# data[].attributes.body
So do we still need Title IX? In my opinion absolutely

# data[].attributes.body
What's next? How can we keep moving foward?

# data[].attributes.body
Recent examples of gender inequity from the Women's World Cup:

# data[].attributes.body
The significance of this question to sports and society, women are still not equally paid or have the same power positions as men. This is why we need Title IX:

# data[].attributes.body
Campaigns to get girls involved in sports:

# data[].attributes.body
These Women have shattered the gender barrier: Progress has been made

# data[].attributes.body
Critical Question: Do we need Title IX?

# data[].attributes.body
Topic Intro:

# data[].attributes.body
SMT 606

Contemporary Issues in Sport Project

# data[].attributes.body
My reflection paper for my padlet project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It is a well-known assertion that coaches of women's teams generally earn a lower salary than coaches of men's teams. This cannot be more true at colleges such as Kansas State. While Deb Patterson earned $596,016, her male counterpart Frank Martin took home twice as much-$1.4 million. This is common throughout the country, with the rare exception of coaches of iconic women's teams, such as Tennessee's Pat Summitt and Connecticut's Geno Auriemma, who both earned up to $1.5 million.

The Equal Pay Act of 1983 requires employers to pay their male and female employees the same amount for the same work. However, many employers find ways to maneuver around this law. While the base salary for men and women coaches are relatively similar, the drastic difference comes from funds from third-parties, such as partnering apparel companies or university athletic associations. These funds are not under the same regulations as university-based funds, and are used to pay coaches for items described in contracts as supplements, talent fees or appearance fees.

Significant differences also occur from summer camp revenue and bonuses. Summer camps can produce up to six figure earnings for men's basketball coaches, while women's coaches aim to break even. Additionally, contracts may not have similar regulations regarding academic performance. According to lawyers who deal with contracts, athletic directors often assume that women's players will be better students. Consequentially, Kansas State's Coach Martin can earn up to $75,000 annually depending on his players' academic performance. However, Patterson does not have this kind of arrangement.

Men who coach women's teams are not protected under the Equal Pay Act. Kentucky's men and women's basketball teams made it to the Sweet 16 of the NCAA tournament, but John Calipari earned a $100,000 bonus while its women's' coach Matthew Mitchell was paid $40,000.

Another reason given as to why women's coaches are mostly paid less is because men's programs tend to be more profitable. Universities often use this as a defense when accused of sex discrimination concerning coaches' salaries. However, this can only be a successful defense if universities can prove that they support both programs equally with funds for advertisement, support staff and promotional and speaking events.

The number of women's teams have been increasing since 1978, from 466 teams to 1,049 in 2012. Despite this, statistics show that the number of women coaches of women's teams have been declining. A study conducted by R. Vivian Acosta and Linda Jean Carpenter showed that in 1978, 79.4 percent of women's college basketball teams were coached by women. However, only 57 percent of women's college basketball teams were coached by women in 2010. This decline may prove to be problematic.

"If your idea of what sports is about is provided only through the lens of a male, then you're only getting one perspective," said Jeffrey Gerson, a professor at the University of Massachusetts Lowell who spent two years researching the declining number of coaches in college ice hockey, tennis and other sports. "And there's something special about a female athlete having a female coach, because they've been in your shoes."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Male and Female Coaches' Salaries - Women's Sports Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is a well-known assertion that coaches of women's teams generally earn a lower salary than coaches of men's teams. This cannot be more true at colleges such as Kansas State. While Deb Patterson earned $596,016, her male counterpart Frank Martin took home twice as much--$1.4 million.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Title IX - Women's Sports Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Please vote DAILY for the Women's Sports Foundation in Gatorade's For The Love of Sports. With your support, the WSF can receive a $50,000 donation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At the time the case ended, a handful of voices argued that the players should boycott the tournament. However well meaning they might have been, such calls came from those with little understanding of what it's like to be a world-class athlete who's spent years fighting for an opportunity to participate in her sport's preeminent event. The World Cup is played once every four years and, for many of the players, it's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. What's worse than competing for a World Cup title on artificial turf? Not competing at all.

There's simply no justification for forcing women to play on a subpar surface when no World Cup in history-either a men's or women's contest-has ever used the material. Prior play can't account for the disparate treatment. Sports fans are increasingly seeing women's World Cup players for what they are: elite, exciting athletes and national representatives first and foremost. Put another way, they're viewed much as male footballers are. And so, with a plethora of stars, compelling storylines-can the U.S. win its first World Cup since 1999? How far can Marta carry Brazil? Can anyone score on German netminder Nadine Angerer?-plus ever-growing interest, FIFA and Canada had a unique and valuable asset in the tournament.

With the World Cup's end, Sepp Blatter's reign as FIFA president apparently near conclusion, and FIFA itself hopefully ready to re-think its future in light of the kleptocratic past outlined in the U.S. Department of Justice's recent criminal indictments, now is a natural time to consider what's next for international women's soccer. There are concrete steps that can be taken now to make things right with the World Cup players and make things better for women's soccer generally.

One option would be to give women players a pay bonus for playing on the fake turf. Last year, after playing seven games on natural grass fields, the men's World Cup-winning German team earned $35 million. The champion team this year will also play seven games (none on grass) and earn just $2 million. The overall prize-money pay gap is similarly stark: $358 million made available for all the men's teams in 2014, but a mere $15 million for the women in 2015. And, according to Business Insider, because the women's field expanded from 16 teams in 2011 to 24 this year, the average share for non-winning women's teams has actually dropped when compared with the last tournament.

Meanwhile, FIFA reportedly spent nearly $30 million bankrolling an unwatchable biopic of itself and its leaders. The least it can do is add a similar amount to the prize money pot for this World Cup. While some professional sports events (see Wimbledon thanks to Venus Williams) have moved toward actual equal pay, giving women's World Cup players even an extra dime or two to a man's dollar would be meaningful progress. FIFA can call the payment whatever it wants but, whatever the "turf bonus" amount, the money should go directly to the players, with no middlemen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Grass Ceiling: How to Conquer Inequality in Women's Soccer

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At the time the case ended, a handful of voices argued that the players should boycott the tournament. However well meaning they might have been, such calls came from those with little understanding of what it's like to be a world-class athlete who's spent years fighting for an opportunity to participate in her sport's preeminent event.

# data[].attributes.headline
England's Sexist Tweet for the Lionesses

# data[].attributes.subject
England's Sexist Tweet for the Lionesses

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Football Association Slammed Over 'Sexist' Tweet About England's Women's Team

# data[].attributes.headline
9 Depressing Facts from the Latest Women in Media Report

# data[].attributes.subject
9 Depressing Facts from the Latest Women in Media Report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
9 Depressing Facts From the Latest Women in Media Report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Jennifer Lawrence makes $11 million less than Adam Sandler

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Corporate America has few female CEOs, and the pipeline of future women leaders is alarmingly thin.

Only 14.2% of the top five leadership positions at the companies in the S&P 500 are held by women, according to a CNNMoney analysis.

It's even worse if you just consider the very top. Out of 500 companies, there are only 24 female CEOs.

"It's kind of shocking really. With all of the attention the issue gets, you'd think companies would be doing better," said Rita McGrath, a professor at Columbia Business School.

In recent years, there have been a number of high-profile female CEO hires, including Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson and General Motors CEO Mary Barra, the first woman to ever lead a major auto maker.

Related: Best and worst countries for women on corporate boards

Progress likely to be slow: But don't expect more women to break through the ranks unless there is a strong pipeline of female talent behind the CEO.

That's why CNNMoney analyzed the next four executive positions -- chief financial officers, chief operating officers and other key roles at major companies. Women hold 16.5% of these four positions just below CEO in the S&P 500. Yet that's still a small pool of leaders to draw from.

"If you don't have women in the pipeline, they are not going to get the top job," McGrath said.

The number of women running S&P 500 companies will actually fall to 23 in April when Maggie Wilderotter steps down after nearly a decade atop Frontier Communications .

Wilderotter told CNNMoney the number of female chief executives is far too low, especially given the motivation and credentials of women climbing today's corporate ladder.

"We didn't get to these jobs without being fearless and courageous at the same time as being good at what we do," she said.

Related: Wall Street's most powerful woman jumps to Google

Stereotypes persist: So why aren't more women making it into the C-Suite?

"When we close our eyes and picture what a CEO looks like, too often the picture that comes to mind is that of a white man," said Deborah Gillis, CEO of Catalyst, a nonprofit pushing to improve corporate gender diversity.

Women also don't have the critical support needed from high-ranking sponsors who can actively campaign for their advancement.

"It doesn't just mean being a mentor. Sponsorship means you are really fighting for that person," said McGrath.

See for yourself: How many women are in the C-suite?

Mission-critical jobs go to men: Women are also lagging far behind their male counterparts when it comes to landing the critical profit-and-loss (P&L) jobs that serve as grooming roles for future leaders. Many successful women end up in roles in human resources and investor relations that are important yet don't serve as a gateway to the top of the C-Suite.

"We need to give women more full P&L experience and the task of managing brands -- the nuts and bolts of the corporations," Denise Morrison, CEO of Campbell Soup, told CNNMoney.

Morrison, the sister of Wilderotter, climbed the corporate ladder at Procter & Gamble and then Campbell by running brands, learning the supply chain and taking on other operational roles.

"There is a disproportionate number of women in staff roles. It's on the backs of both women and the corporations" to fix this problem, she said.

Related: Female investors often beat men

Gender diversity actually works: The push to get more females at the top isn't just about womens' rights. The best case for bringing gender diversity into the C-Suite is made by cold, hard cash.

Companies with a high representation of women board members significantly outperformed those with no female directors, according to a 2011 Catalyst analysis of financial resultsat Fortune 500 companies.

In other words, having leaders with diverse experiences and backgrounds often translates to financial success. That's largely due to the fact that women bring different skills than men and that can lead to more thoughtful deliberations about risk-taking and appealing to female consumers.

Wilderotter said women are "very good at multitasking, have a sixth sense with people, are nurturing and service-oriented."

Related: The woman who broke into the BBQ 'boys club'

Game-changer? Stay-at-home dads: Yet many women who want to have families are forced to give up their dreams for senior management positions due to the demands of the job.

"It's traditionally and will be for the foreseeable future an all-in enterprise to be a chief executive. It becomes your whole life," said Stewart Friedman, director of the Wharton Work/Life Integration Project.

While women still bear the primary responsibility for childrearing, that dynamic is changing. A study by Friedman shows that 42% of the 2012 graduating class at Wharton Business School say they want to have children. That's down from nearly 80% in 1992.

At the same time, fewer men assume all of the household resources will be devoted to their careers at the expense of their spouse's, Friedman said.

"We are seeing more and more stay-at-home dads, enabling more women to go all-in in their careers," he said.

Related: Wanted: Female entrepreneurs

Moving in the right direction: There are other reasons to be hopeful that the gender diversity problem will eventually get better.

