When the NCAA was compelled to allow college athletes to enjoy million dollar sponsorships for the name, image and endorsement, many applauded that the students would finally be allowed to partake of the bounty that had previously gone only to their colleges. Yay? Well, kinda, but for the fact that the bounty wouldn’t be distributed equitably.
To most of us, this was so obvious that it was accepted as a given. Star athletes would make big bucks. Lesser athletes, less, if anything. Meritocracy would vote with its wallet, as it should. But what of the age-old sport conundrum, that women don’t get the opportunities and benefits that men do?
A higher education policy group wants the Biden administration to launch a Title IX civil rights investigation into collegiate athletics programs because the vast majority of so-called name, image, likeness sponsorships go to male athletes.
In a letter to Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona and assistant secretary for civil rights Catherine Lhamon, the Drake Group said that the disproportionate amount of sponsorship money going to male college athletes, often with the cooperation of university athletic programs, was a violation of Title IX’s prohibition on sex-based discrimination and warrants a federal investigation.
Why yes, that’s the same Catherine Lhamon, yet again head of the DoE Office of Civil Rights, who has made it overwhelmingly clear that cares nothing for due process in sex tribunals and shrugs off the innocent men harmed by her callousness. What will Lhamon do about this new oppression of women?
“We do not write to suggest that [the office for civil rights] stem this flow of cash to college athletes, but rather to alert OCR that this cash is, with the blessing and/or cooperation of the 1000+ universities in the NCAA, flowing predominantly to men,” the group said in the letter. “Such inequitable financial aid, treatment and benefits provided to men are a violation of Title IX. OCR must provide guidance to the schools that this is improper and will be pursued with enforcement proceedings as necessary.”
It seems to obvious to need to be said that sponsors aren’t universities. They aren’t within the DoE’s jurisdiction. Not even Lhamon, on her most vicious day, has anything to say about whom companies choose to give millions. But does that mean Lhamon won’t find, and draw, a connection on the other side to try to make either the men, the companies, or the universities, suffer for their sexism?
The schools, for their part, seem either happy to allow this gender disparity, or simply confused as to their obligations. In either case, OCR guidance is badly needed, and quickly. The schools have never been enthusiastic about gender equality in sports, having unsuccessfully attempted to exempt revenue-producing sports like football from Title IX, and having dragged its feet for decades on gender equality. The “Wild West” scene we see today, involving compensation for athletes’ names, images, and likenesses, has simply provided the schools an opportunity to feign ignorance or confusion as to the implications for women athletes. OCR should eliminate that ignorance and clarify any confusion. To be clear, we do not seek any statutory or regulatory amendments. The activities of many of the schools working hand in hand with boosters violate Title IX. We seek only that OCR promulgate clear guidance as to what does, or does not, implicate Title IX concerns in the new NIL space.
Do colleges play a role by boosting the fortunes of male athletes but not women? Are they promoting their boosters to pay for athletes on the men’s teams but not the women’s? Is the promotion of men’s sports like football and basketball creating this atmosphere where men are valued more highly than women? More importantly, even if not, will Lhamon not be able to see the connection that the rest of us can’t and impose guidelines on colleges to “correct” this sponsorship disparity?
What can she do about it? My mind is not fertile enough to imagine the mechanisms someone like Lhamon might impose to guarantee “equity,” but that doesn’t mean she won’t come up with something.
*Tuesday Talk rules apply.
No comments:
Post a Comment