 July 2017 - 02:29 PM

No doubt. But I'm unaware of any high school programs with a girls football team. I would think that this is what it would take to feed a college program that handed out scholarships. Otherwise, schools would be granting scholarships on something other than the ability to play the sport. Of greater concern, however, is that this proposed solution shifts the focus to the nature of the sport rather than the more general concern about providing roughly equal opportunities for intercollegiate competition.

 

Apparently my communications skills are not adequate.  Of course they barely find enough females to play for pay.   And if you want roughly equal leave football out of it, the rest is OK as long as you quit at some point.  Government grows and never shrinks, not affordable or good.


I am a "Vulcan" and try hard to keep things logical and without emotion. However as a "Vulcan" I have a highly emotional reaction mode for special occasions.
UF 1973 Physics
Miami Carol City
Financial Planning / Quality
Tn

#36 WernerIsTentative

WernerIsTentative

    All-American Gator

  • Members
  • 942 posts

Posted 11 July 2017 - 03:42 AM

No, SHAME on you. Understand the reality of giving and giving so that everyone is equal despite their inability to compete fairly at all levels and all things. Why not give schollies based on race and color instead of actual competition? We would have mostly white players on our football and basketball team. Do you consider this fair????

 

Anyone for that proposition?

 

Taking schollies away from the worthy and giving it to non-qualified groups due to what is considered fairness is the Obama, liberal way of dealing with inadequate levels of achievement.  Just to answer the previous poster, yes I enjoy women's sports....would enjoy it just as much if it was funded the right way. One unfair doctrine doesn't become less of an attraction when it is equally proposed. This is simple, but simple minds cannot grasp the concept. 

 

Football should be exempt. The cash cow needs to stand on it's own and let everything else be equal. I can live with that. Trump got elected because dolts wanted to push the envelope even more left. Do you really think he would have won if we had a real leader in the white house?

 

What is so hard to understand that liberals want to create their own level playing field by corrupting the entire field itself. BTW, I am not a member of the GOP either. TRUTH is always hard to swallow whole. So those that can't understand, just take it slooooow.

Wait why did you say shame on me and then start talking about something that had nothing to do with what I said?...

 

My point is that not EVERY liberal ALWAYS over compensates on any issue regardless of fairness. Shame on me for believing that?

 

You said that a liberal ALWAYS over compensates on any issue regardless of fairness. I think  you should just admit that was an exaggeration...

 

Trust me... I completely understand what you are saying...but when I see an incorrect blanket statement, I had to call it out. Thinking that all liberals think one thing or all conservatives think one thing is an extremely toxic way of thinking. It's kind of strange to see someone, who clearly thinks that they are so enlightened, not realize that.

 

In one of my graduate courses at UF, title IX took up an entire day in my education law class. It is a VERY VERY complicated issue (for dolts like myself anyway)  that is hotly contested today as it has been since it was introduced, and a lot of that is because title IX extends to many more issues in institutions other than just sports (which I think a lot of sports fans are unaware of).

 

 

 

Whether it is fair or not with sports and scholarships is not a debate I care about, because it's not going to change any time soon anyway... so I admit it... forgive me lord, for I have sinned... I am straying off topic by attacking a particular part of your original post, instead of joining in on the discussion of whether title IX is fair or not. 

 

I don't take issue with your topic, NOR DO I TAKE ISSUE WITH YOUR STANCE ON THIS SUBJECT OF TITLE IX and whether it should extend as far as it does, but I do take issue with someone using the topic to attack liberals (as if liberals all think and act the same way for every issue in any given situation). Just as I would take issue with someone using the topic to attack conservatives (as if conservatives all think and act the same way for every issue in any given situation). (I italicized and bolded those last two sentences because that was the point of my original response, which seems to have been misunderstood by you since when you responded to me you started making general title IX statements that you made in your original post... except with the added nuance of suggesting maybe I was too stupid to understand what you were saying? I'm making this post longer because I'm not great with words and I guess I didn't use enough of them the first time)

 

Title IX was a liberal idea, and it was put into place by liberals, and the statutes extended by liberals, but that doesn't mean that liberals ALWAYS over-compensate in any situation regardless of fairness. That is a toxic, silly, way to use a brain....especially since the statement is patently and objectively false.

 

 

For that, shame on you, friend.

 

 

 

Your entire original post (along with some of your following posts) gives me the impression that you were looking for a fight though, and I see that you got a few of them.  Of course people responded as nastily (although, perhaps more overtly nasty) as the original post, and you got to sling around some of those insults against liberals that have been used since the dawn of time (heck, why even come up with creative insults for those fairies anyway, right?)... And you probably got to, temporarily, feel a little bit better for being on what you see as the morally (or maybe in this case, the ideologically?) superior ground.

