Finally, some Title IX sanity.

Sorry dude. But it was there and on the tee, couldn't help myself.

 

No. Not saying that is the measurement. It's just a symptom.

 

Next time go with Justina or Justy - it's what my sister would call me to annoy me.

 

Your analysis could be replicated in communities across the country.

We've had multiple girls lacrosse and girls volleyball teams added via interest surveys in the past five years, but we've also got new swim teams (boys and girls) and, I think, at least one (technically coed) ice hockey team. There have been many fewer cuts, mostly to freshman sports, because districts have added pay-to-play for all extracurricular activities instead.

I've heard of cuts to non-athletic extracurriculars as well, but many of those were resurrected through private fundraising. That is how a couple of local swim teams came to be, as parent-funded clubs that eventually worked their way into the school budget.

 

Why is adding boys lacrosse without girls "getting away" with something? Makes it sound like there's some conspiracy to keep girls off the field.....is there any evidence of that?

Most schools in my area have both boys and girls lacrosse now but they weren't added at the same time and almost all of them had boys first. It was interest based not discriminatory.

More schools have boys hockey than girls hockey.....same thing.

 

If the schools have completed a study of their students an it shows their needs are being met, that's fine.

If the schools are just guessing that they don't have any girls that want a new sport, then they are most decidedly not Title IX compliant, and would lose if a parent submitted an OCR complaint.