In 2013 women held 16.9% of the board seats in the Fortune 500, up from 11.7% in 2000, according to Catalyst. That's important because these directors are the ones in charge of hiring CEOs and identifying future leaders in the pipeline.

It should be no surprise then that Thomas Saporito, CEO of executive search firm RHR International, has witnessed a major push by boards to hire more female senior executives.

"This is trending in a better direction, and there is a greater focus on development of women, but there is still much work to do -- both at the top management level and in the boardroom," he said.

Moreover, the hiring -- and success -- of leading women like Indra Nooyi at Pepsi and Phebe Novakovic at General Dynamics should help shatter the stereotype that only men can hold these top jobs.

Related: How companies are keeping new moms on the job

Is legislation needed? Some European countries like Germany are attempting to close the gender gap by mandating a certain percentage of board seats go to women.

There seems to be little appetite in the U.S. for compulsory measures like quotas. However, halfway steps like Australia's requirement to very publicly disclose the proportion of women in senior management at public companies could gain support.

For women, quotas are a double-edged sword. No one wants to be seen as the token female who only got a role because of a quota, but there's also acknowledgment that the pace of change is too slow.

"If I get a job because I'm a woman, it undermines me from the start," said McGrath. "On the other hand, the pace of change if you let things happen organically is absolutely glacial."

Related: The Guardian appoints first female editor-in-chief

Sources & methodology: This CNNMoney analysis was based on data provided by Markit listing the top five executive officers listed in each company's regulatory filings. Each company self-selects which roles such as CEO, CFO and COO it considers the top five.

CNNMoney (New York) First published March 24, 2015: 11:04 AM ET

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Broken pipeline: Why only 14% of top execs are women

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Only 14.2% of the top five leadership positions at the companies in the S&P 500 are held by women, according to a CNNMoney analysis. It's even worse if you just consider the very top. Out of 500 companies, there are only 24 female CEOs. "It's kind of shocking really.

# data[].attributes.headline
Men Still Dominate National Newspaper Journalism

# data[].attributes.subject
Men Still Dominate National Newspaper Journalism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It is still a men's world in national newspaper journalism, according to a survey released last night by the campaigning group Women in Journalism (WiJ).

The study found that 74% of news journalists on the nationals are men and that men also dominate political and business journalism. Somewhat less surprisingly, just 3% of sports journalists are women

Among other eye-opening findings are that The Independent had the lowest proportion of female staff. Just 25% of its editorial team are women. The Sun the Daily Telegraph were little different, with just 26% of female staff.

At the other end of the scale, the papers with the highest proportion of women journalists were The Observer and the Daily Mail, both with 36% of women, closely followed by the Daily Express with 35%.

Male journalists also people areas that researchers regard as "traditional subjects that women might have been expected to dominate". So 49% of lifestyle reporters are men and 70% of arts reporters are also male.

It was clear from the study that women are less likely to be in senior positions. Eight out of the top 10 newspapers having almost twice as many male editors as women editors.

That gender divide penetrates the whole newspaper industry with women making up just 30% of all newspaper journalists.

Rowenna Davis, who led the research, said:

"These results raise serious questions about the meritocracy of our national press.

The UK's media contributes a huge amount to our democracy by holding others accountable, but it should not be beyond that scrutiny itself.

With such gaping under-representation in hard news, business and politics, we have to question whether the absence of women is effecting the content and slant of our news.

I have been lucky to have had a positive experience with news desks, but this research shows that a significant number of women have been less fortunate."

And Sue Matthias, WiJ's chair and editor of the Financial Times magazine, said: "Women's rights in the workplace may have improved, but this research shows that there is still a long way to go in British newspapers.

"The gender imbalance we have uncovered is shocking and it seems old attitudes are still alive and well in many places."

The findings were discussed last night at a WiJ event to celebrate the centenary of International Women's Day (on 8 March).

On the panel were Natalie Bennett, editor of Guardian Weekly, Eve Pollard, the former editor of the Sunday Mirror and Sunday Express, and the award-winning writer and broadcaster Yvonne Roberts.

The study was carried out by the research company Echo in October last year. It involved 28 national papers.

Incidentally, Rowenna is a former journalism student at City University, where I teach post-grads. In my seven or so years at the university I have noted the that females generally outnumber male students. Yet the jobs, apparently, still go to the boys. Why is that?
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Men still dominate national newspaper journalism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is still a men's world in national newspaper journalism, according to a survey released last night by the campaigning group Women in Journalism (WiJ). The study found that 74% of news journalists on the nationals are men and that men also dominate political and business journalism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At least he had a positive footnote at the end of a very bad week.

Title IX turns 40 on Saturday, and its success has been staggering. It's nothing complicated, just 37 words: "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."

According to the Women's Sports Foundation (WSF), about 294,000 girls competed in high school sports the year before Title IX became law. Last year, the number was nearly 3.2 million, an increase of about 980%. At the college level, there weren't even 30,000 women playing sports 40 years ago. Last year, there were nearly 200,000.

Things sound so good for this law at this milestone that the natural inclination would be to say that Title IX has done its job, success has been achieved, every girl who wants to play a sport or two or three is playing them and the law isn't needed anymore, thank you very much.

But that's not so. Boys statistically still are given many more opportunities to play sports than girls. Men are now gobbling up the women's team coaching jobs that women once aspired to. And in spite of the whining about Title IX that we still occasionally hear from guys who seemingly would prefer life in the 1950s, women have not yet come close to achieving the proportional representation Title IX mandates.

According to WSF figures, women make up 56% of college students, but only 43% of student-athletes.

If you know a female athlete, you've heard her tell the anecdotes of subtle discrimination: the high school that gave its female athletes smaller varsity letters than its male athletes. Another high school that built a new athletic complex but forgot to put in a softball field. The constant battles between boys and girls over who gets the practice fields and the gym and the better game times.

Nancy Hogshead-Makar, an Olympic gold medal-winning swimmer and the WSF's senior director of advocacy, told USA TODAY Sports in a telephone interview Tuesday that she receives at least 300 calls or e-mails a year, "from parents, coaches, girls and women, and each one is telling me a different story of discrimination against female athletes. This is 2012, and I'm still getting hundreds of these calls. For people to say we don't need Title IX anymore, I completely disagree. We need Title IX more than ever."

U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan agrees. "We've made tremendous progress since the passage of Title IX," he said in an e-mail to USA TODAY Sports on Tuesday. "My sister, the better basketball player in the family, has been a direct beneficiary, as have countless other women and girls. But 40 years since the law's passage, it's clear we have more work to do as a country. We need to provide more women with the opportunity to pursue cutting-edge fields of study like math and science. And women are still far too underrepresented in collegiate athletics. In this day and age, that's unacceptable and we still need Title IX to help change that."

In just a generation and a half, Title IX has altered the way we think as a sports culture, from how accepting we are of female athletes to how much we want our daughters to be involved in sports, starting with peewee soccer all the way to the dream of a college scholarship.

Think about the fields you drive past near your home. You don't give it a second thought if you see them full of girls, playing soccer or softball or field hockey or lacrosse. Forty years ago, if you had driven by those same fields and seen a girl on them, it's likely she would have been there only to tell her brother it was time to come home for dinner.

Title IX's reach stretches far beyond sports. Among female executives at Fortune 500 companies, 80% said they played sports, according to the WSF, a percentage that is likely to grow in the years ahead.

Can politics be far behind? Imagine the political landscape of the 2030s, '40s and beyond, with women running for president every four years. The common denominator for all those female candidates will be that they played sports. No matter what you think of Sarah Palin, we all can agree that she is one strong-willed politician. She also was the starting point guard on her high school basketball team, as well as a cross-country runner. Just like countless male politicians before her, she was a jock.

One can argue that Title IX is the most important law in our nation over the past 40 years. Others will disagree, but no one can deny just how significant it has been. Think of that girl-athlete you see in the kitchen every morning. Whatever she is going to become - a mother, a lawyer, a doctor, a businesswoman, a coach, a teacher or some combination thereof - she will be better at it because she played sports.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brennan: Title IX needed now more than ever

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At least he had a positive footnote at the end of a very bad week. Title IX turns 40 on Saturday, and its success has been staggering. It's nothing complicated, just 37 words: "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."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
College and professional sports often provide unequal funding and compensation for women. While some sports have progressed, additional investments must be made in order to reach equity.

Gender Inequity in Collegiate Sports

Even though female students comprise 57% of college student populations, female athletes received only 43% of participation opportunities at NCAA schools which is 63,241 fewer participation opportunities than their male counterparts. (NCAA, 2014)

Although the gap has narrowed, male athletes still receive 55% of NCAA college athletic scholarship dollars (Divisions I and II), leaving only 45% allocated to women. (NCAA, 2014)

When examining median expenses per NCAA Division I institutions, women's teams receive only 40% of college sport operating dollars and 36% of college athletic team recruitment spending. (NCAA, 2012)

Median head coaches' salaries at NCAA Division I-FBS schools are $3,430,000 for men's teams and $1,172,400 for women's teams. This is a difference of $2,257,600. (NCAA, 2012)

Gender Equity in Professional Sports

At the end of each World Major Marathon (MMM) series the leading man and woman each win $500,000, making a total prize of one million U.S. dollars. The WMM includes the New York Marathon, the Boston Marathon, the London Marathon, the Tokyo Marathon, the Berlin Marathon, and the Chicago Marathon.

In 2007 Wimbledon announced for the first time, it will provide equal prize purses to male and female athletes. All four Grand Slam events now offer equal prize money to the champions.

When the Association of Surfing Professionals was acquired in 2012, now known as the World Surf League, the new ownership made it a policy that the men's and women's Championship Tour events have equal prize money.

Gender Inequity in Professional Sports

Total prize money for the 2014 PGA tour, over $340 million, is more than five times that of the new-high for the 2015 LPGA tour, $61.6 million. Similar discrepancies exist throughout professional sports.

For a WNBA player in the 2015 season, the minimum salary was $38,913, the maximum salary was $109,500, and the team salary cap in 2012 was $878,000. For NBA players in the 2015-2016 season, the minimum salary is $525,093, the maximum salary is $16.407 million, and the team salary cap is an all-time high of $70 million.

For winning the 2015 Women's World Cup, the U.S. Women's National Team won $2 million. Germany's men's team took home $35 million for winning the 2014 World Cup. The U.S. men's team finished in 11th place and collected $9 million, and each men's team that was eliminated in the first round of the 2014 World Cup got $8 million each, which is four times as much as the 2015 women's championship team.

What you can do

Attend women's sporting events

Support companies that advocate for women's athletics

Encourage television stations and newspapers to cover women's sports

Sign up to coach a girls' sports team, whether at the recreational or high school level

Encourage young women to participate in sports

Become an advocate: if you are or know a female athlete that is being discriminated against - advocate for her rights.

