Jump to content

Katie

Members
  • Content Count

    1,837
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Everything posted by Katie

  1. I agree that college sports teams will continue to be segregated on the basis of sex, even if Title IX is reexamined in light of Bostock. That's just common sense. To my mind, the questions are: Will the courts adjust their interpretation of Title IX in some way? Will Congress amend the law?
  2. I never said Bostock addressed Title IX. I said Bostock interpreted what it meant to discriminate in employment on the basis sex under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I only skimmed a few excerpts of the case, but my understanding is that the majority's underlying logic is that employers must treat both sexes the same way. Now, turning to Title IX. Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex (including in college sports), but does not specifically provide for segregated sports programs on the basis of sex. As a result, I think Bostock makes it inevitable that someone will challenge a segregated college sports team as illegal under Title IX. That being so, I believe that courts will reexamine the law. And I think it's possible that Congress might take a look at Title IX as well. I thought I was clear about all that.
  3. I don’t know what the law says with respect to Texas high school athletics, but your post does illustrate a complication when you’re trying to provide athletic opportunities for everyone in a way that is fair and equal.
  4. I'd add that if Congress responds to Bostock by amending Title IX to specifically allow for segregation in sports along the lines of sex, then there could potentially be a new debate about how to ensure women and men have an equal opportunity to participate in sports. For example: Do expenditures for men's and women's teams have to be equal? Do the number of male and female athletes have to be equal? Are high school participation numbers relevant? Etc. If there ever was an opportunity to refashion Title IX in a way that might help wrestling programs, that opportunity is now.
  5. There may soon be legal challenges to the existence of women-only college sports teams. Here’s why. As I understand it, in the recent Bostock v. Clayton County case, the Supreme Court considered what it meant for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to protect against employment discrimination on the basis of sex. According to the Court majority, discrimination on the basis of sex includes discrimination against "traits or actions" that would not be questioned in members of a different biological sex. Bostock's underlying logic, in essence, is that employers must treat both biological sexes the same way. Now consider Title IX. Title IX, of course, outlaws discrimination on the basis of sex in federally funded educational programs or activities -- including athletics. However, Bostock's underlying logic could encourage legal challenges to the manner in which Title IX is currently interpreted. As one writer put it: There very well may soon be a lawsuit along those lines. And if that happens, how will the courts respond? It's hard to say. But it seems likely that they will have to depart from Bostock's underlying logic in some way.
  6. I wouldn’t look past Taylor so easily. He’s struggled with Dake in past years, but since 2018 he’s beaten Yazdani and Kurugliev, among other truly elite wrestlers.
  7. I believe I saw an article saying that at the high school level, girls’ wrestling is growing fast. Hopefully that translates to more college programs in the future.
  8. In terms of NCAA hardware alone, it's: T1- Nickal (2-1-1-1) T1- Nolf (2-1-1-1) 3- Ruth (3-1-1-1) 4- Retherford (5-1-1-1) 5- Taylor (2-1-2-1) I consider making a world team to be more difficult than winning an NCAA title, and world/Olympic competition to be more difficult than that. So when freestyle's included, my top five would be: 1- Taylor (world/Olympic 1 + NCAA 2-1-2-1) 2- McCoy (world/Olympic 4-5-4-2-7 + NCAA 1-3-1) 3- Kolat (world/Olympic 2-3-4-9 + NCAA 2-3) 4- Retherford (world/Olympic 11-26 + NCAA 5-1-1-1) 5- Abe (world/Olympic 30-15-11 + NCAA 4-3-2-1)
  9. FWIW, I didn't have an argument in mind. I was simply recalling an episode that astonished me. And again, I do believe USA Wrestling did they best they could, given the circumstances. I'll exit this thread now, as well.
  10. According to drag it, it looks like the case was settled. So there you go.
  11. Even if the plaintiff's lost their lawsuit, it would have no bearing on whether they believed they were discriminated against on the basis of their race. At any rate, for all we know, they settled out of court. We just don't know what happened.
  12. It's pretty easy to not open a thread and read it. Try it sometime.
  13. Two thoughts. First, I think USA Wrestling did the best they could under the circumstances. Given his FILA connections, du Pont had USA Wrestling over a barrel. Second, the wrestlers involved sued for racial discrimination. So it seems that the people who were actually negatively impacted by du Pont’s behavior believed that he discriminated against them on the basis of their race. If you’re going to dismiss the racial aspect of the episode, you should at least respectfully acknowledge that fact.
  14. It's not entirely easy to describe the negative effects of a reality shaped by 246 years of slavery and 99 years of segregation to those who have not personally experienced those negative effects. Do you have any pointers there?
  15. I found that reading anything LJB writes is a waste of time.
  16. Du Pont’s actions clearly meet any definition of racism I can find. I really can’t add anything more to that.
  17. Also, I just learned that even before du Pont banned black athletes from Team Foxcatcher and allegedly said Team Foxcatcher was part of the KKK, he also allegedly paid the black wrestlers less and gave them fewer benefits than lesser ranked white wrestlers. (See this article.)
  18. Du Pont apparently associated black people with evil. As a result he placed them on a hierarchy below other races. Then he banned them from Team Foxcatcher simply for being black. Then after banning black them, he allegedly said Team Foxcatcher was now part of the KKK. How is that not racism?
  19. Murder is still murder, even if the reasoning behind it is crazy. Similarly, a racist act is still racist even if the reasoning behind it is crazy.
  20. Firing all black people because they are black is racist. It does not matter that the reasoning behind the racist act is out of step with traditional white supremacy.
  21. It’s also dumb to equate “thriving” with one of the sources of Vitamin D. But I’m not shocked that posters here are that dumb.
  22. Those are some shockingly dumb comments. Yikes.
  23. I don’t watch football, but I always agreed with Kaepernick’s general message (at least as I understand it). So we probably have similar views on the matter.
  24. There’s really no reason for me to take you seriously. You used an offensive term for Asian people. You defended your use of that term. And in making your defense, you claimed that Dictionary.com supports your position when it definitely does not.
  25. If you think that Urban Dictionary is a good source of information, then maybe you shouldn’t educate yourself. So let me help you. Check Merriam Webster or Dictionary.com.
×
×
  • Create New...