Columnist Dean Juipe: Not all men find gender equity fair

Dean Juipe's column appears Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. His boxing notebook appears Thursday. Reach him at [email protected] or 259-4084.

The very subject of gender equity in collegiate sports leads to a wide range of opinion.

Women, of course, see things in a maternal light and welcome the NCAA-mandated advances. They realize all these new women's programs will not only be up and running but will be in full bloom for their daughters.

Men, if this can be generalized, choose to either quietly accept the changes or throw up their hands in absolute frustration. At the latter extreme is the fellow who says "You want true gender equity? Then have a university offer only one team in each sport and let the women try out for positions on the team with the men."

Sorry, fellows. The die is cast and the NCAA is not going to a singular team in each sport. It wants equal opportunity for women and it's slowly but surely getting it.

As detailed in a story elsewhere on this page, UNLV is within a fraction of complete compliance when it comes to gender equity. To put it over the hump, the school will soon launch a new women's sport, likely to be water polo by the looks of things.

That sport will join recent additions like women's volleyball and soccer, and will put the university in a favorable light in the NCAA's eyes.

Only an idiot would fail to see the advantages of these multiplying opportunities for women. Anyone with athletic tendencies will tell you there's nothing like structured competition.

It would be equally idiotic to lament the changing face of collegiate sports and to cite all the men's programs that have been dropped as universities across the country strive for compliance. Many schools -- including UNLV years ago with wrestling -- have had to disband men's programs due to gender equity.

There's really no point bellyaching about these losses. So UNLV offers women's track but not men's track, so what?

There are, however, two arguable tenets concerning gender equity that may be past the point of review yet are curious nonetheless. One has to do with football scholarships, while the other pertains to revenues.

Take football out of the equation and there are now far more women than men competing in sports at the collegiate level. There are men who detest this very fact and they wonder why the 75 or so guys who participate in football should be counted in terms of gender equity.

But, like it or not, they do count. And that's that.

As for revenues, the more vigilant men argue that it's patently unfair to have men's sports like football and basketball pay for this proliferation of women's sports. That viewpoint, while hardly practical, is just a step removed from believing each and every sport should be self-sufficient if it is to exist.

But if that were the case, only a few universities would have more than two or three sports programs. It's a simple fact that the prosperous sports have to subsidize the lesser ones.

Not all men are thrilled with these realities.

They read a story about UNLV adding women's water polo and their blood pressure goes sky high. They not only wonder about the merits of water polo, they see the university having to juggle its athletic department budget and even feel the tax dollars are coming straight from their pocket.

Tread lightly, women. Go and holler your hurrahs, yet bear in mind there are still antagonists in your midst.

archive