Photo Credit: Jan Kruger/Getty Images

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pay Inequity in Athletics - Women's Sports Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
College and professional sports often provide unequal funding and compensation for women. While some sports have progressed, additional investments must be made in order to reach equity. Gender Inequity in Collegiate Sports Even though female students comprise 57% of college student populations, female athletes received only 43% of participation opportunities at NCAA schools which is 63,241 fewer participation opportunities than their male counterparts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2012 we celebrated forty years of Title IX. Many people are unaware of the legislative activity brought about by this law. Here we outline the history of Title IX from its inception in 1972 to the present.

June 23, 1972
Title IX of the Education Amendments is enacted by Congress and is signed into law by Richard Nixon. The sponsors of Title IX are Birch Bayh (Senate) and Edith Green (House of Representatives). Title IX prohibits sex discrimination in any educational program or activity receiving any type of federal financial aid.

May 20, 1974
Senator Tower proposes the "Tower Amendment," which would exempt revenue-producing sports from determinations of Title IX compliance. The amendment is rejected.

July 1974
In the spirit of Senator Tower's failed amendment, Senator Javits submits an amendment directing HEW to issue regulations that provide for "reasonable provisions considering the nature of particular sports" (e.g., event-management needs, etc.) that clarifies that event and uniform expenditures on sports with larger crowds or more expensive equipment do not have to be matched in sports without similar needs.

May 27, 1975
President Ford signs the Title IX athletics regulations and submits them for congressional review (pursuant to Section 431(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions Act).

June 1975
Rep. O'Hara introduces House Bill 8394, which proposes that sports revenues first be used to offset the cost of that sport, and only then to support other sports. The proposed change would effectively alter Title IX's coverage in athletics. This bill dies in committee before reaching the House floor.

July 21, 1975
Congress reviews and approves Title IX regulations and rejects the following resolutions advanced to disapprove the athletics regulations:

June 4, 1975: Title IX was presented to Congress in its present form

June 5, 1975, and June 17, 1975: Senator Helms (S. Con. Res. 46) and Rep. Martin (H. Con. Res. 310) condemn Title IX in its entirety

June 17, 1975: Rep. Martin (H. Con. Res. 311) disapproves of Title IX only as it pertains to intercollegiate athletics

July 16, 1975: Sens. Laxalt, Curtis and Fannin (S. Con. Res. 52) disapprove of the application of Title IX to intercollegiate athletics

July 21, 1975: Sen. Helms introduces S. 2146 in an attempt to prohibit the application of Title IX regulations to athletics in situations in which participation in those athletic activities are not a required part of the institution's curriculum (Sen. Helms re-introduced S. 2146 as S. 535 in 1977)

Title IX federal regulations are issued in the area of athletics. High schools and colleges are given three years, and elementary schools one year, to comply.

February 17, 1976
NCAA challenges the legality of Title IX.

July 15, 1977
Senators Tower, Bartlett, and Hruska introduce Senate Bill (S. 2106), proposing to exclude revenue-producing sports from Title IX coverage. The bill dies in committee before reaching the Senate floor.

1978
HEW issues proposed policy "Title IX and Intercollegiate Athletics" for notice and comment.

July 21, 1978
Deadline for high schools and colleges to comply with Title IX athletics requirements.

December 11, 1979
HEW issues final policy interpretation on "Title IX and Intercollegiate Athletics." Rather than relying exclusively on a presumption of compliance standard, the final policy focuses on each institution's obligation to provide equal opportunity and details the factors to be considered in assessing actual compliance (Participation requirements are currently referred to as the "3-Prong-Test").
Department of Education is established and given oversight of Title IX through the Office for Civil Rights (OCR).

February 28, 1984
Grove City v. Bell limits the scope of Title IX, effectively taking away coverage of athletics except for athletic scholarships. The Supreme Court concludes that Title IX only applies to specific programs (i.e. Office of Student Financial Aid) that receive federal funds. Under this interpretation, athletic departments are not necessarily covered.

March 22, 1988
The Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 is enacted into law over the veto of President Ronald Reagan. This act reverses Grove City, restoring Title IX's institution-wide coverage. If any program or activity in an educational institution receives federal funds, all of the institution's programs and activities must comply with Title IX. 3

September 6, 1988
Haffer v. Temple University Title IX athletics lawsuit won by plaintiff female athletes gives new direction to athletic departments regarding their budgets, scholarships, and participation rates of male and female athletes.

April 2, 1990
Valerie M. Bonnette and Lamar Daniel author A Title IX Athletics Investigator's Manual, issued by the Office for Civil Rights.
February 26, 1992
In Franklin v. Gwinnett County Public Schools, the Supreme Court rules that monetary damages are available under Title IX. Previously, only injunctive relief was available (i.e., the institution would be enjoined from discriminating in the future).

1992
Shortly after the Franklin decision, the NCAA completes and publishes a landmark Gender-Equity Study of its member institutions.

Sen. Mosley-Braun (S. 1468) and Rep. Collins (H.R. 921) sponsor the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA), requiring that any co-educational institution of higher education that participates in any federal student financial aid program and that sponsors an intercollegiate athletics program must disclose certain information concerning its intercollegiate athletics program. Under the EADA, annual reports are required. ⁵

January 16, 1996
OCR issues a clarification of the three-part "Effective Accommodation Test" that reiterates the requirements of the policy interpretation that institutions may choose any one of three independent tests to demonstrate that they are effectively accommodating the participation needs of the underrepresented gender.

October 1, 1996
All institutions of higher education must make available, to all who inquire, specific information on their intercollegiate athletics department, as required by the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act. ⁶

November 21, 1996
A federal appeals court upholds a lower court's ruling in Cohen v. Brown University, holding that Brown University illegally discriminated against female athletes. Brown argues that it did not violate Title IX because women are less interested in sports than men. Both the district court and the court of appeals rejects Brown's argument. Many of the arguments offered by Brown are similar to those relied upon by colleges and universities all over the country.

June 23, 1997
Twenty-fifth anniversary of the passage of Title IX.

February 20, 2001
The Supreme Court issues a decision in Brentwood v. Tennessee Secondary School Athletic Association, holding that a high school athletic association is a "state actor" and thus subject to the Constitution. This means, for example, that the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment applies to athletic associations in gender equity suits.

December 17, 2001
Communities for Equity v. Michigan High School Athletic Association is decided, holding a state athletic association liable under Title IX, the Equal Protection Clause, and Michigan state law for discriminating against girls by forcing six girls' sports, but no boys' sports, teams to compete in nontraditional and/or disadvantageous seasons.

February 2002
The National Wrestling Coaches Association, College Gymnastics Association, and the U.S. Track Coaches Association, along with several other groups representing male athletes and alumni of wrestling programs at Bucknell, Marquette, and Yale, filed suit alleging that Title IX regulations and policies are unconstitutional.

May 29, 2002
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a motion to dismiss on narrow procedural grounds a complaint filed in federal court against the U.S. Department of Education attacking the three-prong test developed for schools to determine their compliance with Title IX in women's athletics programs.

June 23, 2002
Thirtieth anniversary of the passage of Title IX.

June 27, 2002
The U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige announced the establishment of a Commission on Opportunities in Athletics. The stated purpose of the Commission is "to collect information, analyze issues and obtain broad public input directed at improving the application of current Federal standards for measuring equal opportunity for men and women and boys and girls to participate in athletics under Title IX. The Commission will recommend to the Secretary, in a written report, whether those standards should be revised, and if so, how the standards should be revised. The Commission will also recommend other steps that might be taken to improve the effectiveness of Title IX and to maintain and build upon the extraordinary progress that has resulted from its passage 30 years ago.

July 11, 2003
The Office for Civil Rights of the United States Department of Education issued a "Further Clarification of Intercollegiate Athletics Policy Guidance Regarding Title IX Compliance." The Further Clarification reaffirms the validity and effectiveness of long-standing administrative regulations and policies governing this application.

March 17, 2005
The Department of Education issued a policy guidance ("the Additional Clarification") that significantly weakens Title IX. Schools can now simply send out an e-mail survey to their female students, asking them what additional sports they might have the interest and ability in playing. And if the survey responses do not show enough interest or ability, they do not have to add any sports - and are presumed in compliance with Title IX.

June 23, 2007
Thirty-fifth anniversary of the passage of Title IX.

April 20, 2010
The Department of Education issued a policy guidance which rescinded the aforementioned "Additional Clarification" and all related documents including the recommended survey.

April 4, 2011
The Department of Education issued a policy guidance which made clear that Title IX's protections against sexual harassment and sexual violence apply to all students, including athletes. It addresses athletics departments in particular when it requires schools to use the same procedures that apply to all students to resolve sexual violence complaints involving student athletes.
June 23, 2012
Fortieth anniversary of the passage of Title IX.

Some information in this timeline is adapted from the University of Iowa's History of Title IX Legislation, Regulation and Policy Interpretation.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/t9interp.html http://www2.ed.gov/about/landing.jhtml
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/100/s557
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED400763&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED400763
http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/clarific.html
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/title9guidanceFinal.html http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-20100420.pdf
https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History of Title IX - Women's Sports Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2012 we celebrated forty years of Title IX. Many people are unaware of the legislative activity brought about by this law. Here we outline the history of Title IX from its inception in 1972 to the present. June 23, 1972 Title IX of the Education Amendments is enacted by Congress and is signed into law by Richard Nixon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Billie Jean won for all women
By Larry Schwartz
Special to ESPN.com
Billie Jean King won six Wimbledon singles championships and four U.S. Open titles. She was ranked No. 1 in the world five years. She defeated such magnificent players as Martina Navratilova, Chris Evert and Margaret Court.

It isn't a reach to say that Billie Jean King has done the most for women in their fight for equality in sports.

Yet of all her matches, the one that is remembered most is her victory against a 55-year-old man.
History has recorded all King accomplished in furthering the cause of women's struggle for equality in the 1970s. She was instrumental in making it acceptable for American women to exert themselves in pursuits other than childbirth. She was the lightning rod in starting a professional women's tour. She started a women's sports magazine and a women's sports foundation.

But what is remembered most about her is that she humbled Bobby Riggs.

Let's get that match out of the way. Riggs, a 1939 Wimbledon champion turned hustler, had already massacred Court on Mother's Day 1973. So King, who previously had rejected Riggs' advances for a match, accepted his latest challenge.

"I thought it would set us back 50 years if I didn't win that match," she said. "It would ruin the women's tour and affect all women's self esteem."

The "Battle of the Sexes" captured the imagination of the country, not just tennis enthusiasts. On Sept. 20, 1973 in Houston, she was carried out on the Astrodome court like Cleopatra, in a gold litter held aloft by four muscular men dressed as ancient slaves. Riggs was wheeled in on a rickshaw pulled by sexy models in tight outfits, "Bobby's Bosom Buddies."

King, then 29, ran the con man ragged, winning 6-4, 6-3, 6-3 in a match the London Sunday Times called "the drop shot and volley heard around the world."