 

And for that, congrats friend.

 



#37 GatorUrf10

GatorUrf10

    Heisman Gator

  • Members
  • 1,650 posts

Posted 11 July 2017 - 06:20 AM

 

Gee, I feel intimidated....... you’re such a bully........

 

 

Did you write that while you were on the can? Ugggg Maybe you will have better luck on Tuesday....use prunes or some other fruit...you will feel much better.....

 

 

IF you read my statements, (which you obviously did not or perhaps you have a learning disability) I stated that providing a fair system for schollies was not in the cards because of football, the only sport that produces a real income for most schools and is the only reason we can finance other programs and gives women's sports a real edge in non-income producing sports rosters and that it is as unfair as not having Title IX.

 

 

Yes, you can still use make up and go see the Ellen Show when it appears in your home town and feel great about yourself. But don't tell me where to go or what to do. I already know you have no ability to understand logic and refuse to read and comprehend. Maybe you can ask your shrink for some pills. You could use them.

 

 

 

 

Who is the one whining about it in the first place? Don't try to reverse roles. Women's sports are good for the overall college sports picture. BUt yeah, I'm a moron, just like everyone else you disagrees with you.

 

All hail Hart, lord of bull****. 


On illegal hits against Danny Wuerffel: "He's like a New Testament person. He gets slapped up side the face, and turns the other cheek and says, 'Lord, forgive them for they know not what they're doing.' I'm probably more of an Old Testament guy. You spear our guy in the earhole, we think we're supposed to spear you in the earhole. That's kind of where we're a little different." - SOS


#38 gatorhart

gatorhart

    Senior Gator

  • Members
  • 389 posts

Posted 11 July 2017 - 06:51 AM

Who is the one whining about it in the first place? Don't try to reverse roles. Women's sports are good for the overall college sports picture. BUt yeah, I'm a moron, just like everyone else you disagrees with you.

 

All hail Hart, lord of bull****. 

Whining about women's sports? Exposing what is wrong with the current system is not a whine. It is a summary of what is wrong with it in it's current format.

 

If the posters listened to what I said instead of defending women's sports which I actually enjoy, maybe a civil conversation would have actually occurred.  But too many idiots want to show how compassionate they are regarding women's sports without addressing the real issue that currently excites in the system.

 

This was not a discussion of how good women's sports are, or how they are not. That is for your feeble mind to display to the onlookers that you are a decent human being and anyone who discusses the reality of current funding that does not agree with your "ideas" is stupid, short sided and a women hater. Sounds like a trip to CNN.

 

BTW, where did I reverse roles? A debater you are not. Like taking candy from a baby. 



#39 Jabberdave

Jabberdave

    Snatch Magnet

  • Members
  • 8,404 posts

Posted 11 July 2017 - 07:08 AM

Don't make me pull this forum over!


There's not really an emoticon that says "I'm sorry I honked your boobs, and that you weren't a fan of that."


#40 GatorUrf10

GatorUrf10

    Heisman Gator

  • Members
  • 1,650 posts

Posted 11 July 2017 - 07:11 AM

Whining about women's sports? Exposing what is wrong with the current system is not a whine. It is a summary of what is wrong with it in it's current format.

 

If the posters listened to what I said instead of defending women's sports which I actually enjoy, maybe a civil conversation would have actually occurred.  But too many idiots want to show how compassionate they are regarding women's sports without addressing the real issue that currently excites in the system.

 

This was not a discussion of how good women's sports are, or how they are not. That is for your feeble mind to display to the onlookers that you are a decent human being and anyone who discusses the reality of current funding that does not agree with your "ideas" is stupid, short sided and a women hater. Sounds like a trip to CNN.

 

BTW, where did I reverse roles? A debater you are not. Like taking candy from a baby. 

 

Orange, is that you? Lol

 

You're stating common knowledge at a time when this isn't even an issue for discussion. No one wants to take money from Football, but that's the way it is. Call me all the names you want, really makes no difference coming from your keyboard. 


On illegal hits against Danny Wuerffel: "He's like a New Testament person. He gets slapped up side the face, and turns the other cheek and says, 'Lord, forgive them for they know not what they're doing.' I'm probably more of an Old Testament guy. You spear our guy in the earhole, we think we're supposed to spear you in the earhole. That's kind of where we're a little different." - SOS





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users