"Most important perhaps for women everywhere, she convinced skeptics that a female athlete can survive pressure-filled situations and that men are as susceptible to nerves as women," Neil Amdur wrote in The New York Times.

But King was much more than the woman who undressed the self-proclaimed "male chauvinist pig" before a worldwide television audience estimated at almost 50 million. Above all, even more significant than her winning 39 Grand Slam singles, doubles and mixed-doubles titles, she was a pioneer.

"She has prominently affected the way 50 percent of society thinks and feels about itself in the vast area of physical exercise," Frank Deford wrote in Sports Illustrated. "Moreover, like (Arnold) Palmer, she has made a whole sports boom because of the singular force of her presence."

Navratilova said, "She was a crusader fighting a battle for all of us. She was carrying the flag; it was all right to be a jock."
It was for King's crusading that Life magazine in 1990 named her one of the "100 Most Important Americans of the 20th Century." Not sports figures, but Americans. She was the only female athlete on the list, and one of only four athletes (Babe Ruth, Jackie Robinson and Muhammad Ali were the others).
She was born Billie Jean Moffitt on Nov. 22, 1943 in Long Beach, Calif., the daughter of a firefighter father and homemaker mother. Her younger brother Randy would become a major-league pitcher.

She developed into a star softball shortstop before her parents decided that she should pursue a more "ladylike" sport and give up playing baseball and football. Her father suggested tennis, because it involved running and hitting a ball.

"I knew after my first lesson what I wanted to do with my life," she said.

Developing her game on the Long Beach public courts, the pudgy adolescent first gained international recognition as a 17-year-old in 1961 by winning with Karen Hantze the doubles championship at Wimbledon. It was the first of her 20 titles (10 doubles and four mixed to go with the six singles) on the hallowed English grass.

In 1966, King (by now she had married law-student Larry King) won her first singles Wimbledon title and was ranked No. 1, the first of three straight years at the top. The next year, the myopic pepper pot repeated at Wimbledon and won her first U.S. championship.

After having to get by on $100 a week as a playground instructor and student at Los Angeles State College while at the same time shining at Wimbledon, King became a significant force in opening tennis to professionalism. She carried a deep sense of injustice from her amateur days.

With the birth of the "Open" era in 1968, King turned pro. This time she received more than a trophy for winning Wimbledon. She was on her way to earning $1,966,487 in career prize money.

In those days, women players received much less money than men earned. King's voice was heard loudest in the quest for equality. When a new women's tour was started, with Philip Morris sponsoring a new brand of cigarette, King was perceived as a "radical" heading a breakaway group. The Virginia Slims Tour was marketed with the slogan "You've Come a Long Way, Baby."

Things improved financially. King became the first woman athlete to earn $100,000 in prize money in a year (1971), and President Richard Nixon called to congratulate her.

She convinced her colleagues to form a players' union, and the Women's Tennis Association was born. King was its first president in 1973. King, who received $15,000 less than Ilie Nastase did for winning the U.S. Open in 1972, said if the prize money wasn't equal by the next year, she wouldn't play, and she didn't think the other women would either. In 1973, the U.S. Open became the first major tournament to offer equal prize money for men and women.

The next year, King founded WomenSports magazine, started the Women's Sports Foundation, an organization dedicated to promoting and enhancing athletic opportunities for females, and with her husband, formed World Team Tennis.

In 1975, Seventeen magazine polled its readers and found that King was the most admired woman in the world. Golda Meir, who had been Israel's prime minister until the previous year, finished second.

Despite her promotions and activities away from the court, the 5-foot-4 King still played outstanding tennis. The same aggressive, hard-hitting net rusher she had been, she hated to lose. "Victory is fleeting," she said. "Losing is forever."

When she hit the perfect shot, she would become ecstatic. "My heart pounds, my eyes get damp, and my ears feel like they're wiggling, but it's also just totally peaceful," King said. "It's almost like having an orgasm -- it's exactly like that."

Unlike most athletes, King's sexual preference became a matter of public record. Two decades ago, having a lover of the same sex was viewed quite unkindly, and was sensational news. In 1981, King admitted her bisexuality amid a palimony suit brought by a former woman lover.

While King's former personal assistant lost the suit, King estimated the episode cost her and her husband millions in endorsements. Eventually, King and her husband were divorced.

After retiring from competitive tennis, she remained in the game -- as an announcer, coach and author. She gave clinics, became director of World Team Tennis, and played on a Legends tour. Her legs might have given out, but not her passion for the game.

King believes that she was born with a destiny to work for gender equity in sports and to continue until it's achieved.

"In the '70s we had to make it acceptable for people to accept girls and women as athletes," she said. "We had to make it OK for them to be active. Those were much scarier times for females in sports."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Billie Jean won for all women By Larry Schwartz Special to ESPN.com Billie Jean King won six Wimbledon singles championships and four U.S. Open titles. She was ranked No. 1 in the world five years. She defeated such magnificent players as Martina Navratilova, Chris Evert and Margaret Court.

# data[].attributes.body
eye opening statistics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Number of Fortune 500 women CEOs reaches historic high

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This year's list features six fresh faces as well as the noticeable absence of one high-powered tech executive.

# data[].attributes.headline
Women in the United States Still Second Class Citizen

# data[].attributes.subject
Women in the United States Still Second Class Citizen

# data[].attributes.body
Talks about the wage gap

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For several months, I've wanted to write about the way women are treated in the United States today. It has taken some time to organize my thoughts because I feel so deeply about this issue. Uh-oh. I'm a woman. With feelings. Am I going to get too emotional? Will there be tears? How is it possible that I can have intelligent, clear, informed thoughts with all of these emotions flowing through me? This is partly why women generally earn less than men in almost every occupation (in 2012, female full-time workers made 77 cents for every dollar earned by men, a 23 percent gap) -- because implicit and explicit stereotypes still exist. And despite the progress women have made in the last several decades, they are still treated like second-class citizens in all the ways that matter.

Although I received my education at the all-female Smith College, my few post-college years have actually stirred my feminine consciousness more than Smith ever could have (notice I didn't say "feminist consciousness" because, let's be honest, caring about the equal treatment of women in society doesn't make people feminists -- it makes them good humans). That's because out here in the real world, I deal with and see other women face prejudices that make their lives challenging, at the very least.

Women are supposedly regular citizens, yet they continue to be systematically discriminated against. Are women inherently less competent in their jobs than men are in theirs? Of course not. So why are they paid less? When women leave the house in the morning, are they seeking to attract more attention for their appearance than men are for theirs? Or might they be trying to get to work/walk the dog/frequent the local coffee shop without receiving an unsolicited stare from a male stranger? (It's like, "They're mine... and they're covered... so stop burning a hole through my chest with your eyes.") Are women's ideas any less valid than men's ideas? Maybe women, as a gender, lack the relevant experience to comment in certain situations? Wrong again. Yet men are typically taken more seriously when they talk. I don't need a statistic for this. I've been there. These are only a few of the ways women are discriminated against every day. Outside of the U.S., discrimination against women is more explicit and brutal -- perhaps the topic of a future article.

The language used to identify women and their "issues" in the U.S. promotes these stereotypes. If a woman has an opinion, she's called bossy or overbearing. If a man is bossy, he's just taking care of business. In an effort to combat this language, Sheryl Sandberg and Anna Maria Chávez have launched the "Ban Bossy" campaign. If a woman sleeps around, she's a slut (or worse, a *cough* slut *cough*). If a man sleeps around, he's just doing what men do (which women are still supposed to accept as a rationale for infidelity, by the way). If a woman speaks loudly and confidently, she's shrill. If a man does the same, he's authoritative. These subtle identifiers -- used by both men and women -- undermine women, whether those who utter them intend to or not. They are ways of taking women down a peg when they step out of place.

It's time America stops referring to issues that affect women as "women's issues." Almost a century since women's suffrage, it's insulting to address equal pay, reproductive rights and topics surrounding the home and children as issues solely relating to women, when they have consequences for men as well. Similarly, "women's rights," "women in the media," "women in politics," and "women in the workplace" are unnecessary categories. Why not simply say "media" or "politics" or "workplace?" You don't hear people say "men in the media" or "men in politics." And yes, women arrived in the workplace after men, but we're no longer new here. Thanks for the distinction, now kindly remove it.

Separating "women's issues" from other political and economic issues limits America's leaders as they seek to come up with solutions to our country's problems, as Gloria Steinem recently wrote. In January, The Shriver Report revealed that the poverty rate for women would be reduced by half if they were paid the same amount as men for the same work. The same study found that in 2012, the U.S. economy would have produced $447.6 billion more in income -- 2.9 percent of GDP -- if women received equal pay. Will policymakers consider this so-called "women's issue" when looking to lessen poverty in America? Probably not, because it has been differentiated from the "real" issues our nation faces.

In the last few weeks, both male and female politicians have demonstrated just how far the U.S. has not come in treating women equally. Former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has stood by his claim that Democrats are sending the message that women who use birth control "cannot control their libido or reproductive system without the help of government." Dear Mike, you may be unaware, but it's been almost 100 years since Margaret Sanger opened the first birth control clinic. Move on already. State Senator Steve Martin (R-VA) referred to expectant mothers as "hosts" while defending his anti-abortion views. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN) stated last week that Americans "aren't ready" for a female president. Why not, Michele? Because of the cooties? Fox News' Bill O'Reilly agreed with Bachmann, adding, "There's got to be some downside to having a woman president, right? Something that may not fit with that office?" Former Democratic Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently said that advancing opportunities for women is "not a women's issue," but rather "a responsibility that we all share." While Clinton's remark is accurate, she shouldn't have to say it. In Afghanistan or Nepal, this is a different story, but if America operates under the assumption that women are no longer second-class citizens, which in theory it does, there should be no such thing as "opportunities for women." In a country where men and women are truly equal, chances to advance are simply called "opportunities."

One of the worst results of all this is that it leads to women treating one another poorly. Women supporting and empowering one another would go a long way towards reinforcing their worth and helping them become first class citizens. Yet I've seen girls and women from age three to 53 pick each other apart, cut each other down, and shut each other out. This is a direct result of the language people use to talk about women and the innate prejudices they still have towards them.

I am not a second-class citizen. For my entire life, I've been in control of me. I identify the things I want and I make them happen. I work as hard as any man. And no one can tell me I deserve less than exactly what men receive for doing the same work. If you're with me on this, start by not holding yourself back. Continue to strive for what you want, even if it's in a male dominated field. Fight for what you're worth at home and in the workplace. Constantly praise the hardworking women around you, just for being themselves. If you're a man, start by taking interest in this cause that affects you, too. Finally, vote for a female president so we can catch up with the rest of the world ( over 50 countries have had female leaders), alter these implicit and explicit prejudices, and institute policies that further solidify the professed equal status of men and women in America.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Women in the U.S. Are Still Second-Class Citizens: Not Interested? You Should Be

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For several months, I've wanted to write about the way women are treated in the United States today. It has taken some time to organize my thoughts because I feel so deeply about this issue. Uh-oh. I'm a woman. With feelings. Am I going to get too emotional? Will there be tears?

# data[].attributes.body
Shows the limitations put on girls by society

# data[].attributes.headline
Why Professional Women's Sport is Less Popular than Men's

# data[].attributes.subject
Why Professional Women's Sport is Less Popular than Men's

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A FEW hours before the men's Tour de France arrived in Paris on July 27th 2014, a group (or peloton) of women cyclists dashed up the Champs Elysees. It was the inaugural race of La Course, a one-day event organised by the people behind the Tour de France, and the latest attempt to launch a women's version of the main competition. Previous efforts have foundered because of a lack of interest among sponsors and the public. The difficulty of creating a women's Tour illustrates a wider phenomenon: with a few exceptions, professional women's sport is much less popular than the male equivalent. Why?

If there were more sponsorship and media coverage, some say, then women's sport would be more popular. Media outlets and sponsors retort that if women's sport attracted more interest in the first place then they would invest more time and money in it. All sides agree on what it takes to make a sport successful: a balance of consumer, media and commercial appeal.
Get our daily newsletter
Sponsors are unwilling to finance individuals and teams that don't get good exposure - and few female athletes do. The Women's Sport and Fitness Foundation (WSFF) estimates that in 2013, women's sports received 7% of coverage and 0.4% of the total value of commercial sponsorships. This is a vicious circle: viewers want to watch sports at the highest professional standard, and sponsors want to be associated with the best athletes. Because of the lack of sponsorship many female athletes, even those who represent their countries, have to fit training around employment. Those who are paid usually earn less than male colleagues. The Professional Golfers' Association, for instance, offers $256 million in prize money; the women's association offers only $50 million. This inequality is echoed in pay for coaches for women's teams.

Things are changing. The English women's cricket team became professional in 2014, signing a two-year sponsorship deal with carmaker Kia after winning back-to-back Ashes contests. Wimbledon, the oldest tennis tournament, started awarding women the same amount of prize money as men in 2007, and the prize money for the winner of La Course is equivalent to that for a stage winner in Le Tour. Other sports are being leaned on to follow suit. More strikingly, the opinions of sports fans seem to be shifting: 61% of fans surveyed by the WSFF said they believed top sportswomen were just as skilful as their male equivalents and over half said women's sport was just as exciting to watch.

This will matter more when, as seems likely, the increasing numbers of women participating in regular sport yield more potential pros. In Britain, 750,000 adults took up team sports after the 2012 Olympics; 500,000 of them were women. More female participants and viewers should encourage sponsors and the media to balance their coverage. Until then, athletes could consider taking a leaf out of Marie Marvingt's book. In 1908, when she was denied the right to ride in the Tour de France because she was a woman, she ignored the rules and raced anyway, 15 minutes behind the men. Of the 115 people who started the 4,488km (2,789 mile) race that year, only 37 managed to complete it: 36 men and one woman.

Dig deeper:
The best cycling stories often involve the least celebrated riders (June 2014)
Why cycling thrives in some cities and not in others (Dec 2013)
In London most cyclists are men (June 2012)
Update: This blog post has been amended to remove the news peg.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why professional women's sport is less popular than men's

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A FEW hours before the men's Tour de France arrived in Paris on July 27th 2014, a group (or peloton) of women cyclists dashed up the Champs Elysees. It was the inaugural race of La Course, a one-day event organised by the people behind the Tour de France, and the latest attempt to launch a women's version of the main competition.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A 20-year study of network and cable by USC & Purdue sociologists find men take 96% of sports news in 2009.

Even the ESPN Ticker gives women the short shrift - 96.4 percent of the information scrolling along the bottom of the screen was dedicated to only men's sports.

The finding is part of a 20-year study of sports coverage released today by University of Southern California sociologist Mike Messner and Purdue University sociologist Cheryl Cooky.

Though it wasn't surprising to discover that men's sports gets more coverage, it was eye opening when researchers found that women's sports accounted for less than 2 percent of network news and ESPN Sportscenter.

"There's a message that sports is still for, by and about men," Messner said. "When will the news catch up?"

Just as shocking is that as more women than ever participate in all levels of sports, coverage of their gender is drastically declining. In 2004, network affiliates dedicated 6.3 percent to women's sports. Last year it dropped to 1.6 percent.

"News programs are supposed to be a window to the world and there is a journalistic responsibility to reflect that," said Messner, an expert in the sociology of sports.

In 1971, 294,000 high school girls played interscholastic sports. Today 3.1 million play, much closer to the 4.4 million boys who play high school sports.

Yet network affiliates ran 60 stories on men's NCAA basketball in March 2009. There were zero stories about women.

It's not that generous coverage of men's sports leaves no time for women. The researchers found that newscasts routinely air light sports features, such as a story about a hamburger with 5000 calories and 300 grams of fat at a minor league baseball park in Michigan.

The discrepancy is important, Messner said, as it reinforces the historical stereotype that sports proves men are superior to women, that the women's product isn't the same quality or would not have the same mass appeal. Messner points out those arguments have been used before, such as when African Americans weren't considered good enough to compete in Major League Baseball.

The study, Gender in Televised Sports: News and Highlights Shows, 1989-2009, can be downloaded below.

As with the 1989, 1993, 1999 and 2004 studies, the central aim of the current study was to compare the quantity and quality of TV news and highlight shows' coverage of women's versus men's athletic events. Each time researchers analyzed three two-week segments (a total of six weeks) of televised sports news coverage on each of three Los Angeles local network affiliates. Second, they studied ESPN's SportsCenter, replicating their focus on this sports highlights show that they began in 1999 and continued in 2004.

The study is sponsored by the USC Center for Feminist Research.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Women Play Sports But Not on TV - Women's Sports Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A 20-year study of network and cable by USC & Purdue sociologists find men take 96% of sports news in 2009. Even the ESPN Ticker gives women the short shrift - 96.4 percent of the information scrolling along the bottom of the screen was dedicated to only men's sports.

# data[].attributes.body
Men Still Get Better Sports Opportunities

# data[].attributes.headline
Three Cheers as women coaches shatter a sports barrier

# data[].attributes.subject
Three Cheers as women coaches shatter a sports barrier

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The biggest stories in American sports this summer have been triumphs for women.

Of those, the U.S. victory in Women's World Cup soccer is the most celebrated - but it is not the most important.

On the cultural-significance scoreboard, the winner is the rise of women coaches in men's professional sports. Suddenly there are two female assistant coaches in the National Basketball Association, and one in the National Football League.

This is going on as the NFL tries to live down its poor reputation with women, most notably caused by its coddling of domestic-abusers such as Ray Rice. But don't assume the Arizona Cardinals' hiring of Jen Welter to work with linebackers in training camp is a PR move.

Nor is tokenism at work in the NBA's Sacramento Kings hiring Nancy Lieberman as an assistant coach. Or the San Antonio Spurs having Becky Hammon, who has been an assistant coach with the team since before last season, serve as head coach of the Spurs' entry in the NBA Summer League.

These hirings are important nods to Welter's, Lieberman's and Hammon's very real qualifications, and to the value of considering women for non-traditional roles in any walk of life.

When sports franchises break racial, sexual or gender barriers, they don't do it to be politically correct. They do it because the players or coaches in question are right for the positions. Think of the Dodgers and Jackie Robinson.

Hammon showed how good she is by coaching the Spurs' squad to the Summer League championship last month. This shouldn't be a surprise. A star player in college and the WNBA, she is part of the generations of female athletes empowered by Title IX, the 1972 law that prohibits gender discrimination in federally funded education programs - including sports. Naturally many of those great athletes are turning into great coaches.

Women's influence in men's sports is growing and will keep growing. This week, Cal State Northridge named Vicky Sun director of operations for its men's basketball program.

To assume men won't accept women's leadership, strategizing and tutoring is to give both men and women too little credit. Men are accepting it.

At a time when a woman leads the presidential polls, it's nice to see America acknowledge that a woman is also capable of coaching the pick-and-roll.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Three cheers as women coaches shatter a sports barrier

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The biggest stories in American sports this summer have been triumphs for women. Of those, the U.S. victory in Women's World Cup soccer is the most celebrated - but it is not the most important. On the cultural-significance scoreboard, the winner is the rise of women coaches in men's professional sports.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Empowering Women in Sports - Women Still on the Sidelines - Feminist Majority Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Feminist Majority Foundation works for social and political and economic equality for women by using research and education to improve women's lives. The Feminist Majority Foundation Online features daily feminist news with 'take action' ideas, domestic violence and sexual assault hotlines, a feminist career center, information on feminism including women and girls in sports and more feminist research resources.

# data[].attributes.headline
Jennifer Gish: Women's teams should have more female coaches

# data[].attributes.subject
Jennifer Gish: Women's teams should have more female coaches

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you wonder why it's important to have women coaching female athletes, the answer is in the post-game news conference by University at Albany basketball coach Katie Abrahamson-Henderson after the Great Danes lost their NCAA Tournament game by a basket this past Friday.

"We talked about being fearless, fighting, and being relentless," she said. "And they did everything we asked. I'm just so proud of them. We were in the game the whole time, and they fought like warriors. And as women that's what I'm trying to teach them: to fear nobody and to be fearless. You're going to go through battles your whole life, but you're not going to back down and you're not going to fear anybody."

That wasn't an effort to step away from what happened on the court and how close her No. 13-seeded team had come to knocking off the No. 4 Duke. The loss has haunted her, as she's tagged it the worst one she's experienced while at UAlbany. But thinking to go big picture in the news conference, to connect on-the-court action to who her players are as young women and what they'll face in the world, that's a female version of John Wooden. And one that any of us raising young female athletes should want our daughters to hear from someone who's had to walk that path in uncomfortable shoes.

But our daughters aren't guaranteed those role models. Fewer women coach women's sports today than they did before the advent of Title IX in 1972. Then, according to a statement from the Women's Sports Foundation, the percentage of women coaching women was 90. Today, it's 43 percent across all women's collegiate sports.

It's better in women's basketball than a lot of other women's sports. A recent report by the Tucker Center for Research on Girls & Women in Sport at the University of Minnesota and the nonprofit Alliance of Women Coaches showed that in the big Division I women's basketball programs, 63 percent of head coaches were female. It's one of the few sports in which women hold the majority. In soccer, that number's 27 percent. (It's 8 percent in track and field.)

"Little girls, for years and generations, have had a limit on them because all they've seen are male leaders in sports, and as they begin to see women who are powerful, competitive and filled with grace, how does that change the vision for a little girl of what she can be in the world?" says Marlene Bjornsrud, executive director of the Alliance of Women Coaches. "I just think that's significant."

It is. Does that mean male coaches can't be good role models for female athletes? We'll see one of the most famous in women's basketball this weekend as UConn coach Geno Auriemma comes to Times Union Center for the regional round of the NCAA Tournament. He's done a tremendous amount for women's college basketball by building a dynasty in Storrs that can't be ignored by even a casual sports fan. (Of course, the lack of parity to which he's contributed also has inadvertently hurt interest in the women's game.)

But what's alarming is the number of male coaches in women's basketball is growing. According to NCAA Research, 79 percent of Division I women's basketball assistant coaches were women in 1996. Today that number is 65 percent.

As more money has come into women's basketball, Abrahamson-Henderson says, men have looked to coach the women's game. Which is fine, except that those same opportunities don't exist for young women. Women coaches in the men's game are a rarity. So men have two career tracks, women have one.

But the imbalance also has to do with some systemic issues, Bjornsrud says. Women today tend to shoulder more family responsibilities, and athletics is a field in which the hours are all-consuming. So college athletic departments - where women are underrepresented as athletic directors - have to let go of some old ideas about how things must work to have winning programs. Bjornsrud points to a highly successful women's soccer coach who was hired by a university that knew she would be giving birth a month before her season starts. But they valued her skills enough, Bjornsrud says, to promise they'd work with it.

Abrahamson-Henderson said a big factor in choosing UAlbany was its openness to having her daughters around the program. Her oldest daughter is often right behind the bench at games. And Abrahamson-Henderson's husband was able to make sacrifices in his own career to pick up a lot of the family obligations often carried by women. Not all women, she says, are so lucky.

"It's not just women in sports. It's women everywhere," she says. "There's a lot of women trying to have the careers they want."

Bjornsrud says women also haven't been as good at advocating for each other when a female coach is up for a job. A lot of sports jobs are still earned via an "old boys' network," so the Alliance of Women Coaches is encouraging female coaches to make calls to athletic departments on behalf of each other.

"When I'm at the Final Four - and I'm speaking on a panel this year on retaining women coaches - my challenge is going to be, what are you doing with your coaching staff to mentor and groom women leaders, and what are you doing in your athletic department?" Bjornsrud says. "What can a female basketball coach do to advance women in her own department?"

Abrahamson-Henderson says a similar challenge was issued to her and other female coaches last year at the Final Four when a longtime women's coach said too many female head coaches were hiring male assistants who were rising to take coaching jobs in the women's game. Abrahamson-Henderson's own staff is all women, and she says she puts a lot of emphasis on training them to have the skills needed to step up to the next level.

"That rang in me big time. There's plenty of men out there that I would hire," she says. "(But) we need to be trailblazers for each other. It's nothing against men at all."

There are real-world problems being addressed in a field that's about playing games. Not everyone wants to hear it, but it's time, for our girls, that we're all a little more fearless.
jgish@timesunion.com * 518-454-5089 * @Jennifer_Gish * facebook.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jennifer Gish: Women's teams should have more female coaches

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you wonder why it's important to have women coaching female athletes, the answer is in the post-game news conference by University at Albany basketball coach Katie Abrahamson-Henderson after the Great Danes lost their NCAA Tournament game by a basket this past Friday. [...]

# data[].attributes.headline
The Importance of Retaining Girls in Sports

# data[].attributes.subject
The Importance of Retaining Girls in Sports

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By the age of 14, girls drop out of sports twice as often as boys. According to the Women's Sports Foundation, factors such as social stigma, lack of access, safety and transportation issues, costs and lack of positive role models, can all contribute to the reasons why girls drop out of sports in their adolescent years. If these factors can be addressed, I believe that more girls will remain involved in sport and physical activity throughout their lives.

Laureus Sport for Good Foundation USA uses sport as a tool for social change by providing youth the opportunities to overcome barriers they face while growing up in challenging environments. As an organization, we address the factors that hinder youth participation in sports by providing them access to quality sport programs and ensuring that positive role models inspire young girls.

Participation in sport and physical activity positively impact physical and mental health, and reduce the probability of young people engaging in risky behaviors such as unsafe sexual activities and drug use. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 was a giant leap for womankind because it prohibited discrimination based on sex in federally-funded educational programs and activities. This opened many doors for women and girls to participate in athletic opportunities, which were once inaccessible for all females. Today we, as a sport for development sector, need to uncover and invest in innovative methods to retain the number of women and girls in sports. It is our responsibility to demonstrate to girls that it is socially acceptable to participate in sports; it can give girls the skills and confidence to break down barriers and achieve goals throughout their lives.

Firstly, sports can address gender issues and promote gender equality on a global scale. In the study " Girls, Sports and Equality: A State by State Ranking of Title IX," public, co-ed high schools nationwide were surveyed and their gender inequality was ranked; Georgia had the greatest sport gender inequality at 66.3%. There is no state in the country which has achieved equality. This trend needs to change so girls can benefit from participating in sports because of the long-term positive effects it can have on their well-being and livelihood.

The Women's Sports Foundation's report " Her Life Depends On It III" reviewed data from over 1,500 studies that demonstrate the importance of sport and physical activity for women and young girls. According to the report, staying active and participating in physical activity can prevent chronic diseases such as obesity and heart disease, lower rates of substance abuse, reduce risky behaviors, and decrease rates of teenage pregnancies. Furthermore, girls will have better mental health, higher self-image and confidence levels, improved teamwork and communication skills, increased graduation rates, and leadership skills that can lead to achievement opportunities in school and at work.

EY Women Athletics Business Network and espnW conducted a survey making the connection between women, sports and leadership. Out of 400 respondents, 74% said a background in sports can help accelerate a woman's career; 66% believe that athletes make excellent candidates for jobs because they've developed a strong work ethic, can be a team player, and have the determination to be a great employee; and 75% stated that competitiveness is an asset to their leadership style in the workplace.

There have been a handful of organizations working towards retaining girls in sports. Girls in the Game targets girls ages 6-18 from lower economic backgrounds in Chicago by addressing their physical, mental and emotional health through sport and fitness, nutrition, health education, and leadership development. Girls Athletics and Life Skills (GAALS) has a curriculum which, during their practices, pairs learning a physical skill with a life skill to promote problem solving, teamwork, and communication; they aim to build confident girls ready for their futures. Sporty Girls Inc. encourages girls from ages 8-18 in the Atlanta region to engage in non-traditional sports that aren't readily available in local public schools. Laureus USA is committed to ensuring girls ages 6-18 are physically active, and we invest in programs which increase access to this population. One of these programs, Girls on the Run, does remarkable work by teaching girls life skills through hands-on lessons and running activities.

"Girls on the Run is such a great platform for creating physically and mentally strong girls, who eventually will become strong and powerful women." - Kennedy Vaughan, GOTR Alum

Beyond girls having access to quality programs, it is important for them to see positive figures in both the media and their everyday lives to inspire them to stay involved in the game. They can look up to female leaders like Jen Welter, who recently became the first woman to hold a coaching position in the National Football League. They can look up to the US Women's World Cup team, who became national icons. They can look up to women like Laureus Ambassadors Missy Franklin and Tamika Catchings. These two women are examples of females who dominate competitions; Franklin and Catchings have both committed their time to being positive role models for young girls. For example, Catchings founded the Catch the Stars Foundation to "empower youth to achieve their dreams by providing goal-setting programs that promote literacy, fitness and mentoring." There needs to be more individuals such as Franklin and Catchings advocating for female youth participation and retention in sports, acting as positive role models for young girls, and breaking down social stigmas.

Beyond professional athletes, every community has the potential to provide positive female role models to be inspirational figures in a young girl's life, such as coaches. Nonprofits such as Laureus USA, Girls in the Game, Sporty Girls Inc., Girls on the Run, and Catch the Stars Foundation set the precedent to develop programs targeted to girls and promote sport and physical activity for a healthier generation. I hope others will join us in our mission to keep girls active and positively impact future generations through sport.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Importance of Retaining Girls in Sports

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By the age of 14, girls drop out of sports twice as often as boys. According to the Women's Sports Foundation, factors such as social stigma, lack of access, safety and transportation issues, costs and lack of positive role models, can all contribute to the reasons why girls drop out of sports in their adolescent years.

# data[].attributes.body
CNN article on Andy Murray's female coach

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
human resources and personnel management

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
she's the boss: is the future of coaching female? - cnn.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
She's the boss: Is the future of coaching female?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The faces of coaching in big-time sports are looking a lot less familiar these days.

# data[].attributes.headline
What It’s Like for a Woman to Coach Men’s Professional Basketball

# data[].attributes.subject
What It’s Like for a Woman to Coach Men’s Professional Basketball

# data[].attributes.body
Article on Becky Hammon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the NBA, there are head coaches, assistant coaches, strength coaches, player-development coaches, conditioning coaches, mind coaches and many others. Until this week, they all had one thing in common: they were men. Why not a female coach? Women have a special way of communicating to players. We can help disseminate the message of the organization's philosophy to the players, and we can deliver the message of the head coach in a different tone, a different soundtrack. As a female coach in what is perceived as a man's world, I feel unique, but no different than my colleagues in the way of the expected outcome. I, too, want to win. Many of the guys in college or the NBA have had strong, dominant women in their life, so many of these guys are used to taking advice and direction from women. And in my experience, the players respond to me just as they would to the men with clipboards that I sit next to. I love basketball, and I love to coach. My players have always known that my methods are for their betterment; therefore, the creation of trust and bond that I share with them supersedes my gender.

I recall clearly the day my coaching career began. I met with Dallas Mavericks general manager Donnie Nelson at a Starbucks in Plano, Texas. We said hello and he greeted me with a hug that was tighter than his normal embrace. "We need to talk," he said. Those talks became discussions about becoming the first woman to ever coach in a men's professional basketball league. Donnie's career had taken a huge leap, as he had just purchased the Development League team the Texas Legends, the affiliate of the Dallas Mavericks.

When Donnie was getting ready to announce that I would be the coach of the Texas Legends, he said to me: "No matter what happens, you're my coach. We're going to have a press conference, and we're going to tell people about the Texas Legends." People knew who I was, and they knew I had been around basketball for many years. They knew I was successful as a player and a coach in the WNBA, but this coaching position was new. This was historic. I was aware and prepared for people to judge that I'd be a woman coaching men, but my biggest hope was that our actions as a franchise would speak for themselves. As a head coach with my players and staff, I wanted to show people that our hard work, our dedication, our discipline and how we played and cared about each other were credible enough for the big leagues, despite my gender.

My life took another turn when I was blessed with the arrival of my son, TJ, in 1994. He has been one of the most important people in my life, and his support has carried me for the past 20 years. I stepped down from my coaching job with the Legends in 2011 because I felt it was necessary to be there for TJ's senior year in high school. He deserved to have his mom sitting in the stands during his basketball games, so I traded roles and became the Assistant General Manager of the Texas Legends. Women are great multitaskers, and I wanted to be the best mom I could when raising TJ. Our empathy and passion are not bound by motherhood, but can be carried into sports and business as well. These qualities have served me well both personally and professionally

Becky Hammon will have to approach her new role as the first full-time female NBA coach in her own way. Becky knows the game of basketball and knows what it will take to survive on the path she is preparing to pave. Coach Gregg Popovich isn't the type of guy who's looking for media and press clippings; he's the type of guy who's looking directly at results. Can she manage working with his guys? Can she be an asset to the coaching staff? What is her basketball IQ, and what type of interpersonal relationship will she be able to forge with the team as an assistant coach? For Coach Popovich to hire Becky speaks to her credibility and his confidence in her. It's no surprise to me that she won his heart and his mind with her basketball acumen and her understanding of the game, along with the respect he has seen her command from the players.

Once all of the press conferences are over and the interviews slow down, Becky is going to have to be "one" with the guys in the environment they live in. She's going to have to be concise, know when to talk, know when to stop talking and know how to be a great leader on the bench and in the locker room.

I don't think Becky set out to be an example for gender equality or a barrier breaker in sports or society. She started playing basketball because it was a game she found she loved, and she has played it at the highest levels. It seems natural for her to come off the court after 16 years and to use the experience and knowledge she has to coach and teach. The fact that she will end up coaching men speaks volumes for her as basketball player and as an individual. She has the ability to cross over and be respected and trusted by athletes, male and female alike. I look forward to getting an opportunity to do what I love, which is teach and coach at the NBA level one day. I will thank Becky Hammon for the door that she has opened with her relationship with the Spurs and Coach Popovich.
Nancy Lieberman is a Hall of Famer, two-time Olympian, three-time All American, WNBA coach and Assistant General Manager for the Texas Legends, in addition to an acclaimed broadcaster, motivational speaker and esteemed writer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What It's Like for a Woman to Coach Men's Professional Basketball

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the NBA, there are head coaches, assistant coaches, strength coaches, player-development coaches, conditioning coaches, mind coaches and many others. Until this week, they all had one thing in common: they were men. Why not a female coach? Women have a special way of communicating to players.

# data[].attributes.headline
Crisis in Female Coaches Shortchanges Women, Athletes

# data[].attributes.subject
Crisis in Female Coaches Shortchanges Women, Athletes

# data[].attributes.headline
Statistics of Women in Collegiate Athletics

# data[].attributes.subject
Statistics of Women in Collegiate Athletics

# data[].attributes.body
There are only 36 female athletic directors at the Division I level.

# data[].attributes.body
National Association of Collegiate Women Athletics Adminstrators

# data[].attributes.headline
Why has number of women coaches fallen since Title IX?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why has number of women coaches fallen since Title IX?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Erika True hears the stories.

Women coaches being forced out of their NCAA jobs. The reasons from the schools' athletic administrators are politically correct.

Tight budget. Not enough wins. Coaching philosophy doesn't fit the university. Need to go in another direction.

True thinks she knows what direction that is: Toward a man.

"There are an absolute ton of heartbreaking stories that I hear day in and day out about females that are being forced out," said True, the head coach of women's soccer at Indiana State University. "There is a stigma that females are not as good as or as strong of coaches as their male counterparts."

On the courts and fields, women college athletes have made great strides.

But in the coaching ranks, something drastically different is happening. Female coaches are losing ground.

Ironically, the drop started with a law that was supposed to be positive for women, Title IX. Congress passed the law in 1972 that required gender equity for boys and girls in every educational program that received federal funding, including athletics.

Since Title IX, however, the percentage of women coaches at the college level has dropped precipitously. Fourty-three years ago, 90 percent of all women's teams were coached by women, according to Acosta and Carpenter's Women in Intercollegiate Sport study. Today, that number is 40 percent, according to NCAA Research. The number of women coaching men's teams is minuscule with fewer than 300 nationwide - less than 2 percent.

At Indiana's 10 Division I schools, no women coach men's teams. Perhaps more startling is the lack of women coaching women's teams. Of the 96 women's teams at those schools, 31 have female head coaches. That's 32 percent, well below the national average.

The numbers are causing pause - and pondering - in the collegiate sports world. Why, in a day when women are making great gains in other careers, are women in coaching falling back?

There's no simple answer. It's a complicated dynamic with a variety of factors coming together, including discriminatory hiring practices, traditional social roles, a slant toward males in sports, stereotypes and, in some cases, the women themselves.
"I feel guilty"
The clock on the dashboard read 7:03 p.m. when Tracey Dorow slipped into the driver's seat of her car last Monday.

She had just coached an intense basketball practice at Valparaiso, as head of the women's team. The hours had passed quickly, her mind on defense, plays and how to turn around the team's losing record.

But as she started her car and saw that clock, the pangs set in.

"I can tell you right now I feel guilty," said Dorow, the mother of 6- and 3-year-olds, as she drove home. "I'm going to get home at 7:15 at night and it's going to be their bedtime at 8.

"Sometimes you wonder if it's all worth it."

Sometimes, Dorow does think about opting out. She has no doubt why the number of women coaches has dropped. It's virtually impossible to find a work-life balance as a head coach. Travel, evening practices and games, weekend recruiting.

Ultimately, she said, women, more so than men, feel the weight of children and home life on their shoulders.

"I feel like men are driven by work and women are driven by relationships," Dorow said. "The No. 1 reason (there is a lack of women coaches) is because women are mothers."

The statistics back up her thoughts: Though fathers represent an increasing share of stay-at-home parents, they still comprise just 16 percent of such parents in 2012, according to the Pew Research Center.

Dorow feels lucky. At Valparaiso, the administration knows her family comes first. She can leave early or come in late, or delegate duties to her assistant coaches.

"Some women don't have the opportunity to have that flex time and don't feel they can do both," she said. "They don't feel they can have a family and coach."
"Suddenly the men wanted these jobs"
In 1972, women were mothers and had families. Yet, they made up 90 percent of women's teams' coaches.

But there was a major difference. Women's teams then were few and far between. They didn't have the funding, the status or the pressure to win that they do today. Many had volunteer coaches.

Women's athletics weren't even offered by the NCAA. Instead, the Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women governed female college sports.

Still, by 1978, the year the federal government designated as the deadline for compliance with Title IX, the number of women's athletic teams at all levels had more than doubled - from an average of about 2.5 teams to 5.6 teams per school.

That created plenty of new coaching positions in women's sports. But the percentage of women coaching women's teams dropped from 90 percent to 58.2 percent in those six years, according to the Women in Intercollegiate Sport report. That share has steadily fallen since.

By 1982, all divisions of the NCAA offered national championship events for women and most members of the AIAW joined the NCAA.

"Now you have better-trained athletes, better programs, you're coaching outstanding women," said Katherine Mowat, women's golf coach at Ball State University. "You've created a more appealing job for a male. Suddenly the men wanted these jobs."

Unlike women's team coaching jobs of the past, these positions came with money. Salaries high enough to support a family. And they've only risen in the past decades with high profile positions demanding six-figure incomes and more. Former Tennessee women's basketball coach Pat Summitt finished her career making more than $2 million.

"Men are going for these jobs aggressively," Mowat said. "I've heard before at other institutions, 'We wanted to hire a female but our most qualified candidate was male.' "

That's the case at Evansville, which fares the poorest among Indiana Division I schools in representation of female head coaches. The school has eight women's teams, with only soccer coached by a woman, Krista McKendree, who recently had her contract extended.

There have been opportunities to bring in more women with hires in women's basketball, volleyball, women's tennis and softball the past four seasons.

"We are cognizant when making all of our hires and look to fill the position with the best candidates for our student-athletes," said Bob Pristash, sports information director.

It's not that there aren't plenty of women who are part of Evansville's teams. Two of the three women's basketball assistants are female. In both softball and volleyball, the assistants are women and those sports also have female graduate assistants.

"Our primary goal when searching for a head coach is to find the best candidate who will accept the compensation that we are able to offer," Pristash said. "All of our coaching searches are competitive and inclusive of both sexes and all races. In some cases, it is a case of demand over supply."

Purdue head coach Sharon Versyp talks with a player in 2011. (Photo: Mark Dolejs, USA TODAY Sports)
What's different in Minnesota?
Watch a women's sporting event at Minnesota and, more likely than not, a woman will be leading the team.

Out of 12 women's teams at the college, eight have female head coaches. That's 67 percent.

Beth Goetz, executive associate athletics director, said the school isn't deliberate in trying to hire women, but it is deliberate in actively recruiting a qualified and diverse pool of candidates, including women.

"Our dedication to this process has certainly been helpful in our hiring of successful female coaches," she said.

Goetz attributes the lack of female head coaches at other colleges, in part, to who is making the hiring decisions.

"It's a factor that men are still doing most of the hiring," she said, "and often end up selecting from the networks from which they are most familiar, which are majority male."

But it's crucial to have women in the mix as head coaches, she said,

"We require our coaches to deliver results and provide guidance both on and off the court," Goetz said. "And that includes being a strong role model. It is essential that young women see females in positions of leadership and authority."

Karley Dobis grew up in Fort Wayne, playing basketball and soccer. Every coach she remembers was a man.

Then in high school, she had her first woman coach, a golf coach. Her high school basketball coach was a man.

"Both were really, really awesome," said Dobis, a Ball State University junior, who is on Mowat's golf team.

When she found out Mowat was a woman, it didn't affect her decision either way to head to Ball State to play. Once there, she's been impressed.

"With her, there is an understanding more of how as teammates we interact, because she was a teammate once," Dobis said.
Successful coach, now out of a job
Even women who have found success in coaching can find themselves out of a job, sometimes seemingly without cause.

The most recent example came in December when Minnesota-Duluth said it wouldn't renew the contract of women's hockey coach Shannon Miller because of "financial considerations."

"When's the last time you saw a men's collegiate coach fired after winning five NCAA championships, developing 28 current and former Olympians and running up a .713 winning percentage?" asked Bob Collins in the blog he writes for Minnesota Public Radio.

Miller was the highest-paid Division I women's hockey coach, making a base salary of $207,000. But she has repeatedly told the media she would have taken a pay cut to keep her job.

"This move was incredibly disrespectful to all women, not just to coaches and to female athletes," Miller told the Boston Globe. "It is a slap in the face to our gender. I will not tolerate it and I will continue to speak out and fight it."

Miller, an outspoken and openly gay woman, has called her firing a violation of her civil rights.

Whether sexual orientation is a factor when it comes to the hiring and firing of women coaches is tough to prove, but it has been studied by Erin E. Buzuvis, director of the Center for Gender & Sexuality Studies at Western New England University School of Law in Massachusetts, and many others. And Buzuvis said, in many instances, it's a prominent reason women don't get coaching jobs.

Female coaches, she said, have been known to say, "The easiest way to get a head coaching job is to be married." To a man.

"Lesbians are saddled with negative stereotypes such as sexually seductive and predatory, masculine, aggressive and harmful toward children," she wrote in her study. "In general, it is perceived that lesbians are bad for the image of women's sport."

Athletic departments at colleges see it as an easier hiring road to take, to bring on a straight woman or man with a family as a coach.

It's a factor that helps in recruiting athletes, as well. Many families are more likely to send their student to a program with a heterosexual coach because of prevailing sterotypes about lesbians, Buzuvis said.

Indiana State's coach True has heard all of this before.

"I am not sure that I have the answer as to how we change this," she said. "But I do think that there's something to be said about empowering the youth and our girls athletics programs now so that we might actually see the number of female head coaches continue to rise once again."
Dana Hunsinger Benbow writes for The Indianapolis Star.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why has number of women coaches fallen since Title IX?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Erika True hears the stories. Women coaches being forced out of their NCAA jobs. The reasons from the schools' athletic administrators are politically correct. Tight budget. Not enough wins. Coaching philosophy doesn't fit the university. Need to go in another direction. True thinks she knows what direction that is: Toward a man.

# data[].attributes.headline
Serena Williams discusses the barriers broken this summer by women 

# data[].attributes.subject
Serena Williams discusses the barriers broken this summer by women 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On June 23, 1972 Congress enacted Title IX, a sweeping educational reform that ordered equal educational opportunity for men and women and fundamentally altered the landscape of America's schools. Now formally known, after its principal author, as the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act, Title IX, promised equal opportunities to men and women in all areas of the public education system: "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." While the law was a breakthrough for women's rights, a new debate today asks whether, 35 years later, we still need Title IX. NEWSWEEK's Alexandra Gekas spoke with Marcia D. Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center about why she thinks Title IX is still necessary. Excerpts:

NEWSWEEK: Why is Title IX still important, 35 years after its inception?
Marcia D. Greenberger: First of all, there's still a lot of discrimination against women, plain and simple, in all areas of education, including athletics where the discrimination is the most overt and the least subtle. We also need Title IX to make sure we don't slide back and lose progress and the third reason we need it is because it is a statement in our law about what's best for this country and our promise to the next generation that equality of opportunity is something that this country stands for.

Do you still think there is gender discrimination in our public school system?
By every measure, it's clear that there is still discrimination going on. The National Law Center just released several reports that confirm that discrimination is still ongoing. There are statistics that show nationwide that women are still getting second-class treatment in athletics. There are court cases and complaints all over the country that highlight unfair treatment toward women by schools in the area of athletics.

Subscribe to Newsweek from $1 per week

What kind of reaction do you get from people in regards to Title IX?
There was a poll that was done by the Mellman Group, which shows major public support for Title IX. Also, 22 percent of survey respondents report that they were personally aware of recent situations where girl's teams where treated worse than boy's teams. That is people talking about the fact that they themselves know about situations where girls teams are not treated as well as boys teams. Another measure concretely showing how much discrimination there still is, since obviously complaints are just the tip of the iceberg, is that we know nationwide that in high schools only 41 percent of high school athletes are girls.

That doesn't necessarily mean they are offering less opportunities to women. Isn't it possible that the girls who want to play sports only make up 41 percent of student athletes?
Schools decide which teams they will offer, how many teams they will offer, how many slots on the teams they will make available, so the schools are deciding how many opportunities they will make available. In addition, once the school does provide an opportunity to play, the second question under Title IX is are they treating the male and female athletic teams in a non-discriminatory way? Our reports show that many complaints have been filed about discriminatory treatment: second class fields, less coaching support, more inconvenient practice times, inferior uniforms, more travel, less scholarships. So the problems are not only in the opportunities that are made available and the number of girls who could play but don't get a chance, but also as our reports demonstrate even the girls who are given the chance to play, many of them are not given the quality support that their male counterparts receive.

Is it common, then, that men's sports are cut back instead of women's sports being added to balance the number of male to female athletes?
The General Accounting Office did a study a few years ago and found that over 70 percent of schools added opportunities for women and did not cut back on any opportunities for men. This shows that in truth Title IX has operated by expanding opportunities not retracting them. It's also true that Title IX does not provide for women's sports or men's sports a guarantee that a school has to keep those sports forever, so there have been teams, like wrestling, that have been cut over the years. But it's also true that other teams like baseball, lacrosse, basketball, football, etc. have exploded in opportunities over the year. So some men's teams have taken a serious hit, that's been true, but it's the same with some women's sports as support and popularity has changed. Wrestling is just not as popular a sport as it used to be.

Critics of Title IX argue that to balance out the number of male to female athletes, schools have had to cut the men's sports because not enough women want to play. Wouldn't that be unfair to men?
There are close to three million female athletes in high school and only about 170,000 opportunities for women to play sports in colleges and universities. So going back to the point about providing opportunities to play, when the pool was three million of high school athletes, winnowing that down to 170,000 spots there are clearly more people who would play if they had the opportunity to play and although that is clearly true for male athletes too, it is just as true for female athletes. But still, although it's not common, according to the General Accounting Office study, there's also no question that sometimes men's sports are being cut. I don't think there is any question that unfortunately there is a lot of pressure on schools and some schools have chosen to cut sports on account of financial pressures, but at the same time what we've seen is an arms race, pouring an enormous amount of money into certain teams and cutting back on other teams to enhance on the athletic opportunities for football players, for example and putting more and more money into multimillion dollar coaches salaries and extraordinary offices and state-of-the-art facilities. That's not Title IX telling schools they need to invest their athletic dollars that way, that's schools deciding what their own priorities are. Some schools seem to think it's a lot easier to tell a male athlete that they are cutting a team because of Title IX than because they want to spend more money on football and basketball.

What, if anything do you think needs to be changed about Title IX?
The biggest improvement for Title IX is to make sure it is enforced, that all of those people who know about unfair treatment to girls teams have a way of correcting it and that the government itself steps up to the plate. Something else that the National Women's Law Center is doing is to set up a new Web site, , which provides information to parents and teachers and coaches and schools on how to improve and what to do to make sure that Title IX's promise is actually realized.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On June 23, 1972 Congress enacted Title IX, a sweeping educational reform that ordered equal educational opportunity for men and women and fundamentally altered the landscape of America's schools. Now formally known, after its principal author, as the Patsy T.

# data[].attributes.body
Interesting take on hiring a female coach in the NFL and asking if its a distraction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
RACHEL MARTIN, HOST:

Time now for sports.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

MARTIN: There was big news in the NFL this past week. The Arizona Cardinals hired a new coach. Doesn't sound like a big deal, you say, except this coach is a woman. Her name is Jen Welter, and this is a first for the entire league. But anytime any kind of sporting team hires someone out of the ordinary, there is talk about whether or not said person will be a, quote, "distraction to the team." Mike Pesca has been ruminating on this idea. He joins me now. Hey, Mike.

MIKE PESCA, BYLINE: Hello.

MARTIN: All right, can you just start off by telling us more about this new coach, Jen Welter? Who is she? What's her background?

PESCA: Yeah, she's got a long time in football, about 15 years. She played professional women's football for a long time. Then she became the only woman in a non-kicking position to play in a man's game in the Indoor or the Arena Football League, as it's sometimes called. She has a PhD in psychology. Add it all - she loves football - add it all up, those are called kind of impressive credentials.

MARTIN: (Laughter) OK, she's legit. But I'm going to be the spoilsport here and point out the fact that this is not a full-time coaching job, right? She's part of an intern program.

PESCA: Right. So the NFL has a program - and teams do this, where just to get other people in the pipeline and in the name of diversity, in the name of just, you know, more opportunity. So she, during the summer - during the preseason - will be coaching, in an internship position, paid, the inside linebackers. But that doesn't mean this is a sham. From this very program, other assistant coaches, NFL head coaches have emerged. So she'll really be doing coaching. And the Cardinal staff will really see what she's got.

MARTIN: All right, but apparently there are some who say that just having a female on the coaching staff at all is going to be a distraction. Who's saying this, and what's their argument? Because, I mean, come on, it's 2015.

PESCA: There are some, and there's this thing called social media.

MARTIN: I've heard of it (laughter).

PESCA: And whenever there is some, (laughter) those some will say it on social media. But also, you know, sports talk radio, even in the headline of just about the number one football blog, the main quote was Bruce Arians, coach of the Cardinals, saying she won't be a distraction. So the question is...

MARTIN: So he's anticipating that criticism.

PESCA: Yes, why would she be a distraction? I think that, you know, some fans maybe don't want to be brave enough just to say, I am sexist, and this is wrong. So they say, oh, maybe she'll be a distraction. And then if you look at the case of Michael Sam, the NFL player, the - who - first openly gay player, there was so much media attention. And it does become a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy. But I also think that it's because fans, or at least those posing the question, do not understand the mindset of the professional athlete. And yeah, they have to have physical gifts, but you have to be so laser-focused. The mental part of the game is so important. I talked to longtime sports journalist Jeff Pearlman about this. He has written books on Roger Clemens, Barry bonds, the '86 Mets, the Dallas Cowboys of the Michael Irvin, Emmit Smith, Troy Aikman-era, in other words, great athletes in teams who should be distracted and just weren't. Now, Pearlman thought of one instance where maybe you could say there was a distraction.

JEFF PEARLMAN: When Emmitt Smith held out and missed the first two games of a season, it was a distraction. But it was really a distraction because the guy who replaced him, a running back named Derrick Lassic, just wasn't that good.

MARTIN: So, well, it wasn't Smith's fault. It was because people just missed him.

PESCA: Right, the falloff from a great player to a not great player hurt the team. The fact that guys were getting stabbed and arrested on that very team did not bother the members of the Dallas Cowboys, just like there's no way that Jen Welter will bother the members of the Arizona Cardinals. In fact, she might prove to be an excellent asset. You know, Becky Hammon is a coach, and she's on the bench with the San Antonio Spurs. And there was less talk of a distraction there just because the Spurs have proven themselves to be such an efficient, excellent team. And I think what we're going to see with football - yes, it's unusual to perhaps some people who have sports talk radio shows. But we're going to see that this is going to be no problem whatsoever. It almost never is.

MARTIN: Mike Pesca, never a distraction - well, sometimes, but in a good way. He is the host of Slate's The Gist podcast. Thanks, Mike.

PESCA: Thanks, Rachel.

Copyright © 2015 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR's programming is the audio record.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
NFL's First Female Coach Raises The Perennial 'Distraction' Question

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
RACHEL MARTIN, HOST: Time now for sports. (SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC) MARTIN: There was big news in the NFL this past week. The Arizona Cardinals hired a new coach. Doesn't sound like a big deal, you say, except this coach is a woman. Her name is Jen Welter, and this is a first for the entire league.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The video clip is now a cherished part of the Ronda Rousey origin story: Head-shaven Ultimate Fighting Championship impresario Dana White, walking out of the Mr Chow restaurant in Hollywood in 2011, swamped by paparazzi, who begin grilling him about the latest gossip from the octagon. White good-naturedly trades fight talk ("That was the sickest kick...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The video clip is now a cherished part of the Ronda Rousey origin story: Head-shaven Ultimate Fighting Championship impresario Dana White, walking out of the Mr Chow restaurant in Hollywood in 2011, swamped by paparazzi, who begin grilling him about the latest gossip from the octagon.